Adjustable iron sights?

[ThePredator 0]

I am a shooter myself (both handgun and long rifle) but I never had a "zoom" experience. This is ridiculous.

Yes, you conentrate on the front sight, but this does not remove peripheral view nor does your eye zoom to the target.

To realisticaly implement aiming the target should be blurred, the front sight is sharp (you focus on the front sight not the target, that's why red dot, reflex and holo sights are more of an advantage than iron sights).

No need to decrease the FOV, I still have both eyes open (even with scopes, because you do not get tired of looking through the optic that fast).

However, it would be some nice brain work to really make it look realistic in-game.

[strango 5]

However, it would be some nice brain work to really make it look realistic in-game.

With Depth of Field being one of the tricks up DirectX's sleeve, this is possible. In the Crysis tech demo they show it being done very well, although not specifically with iron sites.

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]I am a shooter myself (both handgun and long rifle) but I never had a "zoom" experience. This is ridiculous.

Yes, you conentrate on the front sight, but this does not remove peripheral view nor does your eye zoom to the target.

"Zooming" in ironsight mode in most games is done to compensate for the fact that we're viewing the game environment through a relatively low-resolution, relatively small-screen viewport. The FOV zoom that occurs when going into ironsights in Flashpoint is supposed to give you a more accurate view of the sights, and your targets, but not "artificially" zoom you like a scope would, whereas the normal view is trying to give you as big of a field of view as possible since you don't have any peripheral vision to rely on and thus must make do with what the game offers.

Quote[/b] ]To realisticaly implement aiming the target should be blurred, the front sight is sharp (you focus on the front sight not the target, that's why red dot, reflex and holo sights are more of an advantage than iron sights).

This should be implemented in future games in some capacity (I'll leave debate over the exact implementation to others), I agree. Technology is progressing to the point where it will be feasible sometime in the not-too-distant future to have this as a standard feature.

Quote[/b] ]No need to decrease the FOV, I still have both eyes open (even with scopes, because you do not get tired of looking through the optic that fast).

Decreasing the FOV will continue to be used in these games as long as we're dealing with a relatively low-res, small screens as our only view into the world. It's a compromise, but the end effect is realistic when you get over the "Oh my god, it's magic eye zoom!" misperception that seems to be so common, and start thinking about your actual level of vision and field of view "in reality" and realize that the only way to come close to implementing a similar setup requires such compromises in-game.

[benreeper 0]

If you did not have the little zoom while in iron sights mode, why would you ever use the iron sights? What would be the advantage?

--Ben

[Friedchiken 0]

If you did not have the little zoom while in iron sights mode, why would you ever use the iron sights?  What would be the advantage?

--Ben

Even in first person view, the crosshair is purposely not accurate for distance shooting. Only the ironsites are reliable for long distance shooting.

BIS intended the crosshairs as a method of quick shooting for shorter ranges but nerfed the precision a bit for realism.

So that's why iron sites are still advantageous unzoomed

Dslyecxi: Thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say.

[dachrinne 0]

more tolerance for the crosshairs and the zoomed ironsight view should be a bit blured as mentioned before.

[benreeper 0]

So iron sights, without zoom, is only useful because the other views are intentionally nerfed?

All I wish they would do is not scale the mouse along with the zoom. I despise the , CS-like, rock-steady, sniper zooms.

--Ben

[Chunder 0]

Frankly I don't give a damn about iron sights. Let BIS decide whats the best trade off and stop trying to change something that seems to me nobody will really care about, Because in the end BIS has a reason. A reason doesn't necessarily mean it's agrees with you. opinions are like assholes as they say. You will always find someone to say it's unrealistic.

[Friedchiken 0]

Frankly I don't give a damn about iron sights. Let BIS decide whats the best trade off and stop trying to change something that seems to me nobody will really care about, Because in the end BIS has a reason. A reason doesn't necessarily mean it's agrees with you. opinions are like assholes as they say. You will always find someone to say it's unrealistic.  

Sounds good enough to me.

BTW, There is a reason why you would want to nerf the non-ironsights view.

Think about it; how well can you shoot without looking through the ironsights?

Quote[/b] ]So iron sights, without zoom, is only useful because the other views are intentionally nerfed?  

Yes, because muscle control is only accurate to a point.  And OFP did simulate this, as the point in which the weapons pip pointed was relatively inaccurate by a few pixels.  That makes a huge distance with far away targets.

I'm pretty sure that while people can be great shots without using the sight picture of a weapon, that their ability to hit a target deteriorates rapidly with increasing range, moreso than with iron sights.

Perhaps it's a good idea to have a little zoom for game display reasons, but really ironsights should be advantageous without zoom.

[funnyguy1 0]

If you did not have the little zoom while in iron sights mode, why would you ever use the iron sights?  What would be the advantage?

--Ben

I suggest switching off the "crosshair" in the difficulty menu of your ofp. Do as I said and then tell me what`s the advantage, do you need IR sights or not...

Realistic IRsights for ArmA/Game2 all the way...

I`m quoting myself, that`s never a good sign...

[ThePredator 0]

There are no disadvantages with 3 D sights. Everything realistic is an improvement of the game itself. Iron sights were invented for a reason. They are part of the history of weaponry, their implementation is just obgligatory for a realistic game. NO way around.

The issue however is the way they are sold...2D is easy but inadequate for a military game, 3D is the way to go. Look at BiA, AAO, RO 41-44...This is nice, adding a blur to the target and it's perfect for me.

The blur on the target is one of those reasons, why infantry combat does take place on ranges below 300 m. 200 m actually. You can't see the enemy in most cases, just fire for effect and hope someone knocks the target flat.

[Friedchiken 0]

There are no disadvantages with 3 D sights. Everything realistic is an improvement of the game itself. Iron sights were invented for a reason. They are part of the history of weaponry, their implementation is just obgligatory for a realistic game. NO way around.

The issue however is the way they are sold...2D is easy but inadequate for a military game, 3D is the way to go. Look at BiA, AAO, RO 41-44...This is nice, adding a blur to the target and it's perfect for me.

The blur on the target is one of those reasons, why infantry combat does take place on ranges below 300 m. 200 m actually. You can't see the enemy in most cases, just fire for effect and hope someone knocks the target flat.

Well, if I can't see the enemy at 200m and you expect me to lay down fire in the appropriate direction, I hope the AI will help me out with some extra bullets.

[ThePredator 0]

Well, it's realistic. There is some reason, why many forces use red dot and reflex sights...and low-power scopes too, like the 4x ACOG.