Mouse Acceleration in ArmA 3

[-Coulum- 35]

Often Arma 2 is said to be "clunky". Part of this is due to the animations, which look to be getting a fair amount of improvement already. But I believe another contributor to this "clunkiness" is the negative mouse acceleration that arma has. The mouse acceleration makes it so that the faster you move the mouse the less distance your avatar will turn. Its demonstrated well here.

Basically, if you move your mouse x cm on your pad slowly and then move your mouse x cm quickly, the avatar in game will move his weapons a different amount of distance. In this case the slow movement would rotate him further and the quick movement would rotate him less.

Here's a short example in arma 2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw2nttguTbU

Notice how the weapon seems less responsive/sensitive when the mouse is moved quickly. This mouse acceleration makes it so every distance you move your mouse could translate to a different distance on the screen depending on how fast you moved it.

Normally in game this isn't much of a problem, but when it comes to CQB, it is a huge drawback as it prevents quick/accurate snap shooting that is possible in reality. This is because if the player moves fast he looses control and misses, as the mouse basically changes in sensitivity. On the other hand if the player moves slowly he can get accurate shots, but really it is no longer snap shooting and doesn't allow for the quick split second action of CQB.

Here's some examples of how the negative mouse sensitivity makes shooting quickly, even at close ranges, very difficult and unatrual.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCO_SfEc5oM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re8GuT6WfGw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KH2fGuHDkQk

Notice that, with all the weapons, the player has to either aim very slowly in order to be accurate or tries to go quickly and over/under shoots it and has to readjust his aim. This is because of the mouse acceleration.

Now there is one major pro to mouse acceleration. It prevents unrealistic "insta 360 headshots". It can also be argued that it makes the weapons "feel" heavy.

So my question is what do you guys think of this mouse acceleration and arma 3? Should it be left as is? Should it be totally removed? Maybe its degree should depend on the wieght of the weapon used? Is there a way to prevent 360 headshots without using mouse acceleration so CQB can feel more natural?

Discuss.

[rye1 21]

I don't know what the proposed "fix" or "tweak" could be.... Blank at the moment! But very nice find and good demonstration video(s).

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Maybe its degree should depend on the wieght of the weapon used?

Makes me wonder if the dexterity config setting for weapons slows the speed of moving the weapon when turning or through floating zone only. It is, after all, meant to give each weapon different handling characteristics and discourage inappropriate use of heavier weapons.

If it could be linked to acceleration, that would be interesting.

Edited June 3, 2012 by CameronMcDonald

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Not sure how this is implemented but definately needs futher investigation.

I did a slightly different test with the AKS-74U and got a completely different result. I determined how far I had to move the mouse along the edge of my desk to do a 360 turn at a slow speed, then tested the result against starting my mouse at the same point aiming at the same object and moving my mouse quickly along the edge of my desk the same distance. Moving qickly gave me almost a 1 and 3/4 turn completely overshooting the mark, and the result was replicated a few times, dosn't seem right.

FYI I turned float off for the test.

[Leon86 13]

If you wouldn't have acceleration it would be too easy to aim. you either need some kind of weapon acceleration limiter or another system, like in the old rainbow / ghost recon games, where your view moves fast but it takes a while for the weapon to get on target.

nearly all games have mouse acceleration btw, they take the mouse feed from windows and the windows mouse acceleration cannot be completely turned off unless you use a reg modification like the markC mouse fix.

[tremanarch 6]

"in the old rainbow / ghost recon games, where your view moves fast but it takes a while for the weapon to get on target."

this I would like to have..

[metalcraze 290]

Arcade 360 degree turns with usual rifles let alone MGs and sniper rifles isn't what I want to see.

Since in ArmA3 there's no aforementioned system for the aim getting back on target it can quickly turn into a fragfest.

[BinaryCode64 1]

Deleted

Edited March 10, 2013 by BinaryCode64

[batto 17]

Basically, if you move your mouse x cm on your pad slowly and then move your mouse x cm quickly, the avatar in game will move his weapons a different amount of distance. In this case the slow movement would rotate him further and the quick movement would rotate him less.

I'm not sure if this is negative mouse accel. I think it's because in ArmA your avatar has turn speed so when you move mouse slowly your avatar has enough time to complete turn.

like in the old rainbow / ghost recon games, where your view moves fast but it takes a while for the weapon to get on target.

Something like this would be great. I'll quote myself from recent "dead-zone" thread:

Eeys, head, arms with weapon, torso and legs should turn separately. Each part should have limited angle (except legs) and turn speed (eyes instant). Just imagine how would you turn if something just exploded behind you. In ArmA it would take 1-2 seconds just to see it. If you hear fire behind you in open area and bullets land nearby you want to quickly turn back to find the danger (other parts of body could still be turning) and return fire (after weapon finishes turn with aim distruption if torso/legs are still turning). Of course it'll happen very quickly.

Positive mouse accel as pure usability thing would be nice too.

[rye1 21]

in the old rainbow / ghost recon games, where your view moves fast but it takes a while for the weapon to get on target..

As in sight alignment? Because the 'accuracy' in that game is pathetic for a close quarter shooter.

[Vespa 1]

I have a hunch that mouselook/aiming in Arma3 will be just like in CoD.

[Maio 293]

I have a hunch that mouselook/aiming in Arma3 will be just like in CoD. http://trollface.biz/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/trollface-emoticon-4.gif

Holding true to your new company name I see :D

[BinaryCode64 1]

Deleted

Edited March 10, 2013 by BinaryCode64

[Vespa 1]

maionaize> Nice, I haven't seen that one. Karel iz funny

Since I've been made, I can just as well elaborate on the subject and give you guys some headsup. So far, in E3 build, there is mouselook 1:1 with no weapon lag - player's avatar aim is directly linked with mouse movement, with no artificial limitations forced. If you draw a square with your mouse by any speed, your character's aim describes the same square too. (in Arma2 it was totally unpredictable - see OP)

This means Arma3 handles like a standard fps in regard of mouselook (so yeah, like CoD too) It will undoubtedly create lot of controversy, mainly by increasing the pace of close range combat (actually measured) So far it was well-received among BI team members, testers and consultants, however I can imagine this being a nightmare come true for some people (I won't be pointing fingers, metalcraze :D).

Be advised the matter of aiming with heavy weapons is not closed yet. From a certain threshold, weapons weight should have negative effect on close combat efficiency and we plan to introduce that in some form yet, just need moar time for experiments. So don't give up on us ;)

[-Coulum- 35]

Since I've been made, I can just as well elaborate on the subject and give you guys some headsup. So far, in E3 build, there is mouselook 1:1 with no weapon lag - player's avatar aim is directly linked with mouse movement, with no artificial limitations forced. If you draw a square with your mouse by any speed, your character's aim describes the same square too. (in Arma2 it was totally unpredictable - see OP)

This means Arma3 handles like a standard fps in regard of mouselook (so yeah, like CoD too) It will undoubtedly create lot of controversy, mainly by increasing the pace of close range combat (actually measured) So far it was well-received among BI team members, testers and consultants, however I can imagine this being a nightmare come true for some people (I won't be pointing fingers, metalcraze ).

Be advised the matter of aiming with heavy weapons is not closed yet. From a certain threshold, weapons weight should have negative effect on close combat efficiency and we plan to introduce that in some form yet, just need moar time for experiments. So don't give up on us

Well, I would have mixed feelings about that. First reaction is YAY! close combat is going to be fucking awesome! But then there's the negatives mentioned. Questions I would have then are:

How will long range aiming be made more difficult? Its already too easy to quickly shoot accurately at range, this change would make it even easier - a firefight's worst nightmare.

How will instant 360's be prevented (or would they at all?)

How will different weapon weights effect the handling of the weapons. If there is a threshold of weight that would apply some kind of mouse acceleration how would something like an m16 be made different than an mp5 or a glock in terms of handling?

Now mouse acceleration would be a big change but I believe that with some additional changes to fix those things it would be a change for the better, especially when concerning CQB.

[Leopardi 0]

Often Arma 2 is said to be "clunky". Part of this is due to the animations, which look to be getting a fair amount of improvement already. But I believe another contributor to this "clunkiness" is the negative mouse acceleration that arma has. The mouse acceleration makes it so that the faster you move the mouse the less distance your avatar will turn. Its demonstrated well here.

Basically, if you move your mouse x cm on your pad slowly and then move your mouse x cm quickly, the avatar in game will move his weapons a different amount of distance. In this case the slow movement would rotate him further and the quick movement would rotate him less.

Here's a short example in arma 2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw2nttguTbU

Notice how the weapon seems less responsive/sensitive when the mouse is moved quickly. This mouse acceleration makes it so every distance you move your mouse could translate to a different distance on the screen depending on how fast you moved it.

Normally in game this isn't much of a problem, but when it comes to CQB, it is a huge drawback as it prevents quick/accurate snap shooting that is possible in reality. This is because if the player moves fast he looses control and misses, as the mouse basically changes in sensitivity. On the other hand if the player moves slowly he can get accurate shots, but really it is no longer snap shooting and doesn't allow for the quick split second action of CQB.

Here's some examples of how the negative mouse sensitivity makes shooting quickly, even at close ranges, very difficult and unatrual.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCO_SfEc5oM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re8GuT6WfGw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KH2fGuHDkQk

Notice that, with all the weapons, the player has to either aim very slowly in order to be accurate or tries to go quickly and over/under shoots it and has to readjust his aim. This is because of the mouse acceleration.

Now there is one major pro to mouse acceleration. It prevents unrealistic "insta 360 headshots". It can also be argued that it makes the weapons "feel" heavy.

So my question is what do you guys think of this mouse acceleration and arma 3? Should it be left as is? Should it be totally removed? Maybe its degree should depend on the wieght of the weapon used? Is there a way to prevent 360 headshots without using mouse acceleration so CQB can feel more natural?

Discuss.

Its just the mouse smoothing algorithm. Disable mouse smoothing and its fixed.

[-Coulum- 35]

No, mouse smoothing is not what I am talking about. Try the test that I did in the OP and you will find that even with mouse smoothing the results are the same. Compare a game like ravenshiled, or GR1 with A2 and you will find that it is much easier to snap to a target quickly because of the lack of mouse acceleration.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

maionaize> Nice, I haven't seen that one. Karel iz funny

Since I've been made, I can just as well elaborate on the subject and give you guys some headsup. So far, in E3 build, there is mouselook 1:1 with no weapon lag - player's avatar aim is directly linked with mouse movement, with no artificial limitations forced. If you draw a square with your mouse by any speed, your character's aim describes the same square too. (in Arma2 it was totally unpredictable - see OP)

This means Arma3 handles like a standard fps in regard of mouselook (so yeah, like CoD too) It will undoubtedly create lot of controversy, mainly by increasing the pace of close range combat (actually measured) So far it was well-received among BI team members, testers and consultants, however I can imagine this being a nightmare come true for some people (I won't be pointing fingers, metalcraze :D).

Be advised the matter of aiming with heavy weapons is not closed yet. From a certain threshold, weapons weight should have negative effect on close combat efficiency and we plan to introduce that in some form yet, just need moar time for experiments. So don't give up on us ;)

Actually I for one would be quite happy with it. Any attempts to simulate gun weight or difficulties with aiming should focus on the where you gun is aiming and not affect the direction you are percieving or facing. Though I'm pretty much used to it I can see why many find it unintuitive and would be happy with a change in method

[Leon86 13]

As in sight alignment? Because the 'accuracy' in that game is pathetic for a close quarter shooter.

what do you mean?

No, mouse smoothing is not what I am talking about. Try the test that I did in the OP and you will find that even with mouse smoothing the results are the same. Compare a game like ravenshiled, or GR1 with A2 and you will find that it is much easier to snap to a target quickly because of the lack of mouse acceleration.

True. I wouldn't mind a ravenshield-like system.

problem with the current mouse acceleration system is you cant really aim with muscle memory. Say you'd want to aim at a house in the utmost left of the view, you're always way off if you try to aim fast. This lack of muscle memory aim is what makes cqb feel awkward. If you aim at targets in front of you there's no real problem, as you dont do that with muscle memory but with incremental steps, feels ok, in fact it's too easy on long ranges I think (see video), provided you turn the mouse smoothing slider all the way left, no vsync and no pre rendered frames.

here's me shooting at the heads of targets, I dont think you'd be able to do this in real life, but in arma, no problem.

If it were up to me I'd make the view "fast" to 120 degrees left and 120 degrees right of the direction of the body, the body would turn slower. after a "snap" the gun would get "on target" quite fast (dependant on gun mass) but it would take a few seconds to get stable enough for long range shots. This way you could still aim at stuff with muscle memory but it woudn't be a twitch shooter "fast aim = win" like in battlefield 3.

Edited June 4, 2012 by Leon86

[ruhtraeel 1]

I actually liked BF3's mouse handling, possibly because I turn the sensitivity a lot lower than most people do. I do find ARMA's annoying though, because a big movement =/= a fast turn.

[-Coulum- 35]

True. I wouldn't mind a ravenshield-like system.

problem with the current mouse acceleration system is you cant really aim with muscle memory. Say you'd want to aim at a house in the utmost left of the view, you're always way off if you try to aim fast. This lack of muscle memory aim is what makes cqb feel awkward. If you aim at targets in front of you there's no real problem, as you dont do that with muscle memory but with incremental steps, feels ok, in fact it's too easy on long ranges I think (see video), provided you turn the mouse smoothing slider all the way left, no vsync and no pre rendered frames.

Exactly. The mouse acceleration makes it so if you want to be accurate in CQB you must be slow, and CQB is not slow. It makes it feel clunky and unresponsive.

here's me shooting at the heads of targets, I dont think you'd be able to do this in real life, but in arma, no problem.

Its not that you wouldn’t be able to do it, but it would definitly take a lot more time to line up those shots and far more concentration. That is the problem. At long range its already to easy to shoot, and removing mouse accelertion willmost likely make it even easier. It would be a good thing for close combat, but it might make long range combat far too easy and unforgiving. There's a lot of discussion about that in this thread http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?133245-Aiming-Accuracy-in-Arma-3

If it were up to me I'd make the view "fast" to 120 degrees left and 120 degrees right of the direction of the body, the body would turn slower. after a "snap" the gun would get "on target" quite fast (dependant on gun mass) but it would take a few seconds to get stable enough for long range shots. This way you could still aim at stuff with muscle memory but it woudn't be a twitch shooter "fast aim = win" like in battlefield 3.

That’s a good idea and would probably work. To add, in those few seconds required to “stabilize your gun†your character would also be aligning the sights like Rye was hinting at. And then their would still be a varying amount of acceleration applied to heavier weapons.

But for some reason I have a feeling that BI is simply going to take out mouse acceleration. It will help make the game feel more fluent and will make new gamers from other shooters feel much more comfortable with the controls. Good for CQB but maybe not so much for far range… I can’t wait to see their new “aiming mechanics†at e3.

[pvtdancer 5]

I think the 120 degree fast movement would be good but if BI wanted to be more subtle about it they could just increase the inaccuracy basically "the stabilize your gun" as mentioned. I think that if they made it so the inaccuracy was like when you run your gun sways a little more and then just give it shorter recovery time so in CQB the added inaccuracy due to that added moment would be less notable but at distance would be a heavy penalty. Just an Idea that would be simple, the faster you move your character the more movement it adds to your gun.

But the mouse lag always felt a little unnatural even though I understand the intent just seemed like to much to me and frustrated me to no end while playing.

[-Coulum- 35]

Judging from what I've seen of E3 there definitely isn't any acceleration. The weapons seem very responsive.

[BinaryCode64 1]

Deleted

Edited March 10, 2013 by BinaryCode64

[pvtdancer 5]

That would piss off a lot of people when they got on there and discovered what they saw wasn't there and changed to the degree of ARMA 2's mouse acceleration.