ADS Physics

[Palerion]

Okay, I'm back at it again with some more discussion about ADS Physics. Now, if you've seen later on in one of my other threads, you'll know that I'm talking about the fact that your screen shakes and flinches WAY too much from nearby explosions and damage from bullets, and the fact that most sights (mainly the open ones) have a sort of "physics" asthetic added to them which makes them sort of twist, turn, and sway as you move them while aiming down sights.

Now, the first thing that I'm going to clear up is the screen shaking: Obviously it needs to be toned down a lot. Same goes for the flinching while being shot. If it's going to take 8 bullets minimum to kill me, please don't make me spaz out every time one hits me.

Next is the physics aesthetic while aiming down sights. Mind you, I am mainly talking about lower magnification scopes, open sights, not sniper scopes. Now, when you move these sights, whether it be to track an enemy or, whatever it is you feel like doing, you'll notice that they tend to take some time to catch up to your screen. They sort of lag behind, as to create a feeling of weight or realism, and, again, jump all over your screen as explosions hit near you and bullets damage you. Though it seems like a good idea on paper, in practice, it's a huge fun-killer.

I recently decided to purchase the IR/NV scope for one of my carbines, and noticed an immediate increase in performance and confidence in my playing ability. The game felt much more fun, and much more action packed; my shots were landing on target and I was tracking my enemies with ease. You could say this is due to the fact that the IR/NV scope highlights your enemies extremely well and is "OP", but I happen to know that it is because the IR/NV scope doesn't throw your aim off with the "realistic" weight aesthetic that the other sights have. When your jump or fly while aiming down your sights, your cone of fire increases, but your sight remains where you point it, which makes sense. The same thing applies to taking damage and fighting in the heat of explosive battles; your sight remains where you point it and your cone of fire increases. This significantly decreases your ability to perform under the circumstances, but does not disorient you like making your sights sway and shake around everywhere does.

Of course I must admit I feel silly using the IR/NV sight during the day, and using it sheerly because it feels easier to aim with doesn't seem right to me, but with the other scopes being so shaky, heavy, and inconsistent, it feels like I'm better off sticking with the IR/NV for now. I don't think shaking the player's screen and making his gun feel heavy and unstable is a productive mechanic at all, and I think the current increase in the player's cone of fire is plenty sufficient to damage the player's ability to shoot accurately in the mentioned situations (explosions, damage from bullets, aiming/shooting while in the air). And, the weighted feeling of your weapon in specific while aiming down sights only disorients the player, making him have to wait for his sight to catch up to his screen before he can actually be sure that he is on target.

P.S. I was sure to make this post more legitimate than my others, with more evidence and supporting facts for my main point. I think this does a sufficient job of advocating that this mechanic may hurt the game more than it helps it.

[EvilNinjadude]

/sign.

Agreed. Also, scope in and jump. I dare you to try it.
Bring a vomit bag.

[ShadetheDruid]

What do you have your mouse sensitivity set to? I had to go look to see what you were talking about with the "heavy" feeling, because I honestly don't notice it, but I can see what you mean about the actual dot of the sight taking ever so slightly longer to move to where you aim.

Seems like it happens with higher sensitivities and not lower ones. I switched to lower for a second (I always have mine on high) and there wasn't any of that delay.

[EvilNinjadude]

You're not getting it? Maybe you've got different settings. But I don't mean sensitivity. That shouldn't be the cause really.

[Palerion]

What do you have your mouse sensitivity set to? I had to go look to see what you were talking about with the "heavy" feeling, because I honestly don't notice it, but I can see what you mean about the actual dot of the sight taking ever so slightly longer to move to where you aim.

Seems like it happens with higher sensitivities and not lower ones. I switched to lower for a second (I always have mine on high) and there wasn't any of that delay.

Yes, that is what I mean by the "heavy" feeling. So, obviously you have noticed it too. I personally think it is an intentional mechanic that the devs implemented, but, a counterproductive one; are you suggesting that it may not be intentional? I can't imagine that they would do this unintentionally, and on the contrary believe they simply made a mistake by adding it. I'm at the default 50% sensitivity. I personally like having higher sensitivity though, and think that at these higher sensitivities (I mean come on, it's default sensitivity) your sight should still be keeping up with where you point it. It's either an unintentional mechanic and needs to be fixed or it's an intentional, yet counterproductive, mechanic, and still needs fixing.

[Rago]

-Deal with it!-:D

[Palerion]

-Deal with it!-:D

No reason to post if you're going to try and downplay an absolutely valid point without providing any reason or evidence.

[Babyfark McGeez]

You are absolutely right about the "shaky" behaviour of the reflex/open scopes, i have no idea if you can tweak anything with the settings there though.

I am no real fan of ADS aiming anyways, feels too much like wannabe-immersion to me (and like unnecessary consolero mechancis), but atleast it's now better then it was in beta (moving with ads on an uneven surface, shake it baby!).. So maybe they will improve.

I will definetely try an ir/nv scope next time i check in though, silly me thought untill now it wouldn't really serve a purpose in non-dark situations. :p

[ShadetheDruid]

You're not getting it? Maybe you've got different settings. But I don't mean sensitivity. That shouldn't be the cause really.

On higher sensitivity (I have mine set to 0.70 on the in game slider, I think), yeah. I just never noticed it until it came up in this topic and I went and looked closer. :p

I hit it down to like 0.20 to test it, and it disappeared entirely.

[Palerion]

On higher sensitivity (I have mine set to 0.70 on the in game slider, I think), yeah. I just never noticed it until it came up in this topic and I went and looked closer. :p

I hit it down to like 0.20 to test it, and it disappeared entirely.

Well for many people playing on 0.20 is unbearable xD but, yeah, it is present. I don't know how setting it that low even fixes it for you, I think it is just less noticable because you aren't moving as fast. I hit it down to 0.35 and it was still there; maybe I need to go lower. Anyway, I think it may be, like you said, a bug/error with the current ADS function. I guess I'll shoot an email to SOE, or whatever it is you do to report bugs, in hopes that they fix it soon. It would make gameplay a lot more smooth with these open scopes if they would get this fixed. I even notice it when I watch youtube videos; surprised nobody has really bothered to mention it.

[Sledgecrushr]

I cant say for sure but do you look around slower while using the nv scope? This might just be a limit on how fast your gun can "swing".

[StumpyTheOzzie]

I know I do better with IRNV scope. I don't know why though, maybe it's this.

It just feels "better" than any other scope

[Palerion]

I cant say for sure but do you look around slower while using the nv scope? This might just be a limit on how fast your gun can "swing".

I don't think this is the case. The IRNV scope is a "closed" scope, meaning you can not see around it while you are aiming, only through it. This issue only applies to open scopes, as the issue we are talking about is that the scope seems to actually be moving behind, or at a slower rate, than the camera when the player moves it. With the IRNV scope, the crosshair seems to always be at the center of the screen, no matter how fast you turn. Hopefully when this is fixed, all sights will work as smoothly as the IRNV.

I know I do better with IRNV scope. I don't know why though, maybe it's this.

It just feels "better" than any other scope

I know, right? xD

[SturmovikDrakon]

IRNV scope, and any scope above x6, feel "better" because they're completely static, like an image.

IRNV scope is also causing an issue because it's much easier to bunny hop with it since it's always in place and doesn't bounce around

They need to go the battlefield route with their high powered scopes and make them move and animate around

If you don't get what I mean, watch this video

The SV98 Power | A Battlefield 3 Montage by Darlake - YouTube

ignore the music, this is the first video that popped up for me that demonstrates what I mean

Notice how looking down the scope it moves around constantly when he moves left and right or shoots and reloads

http://i.imgur.com/xUTE9H5.png

just to show that the sights aren't actually there

How hard do you guys figure it would be to make it that way?


But on topic I do think flinching and screenshaking need to be toned down a lot

[Chewy]

I like the fact that getting shot and having something blow the fuck up next to you messing with ADS. It's MUCH better than what BF3 did with suppression and that crap RBS (random bullet spread).

If PS2 was just another arcade shooter then I wouldn't be playing it. I LOVE these little things like bullets hurting, explosions being explosions, and having to watch your footing. These are not mere inconveniences here. They fucking HURT! I for one say thanks to the devs for adding stuff like this in the game. If you can't handle it, then learn to avoid getting shot and to think about where/when to fight your battles.

Can anyone really tell me that they know of someone that can hold a fully loaded weapon steady with shit happening around and to them? I know I can't, and I have many gun nuts in my family with years in the military each. Hell, my heart rate alone can affect my shooting if not prone with a bipod. There's no telling how shit Id be with a bullet in me or an explosion going off.

[Palerion]

Sturmovik,

I'm kind of understanding your point, but not really.

You say they need to go the battlefield route with their high powered scopes, but we're talking about the IRNV and open scopes, not high powered scopes.

We aren't talking about adding animation to high powered scopes. I think what we're suggesting here is to make all the open scopes/sights more like the IRNV in terms of ease of use.

See, the issue is that, with the open scopes, while the camera moves where you move it, the scope tends to show up a small fraction of a second later.

As you know, in a firefight, a fraction of a second means a lot, and when you're tracking an enemy and your scope is always that little fraction of a second behind, it adds up to a frustrating experience.

The point I'm trying to make is that the scope should stay aligned with the camera. It's fine if the scope is knocked off center by a jump, fall, or fly, but when the player is just trying to track a target, it should stay aligned in the center of the camera.

Watch this video of the M4A1 on Battlefield 3 with ironsights.

Battlefield 3 M4A1 Gameplay - YouTube

Notice that when he aims and tracks a target, his sights stay in the center of the screen at all times, and his front and back sight are always aligned.

This is what I am suggesting; get rid of this "bug" or whatever it is that makes the sights/scope move to the center of the screen a fraction of a second late, thus making sights more static.



Chewy,

Reduction in the screen shake and flinch from explosions and bullet damage is a very common request, and will likely be fixed.

What we are talking about here is a less commonly discussed topic about your scope moving to where your camera is a fraction of a second too late.

This "feature", "bug", whatever you want to call it, is not really bringing any appreciable realistic value to the game, and is making tracking your targets harder than it has to be.

Not to mention, in real life, people usually go down with one or two bullets. It's eight minimum from an automatic rifle in this game. They obviously don't hurt as much as the bullets you're talking about.

[SturmovikDrakon]

Sturmovik,

I'm kind of understanding your point, but not really.

You say they need to go the battlefield route with their high powered scopes, but we're talking about the IRNV and open scopes, not high powered scopes.

We aren't talking about adding animation to high powered scopes. I think what we're suggesting here is to make all the open scopes/sights more like the IRNV in terms of ease of use.

See, the issue is that, with the open scopes, while the camera moves where you move it, the scope tends to show up a small fraction of a second later.

As you know, in a firefight, a fraction of a second means a lot, and when you're tracking an enemy and your scope is always that little fraction of a second behind, it adds up to a frustrating experience.

The point I'm trying to make is that the scope should stay aligned with the camera. It's fine if the scope is knocked off center by a jump, fall, or fly, but when the player is just trying to track a target, it should stay aligned in the center of the camera.

Watch this video of the M4A1 on Battlefield 3 with ironsights.

Battlefield 3 M4A1 Gameplay - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqdFsBSXSl4)

Notice that when he aims and tracks a target, his sights stay in the center of the screen at all times, and his front and back sight are always aligned.

This is what I am suggesting; get rid of this "bug" or whatever it is that makes the sights/scope move to the center of the screen a fraction of a second late, thus making sights more static.



Chewy, reduction in the screen shake and flinch from explosions and bullet damage is a very common request, and will likely be fixed.

What we are talking about here is a less commonly discussed topic about your scope moving to where your camera is a fraction of a second too late.

This "feature", "bug", whatever you want to call it, is not really bringing any appreciable realistic value to the game, and is making tracking your targets harder than it has to be.

Not to mention, in real life, people usually go down with one or two bullets. It's eight minimum from an automatic rifle in this game. They obviously don't hurt as much as the bullets you're talking about.

I know what you mean and I agree with you. Iron sights/scopes shouldn't behave as if they're trying to catch up with your view.

I guess I'm bringing an entire different issue to the table that deserves its own thread

I'm just saying that since the IRNV scope is a static image even when you jump, it makes it easier to shoot while hopping

Whenever I get the chance I'll make a comparison video the way scopes behave in BF3 vs. PS2.

[Chewy]

Sturmovik,

I'm kind of understanding your point, but not really.

You say they need to go the battlefield route with their high powered scopes, but we're talking about the IRNV and open scopes, not high powered scopes.

We aren't talking about adding animation to high powered scopes. I think what we're suggesting here is to make all the open scopes/sights more like the IRNV in terms of ease of use.

See, the issue is that, with the open scopes, while the camera moves where you move it, the scope tends to show up a small fraction of a second later.

As you know, in a firefight, a fraction of a second means a lot, and when you're tracking an enemy and your scope is always that little fraction of a second behind, it adds up to a frustrating experience.

The point I'm trying to make is that the scope should stay aligned with the camera. It's fine if the scope is knocked off center by a jump, fall, or fly, but when the player is just trying to track a target, it should stay aligned in the center of the camera.

Watch this video of the M4A1 on Battlefield 3 with ironsights.

(video snip)

Notice that when he aims and tracks a target, his sights stay in the center of the screen at all times, and his front and back sight are always aligned.

This is what I am suggesting; get rid of this "bug" or whatever it is that makes the sights/scope move to the center of the screen a fraction of a second late, thus making sights more static.



Chewy,

Reduction in the screen shake and flinch from explosions and bullet damage is a very common request, and will likely be fixed.

What we are talking about here is a less commonly discussed topic about your scope moving to where your camera is a fraction of a second too late.

This "feature", "bug", whatever you want to call it, is not really bringing any appreciable realistic value to the game, and is making tracking your targets harder than it has to be.

Not to mention, in real life, people usually go down with one or two bullets. It's eight minimum from an automatic rifle in this game. They obviously don't hurt as much as the bullets you're talking about.

But you're comparing a game that relies on pure COF to one that has a mix of COF and recoil. Also that's beta footage. Look this video of how bad the COF was before the suppression nerf.
Another reason why suppression in BF3 is crap. - YouTube

With crap like that happening and almost no recoil to any guns. Can you really use BF3 as am example for a game like PS2?
In PS2 the gun position matters and that makes recoil something that you have to deal with for shots to land instead of praying for RBS to be good. The scope/sight sway is also a way to show that the gun is moving and isn't fuzed to your body. BF3 is an arcade shooter, PS2 is a mix of arcade and sim. Both apples for being shooters, but completely different breeds with their own tastes, feel, textures, and smells.

[Palerion]

Sturmovik,

Lol, I thought you didn't understand what we're talking about.

I do think it would be good if they could make the scopes move more like that. The only problem is when.

I think they can probably get to the issue about the scope showing up on your screen late and flying around everywhere from explosions or bullet damage relatively quickly, as this is an important aspect of the game that people have to deal with every time they get into combat.

On the other hand, I think what you are suggesting would be a much later addition by the devs because high magnification scopes do not necessarily have problems, so this would be more of a new feature than an immediate issue.

Chewy,

Where did you get the idea that this is in any way supposed to be a sim? It's a sic-fi shooter, not ARMA.

Battlefield has recoil too. Either way the scope should be arriving at the same time as the camera.

Come on, I think we're all in agreement that the sight should stay centered on your camera.

[Chewy]

Sturmovik,


Chewy,

Where did you get the idea that this is in any way supposed to be a sim? It's a sic-fi shooter, not ARMA.

Battlefield has recoil too. Either way the scope should be arriving at the same time as the camera.

Come on, I think we're all in agreement that the sight should stay centered on your camera.

What style a game is doesn't matter to what type it is.

BF3s recoil is just the screen moving up when firing. Nothing more, and is independent of where the gun itself is aiming. Look here at this sniper test firing. Watch the laser pointer not move left or right when he shifts the weapon to work the bolt action. Later (about 5 minutes in) watch a SMG hipfire near perfect with the gun shaking all over.
Battlefield 3: JNG-90 & MP5K recoil patterns and E-mag L86A2 & M27 - YouTube

Now look at PS2s recoil
PlanetSide 2: Target Practice to Handle Recoil - YouTube
Unlike the BF3 video, notice how every jump and bump affects where the bullets land. Each shots recoil effects the next shots COF. The guns COF is dependent on the guns location and not the screens. Semi-real recoil.


After saying that I must say that I am against locking sights to the screen damn near 100%. For the likes of IR, NV, and high powered scopes it's kinda needed seeing how it forces a tunnel vision to give those effects at the cost of situational awareness. But to lock iron and reflex sights to the screen is a big no no to me because it undoes the games semi-real recoil. It'll also remove an element of the game that is VERY hard for a game to have. Fear.

Without shaking guns and it effecting aim, how ever little, then PS2 becomes just another arcade shooter with one man armies that don't give a fuck about getting shot or having grenades at his/her feet. PS2 is about being in a WAR, and I for one never want to see a war without fear.

[Kail]

Its not an argument for removing shaking and flinching entirely (or if it is, I disagree with going that far) but about how it's presented. With stock iron sights on most weapons when I get hit I feel like my gun is moving and I need to guess where I'm currently aiming.

But it's not my gun that's shaking, its me: my whole aim should be moved, not like I just swayed the gun back and forth in my hands a little. Or in yet another analogy, it makes me think I have a very unsteady grip on my weapon instead of like a nearby explosion almost knocked my character over.

[Palerion]

We can have recoil and all that jazz, it makes it realistic and I get that, I am not against recoil.

The sights should be more centered on the screen though. What you are asking for is inconsistency in the aiming, which I can assure you most planetside players do not want.

Furthermore I am suggesting that the shaking and flinching be toned down. Absolute removal would lead to the game being too easy.

Now, if you think scopes need to be arrive at the camera late when you turn them, that's your opinion, but as for most everyone else (that has posted here, at least), we want our sights to go where we tell them, when the tell them, so that our movements are more accurately represented and our shooting experience us more fun than frustrating.

Otherwise, we can all run around with night vision scopes in broad daylight, if that's what you really want to happen.

[Ghoest9]

I agree 100% with the original post.

I wish the devs would pay close attention to it.



Of course I hate the absurd flinch code - all it does is help fast guns and hurt slow one - it should just be one flinch on the first hit.
But I am surprised and pleased to see that other posters here are having the same issues with scopes that I do.
I dont know what causes the scope lag but I really hate it I especially notice it with the 1x scope.
And I too find mysel using the IR scope almost everywhere(it doesnt work in daylight on Esmir though.)

[Palerion]

This might be the first time you've ever agreed with me Ghoest, this must be a sign ;)

[Bravix]

I like the lag on the sight when turning, but it could be turned down for sure. It's a bit too laggy.

Explosion/impact flinching is fine as is, imo. Though like stated above, something to make slow firing guns on par with fast firing (in terms of flinching) would be nice.

[ShadetheDruid]

I doubt many people would argue for getting rid of shake from explosions entirely, only that it's a bit over the top in terms of how much shake you get from something exploding from a large distance away from you. I don't know if anyone's tested the max distance for shake-from-explosions, but it always seems quite far.

It's something even some of the devs have noticed as being a bit over the top.

Well for many people playing on 0.20 is unbearable xD

For me, playing on anything less than 0.70 is unbearable. :p

[Gatekeeper]

I'd definitely support them toning down sight-shake from explosions and flinching a little bit, and also trying to balance things so that fast-firing guns and IRNV sights don't have an unfair advantage.

[Rago]

No reason to post if you're going to try and downplay an absolutely valid point without providing any reason or evidence.

I don´t see the Point in it, yeah the Screen shakes like mad,
So what ?
what i don´t want to see is People that run down or even Fall down Hills Shooting with aim WTF.
If Planetside2 where that kind of Game(like ut ect) i would understand the Complains,...

But Planetside is Kind of a Tamed Scifi Game.There is no Way Ads when a Tank or a Bomb Explodes nearby you, which is not bad.imho

[Ghoest9]

I don´t see the Point in it, yeah the Screen shakes like mad,
So what ?


the problem is it happens too much.

1 Massive vehicle high explosive spam is too over whelming at many base defenses. remember this doesnt even require you take damage.
vehicle induced flinch should be limited to once every 20 seconds. It would still provide the feeling of realism with out giving a needless penalty to infantry.

2 Hit flinch greatly favors high ROF over low ROF. Hit flinch should be limited to 1 flinch every 5 seconds.

[Mietz]

My ADS/COF/Suppression thread on PS2 forums.

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/remove-suppression.70440/

The mechanics are stacked against the player being shot at creating a default disadvantage and guaranteed kills for people that shoot first and luck out hitting the other, also favors high ROF weapons.

[Emperor Newt]

also favors high ROF weapons.
That's what bothers me the most. I personally like slower firing but more accurate or harder hitting weapons. But currently these weapons are simply not on par with their faster firing equivalents.

[Assist]

Never noticed a weight/lag component to the scopes, although I use the IR/NV on all my weapons I can. I messed around with this a little late last night and didn't see a delay on input regardless of the weapon/scope.

The IR/NV feels better because it takes all the effects out of the picture. You ignore smoke, flashing, tracers, muzzle flash, and it removes contrast of camo. That's why it feels right, not because of the movement of the weapon. If you can quickly pick the difference between your target and not your target(contrast) then you can more quickly react to it.

[Emperor Newt]

The IR/NV feels better because it takes all the effects out of the picture. You ignore smoke, flashing, tracers, muzzle flash, and it removes contrast of camo. That's why it feels right, not because of the movement of the weapon. If you can quickly pick the difference between your target and not your target(contrast) then you can more quickly react to it.
Also you can see cloaked Infiltrators. Not that you cannot see them otherwise, but with that you can spot them easily.

[Palerion]

For me the fact that my scope lags behind makes the IRNV work better. And I don't think the IRNV needs to be toned down because of it; I think the other open scopes need to be toned up.

The scope drag knocks down the player's reaction time and makes tracking way harder.

Other small aesthetic changes could be used to simulate some sort of realism, but they should try to keep the sight in the center.

Battlefield does this by making the sight just appear to turn diagonally a little bit when moved, but the weapon turns so that, with an ironsight, the front and back sights stay aligned in the center, and with a red dot, the dot is always in the center.

The effect of realism and immersion can be created without this frustrating scope drag and overpowering shaking and flinching.

[Palerion]

Never noticed a weight/lag component to the scopes, although I use the IR/NV on all my weapons I can. I messed around with this a little late last night and didn't see a delay on input regardless of the weapon/scope.

Surprised you didn't notice it.

It's not a delay on input, as the camera moves as soon as you move your mouse, but the scope seems to take a precious little amount of time to catch up.

If you try to move it quickly 180 degrees it should become blatantly apparent.

Everybody else is seeing it. If you still can't catch it, upload a YouTube video of you aiming?

I'm pretty sure It's even noticable in some of TotalBiscuit and Levelcap's vids.

[AThreatToYou]

Agree with OP

also buff MAX units

[Palerion]

The only thing that really concerns me is if and how soon the open scope lag/drag will be addressed and fixed.

It's clearly not a popular mechanic among the players, but not a commonly addressed issue either.

Though it is an integral part of the FPS mechanics in the game, it doesn't get much attention.

Seeing as this is not a commonly discussed topic, I'm afraid SOE won't take notice.

[Rbstr]

I agree that flinching is too pronounced currently.

Agreed. Also, scope in and jump. I dare you to try it.
Bring a vomit bag.

Good.
What kind of nonsense reason do you have for being able to look down a scope while jumping?

[Ghoest9]

My ADS/COF/Suppression thread on PS2 forums.

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/remove-suppression.70440/

The mechanics are stacked against the player being shot at creating a default disadvantage and guaranteed kills for people that shoot first and luck out hitting the other, also favors high ROF weapons.


Ummm that is the only good thing about the flinch code - unfortunately in actual game play its almost meaningless.
ROF matters much more than shoot first(well if you shooty someone in the back up close you usually win flinch or no flinch but thats a separate point.).

[Rago]

the problem is it happens too much.

1 Massive vehicle high explosive spam is too over whelming at many base defenses. remember this doesnt even require you take damage.
vehicle induced flinch should be limited to once every 20 seconds. It would still provide the feeling of realism with out giving a needless penalty to infantry.

2 Hit flinch greatly favors high ROF over low ROF. Hit flinch should be limited to 1 flinch every 5 seconds.

Im in since pre Beta, for me i was maybe one or 2 Times in such a Situation.
Because everybody is Complaining about it, there may be something wrong with it:p Anyway never "had a "it is "that" Excessive.

My ADS/COF/Suppression thread on PS2 forums.

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/remove-suppression.70440/

The mechanics are stacked against the player being shot at creating a default disadvantage and guaranteed kills for people that shoot first and luck out hitting the other, also favors high ROF weapons.

Maybe true, but the Game is like that in the most Situations -> The Player who shoots "First" often "Wins".I Think its not a That Bad Mechanic.


Again, sorry for my Bad English.

[Rahabib]

I agree screen shake is a bit much during explosions, but the one thing that bothers me most is why cant I walk down the stairs with my ADS up?

[Palerion]

To me at least the main point of this thread was to address the lag/drag on open scopes.

The devs really need to address and fix this soon.

This is not to say that the flinch and shake are not as important, but I have a feeling we're all, for the most part, sure that that will be fixed.

The open scope drag seems like an underdiscussed issue, but I think when it's fixed it will be an improvement that people will notice and appreciate.

I am surprised and pleased to see that other posters here are having the same issues with scopes that I do.
I dont know what causes the scope lag but I really hate it I especially notice it with the 1x scope.
And I too find mysel using the IR scope almost everywhere(it doesnt work in daylight on Esmir though.)

It is posts like this that make me think that there are people out there, more than just me, who are irritated by the scope drag; it's just that nobody is speaking up.

[ShadetheDruid]

It honestly doesn't bother me (I mean, I didn't even notice it until you pointed it out :p ), but I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be fixable. Unless there's some issue we're overlooking, of course.

[Palerion]

I simply think nobody will notice until they see how much easier it is without the scope drag.

It would, working together with the flinch and shake redicutions, make things a whole lot less complicated and overwhelming, shooting-wise.

[GTGD]

I really didn't know why it seemed so hard to consistently land shots on a moving target while ADS. I thought it was just the low bullet velocity on some guns, but this opened my mind. I was looking harder and it really seems like when you're moving your aim that it not only takes time for the scope to move into position, but it appears the barrel of your gun as well. Think of a game where you are using a tank turret and although you're looking at your target, you need to wait until the turret finishes moving into position. Now imagine less of a delay (but still not perfect) and you have what is happening here.

[Palerion]

Well the reason it ends up being kind of a big issue is players can move pretty quick in this game.

If my scope isn't keeping up with where I aim it, and I have enemies sprinting across my view, or even jetpacking (which is even harder to hit with this scope drag; coming from a light assault player), it can make me miss a large percentage of my shots.

We need a certain smoothness in our aiming, target acquisition, and tracking to be able to keep up with other players as we shoot at them.

And yes, though it is large-scale warfare, the gameplay can be kind of fast-paced. Our ability to aim has to be able to match that and keep up.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

So the way I understand it....

This is a "feature" to try to make guns feel like they have weight? Like you turn and aim but it takes 0.3 seconds to "settle" or something?

But the IRNV scope doesn't have this for some reason?

[Ghoest9]

I suspect the IRV has it - but its less disconcerting because you cant see it lag relative to the back ground?

Thats just a guess.

[Chewy]

So the way I understand it....

This is a "feature" to try to make guns feel like they have weight? Like you turn and aim but it takes 0.3 seconds to "settle" or something?

But the IRNV scope doesn't have this for some reason?

Something like that. I think of it as being in control of the troop that has a weapon and not just a floating gun.

-Ghoest

IRNV and all high power scope don't have it due to them being a sort of tunnel vision. It's a sniper thing that almost removes the effects and what not of the guns movement and adds scope sway to simulate steadying a long ass weapon. IRNV are CQC scopes and don't have the long range sway but are still treated like high powered scopes so no delay. Win Win for IRNV. It has to be that way as far as I know because the game seems to treat normal troop view as one thing and IRNV, high powered scopes, and vehicle views as another.

[SturmovikDrakon]

So the way I understand it....

This is a "feature" to try to make guns feel like they have weight? Like you turn and aim but it takes 0.3 seconds to "settle" or something?

But the IRNV scope doesn't have this for some reason?

I suspect the IRV has it - but its less disconcerting because you cant see it lag relative to the back ground?

Thats just a guess.

The IRNV doesn't have the delayed sway because it's like a static image. It's not a 3D scope, it's more of an overlay. It uses the same scope as some high powered sniper scopes, and they don't move either

I think it's supposed to simulate your eyes moving on target before your weapon

[Palerion]

I think it's supposed to simulate your eyes moving on target before your weapon

Supposed to. ;) Exactly.

It is supposed to simulate a slower reaction time.

Needless to say I don't think that's something that needs to be simulated.

It just doesn't seem like the right kind of gameplay to shoot for in a Planetside game.

The original Planetside, from what I understand, was a relatively fast paced MMOFPS.

With Planetside 2, moving to modern FPS mechanics is fine, but the scope drag mechanic reaches over the boundaries too much.

It goes beyond many other FPS games in the effort to create realism, and consequently makes the actual gameplay and combat tedious and frustrating.

[Chewy]

Supposed to. ;) Exactly.

It is supposed to simulate a slower reaction time.

Needless to say I don't think that's something that needs to be simulated.

It just doesn't seem like the right kind of gameplay to shoot for in a Planetside game.

The original Planetside, from what I understand, was a relatively fast paced MMOFPS.

With Planetside 2, moving to modern FPS mechanics is fine, but the scope drag mechanic reaches over the boundaries too much.

It goes beyond many other FPS games in the effort to create realism, and consequently makes the actual gameplay and combat tedious and frustrating.

Aiming and looking around, yeah that was faster it had to be seeing how it's a 2003 game. But gameplay? Fuck no. PS2 is by FAR the faster paced game as well as the easier to play one. Watch this and see yourself.
Planetside Gameplay -- CC hack/hold - YouTube

That was only part of a base cap. The entire time they where hold that stair case was to defend the cap point so the hack wasn't undone. Battle in PS lasted DAYS, in PS2 5-15 minutes.

[Palerion]

Battles lasting days is fine actually. Welcomed if you ask me :)

I just don't want scope drag knocking my aim off and preventing my shots from hitting my target.



By the way, has anyone noticed that bunny hopping has suddenly become a viable tactic? I hope that gets fixed too xD

[Chewy]

Battles lasting days is fine actually. Welcomed if you ask me :)

I just don't want scope drag knocking my aim off and preventing my shots from hitting my target.



By the way, has anyone noticed that bunny hopping has suddenly become a viable tactic? I hope that gets fixed too xD

Your last post made me look up some real gameplay videos. And I loved what I saw. Why couldn't have I been a PC gamer in 2003? If it wasn't for the sub fees (Im a cheap bastard) Id be all over PS just to see what PS2 can become.

Also to be honest I still don't see why you are having such problems with the delay. Maybe it's due to me spending so long on ARMA 2 playing Day Z. Iv learned to take my time or suffer for it the hard way not only in games, but just about everything else. Like this post. So far Iv spent 20 minutes on just these 2 bits. If I didn't (and my ADHD wants me not to) not a person in the world could read it, not even me. In fact I often can't read or recognize what I written on paper due to not forcing myself to take the time needed.

As for the bunny hopping. It only takes like 4 jumps before you slow to nothing, not to mention how shit your aim would be. Unless they're LA. Then it might be something, but aiming would still be shit.