Really? A crosshair for a "realistic" sim?

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I don't understand why this "optional" thing always gets back. It isn't optional AT ALL!!! Unless 1.05 has done something new that I'm not aware of. Server controls it, and there is not a thing I can do about it. I prefer playing on servers with people instead of playing solo on my own that actually DO enforce no crosshairs. Another thing that destroys the "optional" argument is that it breaks the immersion when someone is allowed to run around with an M107 as an assault weapon due to crosshairs, even if I myself choose not to. And even if they themselves really don't want to, the server dictates the rules so they can't turn it off if they wanted to.

Anyway, I'm only playing ACE now, where at least I'm able to turn it off for myself via the user config. But it still allows mobile M107 assault cannons for those that wants to do that. But, ACE is slightly faulty in some aspects, like removing "magic crosshairs" for weapons or vehicles that can't be used effectively without them (ex BMP3 sidegunners). This because you can set it only as a config, and not while ingame.

Edited December 24, 2009 by CarlGustaffa

[jw custom 56]

I don't understand why this "optional" thing always gets back. It isn't optional AT ALL!!!

Well it's optional in the sense that you can choose to play on servers that forces crosshair off and thats because crosshair is an option :)

When you host or play singleplayer YOU have the option.

[_Hurricane 0]

The die hard realism fanatics can always turn off the options they want. If they're off by default, the game will be too hard for new players, which won't do selling the game any good.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I sincerely disagree. It is a realism based game after all. I'm not talking about removing everything like the server switch does, only for weapons that have a working sight. Javelin, manpad weapons, certain vehicle stations are lacking proper sights. So until those exists, I don't mind "magic sights" for them.

Removing crosshairs for rifles i.e., doens't make the game much harder, and it doesn't take long for anyone to adopt to it. I'm just guessing here, but I assume most games doesn't have crosshairs for i.e. snipers.

[galzohar 31]

Removing crosshairs is the last thing that makes learning the game harder. All it does is teach you to hit a button to aim before you shoot. Even COD teaches you to do that.

[An Fiach 10]

remember head bob and float zone are on by default too so people new to the game are not going to understand why they can't it anything

[dayglow 2]

I don't understand why this "optional" thing always gets back. It isn't optional AT ALL!!! Unless 1.05 has done something new that I'm not aware of. Server controls it, and there is not a thing I can do about it. I prefer playing on servers with people instead of playing solo on my own that actually DO enforce no crosshairs. Another thing that destroys the "optional" argument is that it breaks the immersion when someone is allowed to run around with an M107 as an assault weapon due to crosshairs, even if I myself choose not to. And even if they themselves really don't want to, the server dictates the rules so they can't turn it off if they wanted to.

Anyway, I'm only playing ACE now, where at least I'm able to turn it off for myself via the user config. But it still allows mobile M107 assault cannons for those that wants to do that. But, ACE is slightly faulty in some aspects, like removing "magic crosshairs" for weapons or vehicles that can't be used effectively without them (ex BMP3 sidegunners). This because you can set it only as a config, and not while ingame.

it is optional, you just have to find people like minded to play with. Asking the devs to force your style of play on everyone isn't the way to go. It's like going to the local Y and complaining to the staff that they should allow people to play horse on the basketball court because you feel that realistic 5 on 5 is the only way to play. The devs have provided the framework for everyone you have to take some responability on yourself to find people you want to play with in the style you want to play.

[HyperU2 11]

Considering the zoom doesn't let you see anything you wouldn't be able to see IRL I wouldn't consider the zoom unrealistic. In fact the zoom is not enough, as even with the zoom it is very hard to see enemies that you would've been able to see IRL.

Yeah it only zooms enough to let you tell if who you're looking at is friendly or not. Perfectly normal. BRB I've gotta go eject from my AH64.

[galzohar 31]

Yeah it only zooms enough to let you tell if who you're looking at is friendly or not. Perfectly normal. BRB I've gotta go eject from my AH64.

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. My point was that IRL I can see things that I can't see in the game because the zoom features is not enough, so saying the zoom feature is unrealistic is quite untrue. If I could zoom in game to see things that I wouldn't be able to see IRL you could say it's not realistic, but fortunately this is not the case.

[HyperU2 11]

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. My point was that IRL I can see things that I can't see in the game because the zoom features is not enough, so saying the zoom feature is unrealistic is quite untrue. If I could zoom in game to see things that I wouldn't be able to see IRL you could say it's not realistic, but fortunately this is not the case.

The fact that you can see things much more clearly when you zoom versus when you don't is exactly why it's unrealistic.

[galzohar 31]

The fact that you can see things much more clearly when you zoom versus when you don't is exactly why it's unrealistic.

So you're saying that the fact you can see more/less is unrealistic, so even though "more" is "less than RL" it would be more realistic if I always saw "less" which is "much less than RL"? Because I'm pretty sure "realistic" means "close to real life" and what you're saying totally contradicts it.

[HyperU2 11]

I'm saying it's bullshit that you think the zoom view realistically represents something you're capable of doing IRL.

[Daniel 0]

My real life vision is not limited by pixels. Neither is the enemy AI's.

The zoom function is a compromise between giving you a decent enough FOV so that you have situational awareness, while still letting you look at targets and objects at the right size (by zooming slightly).

If you think that's bullshit, go invent a curved monitor so we can do away with it.

Do you think BIS implemented the zoom way back in OFP because they thought soldiers had bionic eyes? It's because of the limitations of using a flat screen monitor to represent human vision.

Edited December 26, 2009 by Daniel

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Yeah it only zooms enough to let you tell if who you're looking at is friendly or not. Perfectly normal. BRB I've gotta go eject from my AH64.

Yeah, you're a true realism player :)

[galzohar 31]

I'm saying it's bullshit that you think the zoom view realistically represents something you're capable of doing IRL.

To have full realism we would need a 120deg FOV while being able to spot enemies standing in the open out to something like 500m or even more. This isn't possible with a monitor with standard HD resolutions, so you have to choose. Instead of forcing you to choose the same thing all the time (lose FOV or lose visibility range), they let you toggle between the 2, and they actually don't let you toggle all the way - the regular FOV is still too small compared to RL and the zoomed view still doesn't give you as much detail as you would've had IRL.

I agree that IRL you don't press a button to see far away, but I'd rather have the ability to toggle which unrealistic disadvantage I want to have right now rather than be stuck with always having either disadvantage.

[HyperU2 11]

Yeah, you're a true realism player :)

I'm a real sarcasm player. I just like to point out other things that certain whiny bitches don't mind having in the game, while complaining about crosshairs.

[Bulldogs 10]

Are we still arguing over something that you can easily disable?

[JSj 12]

Are we still arguing over something that you can easily disable?

Are we still ignoring all the posts in this thread which explains why the "you can always turn the crosshair off" argument is BS?

[enforcer1975 0]

Removing crosshairs is the last thing that makes learning the game harder. All it does is teach you to hit a button to aim before you shoot. Even COD teaches you to do that.

LOL

You surely never played on a server with bunny hopping, spraying bullets with the ppsh with drum mag without aiming b00ns. Sute they only make 1 or 2 kills per ~70 round mag, but that seems ok for them. :rolleyes:

And i am talking about more than half of the players :D

Those who want them off turn them off because you can. Don't bother others. If you think you are in a disadvantage keep them on but stop whining. If you want to enforce no crosshairs, get your own server running or join a no cross hairs server. Stop complaining.

[Bulldogs 10]

Those who want them off turn them off because you can. Don't bother others. If you think you are in a disadvantage keep them on but stop whining. If you want to enforce no crosshairs, get your own server running or join a no cross hairs server. Stop complaining.

Spot on.

I've read the arguments but in the end, if you don't want to play with crosshairs, then don't, but don't complain if someone else does want to play with crosshairs.

I enjoy infantry combat more than Vehicle based combat, so I demand that BIS remove all vehicles so no one can use them.

[jw custom 56]

I enjoy infantry combat more than Vehicle based combat, so I demand that BIS

I only like boats so i demand bis to remove ALL objects but boats.... you know what, cows are nice so let's keep them aswell :D

[galzohar 31]

LOL

You surely never played on a server with bunny hopping...

Bunny hoppers in COD still aim. They just aim while mid-air because COD allows it.

Even in the MW2 training they explain to you that you need to aim in order to hit something. If all COD players can understand that and get past the training mission, I think it's probably not all that complicated.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Spot on.

I've read the arguments but in the end, if you don't want to play with crosshairs, then don't, but don't complain if someone else does want to play with crosshairs.

Wrong! As important aspects of the game (Javelin, Stinger, BMP3 gunner etc, guess you didn't read too well) requires crosshairs to be on, turning them off is not a good option. I'm guessing that's why too many servers have them on in the first place. By forcing them off for small arms (only, built into the game), servers could have them on to have this capability.

Or, if we had two settings:

Crosshairs General (turns off all crosshairs)

Smallarm Crosshairs (turns off smallarms crosshairs)

You can bet that most servers wouldn't have Smallarm Crosshairs enabled.

Models configs would have to have an extra attributte that defines into which category a crosshair belongs. So when someone makes a good lock alternative (audible lock for Stinger, custom seeking lock for Javelin), all he needs to do for the weapon is to change it from General Crosshair to a Smallarm crosshair.

But, since many are still wanting to have crosshairs on, I suggest ACE force them off (again, for smallarms and those who have replaced locks in the future), since you obviously have no intentions of playing in a realistic manner anyway. Where is the realism in being able to run around with a small cannon (M107) and use it in close combat? Stick with vanilla Arma and your "fun'n'fast games".

[galzohar 31]

Wrong! As important aspects of the game (Javelin, Stinger, BMP3 gunner etc, guess you didn't read too well) requires crosshairs to be on, turning them off is not a good option. I'm guessing that's why too many servers have them on in the first place. By forcing them off for small arms (only, built into the game), servers could have them on to have this capability.

While I think crosshairs should be off by default, this specific issue isn't the reason. It is a reason though for BIS to fix the missiles to actually work in some kind of way that is similar to how they work IRL... Anyway for now you can still see the "lock indicator" if you hit the "spacebar" - on any difficulty.

[dayglow 2]

Wrong! As important aspects of the game (Javelin, Stinger, BMP3 gunner etc, guess you didn't read too well) requires crosshairs to be on, turning them off is not a good option. I'm guessing that's why too many servers have them on in the first place. By forcing them off for small arms (only, built into the game), servers could have them on to have this capability.

Or, if we had two settings:

Crosshairs General (turns off all crosshairs)

Smallarm Crosshairs (turns off smallarms crosshairs)

You can bet that most servers wouldn't have Smallarm Crosshairs enabled.

Models configs would have to have an extra attributte that defines into which category a crosshair belongs. So when someone makes a good lock alternative (audible lock for Stinger, custom seeking lock for Javelin), all he needs to do for the weapon is to change it from General Crosshair to a Smallarm crosshair.

But, since many are still wanting to have crosshairs on, I suggest ACE force them off (again, for smallarms and those who have replaced locks in the future), since you obviously have no intentions of playing in a realistic manner anyway. Where is the realism in being able to run around with a small cannon (M107) and use it in close combat? Stick with vanilla Arma and your "fun'n'fast games".

do you exit the game and uninstall it once you are killed? Since you play in the most realistic manner only.