Binoculars

[frederf 0]

While I contend that the complaints regarding your so-called offense(s) are only as public as the offenses themselves, I agree that such matters are stated at least satisfactorily in thread and any further word-slinging should happen not on this thread. Back to topic.

"•Are normally stored away? Not sure on this one."

Heaven knows on this one. I'm not sure how often they are used in modern times. I would assume that when the (relatively rare) need occurs to use binoculars they come out of their pouch or packaging, are used for a short time at one to several localized positions, and then returned to storage before any major movement is attempted.

My experience with binoculars (in my life) is that any motion, however small would require re-placing your eyes at the eyecup. I could envision the very tiniest side step while maintaining a sight picture, but nothing beyond that. If one is not able to force out of optics on movement, then the normal huge wobble when walking scoped with a high magnification weapon sight will do just fine.

"•Person can have a rifle/sidearm in one hand while binoculars are out."

Most modern soldiers would have their rifles slung (or pistol holstered) and both hands holding the binoculars. I don't understand what is being hinted at here.

[Quenaelin 0]

ArmA has many restrictions becouse developers wan't players to play game like being in real tactical situation and not to use wrong tactics. There is too many restrictions in this game, which all can't be game engine restrictions or animation restrictions. I am sure lot of these restrictions are made with purpose, not just to annoy players.

for example:

1. You can't point weapon forward when you are running -> safety issue

2. You have to reload stationary -> requires cover

3. You have to change sidearm stationary -> requires cover

4. You have to use binoculars stationary -> requires good observation location

So all these restrictions requires to use better tactics, I don't see any problem encouraging players to use good tactics. You could choose any other game and use bad tactics if you want.

[max power 21]

I don't think you should be able to move much with the binocs up to your face.. noone walks around with telescopes over their eyes.. but you should be able to move freely with them out, for sure, and having them up should not prevent you from moving.. you should just tip them down from your eyes when you want to move.

[sluggCDN 0]

@Quenaelin & Federef - OMG!!!

you really think BIS is trying to encourage us players to use better tactics? They are real busy these days patching up the game and trying not to land on their face once again. They used underdeveloped platform of the 8 year old game and resold it to us in updated packaging with several new addons and 1.5 new island. They haven't chosen to lock us up with the binos in our hands. No, they chose not to redesign the old animation system for the sake of releasing the game on the market ASAP.

All these quirks with the clumsy animation and movement system is the legacy of the old OFP technology where many compromises had been made in favor of performance and at the expense of "realism". However they made it into ArmA not because BIS cares alot about the "tactical aspects of the gameplay", but because the game was rushed to the market and nobody had time to redesign the old junk. In fact I'm becoming more and more convinced that ArmA is just a developmental and financial spingboard to ArmA2.

Yes we can say then there is no point to whine about it - it's too late anyways. But I say they have their priorities somewhat askew. They work for example on VOP - a new feature - for month instead of polishing up the features that are already in the game.

You just look at the ECS mod - what the modders managed to achieve. ArmA spiked with ECS is a brand new game! AI uses covering & supressing fire and clears buildings. Infantry also works along with armour when apcs and tanks keep on firing on buildings where the enemy was identified. Now that is the encouragement for better tactics. Yet it doesn't come from BIS, like so many other things that have been corrected by the community. I hope BIS listen; they did so many promising things in OFP & they can do it once again if not in ArmA then in ArmA2. I'm off-topic

[sluggCDN 0]

@plaintif1

Quote[/b] ]I don't think you should be able to move much with the binocs up to your face.. noone walks around with telescopes over their eyes.. but you should be able to move freely with them out, for sure, and having them up should not prevent you from moving.. you should just tip them down from your eyes when you want to move.

Totally agree - it should work by the same principle as with a scope. If you're looking thru a scope using optics key and press forward key, the scope is lowered and you move. When you release the forward key the character stops, the scope is brought up to the eyes once again.

[Maddmatt 1]

@Quenaelin & Federef - OMG!!!

you really think BIS is trying to encourage us players to use better tactics? They are real busy these days patching up the game and trying not to land on their face once again. They used underdeveloped platform of the 8 year old game and resold it to us in updated packaging with several new addons and 1.5 new island. They haven't chosen to lock us up with the binos in our hands. No, they chose not to redesign the old animation system for the sake of releasing the game on the market ASAP.

All these quirks with the clumsy animation and movement system is the legacy of the old OFP technology where many compromises had been made in favor of performance and at the expense of "realism". However they made it into ArmA not because BIS cares alot about the "tactical aspects of the gameplay", but because the game was rushed to the market and nobody had time to redesign the old junk. In fact I'm becoming more and more convinced that ArmA is just a developmental and financial spingboard to ArmA2.

The fact that you can't move with binoculars is not a limitation of the animation system. It is because animations were not made and set up for moving with binoculars. It is possible to add in animations for movement. They just need to be made an set up in the configs, which takes a decent amount of work.

How can someone use realism and tactics to justify this problem, that is just ridiculous and shows a lack of a grip on reality

It was not done because it takes time, other things had priority. ArmA was made with a small team in a short space of time and probably a rather low budget too.

The insane arguments over a small gameplay issue is just stupid.

[frederf 0]

Quote[/b] ]1. You can't point weapon forward when you are running -> safety issue

2. You have to reload stationary -> requires cover

3. You have to change sidearm stationary -> requires cover

4. You have to use binoculars stationary -> requires good observation location

Engine limitations for developers and engine limitations for modders are quite different. #1 is an example of a reasonable choice by the game designers to have the running animation have the soldier hold the rifle across their body and thus the barrel points in erratic directions while running. However #2, #3, and #4 are a result of an altogether lazy system of animation and not a conscious game design decision.

I've heard tell of "blended animations" and such and it is my impression that reloading on the move, switching to sidearm on the move, etc are all possible (in ArmA, not OFP) but simply have not been done due to the work involved.

A lot of aspects regarding binoculars in ArmA are hard-coded. Not impossible for the devs to change, but certainly so for the modding community.

The state of animations in OFP/ArmA is not solely a consequence of engine and animation issues. Surely the devs originally had the option of a fast-n-arcade version of binoculars that was just as easy as the nail-boots-down version. Out of the two easy systems they chose the slower and more tactical. There is an element of game design in how they chose to implement these things with their limited commitment to full simulation. Be reminded, our consideration is not only of ArmA (which is most assuredly inherited straight from older games) but of the entire OFP/ArmA lineage.

The topic originally asked a question of BIS: "Why did you do it this way?" The answer is likely due to the amount of work required to do more. In the beginning, BIS made 6 weapon types: handgun, rifle, launcher, throw, put, and binocular. Those 6 weapon types are still all we have today. The animation for holding the M16/M203 is the same as the AK-47 (notice your fingers through the M203 barrel).

OFP lacked a visible change in your soldier between sighted and unsighted on the weapon. ArmA still lacks this. BIS chose their method to solve certain aesthetic and AI issues. Watch someone use the ACE binoculars to see the obvious visual flaw.

OFP/ArmA is full of dinosaur code and fixes to problems that are no longer needed. We can hope for a better method in ArmA2 or we can do what the OP did and express their dissatisfaction to BIS to make sure they know we want better.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

An interesting discussion here, methinks.

For my 1/50 of an AUD, I've basically given up on this in ArmA, but was hoping that the introduction of upper-body mobility (e.g. reloading while moving) introduced in ArmA 2 (apparently) would somehow lead to the possiblility of bringing up/putting down/using binos while moving.

EDIT - Poor maths.

[Wolfrug 0]

Just a random thought, I'm sure one of you who are more well-versed in the world of computer gaming and developement can give a more full-fledged answer on this one...

But isn't it true that in most FPS games (à la Half Life, Crysis, COD etc) there are in fact two "sets" of animations. One is the one you as the player see (for instance you reloading your weapon), and the other is what your model is doing (hopefully also reloading his weapon). But these two animations needn't be the same at all - for instance, do you see the plasma chamber thing slide into place when a Combine soldier reloads his AR-2 in HL2 if you look at it from the "outside"? Or when you pick something up in MP Crysis (say a gun) do everyone see you do the swiping animation the same as in first person? Or if you jump in COD, why doesn't your gun swivel accordingly to how your character model seems to be holding it?

Is it, perhaps, possible that the reason these games feel a lot more fluid and approachable with things like these is simply because the other games don't have to worry about this aspect of it all? If they have an outside animation which does something weird (say, basically blocks the first person sight image entirely with flailing limbs or whatnot when jumping), they can simply opt out of using it in the first person view. Whereas, correct me if I'm wrong, the ArmA first person view actually represents (slanted FOV and various parts such as NV goggles and helmets edited out) what your character would see.

Where I'm trying to come with all of this is that it's not entirely fair to compare ArmA to other games that don't use the same type of animation system, and that it might simply not have been possible to, in an aesthetically pleasing way, create the appropriate "moving around" animations for binoculars.

Not making excuses, just offering a random thought. I might be entirely wrong about this as well, of course.

Kind regards,

Wolfrug

[NoRailgunner 0]

Well at least some additional animation would be fine:

• to lower binocs down/bring them up to get an quick overwiew without changing to any weapon (methinks that OFP had some kind of made by community)

• walking, on the knees and crawling with lowered binocs in one hand or with both

But I don't vote for moving and running around with binocs up in front of your eyes.

[Scoo 0]

Just a couple of quick thoughts:

1. regarding binoculars stowed in a case, that's not usually the case (no pun intended ) anymore. Since WWII (some, and nowadays just about all) military binoculars have been clad in protective rubber armour (example of three 1950's-1970's German ones) enabling the user to have them dangle around the neck without having to worry about them being knocked up. Generally speaking, military binos are built to be very sturdy.

2. fix focal length or zoom? variable focal length binoculars (zooms) are very uncommon amongst military field binoculars (and usually shunned by 'other professionals' such as birdwatchers) because a zoom design is more difficult to water/weatherproof and generally less sturdy. Apart from that, image sharpness usually suffers and for a zoom binocular of a given size to gather as much light as a fix focal one (usually 7x or 8x), it would have to be considerably larger, adding to bulk and becoming more unwieldly (same thing with photographic lenses or rifle scopes). Therefore I very much like the implementation in OFP/ArmA, in regards to a fixed focal length (while a zoom thingie fits the sci-fi theme of for example S.T.A.L.K.E.R). A better rangefinder reticle might be nice though.

Regarding the animations, as said before, I assume Arma 2 will feature generally more fluid animations and not ones like the current ones that are somewhat Hidden & Dangerous-esque. Perhaps we'll even have dipped headlights as opposed to only high beams?

[frederf 0]

Quote[/b] ]But isn't it true that in most FPS games (à la Half Life, Crysis, COD etc) there are in fact two "sets" of animations. One is the one you as the player see (for instance you reloading your weapon), and the other is what your model is doing (hopefully also reloading his weapon).

[...]Where I'm trying to come with all of this is that it's not entirely fair to compare ArmA to other games that don't use the same type of animation system, and that it might simply not have been possible to, in an aesthetically pleasing way, create the appropriate "moving around" animations for binoculars.

It is a recognized and appreciated that OFP went the more difficult and truer route of making what the player sees and his actual state one and the same. This makes fully animating the situation more difficult than most FPSs. In fact it was impossible to do to our current satisfaction back in OFP. ArmA I think it was possible, just BIS didn't give it any time/effort.

They certainly did give the Launcher some effort though. Remember changing stance with an RPG in OFP? You had to switch back to rifle to do it, now with ArmA there is a rather fast "Hide Weapon" weapon that allows you to stand up while holding a M136 right away. Something to consider.

Perhaps the "arms lowered" position could be used to differentiate between binocs up and simply binocs in hand. Arms raised brings the binoculars to your face, making it nearly impossible to see unless you choose to look through the optics. With arms lowered you could walk around with the binoculars all day unhindered.

About rubber clad binocular frames... sure that helps make them quieter, more durable but the lenses are glass and prone to dust, scratch, and fracture. The purpose of rubber body binoculars cannot be assumed to mean that they live entirely outside their cases in the field. Besides their vulnerability, try looping binoculars around your neck and jog to the end of the block. Very cumbersome, huh?

Zoom optics are a rarity on the battlefield, it's true. Although it is impossible to represent the FOV of a pair of binoculars and their zoom simultaneously due to the sizes of our monitors. A zoom range that covers both is a functional compromise.

[Quenaelin 0]

I only tried to look what is good in these game restrictions. I try to say binoculars are cumbersome to use when in firefights and it isn't really wise to use binoculars when under fire, this kind of mod encourages using them like that. Binoculars covers both of your eyes and your situational awereness drops radically when you use them, they are bulky to carry around and you always have to take both your hands away from weapon when using them which makes it impossible to immediatly return to enemy fire. If you use binoculars right from safe observation location, it really doesn't matter how long time it takes to put them on or take them off.

[KeyCat 131]

They used underdeveloped platform of the 8 year old game and resold it to us in updated packaging with several new addons and 1.5 new island.

I'm not gonna mix in the binoc discussion since you are doing just fine without me  

Just a few comments to sluggCDN...

So you forgotten that we in ArmA now have JIP as well as a streaming terrain system (among other new features)? I'm not a 3D game developer but I can imagine thoose two was really big obstacles to overcome and get working! So saying "they just resold OFP with a new island etc." is plainly wrong IMO.

ArmA may not be perfect and there still are things that can be improved but we have surely come a long way since OFP:R 1.96 if you ask me.

Quote[/b] ]

But I say they have their priorities somewhat askew. They work for example on VOP - a new feature - for month instead of polishing up the features that are already in the game.

VON/VoIP is not a new feature. It's been in ArmA since the release (not very functional tho). Actually VON/VoIP was even a feature of OFP 1.00 so it has been around for a long time. And they have not worked solely on the VON/VoIP, for example they have made major improvements to the AI's detection routines as well as anti cheat stuff, recoils etc.

Just my 0.20 SEK!

/KC

[Col. Faulkner 0]

...If you use binoculars right from safe observation location, it really doesn't matter how long time it takes to put them on or take them off.

That isn't really the issue. The issue is that making slight

adjustments to one side (if, for example, you find your view

obstructed slightly) forces you to go through a ridiculous

pantomime - put binoculars away, unsling rifle, move two

inches to one side, sling rifle again, get out binoculars again.

It isn't a showstopper by any means but it is sufficiently

annoying and "immersion-killing" to induce many to ask for an

improvement. I don't think anyone is seriously asking for a

faster binocular action so they can use them when in close

contact.

[xxbbcc 6]

If you use binoculars right from safe observation location, it really doesn't matter how long time it takes to put them on or take them off.

I don't see why I have to put away the binocs when I want to walk a few meters. (Or any distance, for that matter.) In real life I can hold the binocs in my hand and have the gun on my back. When I'm done with the binocs and put them away, then it's appropriate to have a longer animation.

One more thing: what do you care where anyone uses a binocular? If they use it in an unsafe location, they'll get shot. Having a cumbersome (and annoying) animation adds no tactical aspect at all. It's just a cumbersome annoying animation.

[OrLoK 20]

hello all

Really IMHO it Is a small part of the game, but I too don't use the binocs due to the difficulty of small movements if im near a bush or somehow cant see due to a wall im next to getting in the way and the slow equip time.

I tend to just use a scoped weapon which allows me to sidle about.

I CAN understand the slow equip (due to getting out biocs, putting weapon safe etc etc etc) but having to remove binocs to move a few centimeters and then wait for reequip anim is mad.

I can do it with a cumbersome RPG or AA launcher whilst looking through sites, so why not binocs?

I think its a legitimate question, and I assume its to do with something like ai not constantly peeking but i could be so wrong.

But as I said afore, its a small issue, compared to other Arma "features", but it does kill the immersiveness for me at least. And I'd love to see a modder create an alternative.

I too tried to mod a pistol to give me zoom, but gave up due to being thick and not being sure if it was the equiv of a cheat.

But If the prop folks (or anyone else) comes up with a fix, Ill deffo use it.

Rgds

LoK

[Jex =TE= 0]

I'm finding it hard to understand some of the view points in this thread - have you guys even used a pair of binoculars before? There is absolutely nothing realistic about being fixed in one spot. Binoculars are easy things to pull out (I used to keep them under my combats round my neck and it takes about 3-5 seconds to get them out and I can move about freely). I can even use my binoculars one handed whilst holding a rifle in the other and move about. I've never been paralyzed on the spot for doing so.

Some argue that it's making it more like an FPS - I don't see the point here because you can't shoot someone with your binoculars and if I understand this correctly, they still need to be holstered before you can bring you weapon up to commence firing. I haven't seen one credible argument for keeping this paralyzation process and as it's going to be a mod, nobody has to use it if they don't wish to.

Personally I love the work already going into this. Now I won't have to sit through a triple animation where I get my rifle out, shoulder it to bring up my bins and then put my bins away to bring my rifle up once more.

Good riddance to bad rubbish