ARMA 3 - still unrealistic optics

[PuFu 4600]

Fake 3d is trash.

All the other games do it, except ro2

[-Coulum- 35]

All the other games do it, except ro2

Well obviously all other games are trash...

But seriously. I can understand why people would want the real deal 3d scopes - more immersion, more realistic, able to have better situational awareness etc. But I don't think that the performance it would cost would be worth it. In RO2 that performance loss doesn't ruin the game per say, but I can think of many other more useful features I would rather have than 3d scopes to eat up those fps. And RO2 doesn't even compare to arma in terms of scale, ai or complexity. The benifits of the 3d scopes don't outweigh the cost IMO. "fake 3d scopes" may be "trash", but they are still many times better than what we have now and provide some immersion and even some extra situational awareness at relatively no cost.

Blur and/or darken for high magnification optics, no blur and no black for low magnification = everyone happy?

The blurring and darkening would work for me. While TheCapulet does have a point that you can't look down the sights and see things outside them clearly and simultaneously, in real life you also have the ability to quickly glance to the left and right of sights unlike in arma where your eyes are glued to the centre of the screen. Compromising so the amount of blur/darkening depends on magnification is a good idea IMO.

Only thing I'm stretched between now is, RTT with crap draw distance for grass, or cheap zoom with mooaar render distance for weed.

If there was an option between better shadow/grass rendering and 3d scopes (And I do realize there really isn't one, but hypothetically speaking) I would have to choose the former. This is simply because scopes are already unrealistically overpowered in arma, and 3d scopes will only inflame this problem, while higher draw distances for shadows and grass will help to bring their effectiveness back down to reality.

My "overall" wish for arma is to have engagements that play out as realistically as possible - better grass rendering would help achieve this more than 3d scopes.

[babylonjoke 22]

Mmm why it should take performance when community already made perfectly working 3d scopes mods for Arma 2 without lose any kinda of fps?

And wasn't Arma 3 "more optimized" ?

+1 to 3d scopes.

[PuFu 4600]

Mmm why it should take performance when community already made perfectly working 3d scopes mods for Arma 2 without lose any kinda of fps?

And wasn't Arma 3 "more optimized" ?

+1 to 3d scopes.

Yeah, community made almost perfectly holographic point in A1. The method used is still a hack and not RTT, including an alpha channel that was vissible on wide sort of ATI/AMD GFX cards. Same method is not possible in A2 without visible (in the pure sense) draw-backs.

[chortles 263]

And whatever those "perfectly working 3d scopes mods" used in Arma 2 had to maintain framerate... doesn't seem to have been used in Arma 3/RV4, considering the lag on the dashboard monitors that was previously cited... yet another case of reputed "stuff done by Arma 2 modders that won't get implemented in Arma 3 by BI for cost-benefit reasons", right up there with all the AI mods.

[babylonjoke 22]

I'm just saying that would be nice have them, and if there's a way to make them we will find it out. ;)

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

You have obviously never used a low magnified optic before. You can shoot with two eyes open quite comfortably. I've even done it with a Kashtan on a SGL-31.

Yep, you're right. You caught me. And if I could roll my eyes any harder, I'd likely go blind. If you bothered to read what I wrote, you'd have realized that I didn't say that it couldn't be done. And you wouldn't have insulted my experience and sounded like an ass. Reread what I wrote, and if you have a real rebuttal concerning what I actually said, I'll hear it out.

[EDcase 87]

I agree with -Coulum- post #46

If RTT is used what about a lowres blured version outside the scope. In theory this should be possible AND look better.

The portion inside the scope would be quite small compared to the whole screen so that would also compensate a bit for the x2 render.

Edited February 3, 2013 by EDcase

[-Coulum- 35]

Mmm why it should take performance when community already made perfectly working 3d scopes mods for Arma 2 without lose any kinda of fps?

I think you may be confusing what people mean by 3d scope. It means what's inside the scope is zoomed and what's outside the scope is unzoomed. Thus

is not 3d scope but rather what we have been reffering as a "fake 3d" scope - because both inside and outside the scope is zoomed. This would be what a real 3d scope would look like in arma and I'm pretty certain no mod has created this (if I am wrong though feel free to correct me, I'd love to get my hands on such a mod). Fake 3d doesn't require nearly as much rendering as the real deal because it only has to render one image whereas 3d scopes have to render two separate images simultaneously - thus people like me saying "maybe its not really worth it."

And wasn't Arma 3 "more optimized" ?

Yes, that is probably the exact reason we won't see 3d scopes.

@TheCapulet, You say that if 3d scopes were to be implemented the peripheral vision should be blurred correct? Although I would actually prefer blurring for gameplay purposes, from a realism standpoint, isn't it possible to quickly glance around you optics to clearly see what is outside the sights. If the peripherals are blurry, you would be disallowing the player from doing this ingame. And if a player is focusing on crosshairs on the screen his actual peripheral vision will be unfocused because he is focusing on the centre of the screen. The only thing I could argue is unrealistic about RO2 style 3d scope is that in game you can switch from glancing outside your scope to focusing back on the crosshairs very fast and rapidly whereas in reality it takes more time to get your eyes lined up with the reticle and what not.

So basically I don't think that it would be all that unrealistic to have 3d scopes like in RO2 where periphirals are totally clean and clear. What do you think?

If RTT is used what about a lowres blured version outside the scope. In theory this should be possible AND look better.

The portion inside the scope would be quite small compared to the whole screen so that would also compensate a bit for the x2 render.

I wonder the same thing. Could outside the scope be a different resolution to increase performance? I think if anything, blurring would actually make the performance worse though. Dasattorney asked similar a while back...

Does RTT have to render both the images with the same LOD? Could you render the scope view in 'full detail' and use a lowered setting for the unmagnified background (and then blur it slightly to cover up the lowered details)? Hypothetically speaking of course.

I guess we won't really know until modders get their hands on the rtt stuff...

[msy 22]

Why people keep talking about an out dated ue3 engine?

Why they don't feel like talking about Frostbite 2 Engine？

Why they don't feel like talking about CRYTEK 3 engine?

Because both the last two don't have the effect as what they want.

But they still think RV engine should has what UE3 has.

[Kamov 1]

Why people keep talking about an out dated ue3 engine?

Why they don't feel like talking about Frostbite 2 Engine？

Why they don't feel like talking about CRYTEK 3 engine?

Because both the last two don't have the effect as what they want.

But they still think RV engine should has what UE3 has.

It can be implemented if source code is public.

[PuFu 4600]

It can be implemented if source code is public.

source code will never be public, isn't it?

[Kamov 1]

source code will never be public, isn't it?

is that a question or an argument? I can't tell the future.

[slatts 1978]

Even if the outside was blurred, won't it still be rendering the view twice and adding a blur effect over it?

[-Coulum- 35]

Even if the outside was blurred, won't it still be rendering the view twice and adding a blur effect over it?

Yeah and blurring actually costs resources. But what if outside was also rendered in a lowered resolution and then the blur was simply to cover up that fact (so it doesn't look pixelated). It would still require a second rendering, but maybe instead of cost 200% it may only cost 150%. I don't really know just an idea.

[lao fei mao 21]

Yeah and blurring actually costs resources. But what if outside was also rendered in a lowered resolution and then the blur was simply to cover up that fact (so it doesn't look pixelated). It would still require a second rendering, but maybe instead of cost 200% it may only cost 150%. I don't really know just an idea.

-------I totally agree, when aiming, low the optic outside 3D resolution to 50%, this would bring FPS stable

[icewindo 29]

Why not just a zoomed in 3d model like this?

(watch 0:34)

I'd prefer this over the 2D scopes anyday and you could blur the edges to hide the outside view. It's actually doable without much experiments.

If you take a look at ArmA3 or ToH mirrors you allready see that BIS halfed the FPS on the mirrored objects for performance reasons and that would look pretty stupid on a rifle scope. A zoomed in 3d model wouldn't need any of that.

[Leopardi 0]

Why not just a zoomed in 3d model like this?

(watch 0:34)

I'd prefer this over the 2D scopes anyday and you could blur the edges to hide the outside view. It's actually doable without much experiments.

If you take a look at ArmA3 or ToH mirrors you allready see that BIS halfed the FPS on the mirrored objects for performance reasons and that would look pretty stupid on a rifle scope. A zoomed in 3d model wouldn't need any of that.

I already suggested this and yes its much better than black texture. It actually looks like the scope only would be zoomed with the way the image moves inside the scope, excellent solution:

http://www.moddb.com/mods/alpha-project2/videos/3d-scope-shaders#imagebox

[Sniperwolf572 758]

I already suggested this and yes its much better than black texture. It actually looks like the scope only would be zoomed with the way the image moves inside the scope, excellent solution:

http://www.moddb.com/mods/alpha-project2/videos/3d-scope-shaders#imagebox

This actually looks like a neat postprocessing workaround.

Edit: To illustrate what's going on, here's a few stills from the video.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Sniperwolf572

[duckii 1]

I really like the optics in Insurgency 2. I'm no expert though by all means but damn they look sexy.

[maturin 12]

I really like the optics in Insurgency 2. I'm no expert though by all means but damn they look sexy.

No blur around the edges, and the render-to-texture effect that probably won't be doable in RV, due to performance. Can't have instantaneous resolution changes either, so far as I know.

But does anyone have anything against zooming in the whole screen, and having only a little space on the edges visible outside the scope? It would at least simulate narrowed FoV when focusing on the lens.

[iceman77 18]

*Having just read the title & no more* - Das Attourney has made an outstanding optics addon. If A3 was anything like that, that would be great.

[fraczek 4]

I really like the optics in Insurgency 2. I'm no expert though by all means but damn they look sexy.

The red dot sight in that video is pretty bad, unfortunately. The whole point of red dot sight is that you have both eyes open, while in the video, when he is using a Kobra AKS, the rest of the screen is blurred. That's totally against how it works in reality. Wouldn't mind the scopes, but as others wrote countlessly, it would require RTT and would be probably very taxing on resources, unlike that video which is from a small game with like 100m view distance...

[Leopardi 0]

No blur around the edges, and the render-to-texture effect that probably won't be doable in RV, due to performance. Can't have instantaneous resolution changes either, so far as I know.

But does anyone have anything against zooming in the whole screen, and having only a little space on the edges visible outside the scope? It would at least simulate narrowed FoV when focusing on the lens.

The blurring solution is the best no doubt, as it actually looks like the scope only would be zoomed.

I already suggested this and yes its much better than black texture. It actually looks like the scope only would be zoomed with the way the image moves inside the scope, excellent solution:

http://www.moddb.com/mods/alpha-project2/videos/3d-scope-shaders#imagebox

This actually looks like a neat postprocessing workaround.

Edit: To illustrate what's going on, here's a few stills from the video.

http://i.imgur.com/bkiI6ZSs.png http://i.imgur.com/HzvOP0Rs.png

[De_little_Bubi 1]

is rtt really that expensive? will it really be imposible to make an rtt with a different resolution and level of detail?

looking at the public materials ( http://img1.playm.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/0005-Arma3_screenshot_1202_20.jpg, also the undersea ship) there will be scenarious where the driver has direct access to 5 rtt areas, possible to see 3 at the same time.

what if inside scope is the main renderer with full framerate and the outside the rtt with low framerate?