BI improving "Collimator Tech": Now or never the time to improve Reddot sights!

[Tsark 12]

Yesterday i saw "Collimator tech" in the sitrep, it wasn' t what i hoped for but well now as good as any other time to tackle it. So basically it' s all in this issue:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=21631

Here' s a copy and paste of myself:

Since Arma1 and the implementation of 3d sights, Reflex sights have always been unrealistic in the Arma license. (They already were in OFP, but that was at the time of 2d sights so that' s behind us now).

People who know more about shooting that i do can feel free to correct me, but as far i know the key advantages of reflex sights over traditional iron sights are:

-Parallax free

-only need to line up the dot/cross...whatever the reticle is and the target, instead of having to line up the target, the front sight and the rear sight.

-Designed to be used with both eyes open, allowing the user to keep a clear, unobstructed view of what' s going on in front of him.

In Arma2, the reflex sights had none of these attributes moddeled into the game; they were basically iron sights with makeup.

In Arma3 they are parallax free, which is a big step forward, but until the introduction of sight misalignment that still offered litte advantage over irons.

Since the introduction of sight misalignment, points 1 and 2 should prove more valuable in game over irons, but still remains the fact that right now the reflex sights are used as if one eye was closed.

Thus i propose a system of semi-transparency of reflex sights when looking through these, something along those lines:

[^]

to simulate looking through reflex sights with both eyes open.

Edit: If BIS is afraid of the cod gamers seeing that and going "Arma3 is full of bugs lol can see through metal irl u can' t unless ur superman lol" maybe it could be optional and disabled by default? Just a thought.

For those who don' t understand how it works, put your hand sideway in front of your dominant eye, or generally in front of your eyes. The distance doesn' t really matter, 5, 10, 20, 50 centimeters...etc and keeping both eyes open focus on any small object around you in the alignment of your hand. You can see it, now close your non dominant eye, you can' t see it anymore, your hand is blocking your view. Looking at it with both eyes open is how red dot sights work in real life, looking at it with the non dominant eye closed is how red dot and holographic sights are portrayed right now in Arma3. So right now in Arma3 we have red dot and holographic sights frames that fill up three quarters of the screen when looking through them, completely blocking our field of view except for a very small window in the centre of the screen, instead of providing a clear and unobstructed field of view as they should if the game would simulate those being used with both eyes open.

So as mentionned in the issue, to remedy to that we should have some kind of semi transparency system for the sights frame like in VBS2 as seen here:

Please BI, this is long overdue and with the Marksmen DLC coming up and you improving the weapon handling in many aspects this is the perfect time to do it.

[Fushko 59]

This is something that should be done with a proper DOF effect, having the gun look like a ghost seems uncanny to me.

[Tsark 12]

I know next to nothing about the technical specificities of the ways to achieve it, but one way or another the sight' s frame blocking the screen has to go. And even with the VBS2 way it wouldn' t have to be the whole gun, only the sight' s frame back. Anyway what i see in that vid is 2000 times better than what we have now.

[five_seven5-7 56]

Yesterday i saw "Collimator tech" in the sitrep, it wasn' t what i hoped for but well now as good as any other time to tackle it. So basically it' s all in this issue:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=21631

Here' s a copy and paste of myself:

For those who don' t understand how it works, put your hand sideway in front of your dominant eye, or generally in front of your eyes. The distance doesn' t really matter, 5, 10, 20, 50 centimeters...etc and keeping both eyes open focus on any small object around you in the alignment of your hand. You can see it, now close your non dominant eye, you can' t see it anymore, your hand is blocking your view. Looking at it with both eyes open is how red dot sights work in real life, looking at it with the non dominant eye closed is how red dot and holographic sights are portrayed right now in Arma3. So right now in Arma3 we have red dot and holographic sights frames that fill up three quarters of the screen when looking through them, completely blocking our field of view except for a very small window in the centre of the screen, instead of providing a clear and unobstructed field of view as they should if the game would simulate those being used with both eyes open.

So as mentionned in the issue, to remedy to that we should have some kind of semi transparency system for the sights frame like in VBS2 as seen here:

Please BI, this is long overdue and with the Marksmen DLC coming up and you improving the weapon handling in many aspects this is the perfect time to do it.

Actually the transparency isn't fully correct, also is need the dual vision like the 3d effect. http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Sony-3D1.jpg

Never see this kind of realism in a game and i don't think that is needed in this "game". There are others priorities involving the sights...

[Sandy* 10]

This is something that should be done with a proper DOF effect, having the gun look like a ghost seems uncanny to me.

I don't get it - how would you be able to see through/past the sight without transparency? A DOF effect would change nothing. The transparency is there to simulate stereo vision.

Meanwhile, iron sights should really have such a feature as well. One tends to use the other eye to see past obstructive iron sights while tracking targets, and some guns have really obstructive iron sights. Not sure though how this could be implemented well, as you'd have to lose the ability when actually aiming and shooting.

[roberthammer 582]

I don't get it - how would you be able to see through/past the sight without transparency? A DOF effect would change nothing. The transparency is there to simulate stereo vision.

Meanwhile, iron sights should really have such a feature as well. One tends to use the other eye to see past obstructive iron sights while tracking targets, and some guns have really obstructive iron sights. Not sure though how this could be implemented well, as you'd have to lose the ability when actually aiming and shooting.

It is more closer to realistic but only game that does it , is the VBS2/3 - no other because its rather minor or even very hard to do it properly

even VBS solution isnt perfect but its really a trivial thing in the end - also in reality you can see much better the iron sight with your eye focus which games can't simulate that yet

Edited March 18, 2015 by RobertHammer

[R3vo 2654]

This is something that should be done with a proper DOF effect, having the gun look like a ghost seems uncanny to me.

Exactly, I prefer a less realistic sight over a half baked feature, ugly looking feature.

[Tsark 12]

Actually the transparency isn't fully correct, also is need the dual vision like the 3d effect. http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/...1/Sony-3D1.jpg

Never see this kind of realism in a game and i don't think that is needed in this "game". There are others priorities involving the sights...

It might not be perfect but it will be a lot closer to reality than what we have now. I' ve never seen this in any other game sadly but isn' t this why we play Arma3? So we can experience things that we can' t in any stupid COD/BF shooter? Sure there are other issues with sights in general in this game but since BI is in the process of refining weapon handling now' s a good time to tackle that.

I don't get it - how would you be able to see through/past the sight without transparency? A DOF effect would change nothing. The transparency is there to simulate stereo vision.

Meanwhile, iron sights should really have such a feature as well. One tends to use the other eye to see past obstructive iron sights while tracking targets, and some guns have really obstructive iron sights. Not sure though how this could be implemented well, as you'd have to lose the ability when actually aiming and shooting.

I must of mixed up DOF with something else, but we must be able to see what' s behind the sight' s frame.

About implementing it on iron sights i' m not sure, since it requires your brain to supperpose three images (Rear sight, Front sight and target) instead of 2 (Dot and target) and thus requires a lot of focus and feels unnatural.

even VBS solution isnt perfect but its really a trivial thing in the end - also in reality you can see much better the iron sight with your eye focus which games can't simulate that yet

IMO it' s not trivial since it' s something that' s obvious and very annoying that happens everytime i bring up my sights when i have a reflex sight, which is very, very often. About iron sights and focus of the eye sure it cannot be implemented with todays technology yet, but simulating using reflex sights both eyes opens is apparently easy to simulate with semi transparency of the sight' s frame the way it' s done in VBS2.

Sure, it might not be very elegant, if somebody has a better solution to simulate the effect i' m all ears, but if not then i' ll take what' s in VBS2 10 000 times over what we have now, it is much more true to life in term of functionality and that' s all that matters to me. If people don' t like it BI could make it so it could be disabled in the options as it is in VBS2?

Exactly, I prefer a less realistic sight over a half baked feature, ugly looking feature.

Using your logic, we shouldn' t have vehicles as the animation for getting in those is ugly, the doors don' t open etc it is half baked, so until it all looks great we shouldn' t have vehicles?:p

Edited March 18, 2015 by Tsark

[Fushko 59]

Using your logic, we shouldn' t have vehicles as the animation for getting in those is ugly, the doors don' t open etc it is half baked, so until it all looks great we shouldn' t have vehicles?:p

Yes, in a world where Arma development isn't half-assed. Game has been released for a while now and we still don't have proper animations for very BASIC stuff such as UGL and launcher reloading.

[Jackal326 1181]

Yes, in a world where Arma development isn't half-assed. Game has been released for a while now and we still don't have proper animations for very BASIC stuff such as UGL and launcher reloading.

I was wondering when it would devolve to a "lets bash BI thread"....9 posts...not bad FPDR

On topic though, I'd welcome the feature if done right.

The VBS2 method you show is a rather ugly method, though unless there is added functionality to detect when someone is looking down the sight, we wont see this any time soon.

[Tsark 12]

I was wondering when it would devolve to a "lets bash BI thread"....9 posts...not bad FPDR

On topic though, I'd welcome the feature if done right.

The VBS2 method you show is a rather ugly method, though unless there is added functionality to detect when someone is looking down the sight, we wont see this any time soon.

What i suggest would involve making the sight' s frame semi transparent only when looking through it and not all the time obviously. Having the sight' s frame semi transparent at all times would be beyond ridiculous, i of course agree.

[Sandy* 10]

I must of mixed up DOF with something else, but we must be able to see what' s behind the sight' s frame.

I assumed you were talking about depth of field, which in terms of videogame post-processing is nothing more than a glorified blur effect used to simulate camera lens/eye focus by blurring objects or the entire image at certain distances. It doesn't allow you to see through anything, as at the end of the day you're still looking at a two dimensional picture on your computer screen.

I don't think there's any practical solution/compromise (aside from transparency) to this issue unless one gets hardware that actually displays a different image for each eye (= VR goggles).

[Tsark 12]

I was indeed thinking of Depth of Field since FrankHH brought it up, but probably mixed up what it could do or couldn' t do with some other effect.

So since semi transparency is the only way it goes like this: Semi transparency is needed but it doesn' t look very good alone, so which effect do you guys suggest be added in addition to the semi transparency of the reflex sight' s frame to make it better?

[Defunkt 431]

I don't want semi-transparent optics thanks.

[Tsark 12]

I don't want semi-transparent optics thanks.

If people don' t like it BI could make it so it could be disabled in the options as it is in VBS2?

You' re welcome.

[Fushko 59]

I was wondering when it would devolve to a "lets bash BI thread"....9 posts...not bad FPDR

On topic though, I'd welcome the feature if done right.

The VBS2 method you show is a rather ugly method, though unless there is added functionality to detect when someone is looking down the sight, we wont see this any time soon.

Not bashing them like some angry kids like to do, I was just making an observation, really.

You' re welcome.

Hmm, I don't think that a gameplay feature so important as this should be optional.

[Defunkt 431]

I think to do such a thing in a way that doesn't break immersion they'd need to apply the effect to everything (optic, weapon, hands) and have the transparency diminish at distance so the stock is nearly invisible and the muzzle completely opaque.

[galzohar 31]

Semi-transparent optics simply won't simulate the realistic effect properly. It'll just look bad and weird.

The only way to get this right is a 3d view. Until we can have that at every home computer, we'll have to live with monocular view. Trying to simulate binocular view with a single monitor that is observed by both eyes simply won't work right.

[Tsark 12]

Not bashing them like some angry kids like to do, I was just making an observation, really.

Hmm, I don't think that a gameplay feature so important as this should be optional.

I agree. Let' s force it upon everybody then. :p

I think to do such a thing in a way that doesn't break immersion they'd need to apply the effect to everything (optic, weapon, hands) and have the transparency diminish at distance so the stock is nearly invisible and the muzzle completely opaque.

You might very well be right. I thought about making the sight frame' s top very transparent ish and then that it would get progressively more opaque as it would get closer to the receiver, until it reaches the top of the receiver which would at this point be completely opaque, but your idea might be much better, frankly i have no idea it would have to be seen ingame to determine what looks the best. This is definitely something that would require a lot of trial and error to get the best possible looking effect.

Semi-transparent optics simply won't simulate the realistic effect properly. It'll just look bad and weird.

The only way to get this right is a 3d view. Until we can have that at every home computer, we'll have to live with monocular view. Trying to simulate binocular view with a single monitor that is observed by both eyes simply won't work right.

Will it visually simulate the effect perfectly? No, i absolutely agree. But will it be better than what the have now? Once again, i believe that 10 000 times, yes. The Red dot sights frame' s in game right now are freaking walls. In reality i could see behind it so it' s not a problem but ingame as it is now it' s as if i' ve had a wall around my reticle, which can range from quite thin to absolutely huge depending on the model, filling up three quarters of your screen when pressing right click leaving as only usable screen space a tiny tunnel around the reticle and some tiny spots around the frame, forcing me to constanly think "should i be looking through my sights at this point and have my fov blocked or not look through them and waste time if an enemy pops up?" in situations where i' d just have my sights up irl? Does that seem as a realistic depiction of a red dot sight to you? To me it doesn' t.

And i for one don' t wan' t to wait until devellopers decide that 3d gear is widespread enough to implement it as the norm to see something tackling that problem implemented in Arma. What if it takes 15 years until devellopers decide that 3d gear is widespread enough to call it "the norm"? Will i still play video games at this point? Heck, will i even be alive?

So it might not look perfect, but in terms of praticality, of usage, it will be much more realistic than what we have now.

By the way, does anybody remember Joint Ops?

This game had semi transparency for red dot sights, it even had it to some extent for iron sights:

Is that Kobra THAT bad looking? Is it really this mounstrous, visually horrible looking thing that you guys are making it out to be?

Of course, that was 2d sights and all, lots of adjustments and refinements would have to be made but still?

Edited March 19, 2015 by Tsark

[das attorney 858]

For me, the problem is that we're trying to impose 3d effect on 2d screen.

The game does not know what my eyes are focusing on, so it looks great looking down the sights, but a stupid "ghost gun" when I look at the metalwork.

Maybe in the future when games can track my eyeballs to see what they're looking at and adjust blur/dof on objects accordingly, but for now it looks bad.

Prefer if it was left alone tbh.

[dmarkwick 261]

Well IMO the ghosted sight effect is absolutely the right way to simulate the effect of binocular view with holographic sight raised on a 2D monitor, the alternative is that you simulate playing the game with only one eye. IMO it's an acceptable abstraction of what you see IRL using that technique (both eyes open with sight raised to one eye), and complaints that it looks weird to have a ghosted sight might as well complain that it looks weird to play the game on a 2D monitor at all.

We play the entire game with the RL equivalent of having a cardboard box over our head with a monitor screen-shaped hole cut into the front, and one of our eyes closed, using keyboard & mouse as replacements for our bodies. Abstractions of movement & effects are not only necessary, we've been using a lot of them without complaint because we have no alternative but to do so. If we wish to have a genuine holographic sight effect that simulates the technique of using both eyes, then it makes no sense to have a viewblocking element that effectively tells you one of your eyes is closed.

Simply holding up a hand in front of my right eye shows me that a ghosting effect is easily the most effective way to simulate this on a 2D monitor.

And BTW, the semi-transparent aiming is an optional setting in VBS ;)

Edited March 19, 2015 by DMarkwick

[Tsark 12]

Exactly.

To simulate using reddot or holo sights with one eye closed, which is exactly what we have now, is about as stupid as having sniper scopes without magnification would be.

Quite frankly, i really don' t get all the hate from people who supposedly value realism over Michael Bayttlefield 4 eyecandy and explosions.

[-Coulum- 35]

I am for a blurred/transparent holo sight housings. It would be hard to pull off though with out it looking "gamey", even though it is more realistic.

[Tsark 12]

Re watching those Joint Ops vids made me think about one thing; Maybe in addition to making the sight' s frame semi transparent when looking through it (pressing right click), other effects could also be used to make the semi transparent mettalic sight frame look thinner than how it looks when not semi transparent (as in not looking through it, pressing right click). A sight with a thick frame such as an aimpoint M2 could look a bit weird if the model is simply turned semi transparent when looking through it and nothing else is done.

The model of the sight when not in optics mode would obviously not be affected and kept as it is.

I don' t know if i can express what i mean very well, and i' m not sure how that would look in game, but i' am sure that by adding other effects on top of the semi transparency the semi transparency and the effect in general can be made much better and more natural looking.

[-Coulum- 35]

What do you guys think of what this guy says: