Higby Wants Your Thoughts on Iron Sights for FPS..... - Page 14

Xyntech · 2012-01-11, 05:10 PM

I think Planetside had a good balance between tactical and arcade, but I felt it was a little weak in both.

I'm hoping that Planetside 2 will make the tactical elements more tactical, and the arcade elements more skillful and fast paced.

Still keep a similar balance of having both being viable and balanced against each other, but make both more satisfying and detailed.

For me, Planetside was a great game over all, but a lot of the details were lacking. It was made up for by other details that were really well done and by the overall game being such an amazing experience, but I think there is a lot of room for improvement.

Of course, it's a delicate thing, because if you change one little thing, it can mess with the balance of everything else. I think that the PS2 dev team is on the right track, sort of ripping the entire thing apart and then adding back in as much of the original game as makes sense in the new system. You need to have a cohesive vision to balance something like this. Hopefully they've made the right decisions on some of the big controversial stuff, like tanks.

SKYeXile · 2012-01-12, 01:43 AM

ironsights make the game more realistic...bbl flying away on my remote aircraft.

Graywolves · 2012-01-12, 05:16 AM

Lol that BF3 clip was hilarious.

I don't think iron sights are more realistic in the way they are implemented. Right now it feels like snap-aim > Shoot. Which is very silly especially when the enemy is under 75 meters away (and then most games have aweful scaling and 100 meters is half a block away...)

sylphaen · 2012-01-12, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by Graywolves

Lol that BF3 clip was hilarious.

TheBladeRoden · 2012-01-17, 07:02 AM

I don't mind sights as long as it doesn't respectively turn zoomed out mode into SprayandMissSide

VioletZero · 2012-01-17, 11:07 PM

I'm going to take a controversial stance here and say that, for Planetside, slower is better.

That's not to say that I don't like skill gaps. Hardly, I like skill gaps in the right games. But Planetside is not the right game for it. Planetside 2 should focus less on individual player skill and more on wide scale tact. Which skill gaps kind of undermine.

This fits better with the MMO formula they are going for here.

So I think ironsights are right at home with this game.

I also feel as though ironsights as a mechanic were victimized by a lot of recent, and really crappy, shooters who made terrible use of the mechanic and made people think that mechanic itself was bad.

Qwan · 2012-01-18, 07:02 AM

IMO iron sights arent bad at all, I would prefer them for quick reflex firing. Going to a scope when the guy is like a few feet infront of you isnt very accurate when tracking. Maybe a reflex sight add on would be nice, but i say leave the scopes for snipers and long range options. In close quarters combat, room to room its the iron sights or a reflex for the win.

Graywolves · 2012-01-18, 07:37 AM

Reflex/snap aiming with iron sights for a closer group (of shots) and a quicker TTK has no place in a game of this scale.

If it is in it should be used for being more accurate for enemies over 100m/300ft away.

Qwan · 2012-01-18, 07:42 AM

Hmm what makes you say that, iron sights would play a very important part in this game. When your moving down a hall way going to a scope isnt very smart seeing as targets arent just standing there waiting to be shot. They move and keeping a wide veiw compared to the circle of a scope view will make the difference when tracking targets.

Graywolves · 2012-01-18, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by Qwan

Hmm what makes you say that, iron sights would play a very important part in this game. When your moving down a hall way going to a scope isnt very smart seeing as targets arent just standing there waiting to be shot. They move and keeping a wide veiw compared to the circle of a scope view will make the difference when tracking targets.

BLUF: Aiming/zoom mechanics should be used to aim at targets that you actually need to aim/zoom-in at. Not as an inbetween your de facto aiming (crosshairs/center of screen on target) and pressing LMB.

Having 10-20 other people in the same area, all quick-snapping to iron sights for shots makes it pointless. The zooming-in-aim-mechanic should be used for only things you need to zoom in on.

Going to iron sights down a hallway is just as silly as using your scope, your opponent is right there and in a closed area. And again there is atleast four other people (that's a very conservative number) right next to you and behind you. You then have 5 people focusing down a lesser number of targets.

Having a greater number of people focusing down targets with snap-aiming might sound like it's not a problem but it really is. For a game of this scale to work you need the outnumbered to have a chance to fight and for them to have a chance we can't pretend that looking down your barrel doesn't make your weapon's theoretical CoF 3x smaller.

The times that zooming/aiming should be used is when the enemy is fighting from a distance away, on their walls, etc.

Zooming in to snap-aim-fire someone 25meters away doesn't require me to have more skill to shoot them, it's more like flipping the safety off and on twice between every person I shoot at. It's a stupid mechanic the way it is implemented in most games.

On the scale of Planetside 2 that method can't work as it would behave like a force multiplayer. Players becoming more effective just because they snap-aim-fire-new target and repeat. PS2 doesn't need a force multiplier on the individual grunt level of play for everyone.

P.S. Iron Sights being more effective in closer quarters than other methods of aiming is a myth. The purpose of Iron Sights is that when you look between two close points your eye adjusts to that and has a zooming in effect. For a target up to 300m away, if it has a nice bright white dot on it, it makes that bright white dot very clear to put your center aiming thing on to.

No one needs any assistance aiming when you're target is less than 50m infront of you, even at 50 you can hit a target with little to no assistance.

Qwan · 2012-01-18, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by Graywolves

BLUF: Aiming/zoom mechanics should be used to aim at targets that you actually need to aim/zoom-in at. Not as an inbetween your de facto aiming (crosshairs/center of screen on target) and pressing LMB.

Having 10-20 other people in the same area, all quick-snapping to iron sights for shots makes it pointless. The zooming-in-aim-mechanic should be used for only things you need to zoom in on.

Going to iron sights down a hallway is just as silly as using your scope, your opponent is right there and in a closed area. And again there is atleast four other people (that's a very conservative number) right next to you and behind you. You then have 5 people focusing down a lesser number of targets.

Having a greater number of people focusing down targets with snap-aiming might sound like it's not a problem but it really is. For a game of this scale to work you need the outnumbered to have a chance to fight and for them to have a chance we can't pretend that looking down your barrel doesn't make your weapon's theoretical CoF 3x smaller.

The times that zooming/aiming should be used is when the enemy is fighting from a distance away, on their walls, etc.

Zooming in to snap-aim-fire someone 25meters away doesn't require me to have more skill to shoot them, it's more like flipping the safety off and on twice between every person I shoot at. It's a stupid mechanic the way it is implemented in most games.

On the scale of Planetside 2 that method can't work as it would behave like a force multiplayer. Players becoming more effective just because they snap-aim-fire-new target and repeat. PS2 doesn't need a force multiplier on the individual grunt level of play for everyone.

P.S. Iron Sights being more effective in closer quarters than other methods of aiming is a myth. The purpose of Iron Sights is that when you look between two close points your eye adjusts to that and has a zooming in effect. For a target up to 300m away, if it has a nice bright white dot on it, it makes that bright white dot very clear to put your center aiming thing on to.

No one needs any assistance aiming when you're target is less than 50m infront of you, even at 50 you can hit a target with little to no assistance.

Ok your right about one thing if you got a number of individuals moving down a hall your right whos gonna snap to quick sights, just fire. But as an individual putting the round on the target is essential. Cause changing magazines, in the middle of a fire fight is not good. Scopes should be used for just that tagging long range targets, iron sights should be posted on a weapon because weapons with the ability to be leathal at long range are more accurate. Regardless of whether the weapon is used for close combat or long range having that iron sight as standard should be a must. Reflex sights are good for close range assaults (50m-80m) it increases that accuracy and doesnt require you to close the none aiming eye. This in combat is what conserves ammo as well makes every round count.

VioletZero · 2012-01-18, 11:35 AM

Just to be clear, what is snap aiming again?

Gandhi · 2012-01-18, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Qwan

Reflex sights are good for close range assaults (50m-80m) it increases that accuracy and doesnt require you to close the none aiming eye. This in combat is what conserves ammo as well makes every round count.

I think you're confusing the real and virtual worlds a little here. In game I don't have a non-aiming eye, I have a single camera with 2 modes: iron sights on or off. This is a huge limitation that tends to get ignored for the sake of 'realism' and is one of the main reasons why the snap aim mechanic in a game is nothing like in the real world. So forget realism, focus on what's best for the game. Maybe the standard Modern Warfare snap-aim system will work out, I doubt it but I'm ready to be surprised. But I really hope that we at least try a couple other methods during beta to see which works best. I know that means extra work for the developers, but I think it's worth it considering it's a core gameplay mechanic that we'll be using all the time.

Bittermen · 2012-01-18, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Gandhi

I think you're confusing the real and virtual worlds a little here. In game I don't have a non-aiming eye, I have a single camera with 2 modes: iron sights on or off. This is a huge limitation that tends to get ignored for the sake of 'realism' and is one of the main reasons why the snap aim mechanic in a game is nothing like in the real world. So forget realism, focus on what's best for the game. Maybe the standard Modern Warfare snap-aim system will work out, I doubt it but I'm ready to be surprised. But I really hope that we at least try a couple other methods during beta to see which works best. I know that means extra work for the developers, but I think it's worth it considering it's a core gameplay mechanic that we'll be using all the time.

High doubtful that SOE will change the shooting mechanics in the beta stages.

But if it happens it happens!

Shade Millith · 2012-01-18, 04:25 PM

I don't mind about the "Zoom in, move slower".

I just hate the big stonkin' gun that takes up 2/3rds of the screen. It's also either "On" or "Off". If we wanted 'realism', then the soldier would be able to have the gun near his face for some improved accuracy, but not close enough to take over half the screen up with 'REALISM GUN!'. Or an option to keep BOTH eyes open, so I can see past the gun.

Also what scares me is that non-ironsights might be completely useless, so I'm forced to use it.