Wait, why would you people vote this down? Jimmy, did you even read? He's asking them to fix the new optics so the thing works more realistically.

Now that I've finally installed and played the latest dev build, I'd like to make one thing clear. Thank you, BI, for trying to implement scopes with peripheral vision. I realize this dev build was an early prototype to get feedback from the community and test the concept. However, I hope that in the future, the sights will be more realistic (With peripheral vision not zoomed in, as was requested by the poster of this issue) if PiP can be optimized enough to make that feasible. If not, I hope that the option to use the older style of sniper optics is still available.

Wait, just to clarify... how do I add a sniper from the editor? My version (On Steam) doesn't even have that...

No words.

Just... No words.

Wait, this wasn't reported before? It's the most noticeable bug in the whole alpha.

That's right. Go back to Call of Duty. They're downvoting you for being a cunt.

Oh. Sorry, Crazikin, I misunderstood. As a 3D hitbox, yes, it'd cause lag. As an interface element, maybe not. I'll upvote, though I don't mind the game as it is now in that regard.

An actual skeleton for hit detection would slow shit down considerably, and physics simulation on the level you're talking about is still science-fiction in a video game as big as ArmA.

It'd be a great idea, Crazikin, if today's current-gen hardware could handle it. We're not running Cray Supercomputers here, I'm afraid the Pentagon has those.

You need to be more precise with what you're talking about, Derrick. What the hell is this garbage? Are you referring to skydiving animations?

Upvoted. I would like to see this return as well.

Hi, Astaroth. I appreciate the efforts of the Bohemia interactive team, and love that you listen to the community. I'd still like to see scopes of the sort that I described in my original post (That can be toggled on or off in the options menu for those with poor computer hardware) that use PiP to create their sight picture - As it stands now, having the area around the scope zoomed in as well looks very bad, and it reminds me too much of arcade titles like Call of Duty and Battlefield.

Now that I've tried the sniper rifles in the latest dev build, I'd like first to thank the developers for adding sniper scopes which were not simple black overlays over the whole of the screen. With that said, I would like to ask that if this feature is to be implemented in the final game, the picture in the scope itself - And NOT what is visible outside the scope - be the only part of the picture zoomed in. If Picture-in-Picture can be optimized to a degree sufficient to make this possible, I would love to see it. Having optics with magnification looks extremely ugly if the area around the scope is zoomed in as well, and does not help the shooter maintain any situational awareness.

Yesss. Assigned. Does this mean we may actually see it implemented, or is that too optimistic?

Bumping. And I'd very much rather not see the rest of the screen zoomed in - Other video games do it and it looks ridiculous, especially in something like ArmA 3.

My hope, huorn, is that by the time the game's final release rolls around, the devs will have optimized picture-in-picture to the point that it mirrors (or comes close to) ArmA 3's gameplay FPS without needing ultra-beefy hardware.

On that note, we'e at five hundred upvotes. Let's see if we can get to a thousand.

@scrim:

First, you seem to have an impairment that prevents you from reading properly. I've asked for it strictly as an optional feature, meaning people with shit hardware can still use the classic black overlay.

Second, it's clear you've never fired a scoped weapon in your life. You don't jam your eyeball into the back of the fucking scope unless you want it smashed in when you fire and the gun recoils. You're able to maintain peripheral vision AND look down the scope, and can easily switch your focus between one and the other.

This issue was created only eight days ago and already has three hundred votes. Keep it up! Get noticed!

Well, Raz, I hope to see it implemented as an optional setting, as I said in the main post. Therefore, people with slower hardware can use the classic black overlay if they so choose.

Polaris doesn't come across as the sharpest tool in the shed here. He's suggesting that a black overlay would be more realistic than a blurred out periphery to a sight picture.

We need more votes to make this happen, gents. Keep voting up.

Yes, similar to what we see in Chehotela's video there, just with ArmA 3's realism.

A wee bump to keep the discussion going.

Corsair, as I said above, it'd be ENTIRELY optional.

Helper, that's why I've requested this as an optional feature. Those who had slower computers or simply wished to keep the classic blacked out scope periphery could keep it.

I'd personally rather not see it implemented like it is in most conventional FPS games today, where the entirety of the peripheral vision AROUND the scope is zoomed in as well. I can hardly imagine anything more ugly or immersion-breaking.

To respond to Helperman, sights would not look sharpedged at all because the peripheral vision (Area around the sight) would NOT be zoomed in.

Just a note for those who don't like the speed at which PIP images currently update: It's an alpha, and I'm sure they'll speed those up to the same FPS as the game before release.

I know this is irrelevant, but I had no idea people could have a typing lisp until I saw this issue.

@Concurssi, since we rely on computer monitors for gaming, and there's no analogue yet to simulate visual focus and peripheral vision, the current aiming deadzone setup works just fine. While it's true that in the real world, the shooter's head will move with his rifle, I just like the feel of the gun's movement on the screen.

I use aiming deadzone for several reasons - For one, moving around only my gun (Which is reflected on my character's model) presents a smaller visual movement than my entire body turning, which will attract more attention in PVP.

For another, I very much like the way it lets me clear rooms and turn corners while exposing less of myself than if I had my weapon centered.

Finally, it's a gameplay element many other shooters lack, and it helps everything feel much more natural and fluid, complementing ArmA's more realistic movement physics.

Bumping. This problem is major for those of us who like to use the aiming deadzone feature, and I would very much like to see a fix.

Why would anyone vote against this? This needs to be fixed, please, BI.

I don't know. I think that AI detection in water is really too good, but I find that elsewhere, so long as I don't sprint in full view of an enemy patrol, and keep a low stance and maintain a walk or tactical pace, they don't spot me as easily.

Misogyny central, bitches.

Misogyny central, bitches.

I don't understand why people would vote AGAINST this feature.

It won't change gameplay. Nobody's shearing your cock off. It simply adds another dimension to immersion representing the likely makeup of armies twenty or so years into the future. Okay, I can imagine the Iranian side being composed solely of men, given that it's an Islamic theocracy. But NATO? Canada's had female infantry for years. The US has finally had that change in 2013.

If you don't like it, play a male character. Don't be an ass and downvote it.

I liked ArmA 2's damage model. It was very realistic. I don't want to sacrifice realism for the sake of a few kids who don't know how to fly well.

Gentlemen, if you had trouble in ArmA 2 with hard landings, practice.

In one of the most survivable helicopters to date, the AH-64D Apache, I believe the crew can be said to walk away without much injury in crashes up to 20 gs.

I believe the same degree of survivability was available in ArmA 2. The helicopter would probably never fly again, but the crew might survive.