Properly Converged NVG & Binoculars

[hoak 0]

Originally discussed here for ArmA 2 it's still disappointing to see this aspect of realism is again ignored/forgotten or marginalised in ArmA 3.

Binocular optics ('Binoculars' and NVG) are still not properly converged in ArmA III. Any properly converged binocular optical instrument, be it: 'Binoculars', NVG, a Binocular Range Finder, or Binocular Periscope will present a perfect peripheral circle not an oval, not to semi converged circles or any other theatrical effects originally created for film...

Examples of incorrect, cinematic, fantasy portrayals of binocular view can be seen: here, here, and here... All properly converged binocular instruments present a view like this, and this...

Some might remark that realism isn't as important here and being able to use more screen real estate on wide aspect ratio displays; in that case a clipped circle would offer more viewable area and still portray a more aesthetic realism -- two illustrations of that can be executed be seen here and here...

It would be nice to see ArmA III present realistic optical aesthetics and limitations of FOV... As well, but perhaps better approached in another topic; it would be nice to see some of the of the optical displacement and magnification effects of NVG realistically portrayed in ArmA III as the means to do so are already in the game...

Vote the technical recitation here on the Arma III Tracker...

Edited May 28, 2013 by Hoak

[afp 1]

I also stated this in the past, the problem was that binoculars have a strong "tunnel vision" feeling while the rifle scopes don't. Reality is the other way... scopes are used few centimeters in front of the eye to avoid recoil, while the binoculars are used near eyes, plus the other optical parameters like eye relief, field of view, exit pupil etc are strongly in favor of binoculars.

The best to picture this in game was the way ACE did it, the big clipped circle for binocular and a smaller circle for magnification optics (which they already did). There is another story for night vision googles, but I'd say that for the sake of gameplay the circle should be bigger too.

[GottyPlays 10]

it's useless if you only open a topic, open a ticket about this and i will upvote it!

[hoak 0]

Per my tracker post on canting, I wanted to wait to see if anyone actually cared before making a tracker post for Improperly Converged/Depicted Binocular Optics -- don't want to waste BI's time and resources with issues Fans don't even recognize no less care about.

[HKFlash 9]

Up voted. I sure as hell want to see an improvement in this area.

[hoak 0]

I added to the tracker post notes to keep the recitation there as factual and technically correct as possible... I understand some may have a personal preference that don't reflect the facts, realism, or scale -- but that's not what I intended to present or argue.

[xyberviri 1]

Per my tracker post on canting, I wanted to wait to see if anyone actually cared before making a tracker post for Improperly Converged/Depicted Binocular Optics -- don't want to waste BI's time and resources with issues Fans don't even recognize no less care about.

people shouldn't even bother posting in the forums about something broken unless they have already submitted feedback to the tracker not the other way around.

if in doubt just use the search feature in the tracker.

[hoak 0]

Not sure what you mean xyberviri, or that I agree depending on what you mean. I do agree more people should visit the tracker and probably vote more issues then brought them there, as the vote system is obviously heavily skewed and biased toward issues people knew and understood enough to seek a forum topic that linked them there or to find the tracker outright and report or confirm a report.

That said I don't think there's anything wrong with getting confirmation from the forum before creating a tracker post or concurrently to doing so. A lot of people new to firearms, serious and scale realism gaming for example are justifiably completely in the dark about a topic like Correct Weapon Handling & Canting, and even if they're seriously browsing the tracker, may blow past a low vote volume issue like this that appears technical or tedious. Having a forum thread to inform and survey interest seems reasonable to me...

[dmarkwick 261]

Speaking personally I find the "binovision" mask acceptable, there have been occasions where I forget that I'm actually looking through binos (as opposed to weapon sights) until I realise the shape of the mask. :) so I see it as an easy visual cue to my current mode.

[hoak 0]

Speaking personally I find the "binovision" mask acceptable, there have been occasions where I forget that I'm actually looking through binos (as opposed to weapon sights) until I realise the shape of the mask. :) so I see it as an easy visual cue to my current mode.

Well your confusion problem (a subjective personal issue I might add) could be just as easily, and far more realistically be assuaged by having a realistic and technically correct binocular reticule (as oopsed to the useless and non functional one we have now) on the 'binovision' mask like:

...Or

...Or learning to hit your 'B' key, unaim your rifle, or toggleing your camera view (if you're really that forgetful....

Or, a 'Special Interface' with bright red flashing text reminding you you're looking through a rifle scope, or binoculars, with voice over repeating 'You are looking through binoculars.'...

I certainly hope BI doesn't deliberately choose such an approach of dumbed down and broken scale to make the game easy -- by the same logic we could end up with idiot lights, circles and arrows or special colored windows reminding you that you're in a house and not a tank, or even 'better' ArmA 3 will be re-monikered: ArmA Call of DooDoo Medal of Action Super Magic Surprise Prize!

:(

Edited May 31, 2013 by Hoak

[daze23 1]

well I think it's hard to simulate the way your brain puts the image together. it's like expecting a first person game to take into account how I can kinda see my nose. or the 'double image' I see if I hold my finger up and focus past it

[dmarkwick 261]

Its just a matter of what you choose to focus on I guess. For me, I need to see visually what stance I'm in, I often cannot remember that either. The main problem is one of lack of proprioception I guess, IRL I don't need to remember what stance/view I'm in, I just know. In game I don't have that kinesthetic sense. Ingame I'm more interested in what I'm looking at than how I'm looking at it, or what with, or how it's represented. I agree that more appropriate realism would solve the issues I have (aside from stance :) but that looks fixed now according to latest beta staus report....).

So yeah - rather than the thread's (apparent) focus on the visibility mask, might make more of a noise about the entire equipment RE it's markings etc. I don't care about the visibility mask, but the markings & usefulness thereof might make me more interested I guess.

[Smurf 12]

I wouldn't mind to see a less cartoonish "mask" but isn't a big deal.

Scopes on the other hand...

[hoak 0]

well I think it's hard to simulate the way your brain puts the image together. it's like expecting a first person game to take into account how I can kinda see my nose. or the 'double image' I see if I hold my finger up and focus past it

Many people, even some with extensive military training behind them never learn how to properly adjust (focus and converge) binocular optics... Adjusted properly it is impossible to perceive anything but a perfect circle unless the binocular instrument in question is damaged or otherwise misaligned, or in some cases of sever facial deformity or injury.

Creating correct to-scale ratios of FOV and perceived image size due to eye relief (focal length) is also only possible with masks that are perfect circles; anything else will be grossly broken scale as far as realism is concerned.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Hoak