Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cathrynn

Scope glare, yes or no?

What should happen with '3D' scope glare?  

87 members have voted

  1. 1. What should happen with '3D' scope glare?

    • Keep scope glare, but tone it down a bit and fix the shadow issues
    • Keep scope glare, but fix the shadow issues
    • Leave scope glare as it is now
    • Remove scope glare completely


Recommended Posts

I recently watched a user made Arma 3 SP mission vid that really annoyed me in part. At one point during the mission the player started to complain when he couldn't look down his RCO scope properly because of the sun's glare on the scope, even having the audacity to tell BI to fix it! What rot! Scope glare happens when you get yourself, and your squad, into a poor fighting position. I would hasten to add that perhaps the player needs to have more of an improvise, adapt, and overcome attitude rather than calling on BI to change the glare just because he couldn't see his target properly. Jeez!

I for one really hope BI never changes the way the sun glares off of the RCO scope as that's one of the many subtle nuances that draws you into the new enviroment, adding to the immerssion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is/was a bug with this though. You couldn't use your RCO even if there was a hill behind you, since the sun would magically shine through it and blind your sights.

I think you agree that we don't need that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And some graphic glitches happens when you have that glare on your scope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feedback tracker issue 0009919: Fix the glare in the 3D optics so that the character body and head will block light sources

While looking away from the sun, the worst of the scope glare/reflection happens while the scope is in the shadow of the user's head. It's impossible for the scope to be in shadow and reflect the sun at the same time.

Edited by ceeeb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course there would be NO specular reflection in the scope because your head would be in the way.

Sorry Bear but you don't know what you're talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zimms: Yes, of course, if there is something behind you blocking the sun so that your in shadow then there shouldn't be any glare. The person in the vid had nothing behind him that should have blocked the setting sun.

DMarkwick: Not always, no. That's one of the reasons why you can fit an anti glare attachment to the RCO and similar scopes.

Smurf: When using the RCO scope I used to be able to press 'left ctrl' with the rmb to blacken much of the screen except for the sight picture, acting like an anti glare device, sort of, but it doesn't seem to be working any more, at least not for me.

EDcase: The sun can and will reflect off of the RCO scope depending on the angle of the sun, that's why there are anti glare devices for those types of scopes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I recently watched a user made Arma 3 SP mission vid that really annoyed me in part. At one point during the mission the player started to complain when he couldn't look down his RCO scope properly because of the sun's glare on the scope, even having the audacity to tell BI to fix it! What rot! Scope glare happens when you get yourself, and your squad, into a poor fighting position. I would hasten to add that perhaps the player needs to have more of an improvise, adapt, and overcome attitude rather than calling on BI to change the glare just because he couldn't see his target properly. Jeez!

I for one really hope BI never changes the way the sun glares off of the RCO scope as that's one of the many subtle nuances that draws you into the new enviroment, adding to the immerssion.

See, here is the problem with mistaking realism and immersion with difficulty. Here you are advocating a gameplay mechanic that makes the game more difficult, but that actually isn't realistic. Same with A2's aiming deadzone.

For glare, you wouldn't see a bright shining light on your sight. You'd see a reflection of yourself most likely, and that would make a reflection because there's light all around you anyway. But the implementation of having this shining sphere reflecting off of your scope isn't really realistic.

Edited by antoineflemming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Stencil shadows" currently do not affect any kind of glare, while the "soft shadows" do. While your own body will cast a (stencil) shadow on the weapon and fail to remove the glare, other things that cast soft shadows will remove the glare like trees and buildings.

In many cases, your head would deny the glare, but there are certain angles of sun and weapon. Glare is fine, but stencil shadows is what's making it silly. It's not about yes or no, glare is fine, but should be removed by shadows, which is currently hit or miss depending on the type of the shadow cast.

Here is a ticket I have open regarding a wider scope of glare issues. They fixed a lot of shadow volume bugs, but the stencil shadows are what's taking a piss on the great changes they've made. :(

Edited by Sniperwolf572

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See, here is the problem with mistaking realism and immersion with difficulty. Here you are advocating a gameplay mechanic that makes the game more difficult, but that actually isn't realistic. Same with A2's aiming deadzone.

For glare, you wouldn't see a bright shining light on your sight. You'd see a reflection of yourself most likely, and that would make a reflection because there's light all around you anyway. But the implementation of having this shining sphere reflecting off of your scope isn't really realistic.

The ACOG (RCO) type sight can and does give sun glare when your up at the aim given the correct sun angles and conditions, Arma 3 is merely trying to reflect this. In RL these types of scopes can be fitted with lens covers and/or anti glare devices, if there wasn't a problem with sun glare and bad reflections interfering with the scope picture then there wouldn't be a need for such anti glare attachments.

---------- Post added at 18:42 ---------- Previous post was at 18:33 ----------

"Stencil shadows" currently do not affect any kind of glare, while the "soft shadows" do. While your own body will cast a (stencil) shadow on the weapon and fail to remove the glare, other things that cast soft shadows will remove the glare like trees and buildings.

In many cases, your head would deny the glare, but there are certain angles of sun and weapon. Glare is fine, but stencil shadows is what's making it silly. It's not about yes or no, glare is fine, but should be removed by shadows, which is currently hit or miss depending on the type of the shadow cast.

Here is a ticket I have open regarding a wider scope of glare issues. They fixed a lot of shadow volume bugs, but the stencil shadows are what's taking a piss on the great changes they've made. :(

I agree, when your facing away from the sun and the rear of the sight is in shadow then there should not be any sun glare on the rear of the sight that disrupts the sight picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely your own head would block the sun.

bingo.

---------- Post added at 09:31 ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 ----------

See, here is the problem with mistaking realism and immersion with difficulty. Here you are advocating a gameplay mechanic that makes the game more difficult, but that actually isn't realistic. Same with A2's aiming deadzone.

For glare, you wouldn't see a bright shining light on your sight. You'd see a reflection of yourself most likely, and that would make a reflection because there's light all around you anyway. But the implementation of having this shining sphere reflecting off of your scope isn't really realistic.

aiming deadzone in any other game makes them easier, but is more difficult to use in arma2/3 due to the horrendous implementation. and it actually is realistic. your arm can move independent of your center line direction. minute, quick adjustments to where you're aiming without changing the position of your feet is actually critical in cqb and mid-range engagements. right now there is a link between gun direction and feet direction, which is the height of stupidity and something that is actually a "gamey" thing as people like to ignore its perfect incarnation in red orchestra 2 and claim that a proper implementation of deadzone aiming is "impossible"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even chemlights in broad daylight cause additional glares, even if they're not in your line of sight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I recently watched a user made Arma 3 SP mission vid that really annoyed me in part. At one point during the mission the player started to complain when he couldn't look down his RCO scope properly because of the sun's glare on the scope...
I'd wager I know the video you mean and if it is indeed the same one his avatar's shadow covers the scope and no flare of that type should be created when the lens is in shadow with a gap of a couple of inches from the source of that shadow. This is reflective (arf arf) of the broader problem with glare, including how it simulates light on the scope lens at night, even with a light source both behind your avatar's head and with other objects between you and said light source. The lens reflection should be properly simulated or faked, but if the proper effect can't be created it'd be best to remove it altogether for the sake of the gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd wager I know the video you mean and if it is indeed the same one his avatar's shadow covers the scope and no flare of that type should be created when the lens is in shadow with a gap of a couple of inches from the source of that shadow. This is reflective (arf arf) of the broader problem with glare, including how it simulates light on the scope lens at night, even with a light source both behind your avatar's head and with other objects between you and said light source. The lens reflection should be properly simulated or faked, but if the proper effect can't be created it'd be best to remove it altogether for the sake of the gameplay.

The player in the vid I was talking about in the OP had no shadow over the rear of his/her scope that would have stopped the glare from the sun. But this thread is at least shining some light (sorry) on the issue of sun glare on the rear of the scope when it's in shadow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course there would be NO specular reflection in the scope because your head would be in the way.

Sorry Bear but you don't know what you're talking about.

This.

Doesn't matter if you've got Mount Everest behind you or the sun itself, if you're looking down your scope, you have to put your head there, and that is 105% enough to block any lights. The anti glare attachment you're talking about is called KillFlash. Yes, it's made to counter the effects of lights being caught by the scope. But it goes on the other end of the scope, to avoid the scope mirroring sunlight and thus revealing the position of it, and thereby the soldier using it. It's got nothing to do with what you're on about. I'm still not sure whether or not this thread is satire, but what I am sure of is that whoever designed the "3D" scopes we have to endure now lacks a very basic understanding of how rifle scopes work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This.

Doesn't matter if you've got Mount Everest behind you or the sun itself, if you're looking down your scope, you have to put your head there, and that is 105% enough to block any lights. The anti glare attachment you're talking about is called KillFlash. Yes, it's made to counter the effects of lights being caught by the scope. But it goes on the other end of the scope, to avoid the scope mirroring sunlight and thus revealing the position of it, and thereby the soldier using it. It's got nothing to do with what you're on about. I'm still not sure whether or not this thread is satire, but what I am sure of is that whoever designed the "3D" scopes we have to endure now lacks a very basic understanding of how rifle scopes work.

I understand that there are anti-reflection devices for the front of the scope but there are also anti-glare attachments for the rear; they're like a rubber gromit of sorts, a soft rubber scope cover, that stops any glare because your eye comes up against the rubber.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=256322

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bingo.

---------- Post added at 09:31 ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 ----------

aiming deadzone in any other game makes them easier, but is more difficult to use in arma2/3 due to the horrendous implementation. and it actually is realistic. your arm can move independent of your center line direction. minute, quick adjustments to where you're aiming without changing the position of your feet is actually critical in cqb and mid-range engagements. right now there is a link between gun direction and feet direction, which is the height of stupidity and something that is actually a "gamey" thing as people like to ignore its perfect incarnation in red orchestra 2 and claim that a proper implementation of deadzone aiming is "impossible"

Offtopic, yes, but aiming deadzone for me is not about what the human body can do. It's about what a trained soldier would do. And a trained soldier would not point his weapon in any other direction other than where he himself was looking. If if was that the entire torso turned as one unit while the lower body remained in the same place, then I'd accept it. But Arma 2's implementation of having your gun + arms move around your screen while the rest of your body faced the original direction isn't what trained soldiers would do. That's the example of "difficulty over realism" that I'm talking about, and this idea that if it makes the game harder, then it must be realistic. Others refer to it as simulation fever. It's like tactical shooters that only allow you to walk everywhere. They claim realism, but it only serves to make the game more difficult. For glare, I have no problem with it. I have a problem with the sun always shining off of your scope though (the bright sphere seen in the video).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd say it was a different video then. A glaring :D mistake on my part.

Of course all scopes that coruscate with resplendence are not truly auriferous. hehehe :bounce3:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The ACOG (RCO) type sight can and does give sun glare when your up at the aim given the correct sun angles and conditions, Arma 3 is merely trying to reflect this. In RL these types of scopes can be fitted with lens covers and/or anti glare devices, if there wasn't a problem with sun glare and bad reflections interfering with the scope picture then there wouldn't be a need for such anti glare attachments.

You've mentioned this twice, and it gives your ignorance away regarding this discussion. Anti-Glare devices are on the other side of the scope. Not the end you stick your eye up to.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5295/5410066285_ef9a7c9aa8_o.jpg

It's called KillFlash, and it's ONLY for the objective lens.

And btw, I've been shooting through the TA31F going on three years now, and I've never once had glare get in my way.

Edited by TheCapulet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You've mentioned this twice, and it gives your ignorance away regarding this discussion. Anti-Glare devices are on the other side of the scope. Not the end you stick your eye up to.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5295/5410066285_ef9a7c9aa8_o.jpg

It's called KillFlash, and it's ONLY for the objective lens.

And btw, I've been shooting through the TA31F going on three years now, and I've never once had glare get in my way.

Another example of an anti-glare rear scope rubber eyepiece for the ACOG - http://www.cobratactical.com/Trijicon-TA35-Rubber-Eyepiece-for-4x32-35x35-ACOG-Scope-Models_p_10983.html

I'm not saying that rear scope glare from the sun is a common thing with the ACOG, I'm merely pointing out that there would not be a need for such rear scope rubber eyepieces if glare never happened when up at the aim, given the right set of circumstances and conditions; just because someone has never experienced something before does not mean that it can't happen and the fact that ACOG scope manufacturers themselves coat the lenses, front and rear, with anti-glare coatings is also suggestive.

Arma 3 is obviously trying to simulate this rear scope glare from the sun although it's not doing a very good job of it at the moment due to shadow issues/bugs etc. But when the shadow problems with the rear of the '3D' scope have been fixed then it can only be a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another example of an anti-glare rear scope rubber eyepiece for the ACOG - http://www.cobratactical.com/Trijicon-TA35-Rubber-Eyepiece-for-4x32-35x35-ACOG-Scope-Models_p_10983.html

...the fact that ACOG scope manufacturers themselves coat the lenses, front and rear, with anti-glare coatings is also suggestive.

I stand corrected, though I can't imagine anyone really wasting their money on it. I'll stand behind my experience though when I tell you that it's an uneeded waste of money. Keep in mind that I'm in Law Enforcement and have been shooting with those who also are in law enforcement and military careers for many years, and I've never once even heard of Trij selling a rear eye piece, let alone seeing one in use. It's simply a waste; you'll realistically never see glare in your modern RCO. And that anti glare coating? It's preventative, not suggestive. It's one of the reasons why you don't experience glare.

Edit: Also, the more I think about it, the more I expect that eye piece is more to promote proper eye relief than anything else.

Edited by TheCapulet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I stand corrected, though I can't imagine anyone really wasting their money on it. I'll stand behind my experience though when I tell you that it's an uneeded waste of money. Keep in mind that I'm in Law Enforcement and have been shooting with those who also are in law enforcement and military careers for many years, and I've never once even heard of Trij selling a rear eye piece, let alone seeing one in use. It's simply a waste; you'll realistically never see glare in your modern RCO. And that anti glare coating? It's preventative, not suggestive. It's one of the reasons why you don't experience glare.

Edit: Also, the more I think about it, the more I expect that eye piece is more to promote proper eye relief than anything else.

Anyone that's got a reasonable level of firearms experience has no need for any sort of physical eye relief device solely on the basis of placing the eye at the correct distance from the rear lens of the scope.

I agree, the lens coating is there to try and prevent scope glare and/or reflection interfering with the scope picture but it obviously suggests that there's a problem there in the first place by the coatings very presance. The manufacturers coating for the curved rear lens isn't perfect by any means and does not completely eliminate sun glare and/or bad reflections when the rear of the scope is not in shadow. Under the right conditions and if there's no shadow being cast onto the rear of the scope, over the curved lens, when the rifle is up at the aim and the sun is at the correct angle, then there will be some glare experienced on the curved rear lens. The fact that the rear lens is coated, the fact that a rear anti-glare attachment can be fitted, the fact that if the curved rear lens is not in shadow when the sun is blazing down at an extreme angle - all add up to what Arma 3 is trying to deliver with it's '3D' scope picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Stencil shadows" currently do not affect any kind of glare, while the "soft shadows" do. While your own body will cast a (stencil) shadow on the weapon and fail to remove the glare, other things that cast soft shadows will remove the glare like trees and buildings.

In many cases, your head would deny the glare, but there are certain angles of sun and weapon. Glare is fine, but stencil shadows is what's making it silly. It's not about yes or no, glare is fine, but should be removed by shadows, which is currently hit or miss depending on the type of the shadow cast.

Here is a ticket I have open regarding a wider scope of glare issues. They fixed a lot of shadow volume bugs, but the stencil shadows are what's taking a piss on the great changes they've made. :(

All the more reason stencil shadows should be done away with entirerly on higher settings. Speaking of which, I can't help but wonder why there are still so many when even BI themselves confirmed some time ago that stencils take CPU while soft takes GPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×