Higby Wants Your Thoughts on Iron Sights for FPS..... - Page 17

Shotokanguy · 2012-02-01, 05:48 PM

Hang on, hold it, huh what?

You can't holster your weapons? I guess it didn't have any use other than letting you run faster, but it's weird to think about.

Metalsheep · 2012-02-01, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

I imagine a piece of metal is cheaper to produce than such a high tech system.

Well, yes. Which is why we don't see much of the LandWarrior system currently, but the American Military was trying to integrate this with all infantry soldiers. (It does alot more than just give sighting, so its a pricey system currently.) I could only imaging in the super future all soldiers would have this kind of equipment. Especially the Terran Republic and the VS.

acosmo · 2012-02-01, 05:53 PM

from what we know, you cannot put away or holster your weapon in PS2. this means you constantly have your weapon out. assuming no 'ironsights', players will constantly be aiming at whatever they're looking at with their gun shouldered.

even with the whole 'landwarrior' stuff, you still have to assume a proper firing posture in order to sustain firing. having computers and high tech stuff doesn't help with that now does it?

VioletZero · 2012-02-01, 05:55 PM

Even with the landwarrior system in use, I am still in favor of ironsights.

Raymac · 2012-02-01, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by acosmo

from what we know, you cannot put away or holster your weapon in PS2.

Is that accurate? I was under the impression there just wasn't an animation or whatever to holster your weapon so it just wouldn't display, but you could in fact holster your weapon. I may have misunderstood though.

I think the realists are just going to have to deal with the whole hip-firing thing. It's kind of been a staple in movies and video games forever. We all know it's not realistic but neither are big firey explosions unless you are using gasoline bombs.

Metalsheep · 2012-02-01, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by acosmo

even with the whole 'landwarrior' stuff, you still have to assume a proper firing posture in order to sustain firing. having computers and high tech stuff doesn't help with that now does it?

True, but i have always assumed in Shooters that the gun is always shouldered unless it shows otherwise. (Like when you sprint, how you move the gun down and sideways to run.)

There just becomes no reason to raise the weapon to your eye with the Landwarrior system. Technically you can even aim around corners and fire with it, though it doubt there is alot of recoil control that way. But i digress, i think its safe to assume your weapon is shouldered at all times.

HitbackTR · 2012-02-01, 06:01 PM

In other news you cant beat a fart out of a dead mule.

acosmo · 2012-02-01, 06:03 PM

so metalsheep, say i'm walking through warpsanc to an outfit mobilization meeting or whatever.

when i'm looking at my outfitleader, you're saying that my player should have his weapon out, aimed, shouldered and ready to fire on him?

Metalsheep · 2012-02-01, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by acosmo

so metalsheep, say i'm walking through warpsanc to an outfit mobilization meeting or whatever.

when i'm looking at my outfitleader, you're saying that my player should have his weapon out, aimed, shouldered and ready to fire on him?

No no, but its a videogame. You already said we cannot holster our weapons. When your gun is out, your aiming it. Unless they add in a function to "lower" your weapon.

But when you are looking at the game, you see your weapon on the bottom right side, pointed forwards. I have always assumed this meant that your weapon is shouldered and at the ready to fire. Because when you have a rifle to your shoulder, pointed forwards, its at the bottom right of your view and ready to fire.

Raymac · 2012-02-01, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by acosmo

so metalsheep, say i'm walking through warpsanc to an outfit mobilization meeting or whatever.

when i'm looking at my outfitleader, you're saying that my player should have his weapon out, aimed, shouldered and ready to fire on him?

Dude. How many screenshots do you need showing soldiers with their guns pointed down? Relax.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1677
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1677
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1622
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1695
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1696
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1710
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1749

OK I've made my point

VioletZero · 2012-02-01, 06:15 PM

It makes you wonder why, with so much realism going into Planetside 2 that they decided to have all the armies wear bright lights to stand out as much as possible.

acosmo · 2012-02-01, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by Raymac

Dude. How many screenshots do you need showing soldiers with their guns pointed down? Relax.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1677
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1677
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1622
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1695
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1696
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1710
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1749

OK I've made my point

point taken? i already know that the situations i propose won't exist in planetside 2 because ironsights will.

the alternative would be apb style character animation/aiming

EDIT: @VioletZero ironsight aren't added for 'realism', they're added to make the game flow at a pace more compatible with a teamwork over reflexes paradigm.

Raymac · 2012-02-01, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

It makes you wonder why, with so much realism going into Planetside 2 that they decided to have all the armies wear bright lights to stand out as much as possible.

Because it's sci-fi, not ArmA

Gandhi · 2012-02-01, 06:25 PM

If we're going to include things solely based on realism then I'd like binocular vision, peripheral vision, changing depth focus, the ability to scan my surroundings while in 'iron sight mode', being able to move just as quickly sans sprinting, an infinite number of steps between 'iron sight off' and 'iron sight fully on' and no penalty for firing from the shoulder under 30m. If you can do all that I'll be happy with a realistic modern combat simulator, until then lets not pretend that you can map anything 1:1 from real life.

1) Does it improve gameplay?
2) Does it make the game more fun?

Those are the only two questions that matter. And it isn't a question of iron sights or no iron sights, there's probably dozens of options in between that are just plain ignored.

VioletZero · 2012-02-01, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by Gandhi

If we're going to include things solely based on realism then I'd like binocular vision, peripheral vision, changing depth focus, the ability to scan my surroundings while in 'iron sight mode', being able to move just as quickly sans sprinting, an infinite number of steps between 'iron sight off' and 'iron sight fully on' and no penalty for firing from the shoulder under 30m. If you can do all that I'll be happy with a realistic modern combat simulator, until then lets not pretend that you can map anything 1:1 from real life.

1) Does it improve gameplay?
2) Does it make the game more fun?

Those are the only two questions that matter. And it isn't a question of iron sights or no iron sights, there's probably dozens of options in between that are just plain ignored.

I agree with this.

That's why I like ironsights.