Combining COF and recoil in an interesting way?

[Seagoon]

Ok, this is a quick idea that I have not thought through much at all and maybe completely redundant or even derpily stupid so im going to keep this quick.

However the idea seems like an interesting way of combining two systems to give us somthing simmilar to PS1 COF while keeping the more realistic visuals and feel of the recoil systems in other games.

Now the idea is this:
The gun will allways fire accurately from the direction the barrel is pointing, none of this bullets coming out at 45 degrees nonsense, however the gun will still have a COF that opperates like in PS1, so the more it fires the less accurate it gets as well as having a certain number of bullets before the cof expands too much.

what the cone of fire does instead of changing the direction of the bullet is control how far the gun can recoil by bucking the sights like in more modern FPSes.

This means that you get the realistic movement and feel of the guns from modern fpses but also the old COF rules that made gun fights a bit more skillful in PS1.

So the larger the COF the more the gun can potentially recoil every shot both virtically and sideways. This will both feel and look good as you will start off with small ammounts of sight recoil while the gun is firing the first few bullets but then will grow more and more uncontrollable as you keep firing. It also gives the player a little more interaction as they can try to control the gun better by attempting to resist the recoil.

This might not be the most realistic implementation of recoil and COF, but I think it would be an interesting way to 'modernise' a old PS1 gameplay mechanic with out loseing its core functionality.

(I understand that modern FPSes use both COF and recoil together already, but they do it the other way around, the COF decides the deviation of the bullet not the deviation of the recoil.)

[Grognard]

Now the idea is this:
The gun will allways fire accurately from the direction the barrel is pointing, none of this bullets coming out at 45 degrees nonsense, however the gun will still have a COF that opperates like in PS1, so the more it fires the less accurate it gets as well as having a certain number of bullets before the cof expands too much.

what the cone of fire does instead of changing the direction of the bullet is control how far the gun can recoil by bucking the sights like in more modern FPSes.

This means that you get the realistic movement and feel of the guns from modern fpses but also the old COF rules that made gun fights a bit more skillful in PS1.

So the larger the COF the more the gun can potentially recoil every shot both virtically and sideways. This will both feel and look good as you will start off with small ammounts of sight recoil while the gun is firing the first few bullets but then will grow more and more uncontrollable as you keep firing. It also gives the player a little more interaction as they can try to control the gun better by attempting to resist the recoil.

This might not be the most realistic implementation of recoil and COF, but I think it would be an interesting way to 'modernise' a old PS1 gameplay mechanic with out loseing its core functionality.


I'd have to see this animation in action... As long as, in order to match the recoil with the barrel, we dont get a "grandma with a fire hose" effect. Then seems reasonable to me.


Edit: Color for emphasis.

[NewSith]

I don't get exactly what you mean...


This is how things work in PlanetSide:
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/COF.jpg


The way I understood what you are saying:
Is it static screen, where the gun and the ch are not?
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Recoil.jpg

Or vice versa, weapon is static, but the screen follows the recoil?
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/VisibleRecoil.jpg

Or is it something else, even?


If you mean the 2nd, I say we don't need it, for it tends to cause headaches in combination with motion blur.
If you mean the 1st, I support the idea.

But even then, having good ol' dusty CoF will forever be fine by me.

[GTGD]

I've said this time and time again: base the recoil and COF off Day of Defeat's system. COF accuracy changes while moving, crouching, etc. When firing the weapon, recoil kicks in. Instead of having it go roughly straight up like in DoD, give it a little bit of random movement up AND side to side to prevent macros from accounting for perfect recoil.


Here are a couple examples so you can visualize it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YlwpVIjZ9Gk#t=234s

In that one, the player is ADSing with a bolt action rifle. As he takes the shot, the crosshairs jump upwards.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YlwpVIjZ9Gk#t=121s

From the same video. This one was a good one to use because it was his first day and he didn't try to control for recoil much. In this one you can see the crosshairs inching up as he holds the trigger, though he occasionally moves it down a little trying to compensate.



SUMMARY:

Exactly like the videos above, except with COF bloom while firing the weapon and more random recoil up and a little sideways to prevent macros from ruining the game.

[mefy]

Socom2 for PS2 had a great combo of recoil and COF in my opinion.

(Ps2) Socom 2 - Tracers (Part 2) Frostfire - YouTube

[Azren]

Hmm... so what about energy weapons? Those have no recoil.

[Rbstr]

Some semblance of the COF is behind most modern recoil systems as it is. You have several sets of precision, depending on if you're moving, crouching, aiming and so on. And recoil usually bucks the gun and expand the cone.

The critical thing is the the circle doesn't really get so big that it looks like the bullets are coming out at crazy angles like they do in PS. And, when aiming down a sight you can pan without your accuracy getting blown to hell.

Recoil, where the gun moves but the screen doesn't is going to look super awkward in a first person view.

Hmm... so what about energy weapons? Those have no recoil.
Or maybe they do. They are fictitious, after all. We've got all the technobabble in the world.

[Sirisian]

I think I'd prefer to have the weapon move and the screen doesn't. I don't like the idea of a player being able to influence the random number generator by fighting the movement of the reticule. I've also never been a fan of the screen jumping when I fire. The Planetside 1 COF system worked really well to differentiate the guns.

If you watch the The9 video it's hard to tell what system they're using. There's like no recoil in the shots and there's no UI so no visual reticule to see a COF.

[CutterJohn]

Will there even be recoil? Didn't appear to be much in the gameplay videos.

[Seagoon]

What I mean is that the crosshairs (in hipfire) or the ironsights/scope moves not your whole screen. However where ever the crosshairs or ironsight post is pointing at is exactly where the bullet will fly to, so no more bullets flying out in stupid directions.

This movement of the crosshairs or ironsights is dictated by the size of the COF. the crosshairs can only recoil inside that COF area.

So smaller COF, less recoil, larger COF more recoil. Firing in bursts means the recoil stays small, but firing continuously will lead to greater and greater recoil, and movement will also increase the recoil just like with the COF in PS1.

the system should be functionally the same as the COF in PS1, however it should make it look and feel far better from the players pov.

Basically I want the COF from PS1, but I also want to improve it asthetically so there is better immersion and better feeling behind the guns.

[Rbstr]

What I mean is that the crosshairs (in hipfire) or the ironsights/scope moves not your whole screen. However where ever the crosshairs or ironsight post is pointing at is exactly where the bullet will fly to, so no more bullets flying out in stupid directions.

Think about the 3D perspective of looking down a sight for a moment. Eye, aperature/notch and post all have to be lined up in order to know where the bullet is going. Three things.

Typically sights are pulled up at the center of your screen, which makes sense as the center of your eye on 2D screen.
To have the gun move but the camera stay still you either have to tilt the gun while will screw up the notch/post alignment so you're no longer looking down the sight or you have to pretend that your eye is moving with the gun, and simply translate the gun as a whole keeping it's alignment moving it up or down the screen.

Neither of those makes intuitive sense when you're holding a weapon.

[Neksar]

Why not have both?

I can't remember which game it was, but I'd played a game once where cone of fire and ADS existed simultaneously. COF just got visibly smaller and easier to control when sighted in. I like that idea, since it gives the best of both worlds. Recoil was simulated by COF and visible through a small amount of screen shake.

If only I could remember what game it was... Mighta been FEAR 3.

[Khellendros]

I really do not want the screen-inching-up recoil system where we have to "push" our screen down to counter recoil. I hate that system so bad, please do not use it!

[Forsaken One]

I really do not want the screen-inching-up recoil system where we have to "push" our screen down to counter recoil. I hate that system so bad, please do not use it!

I sadly have to agree with this.

Any game where it takes 3+ bullets to kill someone just should not have recoil. Its a pain in the ass and is just more reflex work and counter fun then anything else it brings to the game.

CoF is fine and should be kept. Its going to take too many bullets to kill someone for recoil to not be a high annoyance in the game.

[Shade Millith]

Simple.

COF for hip shooting. Recoil for Iron Sights.

Unless there is a visual representation (Like with COF) of what your bloom is, Iron Sights should NEVER deviate from where the gun is pointed.

Aiming dead on an enemy and having everything miss, because you have no idea what your bloom is while iron sighted, is completely and utterly unacceptable.

[wasdie]

Battlefield 3 combines CoF and recoil very well.

Basically it only comes into play when firing fully auto. If you press and hold the recoil is only going to be so much. It's enough to throw your shots off and force you to control it but it's not enough to make you lose control.

What happens is if a player is looking down the sights, the first few shots are going to be dictated by the recoil. If they press and hold the trigger, the cone slowly expands so that the 4th-5th shot starts to be dictated by the CoD instead of the recoil. When a player is not looking through the sights and is firing from the hip, the CoF seems to expand much quicker.

This makes players slow down and control their shots much more. While firing from the hip works in close quarters, anything at range it's utterly useless.

You can see this effect the most with the LMGs. They are bigger and heavier so they have less recoil when you shoot. Unless it's on a bipod, if you hold the trigger even while prone you'll notice the cone of fire dictating the accuracy. This forces players to fire in bursts to keep the cone small. The recoil animation works with this cone. They found a great balance of making the cone of fire come into play without being blatantly obvious.

Basically in BF3, if you hold the trigger you're going to miss a lot. You have to control your shots. I would love to see a very similar mechanic in Planetside 2.

The pace of the game wouldn't be super slow but it wouldn't be lighting fast.

[Rbstr]

Yeah, BF3/BC2 have my favorite shooting mechanics. Like I was saying, the COF exists in the background of most shooters...but they make an effort to keep you from feeling like you're shooting random numbers, which is the feel I get out of Planetside.
Up close you can fairly well shoot a dude without ADS especially pistols and shotguns, but at long range you basically have to. And that's how it should be.