hoak
03-25-2004, 02:35 AM
I'm posting my FAQ in response to and support of the ironsights (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=513105592&m=325108692) thread started on the suggestions forum, and hopefully as a helpful design arcation for mod developers interested in incorporating ironsights in their mods.
While it remains to be seen if a complete and realitic ironsights implementation can even be incorporated in FarCry as a mod or part of a total conversion hopefully these posts will help reveal what can and can't be done on the engine.
This FAQ first appeared on a game design site I started about five years ago called NoCrossHair.Com but I lost a shot at the domain, and interest in ironsights at the time was virtually non-existent.
I'd welcome material, suggestions and additions for expanding the FAQ so feel free to post.
HOAK's IRONSIGHTS FAQ
CONTENTS
[01.0] "What are ironsights?"
[02.0] "What are these different ironsights 'systems' I keep hearing about?"
[02.1] "What is Weapon Vection Aiming (or Vection Draw Trace/Aim)?"
[03.0] "Which ironsight system is better and why?"
[04.0] "Aren't ironsights just for 'Super-Realism' or 'Simulator' games?
[05.0] "What are some games that already have ironsights that I can try?"
[05.1] "What is Free-Aim and/or 'Free-Aim System'?"
[05.2] "What is the value of having 'Free-Aim'?"
[05.3] "What are some games and mods that offer 'Free-Aim Systems'?"
[06.0] "What is 'Taping' and/or a 'Taper'?"
[06.1] "Is 'Taping' really a problem; does it really offer an advantage?"
[07.0] "Why are people so passionate about ironsights in FPS Realism Games?"
[08.0] "Ironsights suck, I hate them, why should they be a part of any game?"
[09.0] "Do enough people really want and play games with ironsights?"
[01.0] "What are ironsights?"
Ironsights are an alternative aim system for FPS realism games that use the actual sights on weapon models as the real aiming machinery of the game. There are several variations on the ironsight theme but generally they all work the same where you have to raise and aim your weapon using the actual sights on the weapon; recoil, flash, the quality of the particular weapons sights realistically effect and mitigate your ability to aim.
[02.0] "What are these different ironsights 'systems' I keep hearing about?"
There are two basic types of ironsight systems with variations:
â· Shader Based
In this system when the weapon is raised and aimed you 'flip' to an aimed view that is only a 2D 'texture' that is supposed to be representative of an ironsight view (this is not the actual weapon model that you see in the normal view in-game). Typically one or more parts of the "sight picture" image will be made to look blurry and out of focus. Operation Flashpoint and Americas Army are two games that use this system of ironsights.
â· Weapon Model Based
In model based ironsights systems you raise and use the actual in-game 3D models sights; the "sight picture" is a 3D model using the same weapon model for the aiming machinery of the game -- you aim through the actual sights of the model of the same weapon you see on screen. Red Orchestra, True Combat, Infiltration, Vietcong, Hidden & Dangerous offer examples of model based ironsight systems.
[02.1] "What is Weapon Vection Aiming (or Vection Draw Trace/Aim)?"
Weapon vection based aim, or 'WVA', is unarguably the most realistic scale method of implementing ironsights, weapon handling, and aim mechanics in FPS games. In a fully implemented WVA system weapons perform exactly as they do in real life; you are able to discharge (un-aimed fire) your weapon at any time, or fire (point aim or precision ironsights aim) your weapon on the move or from any position at any time. But in WVA weapon vection or movement is to scale with player model movement; walking, turning, crouching, jumping or just standing and breathing adds vection to your weapon and effects your accuracy. Summarily in WVA the bullets go exactly where the weapon is pointed at any particular instant, so a player must 'steady' his weapon and there are time constants of 'settle time' based on weapon weight, the player models relative posture, and the possibility for stamina induced vection. There are two implementations of WVA:
â· Animated
The most realistic and correct, the weapons projectile code bullets or hit scan trace is drawn precisely from the position of the weapons barrel when it was discharged or fired. Only one game under development currently employs this system...
â· Interpolated/Calculated
Less exact but properly executed equally convincing and much less computationally intensive interpolated or calculated WVA employs simpler accuracy algorithms or matrices based on player movement variables.
Weapon vection aiming completely eliminates ironsights design considerations like 'Taping' as the weapons position and point of aim is almost never static and requires practiced aim to achieve. Weapon Vection Aim also offers a scale means of realistically modeling weapon handling, accuracy, aiming mechanics and completely eliminating arcade types of game play, like unrealistic and skill mitigating spraying.
[03.0] "Which ironsight system is better and why?"
Most gamers, whether they are real world marksmen, 'super-realism' fans, or 'action-realism' fans prefer the model based system. Some don't immediately appreciate and understand all the abstract reasons why they like it better but there is a sound basis in fact, physics, and the mechinisims of vision that fall into two categories:
â· Immersiveness
Model based sights have perfect continuity, there is no jarring transition from a model view of the weapon to a 2D texture made to look like a 3D render. Model based sights let you realistically see your weapon in entire from an aimed perspective, not just an artificially close render of only the weapons sights. Models based sights also are dynamically effected by in-game effects like light, movement, and recoil effecting your sight picture in ways that a shader sight system can not that both feels and is more realistic. Model based sights offer a smooth, consistent, seamless and contiguous system that is always directly integrated with the "game world" which is what gives it its immersive 'feel'.
â· Technical Correctness
On technical ground model based sights are the only correct way to include and animate an ironsight system. There is the continuity issue already discussed where you are always directly interacting with and handling the real weapon model and not substitute 2D graphics. Model based sights offer the only means to offer "Z" or depth in the "sight picture" and animate it making movement perturb your view and weapon.
One of the most significant aspects that is often confused and used to defend shader systems that is actually misunderstood and incorrect is the issue of 'focus'; shader systems typically will 'force' some part of the aiming system 'out of focus' which is neither more realistic or correct. In the real world the only thing 'in focus' in a person's FOV is what they are focusing on; in aiming a weapon and framing up a sight picture you very rapidly shift your focus from the rear aperture, to the front post, to you target and back -- carefully aligning all three until they are your best estimate of perfect. In the flat projected 3D game world everything is always "in focus" so forcing any particular game element out of focus is dystopic -- i.e. we can't shift our focus bringing an out of focus object in focus because the projection of the world is flat on our display devices, and the blur effect is artificially locked and forced at only one plane of distance.
Dystopic game elements may look superficially 'realistic' but on closer examination and play create the opposite effect intended; they break immersiveness by creating an incongruity, inconsistency -- i.e. a break in continuity that can not be compensated for by the player that could be IRL. 2D floating reticules are an obvious example requiring the player to shift between the illusion of 3D depth and a floating 2D overlay. The cartoon aspects of this does not go unnoticed by game developers as they unanimously remove 2D HUD elements from many of their "promotional shots" to make the picture and game look better, deeper and more immersive.
[04.0] "Aren't ironsights just for 'Super-Realism' or 'Simulator' games?
Absolutely not. The merits of ironsights can be argued separately of matters of realism; i.e. ironsights have merits in-game irrespective of considerations of 'more realism is better' and in fact stand on their own merits as a good element of game-design that favorably effect the quality of game-play improving immersiveness of the gaming experience, skill as the decisive factor in play, and the elimination of numerous kinds of 'lame' or 'exploit' trick-play that aren't wanted in most flavors of FPS realism.
The increased 'depth' that comes from removing artificial 2D overlays greatly enhances the immersiveness and apparent depth of games. It's a known fact of 3D flat projected game design that 2D overlays cause you to shift from flat elements to illusionary 3D and back -- the net result is to 'break' the effect of 3D depth. This is most apparent in screen-shots where there is a lot of HUD overlay making the screen-shots look like story-board or comic book cells rather then a good photograph of a 3D game world that has apaent depth.
Another merit of ironsights is projecting more world interactiveness into the most instrumental feature of FPS realism combat games: "the weapon". By including real weapon handling interactivity with the crucial element of aiming the immersive qualities of really interacting in the world and he primary object of your interaction (your weapon) offers familiar, convincing and tactile "feel" that is much more immersive.
Ironsights most significant contribution however is the most difficult for some to understand, as it includes realistic, unrealistic and abstract aspects of game design: making other players harder to kill. As FPS Realism games scale weapons closer to their real world counterparts in power and ROF weapons become increasingly first hit decisive -- this is very destructive to game-play quality as a function of skill where it is desirable to have skill as the decisive component of game contact outcome. In many ew FPS games we have weapons of very high FHD (first hit decisivne) power, super-accurized. with unrealistic reticule telemetry -- the result is the first to fire and hit will be the winner of most encounter.s The fallout of all this is that it reduces most game-play and tactics to ambushing as this is the most effective, easy and skill mitigating tactic to assure you get the first hit in.
Ironsights put you behind the somewhat awkward aiming machinery of the real weapon, force you (and everyone else) to make choices of when to look and when to raise your weapon obscuring you FOV to some degree and take aim. It is this vulnerability that all players must face equally, the thinking and choices involved that increase move and maneuver tactics in ironsight enabled games, and so dramatically improve the quality of game-play with powerful weapons.
True Combat is an excellent example of ironsights in an action title; this game moves faster then Counter Strike with more sustained intensity and speed and a hell of a lot more immersiveness.
[05.0] "What are some games and mods that already have ironsights that I can try?"
FPS Realism Games
â· Wolfenstein 3D (the first 3D render game is also the first ironsights game!)
â· Hidden & Dangerous
â· Vietcong (model based)
â· Operation Flash Point (shader based)
â· Call Of Duty (model based: unreleased)
â· Shadow Force: Razor Unit (shader based)
â· Delta Ops: Army Special Forces (shader based)
â· U.S. Most Wanted: Nowhere To Hide (shader based)
â· Secret Service: In Harm's Way (shader based)
ⷠSöldner Secret Wars (shader based: unreleased)
FPS Realism Mods
â· Red Orchestra (UW Mod)
â· True Combat (Quake III Arena Mod)
â· Infiltration (Unreal Tournament Mod)
â· Hostile-Intent (Half-Life Mod: not released)
â· Navy SEALs: Covert Operations (released but ironsights not implemented in current version)
â· TacSim (Simulator Interface Research Mod On Raven Shield)
â· The Third Reich (Unreal Tournament Mod)
â· SAS (UW MOD: not released
[05.1] "What is Free-Aim and/or 'Free-Aim System'?"
Free-Aim is a camera view based variation of aim system interaction with the player POV (point of view). Free-Aim Systems can and have been implemented independent of ironsights with regular reticule based games.
In normal (non Free-Aim) games your frame of reference, also called 'POV' and 'Camera' is a frame of reference that moves your weapon and POV in unison, in essence scrolling or 'panning' the world around you as your turn, raise or lower your view.
With 'Free-Aim System' initial lateral and vertical view movement only moves your weapon or reticule; the world camera does not pan or scroll until you have traversed your weapon or reticule to some point near the edge of the screen.
To better visualize the difference staring at your display, raise your hand like a gun in a FPS game, and move your hand with your head -- this is how aim view vection works in most FPS games. Now center your view back at your display and move hand independently of you head (still staring straight ahead) this is how a 'Free-Aim System' moves your point of aim -- when your hand moves to the edge of your peripheral vision then your head/POV/camera turns or pans to follow your weapon.
[05.2] "What is the value of having 'Free-Aim'?"
The typical reason for employing a Free-Aim System is in mitigating concerns with 'Taping' (see: [06.0] "What is 'Taping' and/or a 'Taper'?" and [06.1] "Is 'Taping' really a problem; does it really offer an advantage?") as a means of cheating.
Some argue and feel that 'Free-Aim' is more realistic because you have weapon movement that is dynamically independent of where you're looking, which in concept is more realistic and correct but in game execution for aiming is not.
The dynamic interactive vection of separate 'Free-Aim' view and world pan camera views is in fact not realistic; in the real world a rifleman laterally tracking a moving target with a rifle for example does in fact functionally lock his view to the weapons sights and move them in unison; there is no secondary 'camera' that turns his peripheral vision when he as traversed his view some specified distance in tracking or looking for a target.
In the real world when one aims a weapon by any method whether it be ironsights or point shooting one do not stare straight ahead and move your weapon to follow your target as it moves across your field of vision, and then turn if and when your weapon has reached the limits of your peripheral vision. You move your weapon and field of view as one, because the center of your vision is the most acute it's in the nature of how we use our mechinisms of vision and aim and is also part of virtually every school of marksmanship training.
[05.3] "What are some games and mods that offer 'Free-Aim Systems'?"
â· Infiltration (Unreal Tournament Mod with model based ironsights)
â· Operation Flash point (shader based ironsights FPS realism game)
â· Star Wars Jed Knight 3: Jedi Academy (reticule aim FPS)
â· FreeAim (Unreal Warfare mutator)
â· Half-Life 2 (reticule aim FPS)
[06.0] "What is 'Taping' and/or a 'Taper'?"
Taping is one of the criticisms frequently leveled at ironsights systems were it suggested a player can put a dot of tape at the center of his/her screen so they are able to fire weapons unencumbered by using the ironsights system of the game. Obviously some worry that "taping" is a serious issue.
[06.1] "Is 'Taping' really a problem; does it really offer an advantage?"
Arguably no; with most display devices the thickness of the glass on a CRT or plastic on LCD is more then enough to assure the parallax distance between the 'tape' and the phosphor mask or LEDs is great enough that the player will always have significant parallax error i.e. the tape will never point where the weapon's bullets are going due inter-ocular distance and parallax error created by the dot being suspended above the actual display elements by a thickness of glass or plastic.
The 'arguable' aspect of taping falls into the mean range of engagement in a game. With ranged or distance shooting taping will put the 'taping' player at a significant disadvantage creating an artificial point of aim that is not represented in the game and is virtually never 'on target' due to the aforementioned parallax effect... But in close combat, or CQB (close quarter combat) where full-auto weapons are used taping can confer an advantage because precise aim is not as critical (larger target), the player using tape does not suffer the delay of having to raise his weapon aim accurately, or from the FOV limitations of having his weapon raised.
Generally however practiced players are able to 'point shoot' in un-aimed mode as accurately and effectively as Tapers in CQB as targets are relatively close and large -- significantly reducing the veracity taping as an effective cheat.
[07.0] "Why are people so passionate about ironsights in FPS Realism Games?"
While that's very individual and everyone has their own reasons for wanting ironsights, most seem to agree that ironsights significantly raise the bar in scaling realism in FPS 'realism', immersiveness, and FUN by offering a novel, realistic and addictive feature.
The reticule aim system is a legacy game feature inspired by attack aircraft HUDs and was the only means to effectively include an aiming device on early arcade machines over a decade ago... Ironsights fans recognize that weapon render quality caught up with scale in the rest of the game years ago yet weapons sit in games as static superficial props that waste screen real-estate, penalize your in frame rate, and are ALWAYS posed in grossly unrealistic positions from which a weapon would neither be carried or fired.
Some of the benefits ironsights bring to the games that have them (that have people so excited about them) include:
â· vastly increased immersiveness
â· no distracting, throbbing, strobing HUD reticule
â· totally eliminates whole classes of arcade style play issues (circle strafing, dive play maneuvers etc.)
â· makes camping more difficult (getting to a 'camp' w/o a reticule and keeping it is more work)
â· realistically deemphasizes and makes killing more difficult
â· realistically focuses the game-play on OBJECTIVE play rather then arcade murder rampages
â· emphasizes tactical movement over less skilled arcade tactics of spray'n pray, camp and ambush
â· offers better balance mechanism for scoped weapons
â· offers game designer powerful tools to 'tune' weapon balance and power
â· focuses play on the real elements of the game: (environment, weapon, weapon handling, objectives)
â· is "the next thing" in serious realism game design
â· mitigates 'twitch play' emphasizing deeper skills of marksmanship tactics over raw reflex speed
â· makes the game world look 'deeper' and larger
â· makes weapons real aiming machinery not just props that waste screen real-estate and frame rate
â· moves weapons out of positions no one would even CARRY a weapon no less fire them from
[08.0] "Ironsights suck, I hate them, why should they be a part of any game?"
This sort of rant is typical of people that either have never played with ironsights, or had a bad exposure to something like the shader ironsights systems in OFP or AA. Applying this kind of reasoning though would suggest that nothing should ever be upgraded or improved in FPS realism games.
The best answer though is that ironsights have a significant, dedicated and enthusiastic audience; few game 'features' can claim the power to attract new players to a game the way this one feature can...
Like challenging music, trying ironsights is very addicting once you get over the "hump" of the learning curve. The the most emphatic fans of ironsights were once some of the strongest detractors...
Bottom line, no one that is a fan of ironsights wants to make enemies of fans of the reticule aim systems, and having games that offer the option to play a game through real weapons sighting machinery as an option isn't forcing anyone to try it, play it, or even like it.
[09.0] "Do enough people really want and play games with ironsights?"
That depends on what you consider "enough"... If "enough" means "as many people as play Counter Strike" certainly not. But unique among game features ironsights have an active following of fans that seek games offering the feature. Ironsights virtually guarantees a draw of a significant audience that will at least try a new game or mod.
Few game features have the power not only to draw an audience the way ironsights does, they offer a games compelling addictiveness by way of raising both the skill threshold and ceiling; making games more open to player skill and effort for more replay-ability. The 'irnosights experience' is pretty universal in that once new players come to terms with ironsights differences they find game-play much more consistent, open to their effort in a linear way and much more attractive then they initially had thought. More people playing longer attracts more people to playing as the saying goes.
Neither is this idle speculation; recently a virtually unknown 'Dark Horse' with virtually no advertising, hype or press offered a free beta Demo; Vietcong which on word of mouth only has surpassed big budget games with massive PR budgets like Raven Shield in servers and player-ship in a matter of only days, it offered ironsights as an option and all the server with the option enabled were full... Moreover arguably the worlds largest game publisher Activision will roll ironsights on it's new 'big budget' WWII FPS Call Of Duty...
As the saying goes 'you can't reinvent the wheel' and it looks like a very large audience will be exposed to ironsights relatively soon; it's hard to imagine that with this amount of money, talent and marketing behind games that include ironsights that ironsights will finally be innagurated into FPS games as something that is more widely anticipated and coveted.
â© Hoak (InterLap Design 1999-2004)
[This message was edited by hoak on Thu March 25 2004 at 02:46 AM.]
While it remains to be seen if a complete and realitic ironsights implementation can even be incorporated in FarCry as a mod or part of a total conversion hopefully these posts will help reveal what can and can't be done on the engine.
This FAQ first appeared on a game design site I started about five years ago called NoCrossHair.Com but I lost a shot at the domain, and interest in ironsights at the time was virtually non-existent.
I'd welcome material, suggestions and additions for expanding the FAQ so feel free to post.
HOAK's IRONSIGHTS FAQ
CONTENTS
[01.0] "What are ironsights?"
[02.0] "What are these different ironsights 'systems' I keep hearing about?"
[02.1] "What is Weapon Vection Aiming (or Vection Draw Trace/Aim)?"
[03.0] "Which ironsight system is better and why?"
[04.0] "Aren't ironsights just for 'Super-Realism' or 'Simulator' games?
[05.0] "What are some games that already have ironsights that I can try?"
[05.1] "What is Free-Aim and/or 'Free-Aim System'?"
[05.2] "What is the value of having 'Free-Aim'?"
[05.3] "What are some games and mods that offer 'Free-Aim Systems'?"
[06.0] "What is 'Taping' and/or a 'Taper'?"
[06.1] "Is 'Taping' really a problem; does it really offer an advantage?"
[07.0] "Why are people so passionate about ironsights in FPS Realism Games?"
[08.0] "Ironsights suck, I hate them, why should they be a part of any game?"
[09.0] "Do enough people really want and play games with ironsights?"
[01.0] "What are ironsights?"
Ironsights are an alternative aim system for FPS realism games that use the actual sights on weapon models as the real aiming machinery of the game. There are several variations on the ironsight theme but generally they all work the same where you have to raise and aim your weapon using the actual sights on the weapon; recoil, flash, the quality of the particular weapons sights realistically effect and mitigate your ability to aim.
[02.0] "What are these different ironsights 'systems' I keep hearing about?"
There are two basic types of ironsight systems with variations:
â· Shader Based
In this system when the weapon is raised and aimed you 'flip' to an aimed view that is only a 2D 'texture' that is supposed to be representative of an ironsight view (this is not the actual weapon model that you see in the normal view in-game). Typically one or more parts of the "sight picture" image will be made to look blurry and out of focus. Operation Flashpoint and Americas Army are two games that use this system of ironsights.
â· Weapon Model Based
In model based ironsights systems you raise and use the actual in-game 3D models sights; the "sight picture" is a 3D model using the same weapon model for the aiming machinery of the game -- you aim through the actual sights of the model of the same weapon you see on screen. Red Orchestra, True Combat, Infiltration, Vietcong, Hidden & Dangerous offer examples of model based ironsight systems.
[02.1] "What is Weapon Vection Aiming (or Vection Draw Trace/Aim)?"
Weapon vection based aim, or 'WVA', is unarguably the most realistic scale method of implementing ironsights, weapon handling, and aim mechanics in FPS games. In a fully implemented WVA system weapons perform exactly as they do in real life; you are able to discharge (un-aimed fire) your weapon at any time, or fire (point aim or precision ironsights aim) your weapon on the move or from any position at any time. But in WVA weapon vection or movement is to scale with player model movement; walking, turning, crouching, jumping or just standing and breathing adds vection to your weapon and effects your accuracy. Summarily in WVA the bullets go exactly where the weapon is pointed at any particular instant, so a player must 'steady' his weapon and there are time constants of 'settle time' based on weapon weight, the player models relative posture, and the possibility for stamina induced vection. There are two implementations of WVA:
â· Animated
The most realistic and correct, the weapons projectile code bullets or hit scan trace is drawn precisely from the position of the weapons barrel when it was discharged or fired. Only one game under development currently employs this system...
â· Interpolated/Calculated
Less exact but properly executed equally convincing and much less computationally intensive interpolated or calculated WVA employs simpler accuracy algorithms or matrices based on player movement variables.
Weapon vection aiming completely eliminates ironsights design considerations like 'Taping' as the weapons position and point of aim is almost never static and requires practiced aim to achieve. Weapon Vection Aim also offers a scale means of realistically modeling weapon handling, accuracy, aiming mechanics and completely eliminating arcade types of game play, like unrealistic and skill mitigating spraying.
[03.0] "Which ironsight system is better and why?"
Most gamers, whether they are real world marksmen, 'super-realism' fans, or 'action-realism' fans prefer the model based system. Some don't immediately appreciate and understand all the abstract reasons why they like it better but there is a sound basis in fact, physics, and the mechinisims of vision that fall into two categories:
â· Immersiveness
Model based sights have perfect continuity, there is no jarring transition from a model view of the weapon to a 2D texture made to look like a 3D render. Model based sights let you realistically see your weapon in entire from an aimed perspective, not just an artificially close render of only the weapons sights. Models based sights also are dynamically effected by in-game effects like light, movement, and recoil effecting your sight picture in ways that a shader sight system can not that both feels and is more realistic. Model based sights offer a smooth, consistent, seamless and contiguous system that is always directly integrated with the "game world" which is what gives it its immersive 'feel'.
â· Technical Correctness
On technical ground model based sights are the only correct way to include and animate an ironsight system. There is the continuity issue already discussed where you are always directly interacting with and handling the real weapon model and not substitute 2D graphics. Model based sights offer the only means to offer "Z" or depth in the "sight picture" and animate it making movement perturb your view and weapon.
One of the most significant aspects that is often confused and used to defend shader systems that is actually misunderstood and incorrect is the issue of 'focus'; shader systems typically will 'force' some part of the aiming system 'out of focus' which is neither more realistic or correct. In the real world the only thing 'in focus' in a person's FOV is what they are focusing on; in aiming a weapon and framing up a sight picture you very rapidly shift your focus from the rear aperture, to the front post, to you target and back -- carefully aligning all three until they are your best estimate of perfect. In the flat projected 3D game world everything is always "in focus" so forcing any particular game element out of focus is dystopic -- i.e. we can't shift our focus bringing an out of focus object in focus because the projection of the world is flat on our display devices, and the blur effect is artificially locked and forced at only one plane of distance.
Dystopic game elements may look superficially 'realistic' but on closer examination and play create the opposite effect intended; they break immersiveness by creating an incongruity, inconsistency -- i.e. a break in continuity that can not be compensated for by the player that could be IRL. 2D floating reticules are an obvious example requiring the player to shift between the illusion of 3D depth and a floating 2D overlay. The cartoon aspects of this does not go unnoticed by game developers as they unanimously remove 2D HUD elements from many of their "promotional shots" to make the picture and game look better, deeper and more immersive.
[04.0] "Aren't ironsights just for 'Super-Realism' or 'Simulator' games?
Absolutely not. The merits of ironsights can be argued separately of matters of realism; i.e. ironsights have merits in-game irrespective of considerations of 'more realism is better' and in fact stand on their own merits as a good element of game-design that favorably effect the quality of game-play improving immersiveness of the gaming experience, skill as the decisive factor in play, and the elimination of numerous kinds of 'lame' or 'exploit' trick-play that aren't wanted in most flavors of FPS realism.
The increased 'depth' that comes from removing artificial 2D overlays greatly enhances the immersiveness and apparent depth of games. It's a known fact of 3D flat projected game design that 2D overlays cause you to shift from flat elements to illusionary 3D and back -- the net result is to 'break' the effect of 3D depth. This is most apparent in screen-shots where there is a lot of HUD overlay making the screen-shots look like story-board or comic book cells rather then a good photograph of a 3D game world that has apaent depth.
Another merit of ironsights is projecting more world interactiveness into the most instrumental feature of FPS realism combat games: "the weapon". By including real weapon handling interactivity with the crucial element of aiming the immersive qualities of really interacting in the world and he primary object of your interaction (your weapon) offers familiar, convincing and tactile "feel" that is much more immersive.
Ironsights most significant contribution however is the most difficult for some to understand, as it includes realistic, unrealistic and abstract aspects of game design: making other players harder to kill. As FPS Realism games scale weapons closer to their real world counterparts in power and ROF weapons become increasingly first hit decisive -- this is very destructive to game-play quality as a function of skill where it is desirable to have skill as the decisive component of game contact outcome. In many ew FPS games we have weapons of very high FHD (first hit decisivne) power, super-accurized. with unrealistic reticule telemetry -- the result is the first to fire and hit will be the winner of most encounter.s The fallout of all this is that it reduces most game-play and tactics to ambushing as this is the most effective, easy and skill mitigating tactic to assure you get the first hit in.
Ironsights put you behind the somewhat awkward aiming machinery of the real weapon, force you (and everyone else) to make choices of when to look and when to raise your weapon obscuring you FOV to some degree and take aim. It is this vulnerability that all players must face equally, the thinking and choices involved that increase move and maneuver tactics in ironsight enabled games, and so dramatically improve the quality of game-play with powerful weapons.
True Combat is an excellent example of ironsights in an action title; this game moves faster then Counter Strike with more sustained intensity and speed and a hell of a lot more immersiveness.
[05.0] "What are some games and mods that already have ironsights that I can try?"
FPS Realism Games
â· Wolfenstein 3D (the first 3D render game is also the first ironsights game!)
â· Hidden & Dangerous
â· Vietcong (model based)
â· Operation Flash Point (shader based)
â· Call Of Duty (model based: unreleased)
â· Shadow Force: Razor Unit (shader based)
â· Delta Ops: Army Special Forces (shader based)
â· U.S. Most Wanted: Nowhere To Hide (shader based)
â· Secret Service: In Harm's Way (shader based)
ⷠSöldner Secret Wars (shader based: unreleased)
FPS Realism Mods
â· Red Orchestra (UW Mod)
â· True Combat (Quake III Arena Mod)
â· Infiltration (Unreal Tournament Mod)
â· Hostile-Intent (Half-Life Mod: not released)
â· Navy SEALs: Covert Operations (released but ironsights not implemented in current version)
â· TacSim (Simulator Interface Research Mod On Raven Shield)
â· The Third Reich (Unreal Tournament Mod)
â· SAS (UW MOD: not released
[05.1] "What is Free-Aim and/or 'Free-Aim System'?"
Free-Aim is a camera view based variation of aim system interaction with the player POV (point of view). Free-Aim Systems can and have been implemented independent of ironsights with regular reticule based games.
In normal (non Free-Aim) games your frame of reference, also called 'POV' and 'Camera' is a frame of reference that moves your weapon and POV in unison, in essence scrolling or 'panning' the world around you as your turn, raise or lower your view.
With 'Free-Aim System' initial lateral and vertical view movement only moves your weapon or reticule; the world camera does not pan or scroll until you have traversed your weapon or reticule to some point near the edge of the screen.
To better visualize the difference staring at your display, raise your hand like a gun in a FPS game, and move your hand with your head -- this is how aim view vection works in most FPS games. Now center your view back at your display and move hand independently of you head (still staring straight ahead) this is how a 'Free-Aim System' moves your point of aim -- when your hand moves to the edge of your peripheral vision then your head/POV/camera turns or pans to follow your weapon.
[05.2] "What is the value of having 'Free-Aim'?"
The typical reason for employing a Free-Aim System is in mitigating concerns with 'Taping' (see: [06.0] "What is 'Taping' and/or a 'Taper'?" and [06.1] "Is 'Taping' really a problem; does it really offer an advantage?") as a means of cheating.
Some argue and feel that 'Free-Aim' is more realistic because you have weapon movement that is dynamically independent of where you're looking, which in concept is more realistic and correct but in game execution for aiming is not.
The dynamic interactive vection of separate 'Free-Aim' view and world pan camera views is in fact not realistic; in the real world a rifleman laterally tracking a moving target with a rifle for example does in fact functionally lock his view to the weapons sights and move them in unison; there is no secondary 'camera' that turns his peripheral vision when he as traversed his view some specified distance in tracking or looking for a target.
In the real world when one aims a weapon by any method whether it be ironsights or point shooting one do not stare straight ahead and move your weapon to follow your target as it moves across your field of vision, and then turn if and when your weapon has reached the limits of your peripheral vision. You move your weapon and field of view as one, because the center of your vision is the most acute it's in the nature of how we use our mechinisms of vision and aim and is also part of virtually every school of marksmanship training.
[05.3] "What are some games and mods that offer 'Free-Aim Systems'?"
â· Infiltration (Unreal Tournament Mod with model based ironsights)
â· Operation Flash point (shader based ironsights FPS realism game)
â· Star Wars Jed Knight 3: Jedi Academy (reticule aim FPS)
â· FreeAim (Unreal Warfare mutator)
â· Half-Life 2 (reticule aim FPS)
[06.0] "What is 'Taping' and/or a 'Taper'?"
Taping is one of the criticisms frequently leveled at ironsights systems were it suggested a player can put a dot of tape at the center of his/her screen so they are able to fire weapons unencumbered by using the ironsights system of the game. Obviously some worry that "taping" is a serious issue.
[06.1] "Is 'Taping' really a problem; does it really offer an advantage?"
Arguably no; with most display devices the thickness of the glass on a CRT or plastic on LCD is more then enough to assure the parallax distance between the 'tape' and the phosphor mask or LEDs is great enough that the player will always have significant parallax error i.e. the tape will never point where the weapon's bullets are going due inter-ocular distance and parallax error created by the dot being suspended above the actual display elements by a thickness of glass or plastic.
The 'arguable' aspect of taping falls into the mean range of engagement in a game. With ranged or distance shooting taping will put the 'taping' player at a significant disadvantage creating an artificial point of aim that is not represented in the game and is virtually never 'on target' due to the aforementioned parallax effect... But in close combat, or CQB (close quarter combat) where full-auto weapons are used taping can confer an advantage because precise aim is not as critical (larger target), the player using tape does not suffer the delay of having to raise his weapon aim accurately, or from the FOV limitations of having his weapon raised.
Generally however practiced players are able to 'point shoot' in un-aimed mode as accurately and effectively as Tapers in CQB as targets are relatively close and large -- significantly reducing the veracity taping as an effective cheat.
[07.0] "Why are people so passionate about ironsights in FPS Realism Games?"
While that's very individual and everyone has their own reasons for wanting ironsights, most seem to agree that ironsights significantly raise the bar in scaling realism in FPS 'realism', immersiveness, and FUN by offering a novel, realistic and addictive feature.
The reticule aim system is a legacy game feature inspired by attack aircraft HUDs and was the only means to effectively include an aiming device on early arcade machines over a decade ago... Ironsights fans recognize that weapon render quality caught up with scale in the rest of the game years ago yet weapons sit in games as static superficial props that waste screen real-estate, penalize your in frame rate, and are ALWAYS posed in grossly unrealistic positions from which a weapon would neither be carried or fired.
Some of the benefits ironsights bring to the games that have them (that have people so excited about them) include:
â· vastly increased immersiveness
â· no distracting, throbbing, strobing HUD reticule
â· totally eliminates whole classes of arcade style play issues (circle strafing, dive play maneuvers etc.)
â· makes camping more difficult (getting to a 'camp' w/o a reticule and keeping it is more work)
â· realistically deemphasizes and makes killing more difficult
â· realistically focuses the game-play on OBJECTIVE play rather then arcade murder rampages
â· emphasizes tactical movement over less skilled arcade tactics of spray'n pray, camp and ambush
â· offers better balance mechanism for scoped weapons
â· offers game designer powerful tools to 'tune' weapon balance and power
â· focuses play on the real elements of the game: (environment, weapon, weapon handling, objectives)
â· is "the next thing" in serious realism game design
â· mitigates 'twitch play' emphasizing deeper skills of marksmanship tactics over raw reflex speed
â· makes the game world look 'deeper' and larger
â· makes weapons real aiming machinery not just props that waste screen real-estate and frame rate
â· moves weapons out of positions no one would even CARRY a weapon no less fire them from
[08.0] "Ironsights suck, I hate them, why should they be a part of any game?"
This sort of rant is typical of people that either have never played with ironsights, or had a bad exposure to something like the shader ironsights systems in OFP or AA. Applying this kind of reasoning though would suggest that nothing should ever be upgraded or improved in FPS realism games.
The best answer though is that ironsights have a significant, dedicated and enthusiastic audience; few game 'features' can claim the power to attract new players to a game the way this one feature can...
Like challenging music, trying ironsights is very addicting once you get over the "hump" of the learning curve. The the most emphatic fans of ironsights were once some of the strongest detractors...
Bottom line, no one that is a fan of ironsights wants to make enemies of fans of the reticule aim systems, and having games that offer the option to play a game through real weapons sighting machinery as an option isn't forcing anyone to try it, play it, or even like it.
[09.0] "Do enough people really want and play games with ironsights?"
That depends on what you consider "enough"... If "enough" means "as many people as play Counter Strike" certainly not. But unique among game features ironsights have an active following of fans that seek games offering the feature. Ironsights virtually guarantees a draw of a significant audience that will at least try a new game or mod.
Few game features have the power not only to draw an audience the way ironsights does, they offer a games compelling addictiveness by way of raising both the skill threshold and ceiling; making games more open to player skill and effort for more replay-ability. The 'irnosights experience' is pretty universal in that once new players come to terms with ironsights differences they find game-play much more consistent, open to their effort in a linear way and much more attractive then they initially had thought. More people playing longer attracts more people to playing as the saying goes.
Neither is this idle speculation; recently a virtually unknown 'Dark Horse' with virtually no advertising, hype or press offered a free beta Demo; Vietcong which on word of mouth only has surpassed big budget games with massive PR budgets like Raven Shield in servers and player-ship in a matter of only days, it offered ironsights as an option and all the server with the option enabled were full... Moreover arguably the worlds largest game publisher Activision will roll ironsights on it's new 'big budget' WWII FPS Call Of Duty...
As the saying goes 'you can't reinvent the wheel' and it looks like a very large audience will be exposed to ironsights relatively soon; it's hard to imagine that with this amount of money, talent and marketing behind games that include ironsights that ironsights will finally be innagurated into FPS games as something that is more widely anticipated and coveted.
â© Hoak (InterLap Design 1999-2004)
[This message was edited by hoak on Thu March 25 2004 at 02:46 AM.]