Really? A crosshair for a "realistic" sim?

[max power 21]

I think I will decide for myself what this game is about, as will each individual who is exposed to it.

[mr_centipede 31]

my opinion on this, crosshairs is important if you have deadzone set > 0. otherwise you dont know where you're pointing...

[no use for a name 0]

One thing to point out is that when you're handling a real rifle, there are all kinds of cues that you have available that you don't have when you're sitting in front of a screen. The main thing is probably proprioception-- the sense of knowing where your limbs are, and by extension the weapon that your limbs are holding. Proprioception is the reason there are marksmen who are incredibly accurate when firing from the hip. At one time I was a mean shot with a carbine and I was surprisingly accurate firing from the hip. It was starting to feel like I could hit anything I shot at from any position.

There's simply no possible way to model that with a mouse and I've always thought that having some kind of crosshair does a fairly good job. Goes rather too far though, yes, but maybe people should stop bitching about things that can be switched off in the options.

that's the best explanation I've heard

+1

[dmarkwick 261]

Looks like the discussion has stalemated, basically there are two camps:

The realism crowd, who believe that you should not have any cues that you do not in real life i.e. crosshairs.

The pragmatic crowd, who believe that the cues you do NOT get ingame should be replaced with appropriate, but non-invasive, analogues.

As you can possibly tell I'm in the latter crowd :) but I do understand that whatever crowd you belong too, it's unlikely that argument will get you to change your mind. Unfortunately, it seems that it's unlikely that you can understand the "other" position, and view it as wrong.

Obviously, it's an opinion thing. As such, optional crosshairs is the correct way to solve it. So the beef, in essence, seems to be whether crosshairs are on by default, or off. My unscientific guess is that "on by default" is preferred, simply because of the casual gamer who would otherwise be confused by the setup, whereas the realism gamer will be digging into those options straight way surely. I mean, it's not like crosshairs is the ONLY gamer helping option that needs to be turned off. The realism nut should also turn off map icons as well, but I think that would seriously confuse new and casual gamers.

[frederf 0]

What crowd is it that believes that the game should emulate real life as close as it can in performance? Give someone a rifle and have them shoot unsighted. Record their accuracy. Try to make the game replicate that accuracy while unsighted, whatever it ends up taking crosshairs or not.

There's also a biiiiig problem with the "crosshairs off" difficulty option as not having any crosshairs totally borks some things like Javelins and Stinger launchers.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

What crowd is it that believes that the game should emulate real life as close as it can in performance?

Probably a pretty small one that not too many people care about... Face it, the majority of people aren't that anal.

Hip shooters don't last 5 minutes in ArmA, not even against the AI. If someone is dumb enough to consider using the crosshairs a good thing, it's their funeral. It's not cheating against other players at all.

I'd first like to point out that there is no shooting from the hip in ArmA, it's just shooting from the shoulder without using ironsights.

Now, I rarely ever use ironsights in ArmA (I use magnification optics all the time though), and I rely on crosshairs a lot. I have no problem lasting "longer than 5 minutes" when I actually bother to use proper tactics. The point I'm trying to make is that crosshairs really don't give or remove any advantages to/from the player.

The way I see it, crosshairs are better suited for people who like to use more fast-paced tactics. Using ironsights slows you down a lot, and for impatient people (like me) who use rush tactics they get you killed because it takes too long to use them. It's just a feature that allows more flexibility in playstyle. Why would some of you people complain about additional functionality? If it doesn't suit your preferences then don't use it, it's that simple.

@All the whiners; If you have enough time to complain about crosshairs in ArmA then you're obviously not playing it right. The game is already immersive enough that I barely notice what's on my HUD anyway.

[dayglow 2]

Nah. Its more like this:

No crosshair - drinking a beer at the bar.

Crosshair - drinking a beer at the bar through a sippie cup.

Fair enough to believe that, but its another thing to feel necessary to annouce how much better you are for drinking the 'proper' way.

---------- Post added at 07:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:44 AM ----------

Looks like the discussion has stalemated, basically there are two camps:

The realism crowd, who believe that you should not have any cues that you do not in real life i.e. crosshairs.

The pragmatic crowd, who believe that the cues you do NOT get ingame should be replaced with appropriate, but non-invasive, analogues.

As you can possibly tell I'm in the latter crowd :) but I do understand that whatever crowd you belong too, it's unlikely that argument will get you to change your mind. Unfortunately, it seems that it's unlikely that you can understand the "other" position, and view it as wrong.

Obviously, it's an opinion thing. As such, optional crosshairs is the correct way to solve it. So the beef, in essence, seems to be whether crosshairs are on by default, or off. My unscientific guess is that "on by default" is preferred, simply because of the casual gamer who would otherwise be confused by the setup, whereas the realism gamer will be digging into those options straight way surely. I mean, it's not like crosshairs is the ONLY gamer helping option that needs to be turned off. The realism nut should also turn off map icons as well, but I think that would seriously confuse new and casual gamers.

I fully agree, I'm with the latter position as well. The issue is that some people in the full-real camp seem to believe it is their duty to enforce their opinion by removing options from the game. I mean the OP is arguing that the option should not even be there. Never mind the fact that the redicle is on for lower difficulty settings and off the for higher, and every difficulty settings is fully customizable to tailor the gameplay for your liking.

The larger issue is that some people expect that they should be able to jump onto any server and play the game they want. I've seen this problem in any sim style game with people arguing that the whole community should be consistent across all the servers, never mind that different people enjoy playing the game the way they like. I see it as instead of playing video games online, but instead say you go to the Y to play some pickup basketball. You arrive and some kids are playing 21 or HORSE, or whatever on one of the nets and you get pissed off because they should be playing the game the way it was meant to be played, 5 on 5 full court.

In the end I have no problem with full-real players and I hope that they get enjoyment out of the game. I just don't need them to try to dictate to everyone else how they should play and then make statements on how they are better because they 'man up' or whatever like there is some revelence to who they are in how they play.

Now I fully agree that there has to be better server browser options to help them find the games they are looking forward. They should add to the filter server settings that are important to them like the redicle turned off or friendly/enemy tags turned off, etc.

[celery 8]

I'm not a particularly great player in ArmA, but I can tell you this: if you play against me, I don't care whether you have your crosshairs on or off. It doesn't give you any advantage against me, because I use tactics; I don't rely on you running into my position at ~50m to take you down with the stupid crosshair. (It's flat out unusable for that purpose beyond that distance anyway.) I use the sights/scopes for targeting all times.

If you even consider it a good idea to use the crosshairs (on your own free will) instead of the sights, you didn't even begin to understand this game. It really doesn't matter whether the crosshair is present or not, because the issue is with comprehending what this game is about. I have the crosshair on, yet it's been weeks since I last used it in a last desperate attempt to shoot at someone at ~50m.

You're missing the point: you only cheat yourself if you rely on the crosshairs. You don't cheat any good player even if you shoot every time with the crosshair instead of the sights. This is why it doesn't matter that it's on by default.

Hip shooters don't last 5 minutes in ArmA, not even against the AI. If someone is dumb enough to consider using the crosshairs a good thing, it's their funeral. It's not cheating against other players at all.

Having read what you said, I'm starting to think that all my victorious pvp games have been hallucinations.

But seriously, why do you believe that your way is the proper way to do it? You said yourself that you're not a great player so teaching your not-so-great ways to others like it's the secret to being pro is somewhat questionable.

[galzohar 31]

Yeah, if you think your methods are "the best", please explain to me how come you bringing up the sights while I shoot and kill you with my crosshairs is of any benefit to you. Assume we both played otherwise equally, so we both detected eachother at the same time.

The only really excuse for even having crosshairs is those who insist that a huge floating zone is realistic but doesn't allow shooting with no crosshairs, but as already been mentioned a huge floating zone is far from realistic and actually restricts you in ways that you wouldn't be restricted IRL, crosshairs or not.

As for those that keep saying "but you don't have to use it", well, I don't have to use cheats either, but if everyone on my server can cheat on a copmetitive level, I probably don't have a lot of viable options.

[Nutlink 10]

I don't see anywhere he says that his methods are the best. What I think he's trying to say is that the crosshairs should act as anything but a crosshair (fatigue meter, bearings for TrackIR users, easily able to get in vehicles/open ammo boxes, etc). Instead of using it to shoot people, use your sights the way you're meant to. It's kind of like climbing up crap you shouldn't be able to in Call of Duty, or dolphin diving in Battlefield 2, or even tip toeing in OGR. Yes, it gives you an advantage, yes it's in the game, but it's not being used as intended.

As for those that keep saying "but you don't have to use it", well, I don't have to use cheats either, but if everyone on my server can cheat on a copmetitive level, I probably don't have a lot of viable options.

IE I'll do what I have to to win rather than play the way I want to have fun? This is exactly why I stopped matching in CoD4, because it feels like work rather than trying to have fun because no matter how good of a shot you were it only mattered if you knew every prenading spot and every impossible to reach spot.

Like most of us have been saying though, crosshairs are used for much more than just aiming in this game. If they had a more intuitive system in place for your fatigue, bearings, entering vehicles, using ammo boxes, hiding corpses and talking to people then I doubt you'd have nearly as much of an outcry about removing the crosshairs.

Edited July 8, 2009 by BOTA:49

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Yes, it gives you an advantage, yes it's in the game, but it's not being used as intended.

Are you saing crosshairs aren't intended to be used for aiming? :confused:

...but as already been mentioned a huge floating zone is far from realistic and actually restricts you in ways that you wouldn't be restricted IRL, crosshairs or not.

IIRC, you're also the one mentioned that, so it doesn't make it very credible.

Anyway, I can see you have a lot of bright ideas (warning: sarcasm) about how things should be, so why don't you go and make your own game and do whatever you want with crosshairs and whatnot, it sure sounds like it'd be an instant hit. Until then, just stfu.

[galzohar 31]

Dying repeatedly is not exactly fun either, so it's either getting a partial enjoyment playing on "their" terms or resorting to waiting for more sensible servers to come to life, for the server browser to find them and for good missions to be placed on them, or worse, stick to offline.

[Nutlink 10]

Are you saing crosshairs aren't intended to be used for aiming? :confused:

I should have clarified - crosshairs in this game are not meant to hit targets 200+m out. I would have no problem if they hit targets reasonably out to maybe 30m, but as it is they are a little too accurate (and as galzohar stated, anyone who turns them off still won't have problems hitting out to 200+m anyways once they get used to the center of their screen, making them useful as aids for other things rather than aiming guides).

[xxbbcc 6]

I don't think my way is the best and I certainly don't argue for that. I said quite clearly that I don't care whether someone uses the reticles or not. (In fact, I don't even remember saying anything like my way is best.)

If you play tactically and play right, I don't care how you do it, especially if you enjoy playing. It's just a game, after all. I personally find the crosshairs completely unsuited for distance combat.

I'd first like to point out that there is no shooting from the hip in ArmA, it's just shooting from the shoulder without using ironsights.

I know, I only used that phrase because someone else used it before.

I do find it strange that people argue for absolute realism and then explain how center-of-screen targeting is realistic. I don't care much about 'absolute' realism, I think the game is mostly ok as is. It could use a bit of tweaking, but it's all right.

Now, I rarely ever use ironsights in ArmA (I use magnification optics all the time though), and I rely on crosshairs a lot. I have no problem lasting "longer than 5 minutes" when I actually bother to use proper tactics. The point I'm trying to make is that crosshairs really don't give or remove any advantages to/from the player.

My point exactly. I didn't mean to call you (or anyone else, for that matter) dumb for using the sights - I probably didn't construct that senctence very well.

There is no reason to remove the crosshairs from the game because even if someone uses it, it's not cheating against other players at all - there's no advantage against them. (In fact - this is just an opinion - I think using crosshairs for targeting is a disadvantge. I have them on and use for other purposes, but never for aiming.)

Case is closed on my end - this is a pointless argument.

---------- Post added at 01:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:23 PM ----------

I don't see anywhere he says that his methods are the best. What I think he's trying to say is that the crosshairs should act as anything but a crosshair (fatigue meter, bearings for TrackIR users, easily able to get in vehicles/open ammo boxes, etc). Instead of using it to shoot people, use your sights the way you're meant to.

Exactly what I was trying to argue for. Sorry if the meaning got lost in the text.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

I should have clarified - crosshairs in this game are not meant to hit targets 200+m out. I would have no problem if they hit targets reasonably out to maybe 30m, but as it is they are a little too accurate (and as galzohar stated, anyone who turns them off still won't have problems hitting out to 200+m anyways once they get used to the center of their screen, making them useful as aids for other things rather than aiming guides).

Blah. Crosshairs have nothing to do with accuracy. I think what you mean to say is that they are too precise. IMO they aren't really all that precise, especially at longer distances where they obscure your target quite a bit (I use 3rd person a lot too, so it doesn't help). As for the center of the screen thing, that only applies to people who disable the floating zone. Since it's on by default (which is what I thought the debate was about), and thus the majority of players use it, it's not even an issue.

...this is a pointless argument.

It always has been, but if people realized this there wouldn't be 9 pages of pointlessness taking up space on BI's server right now.

Edited July 8, 2009 by Big Dawg KS

[dmarkwick 261]

Yeah, if you think your methods are "the best", please explain to me how come you bringing up the sights while I shoot and kill you with my crosshairs is of any benefit to you. Assume we both played otherwise equally, so we both detected each other at the same time.

Why assume it's a problem? If you wish to use your crosshairs, please, do so. It's up to me to not get into the position where we are in a face-off. It's up to me to lay down, or arrange the laying down, of suppressive fire to affect your aim.

The only really excuse for even having crosshairs is those who insist that a huge floating zone is realistic but doesn't allow shooting with no crosshairs, but as already been mentioned a huge floating zone is far from realistic and actually restricts you in ways that you wouldn't be restricted IRL, crosshairs or not.

It sounds to me like you're moaning about it both ways. It seems to me that the case for a large floating zone has been made.

As for those that keep saying "but you don't have to use it", well, I don't have to use cheats either, but if everyone on my server can cheat on a copmetitive level, I probably don't have a lot of viable options.

"Viable options"? Just play it as you like to man. Don't sweat what other people are doing, because you'll NEVER get out of the habit of worrying about what other people are doing, and it'll just eat away at every game.

[max power 21]

This is so bizarre. This thread has the most inappropriate and consistent display of vitriol I have ever seen on this forum. So much prejudicial language and posturing- and even before the conversation reached an impasse. These pot shots are even being taken by forum members I considered to be quite rational and level headed in the past. Why not leave the miserable passive agressive back stabbing to assholes like me, and try your best to have a civil discussion? Especially on such a mundane topic. We're not talking about moral relativism here or something.

[dmarkwick 261]

Sometimes it's relaxing...

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Is that guy fishing or taking a leak? :j:

I find either to be quite relaxing...

[xxbbcc 6]

ha ha :)

[dmarkwick 261]

Is that guy fishing or taking a leak?

Probably both.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Sometimes I do both. That's like, relaxing to the power of 2.

[xxbbcc 6]

Yeah, if you think your methods are "the best", please explain to me how come you bringing up the sights while I shoot and kill you with my crosshairs is of any benefit to you. Assume we both played otherwise equally, so we both detected each other at the same time.

You simply consider the act of shooting the important act, nothing else. If I play right, the act of shooting is not important at all. I said I'm not a particularly gret player, but if I shoot you, you're dead even before I pull the trigger (click the mouse, that is. :) ) Unless I mess up the shot itself.

It has nothing to do with my aiming skill, aiming method or my aiming speed. In all likelihood, you're better at those things than I am. The whole thing comes down to actions well before the actual shot. If you can easily shoot at me with/without crosshairs from ~100m, I already made a mistake well before that - I said this, too, already. I let you get into a position from where you can conveniently shoot at me using any method you choose. It doesn't matter to me if you use crosshairs or sights, because I'm likely dead anyway.

On the other hand, if I play right, it doesn't come down to you facing me and me trying to pull up my sights in time. If I play right, I know where you are and I can get to a position where I can shoot you on my terms. Again, you using crosshairs or not is not cheating against me in any way, because things are decided much before the actual act of shooting.

I hope I explained it right - seems like others clarify my points a lot better than I do.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

I agree, if you're doing things right shooting isn't really all that important. I usually let my AI take care of shooting if I have them, while I take care of tactics/stuff AI can't do.

[chaplainDMK 10]

Im all go for loosing it, tho i still have it on but i dont use it :p

I just like it for helping me aim faster with my iron sights, probably cheating but whatever :D Wont miss it.

Edited July 8, 2009 by chaplainDMK