The problem is you can't use freelook when aiming.

Well AD2001, I do not own a TrackIR kit, but I use a Headtracking device similar to TrackIR and you do have freelook when aiming with Headtracking devices. Since this is already implemented (but only for players with such devices) it is possible to add a parallax effect.
I would also love to see this in a simulation, but the fact is that modern scopes and sights have a "counter-parallax" adjustment screw to counter this to a great extent. Also, the parallax effect is of great importance to snipers/scouts/marksman, but of little relevance to CQB, since it's effect is neglible for small distances.
I have to vote this one down, since we play "soldiers", which are trained in aiming and countering this effect.

@AD2001:
I didn't knew that. I have TrackIR and I can freelook around while aiming, so I assumed this is the same when using freelook. I did a quick test and you're right. However it doesn't change anything, because without headtracking device the sights are always aligned and the feature wouldn't work anyway, so no problems for those without headtracking gear.

@Nothun:
It's not about simulating parallax effects inside scopes or sights. It's about something entirely else.

When you shoot a real rifle, you hold it in your hands and aim it at the target. This is what we do with the mouse and the fun of shooting ends here. Point and click.

But for real, you have to put your eye in a correct position behind the sights, so that the eye, muzzle sight, back sight and the target are aligned in one line. It's not that easy, it's a skll to learn and reflex sights were invented to simplify aiming, *especially* at close ranges. With reflex sights, you have to align only two points: target and red dot, the eye doesn't have to be perfectly aligned, as long as you can see the dot on the glass (there are some optical issues here as well, but for the simplicity and gameplay I left them out). IR laser pointer is even easier to use and serves a purpose.

This is what we miss and our sights and lasers are only for show, not really needed, which I find to be a pity. My proposition is to allow for simulating the eye-sights-target aligning process with the use of TrackIR. It would be a skill to learn, for those interested, because this parallax aiming would be a option to choose (or not).

With the feature active, you would have to place the eye (by turning your head) in the correct position, so that the sights are aligned and only then you would hit the target under the sights. If you had a reflex sight, it would be enough to look at the rifle at such headtrack angle, so that the red dot is visible - putting the dot on the target would happen as it happens now, with the mouse. It would require head and hand coordination with what you see on screen.

Try this: in Editor, place your character (BLUFOR medic) on the runway at Stratis Airbase, directly west from the ATC tower. While ingame, get into urban prone position. Aim and try shooting the windows on top of the tower. Then remove the red dot sight and try doing it with ironsights. See the difference? This is what we miss from aiming.

First Rainbow Six had only a cross on the screen, no weapon model visible at all. OFP had black bitmap ironsights, then 3D ironsights were later introduced. In Arma2 reflex sights were still painted on the glass. Now we have "real" collimated reflex sights, so why not to use them? Why not to push onscreen aiming a bit further? At least as an experiment for those willing to check it out. Without innovation we could as well stop games' evolution at Doom or Duke Nukem 3D. The building bricks are in the Arma3 engine already, I don't ask for something requiring massive programmer resources.

You've written:
"we play "soldiers", which are trained in aiming and countering this effect."

With that in mind, all that could be demanded from a player, would be to only hold W and left mouse button, because he plays a trained soldier, whow knows when to move and when to shoot.

OFP, then Arma always were about personal experience. It was the player, who learned the right stuff and overcomed the difficulties in the end. There was no life bar, one bullet ended it. The enemies were hiding and none of them were eager to jump right in front of you. They were good at hitting you, not like in other games, where the enemies miss you from 10 meters away. There were no "perks", which magically improved your aim or made you run faster or being more bulletproof.

In a word, Arma is unforgiving, yet it has survived and has grown a huge fanbase. So maybe a way of "personal experience" is the way to go? Others have to release a new title every year and they are still only "one of many". If so, why not to give players more things to learn?

As a side note, I'm impatiently awaiting introduction of ToH flight model to Arma3. I know how a helicopter works, I used to study FAA publications and similar and hadn't had any problems in any sim out there. But o boy, this will be fun to read: "help! the helicopters are now unflyable!!" or "plz make the pilot class use the old flight model, because he is *experienced* and can fly a halicopter with ease".

It's all about personal experience. Which is why I still love Arma.

@armapirx

Don't get me wrong on the subject, I love Arma since Arma 1 the way you do, because of the non Call of Duty style. Pushing the boundaries of the gaming engine even more so.

"With that in mind, all that could be demanded from a player, would be to only hold W and left mouse button, because he plays a trained soldier, whow knows when to move and when to shoot." -Armapirx

This is not what Arma is about, you are right. The skill in Arma lies in the abillity to learn the skill of doing what, where and when, and this is what is so amazing, players that can fly a arma helicopter to unbelievable precision, because they LEARNED it.
Your idea to be able to toggle it on or off (which I didn't read out in your desc. I am sorry) is great, and yes, for those who can and want to a very nice feature.

I have a lot of experience with rifles, as I worked for a weaponsmith for two years, and i am a hunting guide. Anybody using a rifle (or assault rifles) with iron sights or improved sights like Reflex, Scopes or other, can compensate the effects of parallax simply by pratice and it becomes second nature. Soldiers do not think about the parallex effect since they have the experience with it, thus being able to think about more critical things like the tactical situation or scanning for enemies.
I myself would be so focused on the parallax, that I would completely neglegt my surroundings. Headtracking in my opinion is not as precise as it should be to accomodate this feature.

@Nothun:
I had shot rifles and pistols and I have a degree of experience and familiarity with them. I have used ironsights, as well as reflex sight, which is really helpful, but which required a bit of practice and getting used to it nevertheless.

I was doing some experiments, after I got the idea to enchance aiming, but before posting the ticket. My goal behind this idea, is to introduce an enchancement without forcing anyone to use it, without complicating players' lives and without requiring BIS to create something very complex.

What I did, was to try to keep my head turned to such position, that would hold the red dot exactly in the middle of the screen, while aiming and shooting. I was also trying to align various parts of a rifle against themselves and to keep them aligned, while looking around with mouse in standard (not aimed) view. Is is certainly possible to coordinate head and hand movement, after a rather short training.

An example aiming procedure could be as following (easier and faster to do, than to write and read):

1. You sit on a position, don't move and only look around for enemies.
2. You spot one and turn towards him with a mouse, while keeping your head on him with headtrack gear, for now only just not to loose a sight of him.
3. Once turned towards the enemy, you press the "aim" button and see the sights, which aren't perfectly aligned yet. The enemy is still visible somewhere in your field of view.
4. You move your head with headtrack gear, so that the sights are aligned or red dot is visible on the glass. It would be easy to gauge, what direction you have to turn your head, just by looking at the sights or a rifle model (if you have a reflex sight).
5. You keep your head stationary, to keep the sights aligned and turn the rifle with the mouse for a final aim, just like you do it now. The only difference is that you have to keep your head stationary during the aiming process, which isn't that hard to do.
6. Shoot once the sights or red dot are on the target.
7. Repeat for another target OR just aim with the mouse at another target, while still keeping the head stationary, to keep the sights aligned for quick shooting.

The only difference from the current aiming system, is the addition of step 4 and the requirement to keep your head stationary until the target is down. After that, you're free to look around, until you want to aim at the next enemy. With training, you could even merge steps 4 and 5 into one smooth move. If you had a reflex sight, aiming would be even easier. Looking at the enemy and aiming at him would somehow "automatically" align everything, so that a red dot would appear near the enemy or even, with a bit of practice, on top of him.

There is also one advantage, that this improved aiming system provides over the current system and it would be visible on SDAR. SDAR is zeroed at 30m, which calls for rather high hold over, when shooting on land at greater distances. At the same time, the thick muzzle sight hides the target. With the improved system and a bit of practice, you could aim at targets, without them being obscured by the muzzle sight. It's kind of similar to the case, when you zero your rifle at say 300-500m and make headshots at closer ranges, when aiming below, to keep targets in plain view, instead of hidden behind the ironsights (I used that for AK family in Arma 2 with much success).

You've written:
"I myself would be so focused on the parallax, that I would completely neglegt my surroundings. Headtracking in my opinion is not as precise as it should be to accomodate this feature. "

It's kind of similar to being able to hit a specific key on a keyboard without looking at it. At first I had to look down, for example to find that R for reload, but now I can hit it precisely with my eyes focused on the screen all the time. Also it's similar to walking in one direction, while looking in the other or looking into the turns, instead of directly ahead, where the aircraft's nose is pointing.

It's a matter of practice, which by the way, shouldn't take too long, once you're familiar with Arma's concept of having your view detached from the crosshair, unlike in an ordinary FPP shooter. For me, at first it was total spatial disorientation, like "what?? where am I looking and where am I walking?" but now I can't imagine not to have a headtracking device in Arma.

Regarding the precision, it's only a matter of setting the TrackIR profile to suit your preferences. You can make it less sensitive or to react in a non-linear manner to your head's movements, you can add a deadzone in the middle, there are certain movement smoothing options as well. I don't know if your device, or other headtracking solutions out there in general, have similar options available, but I assume, that the other devices are configurable as well.

Well Armapirx,

Although I normaly wouldn't revoke a vote, you do have very good arguments, and as I would also love to see this feature, but only if you can toggle it on/off. since this is where you are going, I am now with you on this.
One Up!

Thank you! :) I appreciate your vote and our discussion.

I think this would be much more sensible with Occulus rift, but my ultimate issue is I do not have confidence that it will be as natural and easy as in reality. Even with very little practice I've been able to acquire a decent sight picture very quickly on rifles. But that's because I have far more feedback and can achieve a good cheek weld. Track IR cannot give most of that feedback, and cannot offer me a good cheek weld. I think that it would probably do more harm than good. But, if someone can prove that it'd work in the game without any issues with tracking getting in the way, I'd be stoked to see it. I'm just not optimistic about this and it seems like a very small thing to push for when there are much larger issues with weapon handling at the moment.

Mass closing ancient tickets with no activity for > 12 months; assume fixed or too trivial.

If this issue is still relevant in current dev build, please re-post.