Higby Wants Your Thoughts on Iron Sights for FPS..... - Page 9

Redshift · 2012-01-08, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by Elude

Right because robots will always be expensive..... Shit will be so easily produced in the future that it'll be completely ass backwards in which costs more, the drone or the meat bag?

The closest thing you're going to get to men fighting in wars in the distant future is a civil war within a nation.

You know the story behind planetside yeah? Warpgates caused people who died to be reborn.

Hence why the soldiers are inclined to not care about getting blown to bits

acosmo · 2012-01-08, 12:39 PM

thats extremely idealistic, elude. also @ all you people thinking ironsights or gameplay pace has ANYTHING to do with latency, they don't.

Furret · 2012-01-08, 01:20 PM

For everyone here that thinks iron sights are going to slow down the game, I don't think you're thinking it through.

Are you imagining base fights where every player is crawling around with their head jammed in their sights waiting for someone to come around the corner? I can guarantee you that won't be the case.

Since everyone seems to compare iron sights to CoD and the lack of skill involved in CoD, let me give you the unbiased opinion of a competitive CoD player.

There are a lot of different ways you can describe 'skill' in FPS games. In games without iron sights, the better players are the ones who can keep their crosshair tight to their enemy, both by tracking the enemy well, and using recoil/cof reduction techniques to keep their accuracy as high as possible. In a game like Modern Warfare, where iron sights/red dot sights exist, it requires a different skillset to play at a high level.

Many of you are right, it is easy to hit a player when you're aiming down the sights, but by the same token, the other player has those same advantages. Tracking enemy players isn't as important with a 3 bullet TTK, whats more important is getting your sight on them as fast as possible. The quicker you can snap to an opponent, the quicker you can start putting your bullets into him. This leads to styles like jumping around a corner while sighting in, to surprise your opponent, and basically put yourself in the same position as him, whereas strafing around the same corner will get you demolished by any half decent player (also referred to as campers).

They're both extremely difficult to play at a high level, just for different reasons. ((On a side note, I believe the transitioin from crosshair shooters to iron sight shooters has been slow, and has led to the hating of 'campers' because its a very powerful tactic in iron sight shooters.))

So how does this relate to PS 2?

I think iron sights are a good addition to the game. With a TTK higher than CoD, players will still have to track with iron sights, which still leaves some of the skill that crosshair shooter players claim will disappear with the implementation of iron sights.

Iron sights will also add more depth to infantry combat. In planetside 1, fighting past 75 m was very difficult without a sniper rifle, as a gauss took close to 10 bullets to kill, without factoring in the lead, crosshair size at that range, and the less than desirable hit detection (which i presume wont be a problem in ps2). Iron sights would extend the range of effective combat. With a larger space in between opposing zergs, I think this would give tanks and aircraft a much more effective role in moving the front lines.

As far as base combat, I can't imagine walking while zoomed in will be a more effective strategy than quickly strafing while spraying. Obviously there will be a range at which the slow strafing with iron sights will be more effective, but that's not going to take away from the game. Long tunnel fights never were strafing matches, they were camp-the-corners-of-the-tunnel-till-the-MAXs-get-here fights.

TL;DR
There's more than one type of skill. crosshair based shooters require keeping aimed on the target for extended periods of time and retaining high accuracy.
Iron sight based shooters require quick and precise reflexes to get your aim to the target as fast as possible and begin unloading bullets.

relating to PS 2: Higher TTK retains some crosshair based skill while allowing iron sight based skill. Iron sights will also extend the effective combat range increasing the complexity of open field fights. This will not affect base combat assuming hipfire spraying is not made completely useless as it is in CoD.

Slightly related: What if the running speed was only minimally reduced for strafing while aimed down the sights, but a large bounce was added to the iron sights when strafing in this way. Players would still be able to move quickly, but they would be much less accurate. To control this, players could toggle walking as they strafed to allow more accurate strafing iron sight fire, at the sacrifice of quick movement.

Food for thought, feel free to question/critique.

MasterChief096 · 2012-01-08, 03:30 PM

I play a lot of "modern" FPS games (stupid, erroneous term for shitty games that people claim PS2 has to adopt features from because they are "modern") and I can honestly say that Iron Sights should be handled differently in PS2.

For the realism people: By the time a spacefaring civilization like the one in PlanetSide is capable of reaching a wormhole on the other end of the Solar System, then I'm pretty sure conventional iron sights would have been tossed out the window. If it bothers the realists so bad then have an animation that pulls the weapon up to the person's eyes, but zooms in like PlanetSide's system with full movement, COF mechanics, etc. Make the interface look all cool and awesome to account for the future and everything. Tie it into the lore by saying that targeting has become a chip-set interface between a soldiers helmet and the current weapon he's using, and bingo. Every soldier receives a neural reaction time implant to allow for smooth muscle control while zoomed in (hence why we keep the same movement speed etc). *Stole that from Peter F. Hamilton's Commonwealth Saga, probably one of the most realistic sci-fi novels I've ever read (however you define "realistic" in sci-fi, anyways).

I just feel like iron sights don't belong in PS2. I'm not hating on iron sights, I play plenty of games with them, and most of them have unrealistic handling of iron sights anyways. ARMA 2 comes the closest to how hard it actually is to use iron sights. If you've ever fired a real rifle downrange using the iron sights you'd know that its not as simple as raising your weapon in half a second and pumping three bullets into the center of the target. It takes time and aim.

TRxEffects earlier video post demonstrates exactly why I don't like iron sights. PlanetSide was slow a lot of the time, but when it got fast, boy did it get FAST. Running through with an MCG/JH/Lasher not reloading until you have to, while firing away at a constant stream of enemies and not having to worry about swinging a slow iron sight onto new targets.

Maybe iron sights with very slow moving aim can be an add-on to MA weapons later on in the game for suppression/long range fighting purposes, but as the primary form of aiming, I just don't think it fits the PlanetSide feel all that well.

Gandhi · 2012-01-08, 03:58 PM

Iron sights work well in the real world because our eyes work well. Binocular vision, the ability to shift depth focus quickly, even the simple ability to move your eyes around to scan your surroundings while you're looking down the gun sights, all of those things are missing in the virtual world. In a game you put the gun up to your face and suddenly more than half your vision is obscured by useless metal. In the act of trying to be more accurate you've made it harder to see what you're shooting.

Now in a realistic modern warfare shooter iron sights are necessary, because despite their shortcomings in game they've become a part of the experience and even I would miss them if they weren't there. But lets make this game a little different, shall we? If you really want something on the screen at the same time, then make them holographic iron sights that don't obscure half your surroundings. That's a good compromise, no?

Tatwi · 2012-01-08, 09:10 PM

personally, i think it looks stupid and detracts from the game. it's like an 80s arcade throw back in a 2012 game. i would be happy to not have it in ps2.

Elude · 2012-01-08, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by Redshift

You know the story behind planetside yeah? Warpgates caused people who died to be reborn.

Hence why the soldiers are inclined to not care about getting blown to bits

Of course, I was just merely pointing out to Greywolves that he should probably take the whole realism thing in the future with a grain of salt because it will be completely different then it is today, we won't need iron sights in the future, but we also won't be needing half the other shit we see in the military too.

I'm for iron sights in PS2, not because it's realistic to todays standards or that its unrealistic to the futures standards. I'm for them for the sake of gameplay, bringing players down to a crawl when aiming not only helps kill off one man army scenarios but it also helps hide potential latency anomalies.

Originally Posted by acosmo

thats extremely idealistic, elude. also @ all you people thinking ironsights or gameplay pace has ANYTHING to do with latency, they don't.

I'm not much of an idealistic person, but yes I'd agree with you that it is very idealistic.

On the topic of ironsights, gameplay, and latency.... Iron sights do slow down gameplay, for a number of reasons. They slow your movement speed down (you move slower), they decrease your field of view (you turn slower), you have to press an extra button, and wait for the camera to animate into position (you literally wait longer).

Now that we know iron sights lead to slower pace gameplay, how will this fit in with it affecting latency? Iron sights won't decrease or increase latency if that's what you're getting at, but since the game is slower it means hit detection anomalies will decrease.

acosmo · 2012-01-08, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by Elude

On the topic of ironsights, gameplay, and latency.... Iron sights do slow down gameplay, for a number of reasons. They slow your movement speed down (you move slower), they decrease your field of view (you turn slower), you have to press an extra button, and wait for the camera to animate into position (you literally wait longer).

Now that we know iron sights lead to slower pace gameplay, how will this fit in with it affecting latency? Iron sights won't decrease or increase latency if that's what you're getting at, but since the game is slower it means hit detection anomalies will decrease.

the whole latency thing is silly. you'll get a ghost shot every now and then it doesn't matter how many bullets are being shot or how fast people are snapping from target to target. the game is the game and servers these days aren't like they were 10 years ago. also please take it easy elude, it's not like you'll be twitch snapping at targets 100m off and it's not like you'll have to take aim at a target around just a few meters away around a corridor corner either. ironsights will help you, they will not hinder you. just think of ironsights as a single button to press for CoF reduction as opposed to having to learn tricky CoF reduction exploits/techniques.

Elude · 2012-01-08, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by acosmo

the whole latency thing is silly. you'll get a ghost shot every now and then it doesn't matter how many bullets are being shot or how fast people are snapping from target to target. the game is the game and servers these days aren't like they were 10 years ago. also please take it easy elude, it's not like you'll be twitch snapping at targets 100m off and it's not like you'll have to take aim at a target around just a few meters away around a corridor corner either. ironsights will help you, they will not hinder you. just think of ironsights as a single button to press for CoF reduction as opposed to having to learn tricky CoF reduction exploits/techniques.

I want iron sights and I want them to hinder you while also providing you with a bonus, trading off speed for precision. PS2 is a team oriented game that should penalize players who don't rely on their team mates

SKYeXile · 2012-01-09, 12:30 AM

Originally Posted by acosmo

the whole latency thing is silly. you'll get a ghost shot every now and then it doesn't matter how many bullets are being shot or how fast people are snapping from target to target. the game is the game and servers these days aren't like they were 10 years ago. also please take it easy elude, it's not like you'll be twitch snapping at targets 100m off and it's not like you'll have to take aim at a target around just a few meters away around a corridor corner either. ironsights will help you, they will not hinder you. just think of ironsights as a single button to press for CoF reduction as opposed to having to learn tricky CoF reduction exploits/techniques.

it would be interesting to know the coding behind forglight, but even if planetside was switched to interpolation and the tickrate upped to 10(currently 5) there would be a massive difference in gameplay. movement is really going to be a nonfactor issue. the issue with latency is TTK, for example if I come around a corner and have a position prelined up I could kill somebody before i render on their screen with a low TTK. The TTK really does need to be higher in this and the skill more about consistent aim rather than reflexes, that way atleast the games caters to all ages better aswell, its obvious kids have faster reflexes.

Elude · 2012-01-09, 01:08 AM

But movement is a factor! If a player is moving faster than a speeding buggy and you shoot him with a hitscan weapon on something that remotely resembles client based hit detection while both players have high latency it's going to have some visual anomaly. The player being slower will reduce the gap for error.

UT, Quake, Tribes all have relatively high TTK in comparison to your modern shooters today. Yet these games have far more hit detection issues because they are simply faster paced games.

SKYeXile · 2012-01-09, 02:07 AM

Originally Posted by Elude

But movement is a factor! If a player is moving faster than a speeding buggy and you shoot him with a hitscan weapon on something that remotely resembles client based hit detection while both players have high latency it's going to have some visual anomaly. The player being slower will reduce the gap for error.

UT, Quake, Tribes all have relatively high TTK in comparison to your modern shooters today. Yet these games have far more hit detection issues because they are simply faster paced games.

those games have hit detection issues because they all use serverside hit detection, there is no problems with clinetside hit detection. planetside 2 wont have hitscan weapons(well many) because gravity will play an effect on bullets.

The only real anomaly when facing a player with high latency and CSHD is dying around corners on your screen.

and why would a player be running faster than a high speed buggy?

Metalsheep · 2012-01-09, 02:35 AM

While i don't like the idea of Iron Sights, i could think of a way to impliment them, while keeping the ability to shoot from the hip. Planetside takes place in the super future, where most soldiers have some kind of visor or occular implants im sure. It would make sense to link the soldiers weapon to their HUD or HMD for easier aiming. (i think the landwarrior system does something similar to this.) Giving players their Crosshiers and ability to shoot from the hip with accuracy.

Ironsites could be the first tier of aiming/sight upgrades for Rifles and other precision weapons that all players have access to. Using the Iron Sites wont necessarily slow down the player, but can allow the player to fire at distance more accurately. If the player continues to run while in ironsites or keeps spraying, accuracy dosent really improve much. Aiming down the ironsites will require discapline, you have to slow your own speed and pace your shots. But once you use the weapon or class of weapons enough, new sites will unlock, such as reflex sites, scopes of varying quality ect ect.

Cone effecting variables such as running, crouching, getting shot will effect accuracy in both Hip Fire and Sight Fire modes. Neither is really more accurate than the other, the sites just allow finer aiming at distance. Alot like Planetside 1s scopes for MA weapons. Sure, you could zoom in, but it never really made the weapon itself MORE accurate. It simply improved your vision at range and allowed you to fire at a distant target better than him spraying at you without zooming. Neither of you have a more accurate weapon. But the player who chose to zoom and maybe crouch, will win the firefight. Could the player who didnt zoom possibly kill you? Yeah, maybe. But the major advantage goes to the player who properly used his sights. Assuming the crosshiers bloom like in PS1, aiming from the hip wont be as accurate as it will be hard to tell where exactly your shots will land.

If ironsites were implimented like that, i would find it more acceptable. Cause once you upgrade to a Scope or other siteing device, you cant use the ironsites anyways. Aiming down the site shouldnt immediately slow you to a crawl or make you pinpoint accurate. The accuracy still lies with the shooter and his choices. I also like the idea of the IronSites bobbing if you are moving fast while aiming down them, but that detracts from my point a little.

Halo is similar to this, the Sights dont impede your movement or make the weapon magically more accurate, but it makes a huge difference when you chose to scope in for a distant kill, rather than trying to hip fire it the entire time.

Elude · 2012-01-09, 02:52 AM

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

those games have hit detection issues because they all use serverside hit detection, there is no problems with clinetside hit detection. planetside 2 wont have hitscan weapons(well many) because gravity will play an effect on bullets.

The only real anomaly when facing a player with high latency and CSHD is dying around corners on your screen.

and why would a player be running faster than a high speed buggy?

Quakelive and Tribes Ascend don't use server side hit detection, if they do then I must obviously be misunderstanding what it means. To word it better, both those games simulate a zero latency scenario, you don't need to lead your target with a hit scan weapon like you would with serverside hit detection.

If it they were using a form of server side hit detection (using my understanding of it in case I'm wrong) there would be no anomalies in shot registration, but instead there would be delays in the shot instead, and ultimately forcing you to lead with even non projectile based weapons.

Also clientside hit detection (again to my understanding of it) doesn't just affect hitscan, but projectile weapons also, you can see this easily in other games that use clientside hit detection. Meaning it doesn't matter if PS2 used hitscan weapons or projectile weapons, they would still get the same treatment.

sylphaen · 2012-01-09, 02:55 AM

As long as people can still run around and assault base fortresses or fight in forests without having to slow down to shoot straight, I dont see a problem. As such, the way PS1 zoom worked was fine imo: tighter cof longer while crouch but you could still shoot straight when running.

If we have to choose between slowing down in the open or sprinting for cover all day long to fire, camping would make a come back. Which is not exactly like speeding up the gameplay.

Will there be prone btw ? I hope not.

Edit: just to clarify, I hope prone will not be in PS2 because it's synonym to static fire gameplay and entrenched positions. I have nothing against prone in games like Day of Defeat or Red Orchestra which I like a lot (it goes with the ttk too).