Really? A crosshair for a "realistic" sim?

[An Fiach 10]

Rifle crosshairs should be more transparent and much wider to eliminate long distance aiming while still functioning as an indicator for weapon orientation and using menus, etc.

WWII Online is great, but it doesn't have AI like ArmA 2, in order to limit the AI the same way players are handicapped by not having their muzzle glued to center screen (realism), the AI would be rather ineffective. For PvP it is fine not to have crosshairs.

[Master gamawa 0]

Oh, hi it's this topic again, innit?

Did you guys talk about minimal crosshair mod yet? it's the best. Use it, shut up and have fun.

[dmarkwick 261]

Oh, hi it's this topic again, innit?

Did you guys talk about minimal crosshair mod yet? it's the best. Use it, shut up and have fun.

Heh :) I think this thread is no longer about what can be done about it, but more about the possibility of time travel, so that BIS can remove the crosshair from the original release :)

[ricnunes 0]

Actually I disagree when anyone says that Crosshair is UNrealistic!

Actuallly I find the opposite since in CQB combat you always have the notion where you're aiming your gun at without having to carefully aim your gun and again in CQB combat enviourment most of the shots taken and NOT aimed shots (since you simply don't have time to make aimed shots). In situations like this and without the Crosshair you simply don't have the notion where you aiming at!

People have to realise that while most of us (including me) want the MOST REALISTIC combat experience with ArmA2, it's simply NOT possible to model or experience many things like in real life since for example we're looking into a computer monitor and in a computer monitor we simply don't have things like proper depth perception and neither the field of view like we have in reality.

So visual cues like the Crosshair serves to level and overcome those limitations and feedback that we can't receive from a computer like we have in real life!

[jw custom 56]

Actually I disagree when anyone says that Crosshair is UNrealistic!

Actuallly I find the opposite since in CQB combat you always have the notion where you're aiming your gun at without having to carefully aim your gun and again in CQB combat enviourment most of the shots taken and NOT aimed shots (since you simply don't have time to make aimed shots). In situations like this and without the Crosshair you simply don't have the notion where you aiming at!

I play without Crosshairs and in CQB i often shoot without using the sights, yes it takes practice and it's not just something you learn in 2 minutes but it's very learnable( if thats a word :p ).

[galzohar 31]

You never shoot from the hip but you never aim your weapon either. If you look at another player you will never be able to tell whether he is aiming his weapon or not. Arguing that the crosshairs give you the ability to shoot unsighted which is an ability you should have IRL is total BS, as the current crosshair is more accurate and easier to shoot with than the actual sights, which is definitely far far off from how it is IRL.

Also for the guy thinking point shooting with pistols is easier, I can say it's much much easier with rifles. A sighted pistol is effective to something like 10-20m, while an unsighted rifle is effective up to ~25m, so that should give you an idea.

I personally avoid servers that play with crosshairs like the plague. It's just loses that much realism for me. If you prefer playing with crosshairs, then so be it, but you're missing out on a major aspect of realism this game is offering.

[HyperU2 11]

Yeah I was thinking about how unrealistic the cross hair was today as I watched an AI convoy fail to negotiate a bridge.

[jw custom 56]

Yeah I was thinking about how unrealistic the cross hair was today as I watched an AI convoy fail to negotiate a bridge.

So only reason you are using crosshair is because AI have problems with bridges so then you can just aswell use crosshair... makes sense :confused:

Personally i don't care if people uses crosshair as long as server/host has the option to force it off for all clients and that we have, but please stop talking about it being more realistic with'em on than off :eek:

[celery 8]

Aiming a weapon that is on your shoulders like in Arma 2 is super easy. In the game without crosshair and with floating zone on it becomes harder than real life, so how is that supposed to be realistic then?

[jw custom 56]

Aiming a weapon that is on your shoulders like in Arma 2 is super easy.

When i was in the army we trained aiming down the barrel and that was not super easy and specially not on longer distances!

[celery 8]

When i was in the army we trained aiming down the barrel and that was not super easy and specially not on longer distances!

You trained to aim down the barrel. What are you getting at? Point aiming a rifle on your shoulder is still super easy for anyone with half decent hand-eye coordination.

[HyperU2 11]

So only reason you are using crosshair is because AI have problems with bridges so then you can just aswell use crosshair... makes sense :confused:

Personally i don't care if people uses crosshair as long as server/host has the option to force it off for all clients and that we have, but please stop talking about it being more realistic with'em on than off :eek:

Nah, I just meant some folks put the nitwit in nitpicking when it comes to realism.

[ricnunes 0]

You never shoot from the hip but you never aim your weapon either. If you look at another player you will never be able to tell whether he is aiming his weapon or not. Arguing that the crosshairs give you the ability to shoot unsighted which is an ability you should have IRL is total BS, as the current crosshair is more accurate and easier to shoot with than the actual sights, which is definitely far far off from how it is IRL.

.

Well not in my game! With Crosshair, no way you can hit anything at longer ranges than 20-25 meters. Honestly there's nothing more BS and unrealistic as trying to shoot unsighted without crosshairs in ArmA2! The shot trends to go from the right side of the screen to the left side, instead of going foward.

So with this, I still affirm that crosshair while not perfect, gives the player the best and most realistic "ability to shoot unsighted" available in ArmA2!

Also for the guy thinking point shooting with pistols is easier, I can say it's much much easier with rifles. A sighted pistol is effective to something like 10-20m, while an unsighted rifle is effective up to ~25m, so that should give you an idea.

Yes, I totally agree with you on this comparison between rifles with pistols! But in ArmA2, I have to say that without crosshair it's basically impossible to make unsighted shots much less than 20-25 meters with rifles while WITH crosshair it's possible to do it and at the same time with crosshair you basically can't hit sh*t at distances above 25 meters, so I would say that crosshairs in this regard makes the game MORE REALISTIC than without them!

I personally avoid servers that play with crosshairs like the plague. It's just loses that much realism for me. If you prefer playing with crosshairs, then so be it, but you're missing out on a major aspect of realism this game is offering.

Like I previously said and having in consideration the limitations from the feedback that we get from a computer monitor screen, I have the oppinion that playing WITH crosshairs gives me a more realistic gameplay experience than playing WITHOUT the crosshair.

[jw custom 56]

You trained to aim down the barrel. What are you getting at?

I take it your talking about having you rifle in your shoulders but not looking through your sights and then shooting... yes it might be rather easy at shorter distances. In ArmA 2 you can do that aswell with a little practice, but of course with crosshair you need no practice!

[Gunter Severloh 4042]

just noticed this topic,

there is another game i play with my WW2 Realism Unit, which is the game called Red Orchestra Ostfront 41-45.

using an example here in Red Orchestra or RO for short, there are no crosshairs, nothing but ironsights. Ballistics are real, and most of the guns are rifles,smgs, and machine guns, every gun has its own recoil, you can shoot the guns from the hip but are more accurate if you use the iron sites, for most of the rifles there is a bayonet attachment where you can do some trench clearing and CQB.

vidoe is the RO infantry tutorial demonstrates realism aspects of the game

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWr8tfB0Rqs&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWr8tfB0Rqs&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

My point is I think it would be best to keep arma 2 options as they are as not everyone likes the ironsites, like alot of people have been saying here if you dont like the crosshairs you can turn them off.

I think too that players will come from other games that are nothing but cross hair oriented where you cannot turn them off, nowadays more games are giving you the option, i think the option should be open to the player, if you want realism turn them off.

As for RO there is no option to turn crosshairs on, the guns have weight, you have fatigue, and the game is geared to mp.

option is important leave it up to the player.

[celery 8]

using an example here in Red Orchestra or RO for short, there are no crosshairs, nothing but ironsights. Ballistics are real, and most of the guns are rifles,smgs, and machine guns, every gun has its own recoil, you can shoot the guns from the hip but are more accurate if you use the iron sites, for most of the rifles there is a bayonet attachment where you can do some trench clearing and CQB.

Red Orchestra is a bit of a bad example in realism. The weapon model in 1st person is more like a moving 3d cardboard that has no physical presence in the outside world, so the bullet always comes from your eyes and not the rifle, and some weapons are misaligned (barrel points up-left of actual impact point), making unaimed shots extremely difficult even if you normally have good spatial awareness. Every gun has its own recoil yes (just like in Arma 2), but automatic weapons have a ridiculously exaggerated recoil and dispersion, for obvious balancing reasons. Bayonets are almost useless because of the aforementioned cardboard modeling, you'll miss a clear stab many times. RO is a big collection of gameplay compromises within the limits of the Unreal engine.

[nkenny 1057]

Aiming a weapon that is on your shoulders like in Arma 2 is super easy. In the game without crosshair and with floating zone on it becomes harder than real life, so how is that supposed to be realistic then?

Operation flashpoint had it right. Floating zone FORCED ON when you werent 'using' optics/ironsights.

Unrelated to the above post. In Arma2 its a bit of a misnomer to declare "unsighted" shots as 'hip'fire. Its not. Your weapon is still held at shoulder level; you are actually quite ready to rock and roll.

The only unfortunate thing (which Infiltration did much better) was that even in unaimed mode your weapon model was significantly more 'center' to the screen. With some training it it was quite possible to make reasonably accurate shots using only the front-post. It should be like that in ARMA2 as well.

-k

[Gunter Severloh 4042]

Bayonets are almost useless because of the aforementioned cardboard modeling

Is that your edjucated guess as in knowing that from playing the game or you just theorizing with conclusions and observations.

Did i say anything was realistic, is any game realistic?

im merely make a few points based on how the gameplay is, lose the negitives and look at what it does do, there isn't going to be a perfect game, or a game that is right, whats right is what the player likes, if he dont like it and thinks its not realistic then so be it, players have the powe to change whatever they want in the game as they do in arma and arma 2.

i beg to differ that bayos are useless, i use them all the time, maybe you just suck at bayos or again are theorizing on modern day possiblities, they are useless in todays modern military all depends on who your talking too.

On another level based on the game's atmosphere, and gameplay bayo is the best option in certain situations whereas rebolting after a shot on a rifle would take u half sec to complete, whereas bayo is quicker.

Practice is mans best friend in any game, all depends on where you want to go with it.

[frederf 0]

It's his educated knowledge. We know the Unreal engine has a distinct schism between the 3rd weapon and the 1st person weapon. This is not a "guess."

[JSj 12]

The only unfortunate thing (which Infiltration did much better) was that even in unaimed mode your weapon model was significantly more 'center' to the screen. With some training it it was quite possible to make reasonably accurate shots using only the front-post. It should be like that in ARMA2 as well. -k

Great point. If you want to simulate point shooting, and make unaimed fire more accurate than it is today with crosshairs off, this is how you do it. Move the weapon model more to the center, so that aiming gets more accurate. You don't put an arcade-style crosshair on the screen in a game that's striving for realism.

I've never played Red Orchestra, but I'm not surprised to hear that there are no crosshairs in that game, as this also seems to be more about realism than arcade-style action.

Edited December 3, 2009 by Johan S

[whisper 0]

And my biggest problem with it still remains. A game based on realism should not have a detached, unrealistic crosshair in the middle of the screen.

I'll go a bit OT here, but people asking to remove options in this game are getting me nervous :)

No, the primary intent of this game is not realism.

It's scale and freedom.

That's why the main evolutions between OFP and A2 are about islands size, terrain streaming system, number of AI sustainable by the engine, recent works on better ability of AI to behave in this bigger environnement, number of online players, enhanced openess of editor and scripting engine, added modding and editing tools.

If base of this game was realism, then the changes from OFP would have been mainly about things like true weapon sights management, realistic penetration system for everything, including armor and such, more precise sensors model (not this know-it-all radar we have today), detailed weapon procedures, even DR does a better job on Javelin (and this is pretty much the only point DR does better)... in short, we would have ACE2 right out of the box.

And obviously it's not what we have now.

We do have, though, something that permit ACE2 to be created. ACE2, and a huge number of completely different things.

So, this wall of text, just to state this :

Please, stop asking for removing optional things

You don't like crosshairs? It's OPTIONAL

You don't like how this option is handle? Then ask for change on this, NOT on complete removal of the feature. The primary question is asking for something very wrong and against the spirit of OFP, imho.

The good suggestion would be to have more customizable crosshair configuration. Like having crosshair optional per simulation type. You could be able to switch crosshair on/off for "shot" type weapons, "missile" type weapons, "thrown" type weapons. And I think that would suit your need while not going against the game.

/end of OT

[jw custom 56]

I think the crosshair should stay for those who prefere playing with it. And there's a option to turn it off which is forced by host/server so i don't see the problem with it at all.

Personally i used it while learning to control the game and maybe others do the same, no crosshair at all might scare some people away... ArmA 2 can be a little scary at first :p

[dmarkwick 261]

I'll go a bit OT here, but people asking to remove options in this game are getting me nervous :)

No, the primary intent of this game is not realism.

It's scale and freedom.

That's why the main evolutions between OFP and A2 are about islands size, terrain streaming system, number of AI sustainable by the engine, recent works on better ability of AI to behave in this bigger environnement, number of online players, enhanced openess of editor and scripting engine, added modding and editing tools.

If base of this game was realism, then the changes from OFP would have been mainly about things like true weapon sights management, realistic penetration system for everything, including armor and such, more precise sensors model (not this know-it-all radar we have today), detailed weapon procedures, even DR does a better job on Javelin (and this is pretty much the only point DR does better)... in short, we would have ACE2 right out of the box.

And obviously it's not what we have now.

We do have, though, something that permit ACE2 to be created. ACE2, and a huge number of completely different things.

So, this wall of text, just to state this :

Please, stop asking for removing optional things

You don't like crosshairs? It's OPTIONAL

You don't like how this option is handle? Then ask for change on this, NOT on complete removal of the feature. The primary question is asking for something very wrong and against the spirit of OFP, imho.

The good suggestion would be to have more customizable crosshair configuration. Like having crosshair optional per simulation type. You could be able to switch crosshair on/off for "shot" type weapons, "missile" type weapons, "thrown" type weapons. And I think that would suit your need while not going against the game.

/end of OT

Most intelligent post yet :)

[max power 21]

Ten characters of +1!

[galzohar 31]

IMO, the OP was directing it at BIS while it should simply be directed at server admins, but the exact same arguments apply. Having crosshairs is not realistic, and not having them while other guys do have them is even less realistic.

ricnunes, All I can say is that the stuff you consider as absurdly difficult I find rather easy. Not to patronize you or anything, but if I can hit stuff up to "until it becomes a pixel" with crosshairs, and without crosshairs easily hit stuff up to 25m (and with MGs and some spraying to even ~100m, and with mounted/static MGs at even longer than that), then I bet a lot of other people can too. I'm nothing special. In fact I fell I do much better than I can do IRL with crosshairs off, so how can turning them on be any more realistic? Besides, you can aim the weapon unrealistically fast anyway.

Options are nice, and I really don't care if some people want to play this game not as realistically as it can be played, but if you want people who play this game for its realism to join your server you should force crosshairs off, and if you actually play this game for realism you should do whatever you can to find those few servers that do run with crosshairs off.

Suggesting people play in a server where crosshairs are optional sounds like a really bad joke to me, unless you have absolutely no other options.