2016

>2016
>DICE still get away with this.

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com/search?q=single scope rendering&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
google.com/search?q=single scope rendering&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q="single scope rendering"
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Ill bite(not that I care about BF, Istoped plaing this game at BF2)

Whats wrong in this one?

Rehashing the exact same game for the 4th or 5th time? Or the horrible scope in?

single scope rendering

I'm going to assume rendering the entire scene once and then blurring out the area outside the scope instead of rendering a scope

and the issue with this is?

Literally who gives a shit?
You should be thankful games have come this far. There used to be a time when a "scope" was just a zoomed in view with a shitty "scope" sprite rendered to cover half the screen.

>You should be thankful games have come this far
12 years ago

I don't play these game, nor have I ever owned a weapon, but isn't that kinda realistic as you don't close you other eye when looking down the scope right you just focus only one. It probably is them just being lazy, but it's not the end of the world.

3D scopes are incredibly taxing on performance
all the games that do it don't have graphics anywhere close to the BF series

It really isn't

The games that have it are made for military autists who get mad at that type of shit though

should be an option, but it is taxing on performance

Since when is Killing Floor for military autists?

Even KF1 has that feature

No. It isn't.

That was true 10 years ago and it is 2016, not 2006. They just don't do it because they're shit.

it really is

They probably already tried it and it sucked. Single scope render is better for fast paced fps games.

I've read the whole thread and I really don't get whats wrong? Is it that its not zoomed?

look at
then

Are you dumb ?

So the problem is that its just a scope rendered over the screen and the perspective is continous? I mean I don't really get it. Especially because technically looking through a scope with one eye closed looks more like the zoomed screen with a sprite drawn over it thing from fallout and old cods.

no they aren't
devs are just too stupid to render them correctly

why red orchestra, insurgency, escpae from tarkov and tons of other fps can do it ?

Because they look like shit in comparison to any recent battlefield?

how does that excuse shitty scopes?

is this bait? nobody can be this retarded

It's an intentional design decision. Rendering the scope as a separate render camera is very jarring when you're playing and it forces people to slow right down to use the gun.

With BF generally being a run and gun franchise it goes against that.

tricks, smokes and mirrors mostly.
People underestimate teh cost of a double rendering in moder screen resolution greatly.

or, you know, DICE are incompetent idiots

Game will still be fun as fuck and all the people that took the time to come in here and whine will still be there day one.

But people are often this retarded and more.
Actually this is the kind of people games like battlefield are aimed at. This is their target audience.

that's a pathetic, retarded excuse. rendering the scope separately has never slowed me down in red orchestra.

RO2 is for military autists?

I just want to shoot some slavs with my k98 or torch some japs with a flamethrower

Could be that too.

That's because Red Orchestra moves at the pace of an old woman on a zimmer frame with no arms.

Nope. Feels like a slower CoD.

Not the user, but I too dont get this. Whats going on?

Battlefield 1 looks shit compared to any game

Kill yourself

The out side of the scope is zoomed in

>That's because Red Orchestra moves at the pace of an old woman
lol what the fuck are you talking about, retard?
RO is about as fast paced as battlefield, since both ostfront and HoS had a lot of smaller maps with a lot of automatic weapons, long sprint times, and whatever mouse sensitivity your preference was.

still a retarded excuse

Go to bed RO drone, no one cares about your dead game, it's slow, janky and boring.

Oh! I thought it just lines with the scope zoomed in image. Now I get why people are mad. Fuck.

>implying I excuse the buggy mess that is RO2
go to bed mental defective shitter

Battlefield 1 uses almost the same techs as battlefield 4. I expected them to work on this kind of details since the graphics didn't improve since 3 years.

Is the barrel bend to the left? How does he hit?

It depends entirely on eye dominance. People who have an eye that is much stronger than the other will not be able to have both eyes open due to the dominant eye taking over and fucking with your focus. I have an extremely strong dominant eye and I can not shoot with both eyes open if the sight radius is too long.

Some people also have issues depending on magnification. Like those 1x optics that aren't quite 1x, but more like 1.2x or something.

This of course doesn't matter at all in vidya.

Oddly enough, I'm hype for this shit.
I haven't played a Battlefield since 3 (what a fucking mess) but goddamn this shit looks good

Would this effect be present when not using magnified scopes or anything like that?

I notice that I cannot get a good sight on something when looking down my sks, but it doesn't have any scope mounted to it but I don't have a way to test my vision with a scope because I'm poor

I gotta say, the gameplay was better than I was expecting, but I'm still not sold on it.

The scope is mounted offset to the left of the bore. You compensate by zeroing. You adjust it to hit point of aim at certain distances, and you compensate or dial in when you are shooting at difference distances.

On this case, if you shoot at a closer target, the point of impact will be to the to the right. Too far and it'll be to the left.

I don't think this game actually takes into account windage though, only elevation.

It does fore me. The only time I can shoot with with both eyes open is when I am shooting with only a front bead (certain shotguns) or when I am shooting handguns (short sight radius of just a few inches)

Can't have both eyes with rifle irons or optics (even if it's 1x, I think the housing fucks me up).

If you can't get a good sight picture even when you're closing one eye, that just means you need rx glasses.

When closing one eye I get a perfect picture. I just can't get one through my sks with both eyes open.

Haven't thought to try with my shotgun and don't own a handgun though

>nobody can be this retarded
If people actually knew about guns and how they worked we wouldn't have people crying out for gun control every 30 seconds.

>why do they keep doing A?
>because doing B is more graphically demanding
>why did these games do B then?
>because they were overall less graphically demanding
>what does that have to do with A?

are you actually fucking retarded

Yes it is. It means you have to render the scene twice. For the same reason, mirrors are very rare in modern games.

Well, you can't get a totally clean picture with irons. You should be focusing on either your front sight or the target itself. you could also try using peep sights, which tech sights make for the SKS.

Of course it ain't cheap, so you can simulate it with something like this sticker here.

considering insurgency and RO2 had way lower budget, it's actually no excuse for DICE to drop that feature

Why is Eddie Guerrero in the front cover?

They probably hired Valve's Special Needs playtesters and learned that the total lack of peripheral vision/tunner vision makes it hard to figure out where the hell you are aiming at. You wouldn't be able to snap-shot people with an high-mag scope anymore. Boo fucking hoo- that's the whole point of low magnification sights and scopes existing. Instead they balance it around the animation taking for-fucking-ever to bring it up to your eye if it has a big zoom.

tl;dr their game designers don't want to take any risk and cater to the dumbest of the dumb and the baddest of the bad.

CoD does not have forced rifles

Unturned as well.
Freaking roboblox inspired DayZ started by then 16 year old kid has more realistic scopes than big AAA games.
Really makes you think.

>RO2 is for military autists?
Fuck no.

It's a tactics based FPS that doesn't go anywhere near full milsim. But when your only experience is Call of Battleduty then your opinions are a game is either CoD or ArmA and there is no in between.

>That was true 10 years ago and it is 2016, not 2006
It's still true, you basically render the same image twice

it's not a matter of budget it's a matter of engine optimization for efficient publication to discrete hardware specifications in a much larger development pipeline.

As someone who actually collects WWII guns, RO2 drives me mad with some of their guns inaccuracies. Especially the SVT.

If you really want to know if double rendering will impact the game, then wait until the beta, and just scale the resolution up to the appropriate percentage and see what happens

yeah, and disregarding such a logic and nice feature showcases the incompetence of DICE and the retardation of their fans

What inaccuracies? Could you name/show them?
Genuinely interested.

>Still using dorito based headshot assists

Why? At the very least you could have put them on center of mass instead right above their fucking head DICE.

>As someone who ACKSHUALLY collects WWII guns,

Fuck off with your nugget poorfag nobody gives a fuck

What? Escape from Tarkov looks better than any Battlefield to date.

>Sniper scope
>Only zooms 10 meters

Shitty picture, but you see that bolt on the SVT? It's purple, like in the game. That's not period correct. The color is a result of post war refurbished and the bolts were blued.

Period correct WWII SVT bolts were in the white.

which of those games has destruction you stupid ugly virgin?

>expecting anything more than single scope rendering

Nigga, that shit killed FPS like motherfucker in COD Ghosts, you wanna have practicly negative FPS on Battlefield?

JESUS CHRIST HOW ARE YOU THIS RETARDED

>muh jarring gameplay

It's not jarring you fucking idiot they don't do it because it's extremely taxing on systems to have to render a screen twice.

Acshalluy, you dont.

You are rendering 1 full picture like normal, and a small part of that is covered with a zoomed up version. You dont have to render two separate running versions of the game like a mirror, its the same picture.

Because they're based on antiquated technology that can run on toasters.

google.com/search?q=single scope rendering&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
google.com/search?q=single scope rendering&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q="single scope rendering"

Nobody says this, you dumb faggot.

Are you dumb ... ?

great argument

Red Orchestra 2 has destructibles

unreal engine 4 is for toaster ? Also my toaster can run BF4.

how can anyone be this stupid

nice samefag you desperate fanboy
calling someone retarded is not an argument

it's a much more graphically demanding game than all of those you listed, so they can't feasibly do #D scope rendering
get it through your thick fucking skull

you can see its clearly a swat mask the guys wearing

>graphically demanding game
For consoles maybe

It has better graphics, so what? why should it sacrifice features for some fancy bloom? half life 2 back in 2004 had both better graphics AND better features than most games

>why should it sacrifice features
except it isn't sacrificing anything because it never had it in the first place
you don't have a leg to stand on

Yeah, all new games should require a 1080 to run at >60 FPS on a 1080p monitor.

>it was always shit so it doesn't have to get better!
yeah ok

Gee user, two nuggets?

>battlefield 1
>filled with WW2 stuff
bravo DICE

developers have to deal with performance constraints
not everyone has a 1080 you fucking spastic

>Games from years ago did it
>Somehow they requisites increase as time because it helps you argument

yeah, and dice isn't very good at dealing with it
and stop the petty insults, it feels like I'm arguing with a 13 year old

>skipping history classes

games that are substantially less demanding
neither ArmA or Squad do it for the exact same reason
>yeah, and dice isn't very good at dealing with it
have you seen BF4 or Battlefront?
they make the best looking shooters on the market and the optimisation is generally pretty good

im sorry but america wan't even a country till half way through world war 2 so I dont know what the fuck you're talking about

if it was Britain and Spain fighting then this would be on point but no they're focusing on a fake battle because of hittlers popularity.
Dice is so shit.

When are we going to stop making games about male power fantasies?

Murder and guns are not "cool"