3rd person versus Egoshootermode

[Herbal Influence]

3rd person view versus egoshootermode

I just played the crcti on ArmA2 and I was fascinated.
I just start straight away no need do download anything.
My only frustration was (beside the known, excusable bugs):
3rd view was deactivated by the admin.

But my topic is something for all MP-Missons taken aside the doomlike-egoshooter-maps where you run around buildings ...

Not to read again and again what I have heard in numerous online games where I asked not to deactivate 3rd-persons-view:

(1) The "shoot-over-the-hill"-possibility - you can watch a nice demonstration on youtube.

(2) "Flying" over the shoulders is real only after death - at least following some being-clinically-death-reports.

(3) Using the <alt> - key - feature with mouse moving to turn your head.

But !

While you read this text you focus on your monitor screen.
Nevertheless you realize something moving that is 90 degree aside from your viewing line onto the screen - to the left and to the right.
Try yourself!
That's a viewing angle of about a 180 degrees!
And that's not for nothing. Anything else - kills ! ;-)

And scientists found out that the borders of our "viewing field" are even more contrast-sensitive than the rest of the eyefields, because or for this they do no sense colours but only black and white. A result of the evolution of the eyes for it was always very important to realize a wild animal or any other danger from aside of your position.

In other words:
No-third-view or "egoshootermode" as I like to call it is quite unrealistic in a very basic and an very important sense. It steals important information like as if - and many will remember this argument - you were wearing a gasmask (or diving mask on your face).
To illustrate this: I once was diving in the Red Sea (near Israel, Jordania, Egypt) which is famous for its richness of sharks. While I was inspecting a big nice coral reef under water with my back to the dark blue sea I couldn't see two sharks that were coming up from behind. I didn't even notice them while they were swimming aside of me because a diving mask makes you look through a "tunnel" only, the better the mask the lesser this effect.
After the shark-experience I began to compensate by turning my head nervously and steadily to the right and to the left - you may imagine me as a frightened person ;-)

And this constant head turning is what you can do with the <alt> - key, but that is far from realistic: Neither do you constantly behave like that without a diving mask on your face, nor do you like to hit the <alt> key in real life ... ;-), especially when you need all your hands on your weapons etc.

Indeed it seems to be the only way to "realize" the real viewing field with that "flying over the shoulders" effect of third view "on".

The fact that "shooting-over-the-hill" is possible - is undeniable and I do yet NOT know how to disable that. But ... in my experience of a hundred ctis per year within the last 8 years nobody ever did ever use that "cheat".

What, instead of 3rd view, really should be deactivatable is the strategic view (<,> on the num-pad).

By the by:
I thank the Oldfreakz-Clan very much to have 3rd on all the time "on" their server.

This is my opinion. You may have another - but please give reasons. And please do not simply reiterate the known reasons I quoted above. Thanx !

[whisper]

OTOH 3rd person view brings in even worse unrealistic feature, seeing past an obstacle without having to move any part of your body out of said cover. You can know who is behind this wall without having to actually go see it. Even worse when you're commander of a squad.

If you don't use it while playing, you're putting yourself at a huge disadvantage, trust me. I can't count the number of helpless IA I got using this

[NoBrainer]

I read what your saying, but as an admin, I'm not going to enable 3rd person view.

EVER...

[nedley]

I read what your saying, but as an admin, I'm not going to enable 3rd person view.

EVER...

Wants to see more of this train of thought in servers!

[BaseJumper]

You can have better peripheral vision (meaning you can have 180 degrees of vision), if you use 3 monitors and the Matrox TripleHead2Go
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/

Its going to cost you a lot of money for this though :D

[Herbal Influence]

@<hidden>:
I understand.
But you can't you see it this way too:
You don't have the same size/tallness as before. You are about a 100 cm taller than without 3rd view. And therefore you may look over a wall which is not higher than that.
In reality the tallness of men differ from about 150 cm to 237 cm ... roughly estimated. The tall ones are no cheaters though they can overlook a wall the small ones can't. ;-)

@<hidden>:
yeah, and you can use this IR-thing which makes your avatars head turning like your own, real head ... but it's only like turning around with a gasmask on your face ... no fun ... making me seasick.

[whisper]

@<hidden>:
I understand.
But you can't you see it this way too:
You don't have the same size/tallness as before. You are about a 100 cm taller than without 3rd view. And therefore you may look over a wall which is not higher than that.
In reality the tallness of men differ from about 150 cm to 237 cm ... roughly estimated. The tall ones are no cheaters though they can overlook a wall the small ones can't. ;-)

It's not a question of size! at all, it's not only because my view point is above me!

It's because my view point is external and can move

Switch to 3rd person, use your ALT key and you can see people when it's physically absolutely not possible to see him, and not only by looking above obstacles.
Want to check if someone awaits you after this house corner? Approache, stops 3m before, go in 3rd person view, press Alt and look at the house, wait for the guy to looke elswhere and surprise him.

Now, as I said, even worse, when squad leader, go in commanding mode, zoom out to the max, and move your camera to check inside houses, behind vehicles, etc... That's far more than "looking above your shoulder"

[Herbal Influence]

when squad leader, go in commanding mode, zoom out to the max, and move your camera to check inside houses, behind vehicles, etc...

Ok ... understood. But what is the "commanding mode"?
Maybe I am using it all the time and we only use different words.
Do you mean strategic view? (<,> - key on the numpad)
But you can use that anytime without being squad leader?

[whisper]

Yup it's the "." of numpad, and only usable when squad leader

[dvolk]

3rd person view is a bit unrealistic, but I think it's acceptable when playing against AI since they ignore grass and apparently some obstacles.

[whisper]

3rd person view is a bit unrealistic, but I think it's acceptable when playing against AI since they ignore grass and apparently some obstacles.

This is the only reason I'd put back 3rd person view in place, waiting for BI to implement the grass layer.
But I'm currently more into trying to make the server disable grass automatically. Not found yet as seemingly the old ArmA1 technic doesn't work :(
If I still can't do it, 3rd PoV will be put back in place on my server

[Herbal Influence]

Ok - but there is still no solution to the "shark-problem".
At least none without steady head-shaking .... :-(

[Defunkt]

To hell with triple-head, I want THIS (http://www.gadgettastic.com/2009/06/05/nec-43-inch-curved-lcd-monitor/#more-4121):

http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/nec-crv43_1.jpg

[Herbal Influence]

TMHO - that would work ... !
But only if your distance to the monitor is shorter than about a 50 cm .... and thats bad for the eyes ... :-((

Other ideas to the problems of sharks attacking directly from the side ?

For remembrance:
Natural view: you see, at least: notice! them.
Egoshooterview: you don't see them without turning your head steadily, nervously from side to side !

TMHO:
Egoshooterview is not the "realistic" viewingmode.
At least not more realistic than 3rd view.

Both produce
- a lack or (egoshooterview)
- an overflow of information (3rd view).

By the by:
Does anybody know whether the use of three monitors with triplehead (or so) does make sense in this regard? Whether ArmA is build to be used with it?

[nomdeplume]

Doesn't ARMA 2 have "peripheral vision dots" at the screen edges to indicate the presence of people and vehicles that your character can "sense" or otherwise knows about but can't see?

Perhaps an improvement of this system would be a better solution for Herbal Influence's "tunnel vision" problem, without giving people magical abilities to look over walls and around corners. Coupled with headtracking it should provide a realistic system; the pips let you know "something" is there, and if it's not expected you can easily look at it to identify it.

[monty67t]

I agree that 3rd person view should not be available while playing the role of an infantryman. However, even though alot of people don't use it, I believe it should be available to pilots. I was a crew chief in a Blackhawk for several years in real life. The view and perspective you get in the cockpit view is nothing close to the real thing. In real life you have crew chiefs on both sides of your aircraft telling you where you are, calling you into LZs, etc. The only way I will fly a helicopter is in 3rd person view. If I had track ir and a full crew who knew how to perform crew chief duties like airspace surveillance and stuff then I would consider it. You just can't see shit when flying in 1st person view, you have no peripheral vision and in my opinion its far from realistic.

[CarlGustaffa]

I also agree that 3rd person mode should be completely out of the question for all but the lowest difficulty (maybe even hardcoded), especially so in multiplayer. However, it is a great tool while debugging a mission, even multiplayer.

I agree that 3rd person might be helpful for spatial awareness in some cases, like helo flying, truck driving, and maybe even tank driving. However, the 3rd person view should not add any situational awareness to those using it. The way to implement it is via a very top down view, just slightly oriented forward, and no freelook. You'll know the position of your vehicle, like in being able to shift position in your seat and do stuff with your body that you can't ingame. But you don't get any battle information that you shouldn't get while in this view.

[whisper]

I agree that 3rd person view should not be available while playing the role of an infantryman. However, even though alot of people don't use it, I believe it should be available to pilots. I was a crew chief in a Blackhawk for several years in real life. The view and perspective you get in the cockpit view is nothing close to the real thing. In real life you have crew chiefs on both sides of your aircraft telling you where you are, calling you into LZs, etc. The only way I will fly a helicopter is in 3rd person view. If I had track ir and a full crew who knew how to perform crew chief duties like airspace surveillance and stuff then I would consider it. You just can't see shit when flying in 1st person view, you have no peripheral vision and in my opinion its far from realistic.

I used to push Alt and turn my virtual head when needing to check obstacles on sides and such in choppers. The only issue is trying to auto-lock in this case :D => Alt-TAB == going out of game! I keep forgetting it

Thing is, I think for ground vehicle, the 3rd person view gives you too much. I like the impression of confinement when driving from the inside. Makes you feel uncertain

[galzohar]

Change your keybindings...

[whisper]

Thank you, Captain Obvious :)

[galzohar]

Too many people religiously insist on keeping default keybindings ;)

[horror1]

i support 3rd person except in pvp.

[CarlGustaffa]

If I have to choose between the current 3rd person view and only 1st person, I have to go with 1st person only.

[whisper]

Too many people religiously insist on keeping default keybindings ;)

Nah, it's not religion... Well, unless you call laziness a religion :)

[DJSeanIT]

I read what your saying, but as an admin, I'm not going to enable 3rd person view.

EVER...

May I ask how you disabled it so I can do it on our network?

Cheers :bounce3:

[NoBrainer]

May I ask how you disabled it so I can do it on our network?

Cheers :bounce3:

This you do from your Server.ArmA2Profile.

There are a section with the different difficulty settings, you have to edit all or at least those you want.


class Difficulties
{
class recruit
{
class Flags
{
Armor=1;
FriendlyTag=0;
EnemyTag=0;
HUD=1;
HUDPerm=1;
HUDWp=1;
HUDWpPerm=1;
HUDGroupInfo=1;
AutoSpot=0;
Map=1;
WeaponCursor=1;
AutoGuideAT=1;
ClockIndicator=1;
3rdPersonView=0;
Tracers=1;
UltraAI=0;
AutoAim=0;
UnlimitedSaves=1;
DeathMessages=1;
NetStats=1;
VonID=1;
};
skillFriendly=0.80000001;
skillEnemy=0.80000001;
precisionFriendly=0.30000001;
precisionEnemy=0.30000001;
};
class regular
{
class Flags
{
Armor=1;
FriendlyTag=0;
EnemyTag=0;
HUD=1;
HUDPerm=0;
HUDWp=1;
HUDWpPerm=1;
HUDGroupInfo=0;
AutoSpot=0;
Map=1;
WeaponCursor=1;
AutoGuideAT=0;
ClockIndicator=1;
3rdPersonView=0;
Tracers=1;
UltraAI=0;
AutoAim=0;
UnlimitedSaves=1;
DeathMessages=1;
NetStats=1;
VonID=1;
};
skillFriendly=0.80000001;
skillEnemy=0.80000001;
precisionFriendly=0.5;
precisionEnemy=0.5;
};
class veteran
{
class Flags
{
HUD=1;
HUDGroupInfo=0;
WeaponCursor=1;
3rdPersonView=0;
UltraAI=0;
DeathMessages=0;
NetStats=0;
VonID=0;
};
skillFriendly=0.80000001;
skillEnemy=0.80000001;
precisionFriendly=0.69999999;
precisionEnemy=0.69999999;
};
class mercenary
{
class Flags
{
UltraAI=0;
DeathMessages=0;
NetStats=0;
VonID=0;
};
skillFriendly=1;
skillEnemy=1;
precisionFriendly=1;
precisionEnemy=1;
};
};The tag your looking for is "3rdPersonView=0;", only the class "mercenary" is not abel to adjust setting.
This is just an exampel. I need to adjust a lot more to make this config work ok. I don't want AutoGuideAT and other settings. It's just so you know what tolook for.

[Commando84]

I try to play only on servers with 3rd person view on, especially since i low watching my choppers. aircraft models in 3d person, they are so pretty :D

[MattXR]

I read what your saying, but as an admin, I'm not going to enable 3rd person view.

EVER...

Same :) from our clans point of views it has many more unreleastic points to good points..

Same with crosshair! although that can be argued we like to get people to use ironsights

[Herbal Influence]

.... I was a crew chief in a Blackhawk for several years in real life. The view and perspective you get in the cockpit view is nothing close to the real thing. In real life you have crew chiefs on both sides of your aircraft telling you where you are, calling you into LZs, etc. The only way I will fly a helicopter is in 3rd person view.

That's a statement !

And let me add as a simple footpassenger (infantry man) I once was, down in the streets of our city hastingly checking all the beautiful girls while shopping:
The egoshooterview is nothing close to the real thing.

I wouldn't have found my beautiful wife doing the egoshootermode all the time. ;-)

And for our Youngsters: You notice when your Ma comes in your room even if she is very slow and silent. You see her in the corners of your eyes when she is on the line of your both shoulders, 90 degree from your viewing line.
You won't see her if your natural view would be the no-third-view, the egoshootermode.

I respect the tunnelviewers, but I want to stress the fact, that the tunnel- or egoshootermode is far from being realistic: Nobody, especially being in danger, would like to wear a mask on his face, giving only a tunnel view. With horses you call that "blinders".

I have a 22'' monitor - so don't think the size of the monitor is of any help.

[whisper]

Again and again, the disadvantages overcome the advantages, even in terms of realism.
+ BI has put these nifty out-of-view presence indicators, making you know your character is feeling his surroundings

[NoBrainer]

I agree on that one. I have no problem with that.

But tha clan I represent have agreed upon that to look over walls and around corner is much more anoying than 1 pilot that can not land his chopper.

We choose to disable it to prevent "cheating" in PvP.

[Herbal Influence]

... + BI has put these nifty out-of-view presence indicators, making you know your character is feeling his surroundings

Sorry - what you mean ? Which indicators?

[wipman]

Hi, i've never used the 3Rd Person View to look above a hill, wall, object or whatever; i've
always used it to have a better awareness when driving a Tank, APC or any other vehicle
that in the ArmA don't had a vehicle interior; back in the OFP as the tanks had a interior...
i never used it. The pilots don't have mirrors in the real life, so i never used it to land or
crash a helo, i guess that not everyone isn't "as clean" as me when playing and they use
dirty tricks, i know; will be good if the 3Rd Person View could only be enabled for those
operating vehicles. Let's C ya

[whisper]

Sorry - what you mean ? Which indicators?

Green, white or red misty dots appearing at the edge of the screen, indicating friendly, unknown or ennemy presence at the side where it appears

[Herbal Influence]

Green, white or red misty dots appearing at the edge of the screen, indicating friendly, unknown or ennemy presence at the side where it appears

Ooopps ... I didn't yet realize / see them ... perhaps my resolution doesn't fit the monitor size ... and they were "thrown over the corner" arrrgh ??!

"some kind of guy" gave this hint earlier in this thread too, but I couldn't find them.


Doesn't ARMA 2 have "peripheral vision dots" at the screen edges to indicate the presence of people and vehicles that your character can "sense" or otherwise knows about but can't see?


Edit:
Watch that nice video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5nqxxJg6qY&feature=channel
and you see what I mean with "nervous and steady head turning" may it be through <alt> and <mouse> or by IR5 like in the video. After watching it I do feel seasick.
And by the by: there are no "green, white or red misty dots appearing at the edge of the screen" or are they deactivated?

[whisper]

Game difficulty option may disable them, I'm not sure

[Ish]

Even tho im pro realism, I quite like the 3rd person view.. No head bobbing.. When you roll, the screen don't roll with you.. etc etc.. It just feels smoother *sorry*

[Herbal Influence]

Please find recent commentaries on third view vs. egoshooterview, i.e. the shark-problem by the developers themselves:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSKIgfdg7fY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arma2.com%2F&feature=player_embedded

[galzohar]

FOV issues are no excuse for 3rd person. Instead they should fix the FOV so max zoomed out mode will compress a 120deg view into your monitor, and you'll be able to "zoom" (reduce FOV) to see distant objects. You can't have both, 3rd person or not, so having 3rd person doesn't solve that.

3rd person only lets you see things from angels that you would otherwise not be able to see, which is unrealistic. It' mostly for seeing around corners, above grass etc. Combined with crosshairs it feels like you're playing an old platform game with pretty graphics, on top of giving you abilities that no human has IRL.

When driving/flying, IRL the view is ALSO limited. Why do you think people make car accidents or have trouble parking IRL? Not to mention in tanks the crew is nearly blind. The driver drives almost exclusively based on commander input, preferably with the commander sitting with his head outside of the hatch so that he can really see around when possible. And if you really want to have the view yourself you can open your hatch and take your head out as well. Of course, remember to keep mouse (or trackIR) freelook on when driving, and use keyboard/joystick/other to actually steer.

The game is more than perfectly playable without 3rd person. There's no reason to argue for it that isn't in fact saying "I want an easy arcade mode and not a realistic simulation". Which is OK to say, I guess, but personally I will avoid servers with such players like the plague. It's not what I bought Arma 2 for.

[Tiger.BiH]

3rd Person worst problem is that you can see around the corners without exposing your body to fire. However the good thing about 3rd Person view it gives you better situation avernes, then FPV. And with that in my i would argue 3rd Person is more realistic the FPV. Think about real life, you vision is not limited like it is in FPV.

[RasdenFasden]

I hate that everyone uses 3rd person. Alone the fact that it lets you see around corners is bad enough. First person view is already far more flexible in arma 2 than in many other games so 3rd person is really only for people who can't fight properly.

[galzohar]

3rd Person worst problem is that you can see around the corners without exposing your body to fire. However the good thing about 3rd Person view it gives you better situation avernes, then FPV. And with that in my i would argue 3rd Person is more realistic the FPV. Think about real life, you vision is not limited like it is in FPV.

I would re-post the same thing over again but considering it's just one post above yours, you may want to go and read it...

[RasdenFasden]

Actually, I read that. My post is a counter argument to his pro 3rd person one.
There's a massive difference between situational awareness and seeing around corners without exposing yourself. If you're whining about a small field of view then simply move your mouse a bit or use freelook. It's more than enough.

[Vlad_13]

3rd person view is for NOOBS! And for SOCOM (PlaySyation series) fan boys.

[galzohar]

Actually, I read that. My post is a counter argument to his pro 3rd person one.
There's a massive difference between situational awareness and seeing around corners without exposing yourself. If you're whining about a small field of view then simply move your mouse a bit or use freelook. It's more than enough.

I wasn't quoting your post, lol...

I agree zoomout and freelook are what you should use, not 3rd person. 3rd person doesn't give you much more FOV anyway, it just gives you other cheats.

[Murklor]

I'd happily only use 1st person the moment we get the option to disable just motion blur. I like the effect bloom gives, but I prefer not to bleed out of my eyeballs every time I move my head in 1st person. Its not particularly realistic, unless we where to assume that your character have a constant headache or a serious inner ear problem.

[RasdenFasden]

I'd happily only use 1st person the moment we get the option to disable just motion blur. I like the effect bloom gives, but I prefer not to bleed out of my eyeballs every time I move my head in 1st person. Its not particularly realistic, unless we where to assume that your character have a constant headache or a serious inner ear problem.
Bloom is disgusting too, just disable post processing.

Oh, and whoops to galzohar :P

[Herbal Influence]

FOV issues are no excuse for 3rd person. Instead they should fix the FOV so max zoomed out mode will compress a 120deg view into your monitor, and you'll be able to "zoom" (reduce FOV) to see distant objects. You can't have both, 3rd person or not, so having 3rd person doesn't solve that.

3rd person only lets you see things from angels that you would otherwise not be able to see, which is unrealistic. It' mostly for seeing around corners, above grass etc. Combined with crosshairs it feels like you're playing an old platform game with pretty graphics, on top of giving you abilities that no human has IRL.

When driving/flying, IRL the view is ALSO limited. Why do you think people make car accidents or have trouble parking IRL? Not to mention in tanks the crew is nearly blind. The driver drives almost exclusively based on commander input, preferably with the commander sitting with his head outside of the hatch so that he can really see around when possible. And if you really want to have the view yourself you can open your hatch and take your head out as well. Of course, remember to keep mouse (or trackIR) freelook on when driving, and use keyboard/joystick/other to actually steer.

The game is more than perfectly playable without 3rd person. There's no reason to argue for it that isn't in fact saying "I want an easy arcade mode and not a realistic simulation". Which is OK to say, I guess, but personally I will avoid servers with such players like the plague. It's not what I bought Arma 2 for.

I appreciate your post.

And I think your idea oft a good zoom in/out could be a solution to that problem of situational awareness which I feel is unnaturally decreased by the egoshooterview.

To me it is important that people realize that it's not simply like that:

3rd person view = noobmode and egotshooterview = realistic mode

With egoshooterview you have a tunnelview that's completely unrealistic and dangerous (shark attacking from aside = unvisble), so you would never chose that in a real combat situation.

The simulation of the natural situational awareness is difficult because it consists of so many senses man has developed during evolution just to survive: natural viewing angle more than 180 degree + smelling + stereo (even spatial !) hearing + senses for vibration/shaking of the ground + wind (e.g. from a passing vehicle or explosion) + etc.

Indeed you cannot see "round" the corner but there are many senses that might give you information there is something moving there you don't get being only in egoshooterview.

And the needed constant head turning ... it makes me seasick. The IRpro or the <alt>-key doesn't help - it's even worse then.

Above in this thread you also find a statement of a former blackhawk pilot saying that egoshooterview is quite unrealistic - at least while in vehicle.

Don't mix "complicated" or "handicapped" with "more realistic".

[RasdenFasden]

I appreciate your post.

And I think your idea oft a good zoom in/out could be a solution to that problem of situational awareness which I feel is unnaturally decreased by the egoshooterview.

To me it is important that people realize that it's not simply like that:

3rd person view = noobmode and egotshooterview = realistic mode

With egoshooterview you have a tunnelview that's completely unrealistic and dangerous (shark attacking from aside = unvisble), so you would never chose that in a real combat situation.

The simulation of the natural situational awareness is difficult because it consists of so many senses man has developed during evolution just to survive: natural viewing angle more than 180 degree + smelling + stereo (even spatial !) hearing + senses for vibration/shaking of the ground + wind (e.g. from a passing vehicle or explosion) + etc.

Indeed you cannot see "round" the corner but there are many senses that might give you information there is something moving there you don't get being only in egoshooterview.

And the needed constant head turning ... it makes me seasick. The IRpro or the <alt>-key doesn't help - it's even worse then.

Above in this thread you also find a statement of a former blackhawk pilot saying that egoshooterview is quite unrealistic - at least while in vehicle.

Don't mix "complicated" or "handicapped" with "more realistic".
This whole perpheral vision and extra senses thing is nothing more than an excuse to use 3rd person. You can track an enemy's footsteps with stereo headphones well enough and there is no sense that tells you whether or not an enemy is round a corner. If we would have that imagine how easy hide and seek would've been when you were a kid. Your FOV in real life is only where you're actually focusing, the outer areas at the corner of your eye are practically ignored so having a huge field of view simply makes no sense.

1st person is good enough for infantry. FOV and all that is nothing but an excuse. The only time where it's not enough is flying an aircraft and that's only due to the lack of 6DOF.

[Alpha-Kilo]

Your FOV in real life is only where you're actually focusing, the outer areas at the corner of your eye are practically ignored so having a huge field of view simply makes no sense.

I think this is not entirely true. Think about driving a car in real life with your 180degrees field of view. You may be concentrating on the road ahead, allowing your brain to ignore what you see with the corner of your eye. So far you're right.

But as soon as your eyes detect MOVEMENT in any area of your FOV, your brain will be put in a state of alert allowing you to analyze the situation at hand.

You can easily verify this if you limit your FOV and walk around. (I strongly suggest to refrain from driving while making this experiment). As soon as your peripheral sight is limited you will feel very strange and you will start moving your head in all directions. Most people will want to regain their normal field of view after a very short time.

What does this mean in terms of gameplay? The FOV should be as wide as possible (zoom out as far as ArmA2 lets you) when walking around. If you notice any movement, zoom in on this object and identify it. I don't own TIR, but from what I read it the zooming feature of this device seems to simulate this quite comfortably.

[anfiach]

The simple way to resolve this in a realistic manner is for people that want 3rd person view to do what soldiers do in real life and move their head A LOT. Nobody relies on peripheral vision to save them from an enemy threat.

[adom23]

I cant beleive ppl are arguing FOR 3rd person view in a mil sim!.. I shall just switch to the camera I have stuck on top of a pole taped to my back to get a better view! crazy!

[Spamurai]

3rd Person View has it's realistic advantages with a sim. It also has an arcadish side that can be exploited for it's gaming potential.

First Person View is not as realistic as people think and claim it is. It is far more of a claustrophobic interaction with the world around you then you would normally have. Your field of view is only, at most, 90 degrees and you have no peripheral vision. You also lack the natural sense for your personal space.

Third person view creates a more natural sense of situational awareness.

The downside, because no "system" or mode is without compromises, is that you can "peek" around objects. You can also get a great deal more situational awareness then perhaps you should. Like when driving a vehicle.

However, this is a game with a limited interface through which you can interact with a virtual world. There have to be compromises. Try driving a car in the real world with a neck brace on and your peripheral vision locked out to a 75 degree field of view. Try parking your car like that. I can throw a ball into the air from my left hand and catch it with my right hand all without looking at my hands, I just "know" where my hands are in relation to the ball at all times. I just typed out this post without looking at the keyboard at all... I just know where my fingers are in relation to the keyboard. Try modeling that into a virtual 3D world displayed to you on a flat 2D window in which you only get so many buttons to push to accomplish whatever it is you want to do in the game world.

People who decry the virtues of realism in a video game often ignore the fact that the very premise of trying to emulate reality in a fake virtual format requires all kinds of compromise. It just comes down to which compromises they're prepared to ordain and accept or ignore for the sake of their fantasy.

It's always interesting debating "reality" in a video game with hardcore armchair commando's. Fortunately ArmA is customizable... it caters to everyone.

PS: I can peek over a wall or from around a corner without exposing a full third of my body you know. However, I have never known how to respawn myself after having been shot dead.

[galzohar]

Actually, in another thread someone measured the FOV in 1st person, and it was ~80-90deg. Zoom out and you will have more, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the full 120deg FOV.

The thing is, you can't have a realistic view on a computer monitor, simply due to pixel size (and to a lesser degree, physical size). The bigger your FOV, the smaller each object is to the point where it becomes invisible due to it being represented by too few pixels (or a too small silhouette). That's why games don't give you 120deg realistic FOV by default.

Note that 3rd person does NOTHING to help this issue. You still have to choose between a biger FOV to better visibility of distant objects. The only thing 3rd person does is allow you to see things that you cannot physically see in any way IRL. It's a 100% realism killer.

1st person IS the realism mode. Not perfect realism, but with proper zoom features it is the best a computer monitor can give you. 3rd person doesn't give you anything that you would've had IRL that you can't have in 1st person.

The only real issue is the fact your head is nailed to the chair when in vehicles, but most are still perfectly manageable. Tank drivers don't see jack s!@<hidden># IRL either. I've driven an APC, and my vision was definitely s!@<hidden>#, you pretty much HAVE to have someone telling you where to go and warn you of certain obstacles, not to mention guide you step by step when you want to reverse. This is all implemented in game by the commander-driver quick commands. In helicopters/airplanes I'm not sure how much being allowed to realistically move your head/body would help - it'd definitely not help nearly as much as the 3rd person view helps.

[Herbal Influence]

.... 1st person IS the realism mode. ....

That indeed means that you are saying that it is realistic to turn your head constantly from one side to another during the whole game to - that way - gather the real field of view (FOV).

While you concentrate on the monitor - right now ! - you sure realize a person or a thing that moves behind a straight line of your both shoulders, i.e. that is 90 degree right and left of you. The FOV therefore is more than 180 degree.

To reduce this to the egoshooterviewingangle you have without 3rd view ... you use blinds on horses ... and ... you can use a gasmask to do the same.

You would never like to get in a dangerous combat situation that way or - as shown above - try to get your car in a parking lot.

[Alex72]

Online i want 1st - in SP on my own i love the 3d for the reason that i love to see my guy. He looks so damn cool. :bigglasses:

[Tiger.BiH]

The good thing about a2 is that it gives options to use. If somebody prefers 3rd view its not my place to say you play the game wrong way. If its more fun, more power to them. After all guys this is a game, and lot of things are done to make it fun for example, in a2 you can get in a chopper and be airborne within 5 sec. Can you do that in real life? I don’t think so. But that’s fine, its good the way things are in a2, its got good balance between being realistic and still maintain that fun factor. Would anybody want to fly choppers if you had to get in the chopper and go through 45 steps checking that all your systems are working, making sure everything is in place every time you want to fly? For me it would be boring. I want to get in. get the bird airborne and focus on mission and tactics.

[galzohar]

That indeed means that you are saying that it is realistic to turn your head constantly from one side to another during the whole game to - that way - gather the real field of view (FOV).

While you concentrate on the monitor - right now ! - you sure realize a person or a thing that moves behind a straight line of your both shoulders, i.e. that is 90 degree right and left of you. The FOV therefore is more than 180 degree.

To reduce this to the egoshooterviewingangle you have without 3rd view ... you use blinds on horses ... and ... you can use a gasmask to do the same.

You would never like to get in a dangerous combat situation that way or - as shown above - try to get your car in a parking lot.

Like I already explained, 3rd person does not solve FOV problems. It doesn't increase your FOV - all it does is let you see stuff that are in your character's vicinity - most of which you wouldn't have been able to see IRL, and most of the stuff you complained about not seeing in 1st person are not visible in 3rd person either. It's a net realism LOSS. Zooming out for extra FOV does solve FOV problems, so if you still think you don't have enough FOV after zooming out you should cry some more so BIS fixes it.

It seems like the zoomed out FOV is 120deg (which is more or less as far as your eyes can see IRL without moving them), though I hadn't measured it directly yet (look at one of the ACOG threads for similar FOV measurements). They should just fix it so that you can use it anywhere and not just when using a weapon with non-magnifying sights, and also make it go up to 120 degrees if it doesn't already.

The only reason the default FOV is smaller than the realistic FOV is becuase a realistic FOV would reduce your visibility distance (distance to which an object is visible rather than a pixel), and with a monitor you simply can't have both. 3rd person doesn't let you have both either, it just gives you other cheats in its place so that you can play it like it's World of Warcraft.

[Murklor]

It seems like the zoomed out FOV is 120deg (which is more or less as far as your eyes can see IRL without moving them), though I hadn't measured it directly yet (look at one of the ACOG threads for similar FOV measurements). They should just fix it so that you can use it anywhere and not just when using a weapon with non-magnifying sights, and also make it go up to 120 degrees if it doesn't already
I doubt its anything but the standard 80-90 FOV. 120 is alot for a game. IMO any FOV other than 90 translate poorly to a monitor. In the worst examples you get a fisheye lens which makes one dizzy and nauscious.

[galzohar]

The standard FOV is definitely somewhere between 80 and 90, and you can zoom that out quite a bit more than that. And again, no 3rd person is going to give you that lost FOV back.

[Spamurai]

I'd say it's 90 degrees and then when you right click to "focus" it zooms in to 75 degrees.

3rd Person is more authentic for emulating the natural awareness for your immediate surroundings. Something 1rst Person can not do.


However, it can give you too much awareness at times. That said, it can be good for gameplay to give players more information then they warrant. It allows them to make the kind of decisions that facilitate there sense of fun by allowing them to focus on things with that goal in mind.

Allowing them to better judge whats going on around themselves helps keep them from feeling bogged down in the minutia that distracts them from fun times.

It just comes down to why exactly is the individual playing ArmA and what do they expect to get from their experience.


Many players like the idea of realism, but only so much as it helps facilitate the atmosphere of their fantasy.

Most people in history who've had the experience of living through a real shooting war will state that they found it anything but fun or desirable. The wisest of generals have stated that a shooting war is the least desirable of outcomes. It proves to be something that just isn't any fun for all those involved.

So it is ironic that we choose to make a past time out of it in the interests of entertainment. It's good to think about that when we strive to make the most lifelike of war games. The closer we get to making ArmA just like the real thing, the less fun it will inevitably become. It's the natural course of this continuum. One side is concrete realism (Real Life) and on the other, Abstract arcadism (Choatic Fantasy). Neither end of the spectrum extreme is desirable. "F.U.N." is therefore situated someplace inbetween the two. Where exactly it sits, depends on the individuals sense of it. Fortunately ArmA 2 can slide along the continuum to accommodate many different tastes.

[NkEnNy]

Just to start things off. I've played first person shooters for the better part of my life. I've built shrines to Quake. I've ranted and wailed on Rainbow6 forums way back when on the topic of 3rd person views. I've been around the block.

3rd Person
Recently in Arma2 I've been experimenting with using 3rd person, and quite surprisingly it feels more natural! Arma2 suffers greatly from its poor internal animations, its clunky interface, and sometimes insane user interface. But 3rd person to me; dealt away with many of those issues.

When it is possible to see the soldier, it becomes easier to understand ARMA2s limitations. In fact it seems to me like ARMA2 was developed with third person in mind.

For long range engagements, or just short sharp close range fire, the first person ironsights rule. But for Patrolling? or moving in buildt up areas? Storming madly ahead. 3rd person view has done wonders to me.

-K

[Murklor]

3rd Person
Recently in Arma2 I've been experimenting with using 3rd person, and quite surprisingly it feels more natural! Arma2 suffers greatly from its poor internal animations, its clunky interface, and sometimes insane user interface. But 3rd person to me; dealt away with many of those issues
Dont forget less blur so you can actually see things!

I still always play in 3rd person, unless of course its disabled. Personally I think some of the issues can at least be helped by adding some limitations instead of foaming at the mouth and screaming 1st person.

- move it closer just a notch (ie reduce the view)
- limit vertical movement downwards (no point in aiming at the ground anyway, this will help peeking over walls)
- go to 1st person when clicking free-look
- remove the aimpoint in 3rd person regardless of difficulty setting (after all, its hard to see where your aiming when you're outside your head).

Anything else?

[Master gamawa]

I have made a deal with the devil. The minute I use third person he is going to steal my soul and rape it for the rest of the eternity.

For fucks sake, third person allows you to see around corners and over walls. Don't give me shit about natural awareness.
Even the most aware person CANNOT SEE AROUND A CORNER without actually looking around the corner!

But then that's just me. I cannot stand third person games as I don't get immersed when there is a little asshole running on the screen.

[NkEnNy]

re: Third person vs First person
IRL
...I don't get stuck in doors when carrying things, unless I'm being silly.
...I can glance around a corner and watch all angles.
...I don't accidentally trip around corners.

Looking over walls or around corners is in all brutal honesty a VERY minor issue. And as Murklor notes the fixes are pathetically easy to implement.

I think more people should try it, if only to appreciate the craft BIS put into it. Who knows you might grow to appreciate the GAME implications of it.

[whisper]

Looking over walls or around corners is in all brutal honesty a VERY minor issue.
Having played Planetside quite a lot, I tell you, it's all but a minor issue, it's completely game-changing.
And commander view issues are still not covered

[Mojo]

depends on what you want out of the game. at the end of the day it *is* a game, so where do you get your bliss? personally I'm put off by OP's egoview statement because I don't think it has any ego in it, I feel that 3rd has cheat-like qualities --- BUT that is just my opinion. OP is welcome to create a server that is 3rd POV .. The servers I admin will not have this ability.

In the end, this entire thread is interesting because the two sides can never seem to find that common ground to compromise. To me, seeing over a wall/into a building/etc. far out weighs the other lack of peripheral view, so I do the Mr Wobbly-head and look around a lot.

Get track IR - get multiple monitors - get your own server for your own rules.

[Herbal Influence]

Thank you for your posts! Thanx for the interesting discussion.

Some are saying that the IRL FOV ("In Real Life Field Of View") is like or even below 90 degree.

They state that with egoshooterview you see what you see in real life.

Again I wish you to comment on this:
While you read this, while you are focussing on the monitor like you do in combat: you notice that your mama (for the youngsters) or your jealous partner is standing right next to you on the left or on the right side. Just draw a line from one shoulder of yours to the other: you notice things that are even beyond this line, especially when they move.
The real FOV therefore is undeniable more than 180 degree.

Try it yourself now! No need to stand up for that ... or even stop reading this!

But let me explain furthermore what I mean with FOV - maybe that explains lots of the discussion.
Evolution - the survival of the fittest - implemented our eyes that way to make us able to detect dangers.
It even implemented it that way (scientists have found out this - but you can easily try yourself) that you don't see colours at the very edges of your FOV.
It works only with black and white.
This has a very good reason: You can easier detect contrast changes = movements.
Things that move right or left at the very edges of the FOV are to be detected for they can be dangerous - in woodlands where our anchestors lived but also at the monitor, when your ma comes up to tell you again and again that you already spent hours at the PC gaming.

In another thread someone stated: Don't make it more complicated than real life. Don't call it real because it's more complicated than real life.

[Murklor]

I feel that 3rd has cheat-like qualities
You say cheat-like, I say equal qualities as the AI :D

[anfiach]

pvp should be first person view only. Everyone is limited the same in their FOV keeping things 'fair'. 3rd person view does not fix FOV limitations and you are in reality trying to compensate for a lack of spacial awareness that cannot be experienced through a monitor although the free look ability helps the issue somewhat.

[Herbal Influence]

pvp should be first person view only. Everyone is limited the same in their FOV keeping things 'fair'. 3rd person view does not fix FOV limitations and you are in reality trying to compensate for a lack of spacial awareness that cannot be experienced through a monitor although the free look ability helps the issue somewhat.

Everyone can be limited to the same FOV by 3rd view too.
And to me 3rd-view *does* exactly fix the unrealistic limitations of egoshooterview.
The spacial awareness of reality can be experienced by using 3rd view - not by egoshooterview.

I get seasick turning my head round and round and round and round ... and ... round not to talk about the unability to shoot fast while steadily turning and turning, turning, etc. because I have to use my fingers on <alt> and the mouse. Using this IR-head-thing wouldn't change my seasickness ... would only give me the ability to shoot at the same time.

Strange ... I can't understand that it's fun looking through a tunnel into game-reality.
Especially into this with it's outstanding graphics.

[Thirdup]

Heh, the topic will be debated by our grand children.

But the bottom line is that we have a choice in ArmA.

If you don't like what you see, change servers.

It's that simple.

I fly helos in 3rd-person. I fly aircraft in 1st-person. I play ground combat in 1st-person. I drive vehicles in 3rd-person. I gun tanks in 1st-person.

To each their own....

[anfiach]

Everyone can be limited to the same FOV by 3rd view too.
And to me 3rd-view *does* exactly fix the unrealistic limitations of egoshooterview.
The spacial awareness of reality can be experienced by using 3rd view - not by egoshooterview.

I get seasick turning my head round and round and round and round ... and ... round not to talk about the unability to shoot fast while steadily turning and turning, turning, etc. because I have to use my fingers on <alt> and the mouse. Using this IR-head-thing wouldn't change my seasickness ... would only give me the ability to shoot at the same time.

Strange ... I can't understand that it's fun looking through a tunnel into game-reality.
Especially into this with it's outstanding graphics.

It doesn't give you spacial awareness at all. You still can't 'feel' that team mate just behind you and that is what spacial awareness is about, sensing your environment, not peripheral vision, which 3rd does not give you and for everyone to experience it you would have to lock everyone into 3rd, the point is for everyone to be equal by default and peeking around corners and over walls is right out. Also, why are you spinning in circles? Scanning the horizon doesn't require you to turn turn turn, 3rd doesn't eliminate the need to bring your weapon to bear on the enemy either. I don't understand what you are saying.

[galzohar]

Heh, the topic will be debated by our grand children.

No it won't, because by then Ground Branch would have been long released and showed the world what's realistic and tactical FPS gaming done right really is.
www.blackfootstudios.com/forums

FOV IRL is ~120 degrees, with slight variations between different people. There are easy experiments to test this, such as focusing on a dot right in front of you while having 2 dots "move" slowly from behind you around you towards the center point, and you clicking a button to stop them and checking at what angel the dots stopped.

Regular FOV is ~90 degrees, to compensate for the fact that compressing a 120deg FOV onto a monitor would not allow you to notice details up to a feasible distance. However you can zoom out to a FOV much greater than 90deg (use "zoom out" or "zoom out - toggle" button for this), which is either 120deg or something not far from it. Feel free to measure in game by measuring how many T72s you can get in your FOV at 100m, multiply by the length in meters of a T72, divide result by 100, get the arctan of the result you got and multiply its result by 2. You can do the same with 3rd person to see that your FOV isn't really different, it's just that your view point is moved backwards by a few meters and gets rather unlinked from your chracter.

While 3rd person gives great situational awareness at times, IRL if everyone had as much awareness as 3rd person view provides the world would probably be a MUCH better place (think car accidents for starters).

[Murklor]

IRL if everyone had as much awareness as 3rd person view provides the world would probably be a MUCH better place (think car accidents for starters).
Well at least cars have mirrors that actually reflect what you're looking at behind you, unlike a certain game. Real life 3rd person in a car would give you FAR WORSE awareness as you wouldnt see crap behind you.

[anfiach]

If Ground Branch ever gets released it might live up to the hype.

@<hidden>, do you have a point?

[whisper]

What on earth does 3rd PoV gives you exactly that makes it real? Double tap Keypad-minus and enjoy a better FoV, why would you need to permit cheat to have that?
You don't get better awareness with 3rd PoV, you THINK you get, and the little more you have, in fact you shouldn't have it, it's seeing above your head that gives you more info that you'd have IRL (your so awesome 3rd sense included) and which gives you this impression of better SA.

If it's a question of FoV, difference between the 1st person viewpoint and 3rd person viewpoint is so tiny compare to the area before you that it's not worth it. + you have enlarged FoV with double keypad-minus.
If it's a question of seeing behind you, same, you're what? 1.5 m behind your personna? So useless that it's not worth the irrealistic cheat potential
It's a question of "something else"? Tell you what, the something-else is your viewpoint being higher. Meaning it gives you sight of what you'd never see IRL. It doesn't compensate for any screen limitation, because screen limitation is FoV, and 3rd PoV FoV advantage is nearly zero. It's no compensation that you see higher, it's unreallistic advantage.

This exclusively for infantry.
Vehicles, and especially open ones (cars, choppers) are another matter. I don't really see why 3rdPoV should be mandatory for tank driving, for example, as IRL the driver doesn't have perfact outside vision, far from it, and the game renders this impression quite well. But that's a bit understandable for choppers

Continue using 3rd PoV (I didn't disable it on ping0), I'll continue using and abusing it :) To me, the "limitation compensation" for infantry is only an excuse, truth is, used with a lil bit of brain, it's a huge tool, but unreallistic one

[demowhc]

I normally love FPS view in games, however in ArmA2 I feel it is poorly done, movement etc feels terrible.. and on top of that the frame rate is so poor it makes it feel even worse.. so in ArmA2 I prefer 3rd person mode and tbh if it wasnt for the option of 3rd person I doubt I would have stuck with it long enough to find out what a great game it is.

[Noraf]

Well, it's stated before in this tread, quite some posts ago, that when playing ( unless you're on merc settings i guess ;) ) you have thise dotts on the edges of the screen that helps you when it coems to notice things you easier would have done irl than ingame.

That a lot of ppl do not notice those, i thnik is another story ;)

[whisper]

I normally love FPS view in games, however in ArmA2 I feel it is poorly done, movement etc feels terrible.. and on top of that the frame rate is so poor it makes it feel even worse.. so in ArmA2 I prefer 3rd person mode and tbh if it wasnt for the option of 3rd person I doubt I would have stuck with it long enough to find out what a great game it is.
How is movement different in 1st and 3rd person view?
The difference is in headbob absent from 3rd person view, and if I'm not mistalen, at least some of the blur effects.
2 things that you can disable if you haven't already done so. See headbob option in the Game Option , and postprocess to off in the advanced Video Options
Hope this helps

[Mojo]

You say cheat-like, I say equal qualities as the AI :D
I guess... but 1) I don't think the AI are all that brilliant, definitely not as cunning as a human player and 2) I seldom play with AI any more, I prefer PvP. SO, it is an opinion, just like you own. :) This thread has circular qualities to it, as I said before (ironic), the 2 sides just don't seem to be able to locate a compromise

So, create your own, or locate a server that allows 3rd person, you wont like my servers.

[bhaz]

I prefer to play with 3rd person forced off, I can't count the number of times 3rd person view has saved me, where I could see over or around something that couldn't be seen through 1st person, followed by a couple of "how the fuck did you know" grenades over a wall.

The problem is whenever it isn't forced off, I tend to use it anyway, even though I feel it's cheating, guess it's a matter of balance.

[Pouk]

I never play in 3rd person, even when everybody else around do, I just can't, It feels to me like total spoil of a game, which supposed to be wat simulator. But I just bought TrackIR and it make first person little easier.

[Yoma]

I don't quite understand the whole debate:

BIS allready made 3rd view an option. Clearly the different opinions on this forum indicates that they made the best possible decision on the issue: they made it an option that can be set by the server admin.
That leaves people with all options:
-play with it (on a server that sports it)
-play without it (on a voluntary basis or restricted by server)

There is really not much more they can do unless you want them to enrage people by enforcing either one of both options.

I think this debate is... a useless waste of time.

[Flightster]

I think people should be able to play how they want to play, be it in 1st or 3rd person.. I find the 1st person in this game to be somewhat restricting and difficult, mainly because you need to use different buttons to actually get the "awareness" that you already have in 3rd person.

Besides, I don't think anyone really has the right to force a player into playing like they want that player to play either.. Everyone should be able to play in the fashion that they are most comfortable with, IMO

[Yoma]

I think people should be able to play how they want to play, be it in 1st or 3rd person.. I find the 1st person in this game to be somewhat restricting and difficult, mainly because you need to use different buttons to actually get the "awareness" that you already have in 3rd person.

Besides, I don't think anyone really has the right to force a player into playing like they want that player to play either.. Everyone should be able to play in the fashion that they are most comfortable with, IMO

Someone that pays hard cash for hosting a decent server has every right to play with whatever settings/options/rules/blabla they want to.
If you don't like the server's rules/settings, go find another or host your own.
Surely there will be some server out there that plays with the mindset you are after. Just don't expect the whole world to live by YOUR rules or standards.

[Herbal Influence]

I don't quite understand the whole debate:

(...)

I think this debate is... a useless waste of time.

I will help you to understand!:)
And I think you don't critize me (and all the other posters and readers) in earnest for opening this thread but want to express that you really don't understand it. For otherwise you sure know that the easiest way is to ignore what others are interested in in forums, i.e. certain threads.
If you look at the "hitting rate" of this thread you sure realize that people are interested in for you did call a "waste of time".:confused:

My point was to make clear that the rumour spreaded that only egoshooterview is the "real combat mode" and 3rd person view is for noobs only.

This thread has shown - in several posts - that that is not so.

In fact the egoshooterviewmode is in an important point most unreal - I won't repeat it all, but you can find it explained in this thread repeatedly.
Even by gamers who really did fight in war for years.

I go with you, that BI doesn't make no fault allowing both ways.
Nobody I know ("read") ever critized BI for it and I love the freedom BI gives to it's fans - we sure all think/feel that's the big reason for the succes of OF, AA1, AA2.

And I found another good reason for chosing 3rd view:
I already said, egoshooterview makes me seasick - somehow.
I found the second reason!

It's not only the unrealistic viewing angle (discussed above).

It especially happens when you simply run with your inf avatar lez say over a field.

The ups and downs of the avatar are nicely simulated.
And therefore your whole viewing field is shaking like it .... should.:bounce3:

But ... should it?

No.

Because in real life you concentrate on certain points with your eyes and you compensate that shaking with your eyes.

Again: Try it yourself while jogging through a park - which is most recommandable for mousepushers like we are.:p

It's like the cannon of a modern tank - as far as I know firstly done so with the German Leopard: it focusses on the target and the cannon sticks to it while the whole tank is shaking as the landscape is seldomly completely flat.

I do not say that BI should remove this natural shaking of the body nor the eyes - I am not critizising! ;) - because I remember games that completely removed it (wasn't that Doom?) and that feels unnatural too.

But - as I said and explained - it's not the normal way of "seeing" while running ... and I get seasick from it.

In fact, by now, I have no solution for this problem.

But it's another reason why egoshooterview is an somehow unrealistic mode - while I do not forget the "look behind walls" etc. - reasons given contra 3rd view.

ps:
Repeatedly it was said there would be some lighting spots at the rim of the monitor to simulate a broader view. I remember having once seen them. But only once - and never ever again. Perhaps somebody can give a hint, which settings show these points? Thx !

pps.
For those who do not want no debating on whether 3rd should be turned on/off I recommend the Oldfreakz-server - for OF, AA seems to be in work - though I am not a member of Oldfreakz: 3rd is ALWAYS on!

[galzohar]

I've already said in other threads the head bobbing is totally unrealistic, for the simple reason that shaking the monitor, when your brain is concerned, is a TOTALLY different effect than shaking your head IRL. Try it yourself. Luckily, we can turn head bob off though so it's no excuse for 3rd person.

[Herbal Influence]

I've already said in other threads the head bobbing is totally unrealistic, for the simple reason that shaking the monitor, when your brain is concerned, is a TOTALLY different effect than shaking your head IRL. Try it yourself. Luckily, we can turn head bob off though so it's no excuse for 3rd person.

LOL - though I am sure we do not need any EXCUSE for using the more real thing, the 3rd view, I would like to learn, how you can switch off the head bobbing?

I searched the forum but did not find a hint to that but discussions about whether head bobbing is more real than no-head-bobbing.

Thank you!

[whisper]

Options -> Game Options -> Headbob slider to zero

and forcing in every sentence you write your opinion like it was the ultimate truth won't help much. 3rd view being better is your opinion, not the ultimate truth

[Herbal Influence]

Thanx for the hint whisper!

But for the rest of your text: Should I say, I don't like you either? Forget it. I won't do that. For I know the truth. ;-))

[whisper]

Thanx for the hint whisper!

But for the rest of your text: Should I say, I don't like you either? Forget it. I won't do that. For I know the truth. ;-))

It's not about liking you or not. You're just pushing your propaganda in a not so subtle way, I was just warning

[Liability]

You only get to focus on anything in about a 120-90 degree field of view, the outside 40-80 degrees is motion and contrast detection. Even veteren mode offers the white bubbles on the screen edge to indicate a motion or contrast sensing, without highlighting it in the FOV.

Seeing over walls and around corners is game breaking for the most part, and definately more so than an artificially limited FOV. If you want 3rd person in PVP might as well turn on all the newbie level settings and get a massive boost to situational awareness, god knwo sI coudl use it some days when my team is sneaking up on an enemy I saw disappear behind a fenceline and I get them confused.

[Herbal Influence]

Yeah, I tested it. Some veteran mode offers those bubbles. The modes "below" veteran don't.:confused:

And thanx for the hint on the double tip on "-" on numpad.:o
Does work - and I hadn't expected that for in other modes or what it did only work momentarily: only as long as you press the button it zoomed out.

I could even find something following the tri-monitor idea which was posted above as a joke: If you switch to it in graphic options with having only one monitor - at least - you get an idead what a broader field of view (FOV) gives to you - even on ONE monitor screen. Sure it's all condensed or deformed - but maybe a way to solution: if the contortion would only be a the very rims of the monitor screen, it could be nice simulation of a real FOV.

[galzohar]

Does setting resolution to something like 5000X1000 increase your FOV? Or does it just stretch your FOV over 5000 pixels?

[Albert Schweitzer]

3rd person view is a bit unrealistic, but I think it's acceptable when playing against AI since they ignore grass and apparently some obstacles.

totally agree. If the AI would act in a more realistic manner then I could fully abandom 3rd person view.

Also, when running I get the famous motion sickness. I know this shaking is in fact realistic, but it is simply hard to take when having to run more than 400 metres across the country.

[Herbal Influence]

totally agree. If the AI would act in a more realistic manner then I could fully abandom 3rd person view.

Also, when running I get the famous motion sickness. I know this shaking is in fact realistic, but it is simply hard to take when having to run more than 400 metres across the country.

Nah - as explained above it's not real.
I was happy to learn from whisper (above) that you can change that in options.

[Herbal Influence]

Just to make it complete:
The stance-conscience-problem seems to be one more arguement for 3rd view.

You find it here:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=80669

Don't tell me that the stance indicator is something you have in real life! ;-))

[Albert Schweitzer]

Nah - as explained above it's not real.
I was happy to learn from whisper (above) that you can change that in options.

you can get rid of the blur effect, but the screen still shakes like hell. And with a rather big screen I can assure you that even if you are used to offshore fishing then you can still get dizzy and motion-sickness from playing 1st person view.

[galzohar]

I have a stance indicator in my brain. Ask me what stance I am at and even with my eyes closed and ears plugged I will give you an instant answer (I'd need to somehow hear the question though).

[IronPants]

you can get rid of the blur effect, but the screen still shakes like hell.

If you bother to actually look at the options, you will indeed find a headbob slider. I'm having a hard time resisting the urge to rib you for it... but seriously, the default setting is too excessive. Just turn it down / off.

[Inkompetent]

Just to make it complete:
The stance-conscience-problem seems to be one more arguement for 3rd view.

You find it here:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=80669

Don't tell me that the stance indicator is something you have in real life! ;-))

Hell no! It's definitely not an argument for LookOverWalls person view. 1st person view with sufficient information, that's what it is about ;)

[Apocal]

Stance indication...? Seriously? Confusion-wise, it's effectively binary, either you are crouched or standing. If you think you are crouched and wish to stand, hit the stand button; if you are standing and wish to be crouched, hit the crouch button. If you are confused, hit the button relating to the state you wish to be in. It even works while moving.

On the other hand, if you can't tell the different between prone and crouched, you have much bigger problems than mere third person view will fix.

[whisper]

you can get rid of the blur effect, but the screen still shakes like hell. And with a rather big screen I can assure you that even if you are used to offshore fishing then you can still get dizzy and motion-sickness from playing 1st person view.

arg! :)
going to quote myself in this case :

Options -> Game Options -> Headbob slider to zero
;)
Notice it's NOT in the Videos Options

Btw, after removing it entirely for long time, I put a very little bit of headbob back lately, a little bit of Holywood Effects is not that bad after all (for immersion, gives more a "I'm scared" feeling... well, subjective thing :) )

[galzohar]

Yeah, that headbob is a real headache, lucky I found how to turn it off ~5 minutes after loading a mission for the first time. Shaking your screen is simply NOT the same effect as shaking your head IRL (try it - some people can actually run on a treadmill and read a book at the same time, but I don't know anyone who can actually hold a book in his hands and read it while running).

I still have problems with motorcycles bouncing around though, very hard to see where you're going with the massive bob you get when speeding through the woods ;) But at least you're probably not supposed to be able to even drive at those speeds on such terrain anyway, so maybe it's only fair.

[Herbal Influence]

I just learned that I love to enjoy BI games as a Real Time Strategy game (RTS) and less often as FPS.

This means that I tend to delegate soldiers/tanks round a house corner or up a hill instead of running / shooting myself. This is much easier, when you have a kind of "overview".

This might explain why I am quite annoyed when 3rd view is switched off by the server.

But it remains that egoshooterview erases big parts of natural environmental awareness for the tunnel view it creates.

[Alex72]

Yeah, that headbob is a real headache, lucky I found how to turn it off ~5 minutes after loading a mission for the first time. Shaking your screen is simply NOT the same effect as shaking your head IRL
Oooh it bumps a bit when running. Besides to me it makes the whole world inside the game to "move" a bit and it brings immersion - to me. Still head a la stick up my ass when running i had enough of from all the older games.

My slider is however set very low or puking will set in. Options and sliders is the future. :)

[Ruxster]

3rd person view is a bit unrealistic, but I think it's acceptable when playing against AI since they ignore grass and apparently some obstacles.

At the end of the day, 3rd person gives you an unfair advantage, I thought the whole reason people play these simulations, is to simulate.

Ai or not, no 3rd person view please, infact the whole reason im here in the first place is to get away from war games with 3rd person views.

Thank god you can swith it off on line.:eek:

[randir14]

One of the developer tutorial videos says 3rd person is meant as a substitute for body awareness, since in real life it's easier to know how exposed you are. I'm sure all of us have been sniped in the head because we were in first person mode ducking behind an object and we didn't know our head was sticking out.

[Enforcer1975]

OTOH 3rd person view brings in even worse unrealistic feature, seeing past an obstacle without having to move any part of your body out of said cover. You can know who is behind this wall without having to actually go see it. Even worse when you're commander of a squad.

If you don't use it while playing, you're putting yourself at a huge disadvantage, trust me. I can't count the number of helpless IA I got using this

Beeing able to see past obstacles is the only and worst thing with 3rd person view.
On the other hand you have a better feel for your body/vehicle and environment when with 3rd person on. And you are less prone to vomiting :D

[galzohar]

It doesn't *only* let you see around objects, it also lets you see all around you even though you're in an armored vehicle in a position with limited FOV such as tank driver or gunner.

[Emberwolf]

Commander view needs to occlude all units out of the player character's physical LOS, and should also play sounds that can be heard from the player's physical position only (instead of putting sound awareness at the camera). In fact, this should go for third-person mode as well.

Each vehicle would have unique LOS cones coming from canopies/viewports/windshields and if you're driving along looking around your vehicle in third person, units would only become visible within those cones.

This would be ideal as a difficulty switch if someone wanted the old behavior.

I realize this would probably drag the CPU down and consequentially the framerate. Whether it's feasable or not, we can at least shut off third person capability right now as a perfectly functional solution.

I sure as hell refuse to play any pvp missions with third-person enabled. This goes especially for Warfare, where proper tank combat turns into a game of who can spot the other player's units quicker by slewing their view some hundreds of meters above their tank and looking over two hills and a forest.

[JumpingHubert]

I do not buy games with 3rd view only. It only makes the field of view bigger but destroy all immersion the rest of the game try to build up. There is an alternativ way to make the field of view bigger: zoom out.

[galzohar]

3rd person view doesn't really change the field of view, it just moves the camera backwards while giving you the same FOV as if you were standing a few meters back (that is, at X meters distance from the camera you will still see only Y meters). Zooming in/out is what actually changes your FOV.

[DirtDog]

Many love 3rd person and many hate it. There is no convincing anyone to change their mind. It is a personal preference. Most of the discussions I here are mostly in regard to person "3rd person view" not the vehicles "3rd person view".

The biggest cheat complaint I here is (1) you can see to much and (2) you can fire from this view.

What I like to see is the next version of Arma 2 is support for easy server or mission settings(in a mission file) to adjust different settings on 3rd person view.

Enabling setting of the x,y,z to adjust the 3rd person view, gun recital on or off and enable or disable firing in 3rd person view. All of these can be done in existing mods but it would be nice to have them settable in the server or in a mission parameter setting.

[Xerxes-17]

Whenever I am voted admin on the server I play on, I always put the game on expert mode (no 3rd person). This is for the following reasons:
1-The well known see over hills, walls and other obstacles without exposing yourself, which is bull.
2-Makes tanks able to see much better than possible as well a a few meters behind themselves! Tanks are supposed to have poor vision arcs. Tying in from this, the number of rambo tanks are lessened.
3-The command view again is like a personal invisible UAV.

So while it is true that you can see via peripheral vision, eitehr drop the dosh for a multi-monitor setup or accept it as a technological limitation.

[Herbal Influence]

Another optical issue is this:

Video Ship Simulator. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPiFTuj-NDQ&feature=player_embedded#)

The frames of the windows of any vehicle in Arma2 are - that's my thesis ! - realisticly broad but yet the view is much better in real life: The human vision is able to somehow "thin out" hindering frames or other hindrances.

Indeed I am quite sure that noone in reality would dare to fly with such a bad view as the vehicles show in Arma2 (and other games) where there is no correction of "reality".

Whereas - don't get me wrong - I only want it to "look" real but it seems to be inevitable to "correct" a two-dimensional-monitor-picture to get a realistic view ... any ideas ?

[Rasa-be]

First person perspective already simulates peripheral vision by condensing 180 degrees of view into your monitor.....

[galzohar]

First person perspective already simulates peripheral vision by condensing 180 degrees of view into your monitor.....

It actually doesn't. But you can adjust your FOV in your settings file to something like that if you really wanted to (it'd look ugly though).


The problem with car windows is mostly that the sizes of vehicles (and buildings) seems to be disproportional compared to the size of our soldiers.

[McArma]

Hum ... 3rd-person view ... just like in the real world, our eyes following behind and above us. lolol

[Herbal Influence]

Hum ... 3rd-person view ... just like in the real world, our eyes following behind and above us. lolol

Well ... the 3rd-view-problem has been discussed a lot about and your remark has been discussed already in the first post: If you like the "tunnel-view" it's your choice.

I would like to discuss the topic of unrealistic amount of windowframes and other viewing hindrances in vehicles whereas the hindrances themselves might be of exact scale.

Though they are of exact scale - no realworld pilot would fly the ah-64 in a war situation with the view it has at present because of the reduced view.
That's my thesis.

[Celery]

I don't quite understand the German convention of calling first person shooters "egoshooters". It just sounds wrong and in this context it can and has clearly been associated with games that are meant to stroke one's bulging ego.

And no, I will not allow 3rd person egoactiongameview in most of my deathmatches because it's simply unfair to peek around corners and obstacles.

[galzohar]

And no, I will not allow 3rd person egoactiongameview in most of my deathmatches because it's simply unfair to peek around corners and obstacles.
I think that sums this thread up perfectly ;)

[Zipper5]

I think disabling third person is fine for infantry, but I personally find that it makes vehicle usage much better with it enabled. Guess it wouldn't be hard to force such a condition using a simple camera-switch script.

[galzohar]

ACE already has a module that disables 3rd person only when not in a vehicle. Though I find that for many vehicles the more difficult use should be there from a realism point of view. For example tank drivers IRL can't see jack either. But the lack of mirrors in simple cars and jeeps is a bit of a limitation, but really only causes unrealistic problems when you need to reverse. I'd still rather have it off so all the armored vehicles don't completely break realism-wise, since the limited FOV of the crew is an important part of armored vehicle simulation.

[Smookie]

The 3rd view in vehicles creates the same problem - you still can look over obstacles and most of all, there is no way anyone can sneak up on such vehicles (like it would be possible normally) and plant satchel charges for instance. Should the viewpilot models be created, just like they were in OFP, there would be probably no problem at all at navigating any kind of vehicle in the game using 1st person view only.

[NeMeSiS]

The 3rd view in vehicles creates the same problem - you still can look over obstacles and most of all, there is no way anyone can sneak up on such vehicles (like it would be possible normally) and plant satchel charges for instance. Should the viewpilot models be created, just like they were in OFP, there would be probably no problem at all at navigating any kind of vehicle in the game using 1st person view only.

Then again, in real life i tend to have mirrors on my car so i can drive backwards without running over my mates.
Preferably this would be solved with real ingame mirrors, but i need 3rd person in vehicles in the meantime.

[Alpha-Kilo]

Smookie and Nemesis are both right, I think. Game limitations make it difficult to do both opinions justice. In our group we normally have the passenger get out and tell the driver via TS how to steer clear of obstacles. If other players are around and fear they might get run over by a vehicle in reverse, they can either clear the area or talk to the driver. If TSis not an option, ingame text chat can help. This may not be ideal, but it works most of the time. Working rear mirros would be great, though.

[Herbal Influence]

Well ... the 3rd-view-problem has been discussed a lot about and your remark has been discussed already in the first post: If you like the "tunnel-view" it's your choice.

I would like to discuss the topic of unrealistic amount of windowframes and other viewing hindrances in vehicles whereas the hindrances themselves might be of exact scale.

Though they are of exact scale - no realworld pilot would fly the ah-64 in a war situation with the view it has at present because of the reduced view.
That's my thesis.

Yes. I am right. ;-)

[Liquidpinky]

Smookie and Nemesis are both right, I think. Game limitations make it difficult to do both opinions justice. In our group we normally have the passenger get out and tell the driver via TS how to steer clear of obstacles. If other players are around and fear they might get run over by a vehicle in reverse, they can either clear the area or talk to the driver. If TSis not an option, ingame text chat can help. This may not be ideal, but it works most of the time. Working rear mirros would be great, though.

Not to mention some vehicles veiw while turned in is a bit obscured or even not functional at all. Try a BTR-90 for example.

I am sat here with three monitors and a TrackIR5 (well not exactly as I am at work right now but in around an hours time), shouldn't someone with only a single monitor not have an option to compete more fairly with me, eg third person view?

[galzohar]

Sure no 3rd person might be a small slightly unrealistic hindrance at times, but when enabled is a huge, unrealistic advantage.

[whisper]

Not to mention some vehicles veiw while turned in is a bit obscured or even not functional at all. Try a BTR-90 for example.

I am sat here with three monitors and a TrackIR5 (well not exactly as I am at work right now but in around an hours time), shouldn't someone with only a single monitor not have an option to compete more fairly with me, eg third person view?

Not when it means giving the ability to see through walls (or even inside houses from outside when you're squad leader), which is what 3rd PoV gives you.

[BasileyOne]

FPS ftw.
even in vehicles.
should be locked down that way on any Good server.
and rest in "default" state on Evil ones ;)

[whisper]

BTW, there's a solution to enable 3rd PoV in vehicles and disable it on foot, in MP.
Server admins can use Server side scripting : http://dev-heaven.net/projects/serversidescripting/wiki
And use the code snippet for 3rd PoV infantry disabling listed here :
http://dev-heaven.net/projects/serversidescripting/wiki/Example_3rd_PoV

[Sirex1]

Okay, time to bring this discussion around. How do we fix better fov in firstperson view?
Does increasing resolution and playing in zoomed out mode give more realistic fov?
Do trackir as infantry to an extend minilise the "nervous looking to side to side" behavior sence you get better fluent control?
What aspects of a monitor is important to look at for wanting to get better fov and still see things?
How do we tweak our setting?
Does it exist tri monitor that don't cost redicoulos amount of money?

Overall i think it's alright with zoomed out firstperson, if you need to fire at something at a distance, start fire then right click zoom and kill it. All tanks firstperson then use the normal view so this is a none issue. Cars don't matter, as much, you have a such high profile you really can't exploit corner and ridges like when infantry. Aircraft and helicopters i really don't know, maybe third person with track ir?

[Liquidpinky]

Okay, time to bring this discussion around. How do we fix better fov in firstperson view?
Does increasing resolution and playing in zoomed out mode give more realistic fov?
Do trackir as infantry to an extend minilise the "nervous looking to side to side" behavior sence you get better fluent control?
What aspects of a monitor is important to look at for wanting to get better fov and still see things?
How do we tweak our setting?
Does it exist tri monitor that don't cost redicoulos amount of money?

Overall i think it's alright with zoomed out firstperson, if you need to fire at something at a distance, start fire then right click zoom and kill it. All tanks firstperson then use the normal view so this is a none issue. Cars don't matter, as much, you have a such high profile you really can't exploit corner and ridges like when infantry. Aircraft and helicopters i really don't know, maybe third person with track ir?

Before I bought the three monitors I have, I was considering three £150 monitors that were 23" 1080P. I have settled on three Packard Bell 24" 1080P monitors at £200 each. I have spent around £800 on the 2 3GB GFX580s, the extra memory comes in handy for the higher resolutions required for three monitor usage.
Yes you could go cheaper or even with one ATI card using eyefinity, but don't think for a minute you will get the same performance. I am considering a third card as a future upgrade also.
So in my case £1400 has been spent on GFX cards and monitors but you could go as low as £600 I would have thought depending on what monitors and GFX cards you choose. You could also go a lot lot higher.

TrackIR or Freetrack and FacetrackNoIR I would recommend as they do add more fluidity to play.

[BasileyOne]

after i do market survey and seem tons of LCD monitors, including really expensive ones, at price of cheap car, i really conclude thats still nothing good for gaming as good 20''-22'' CRT. even [overpriced and overpromoted]S-IPS monitors not impressive anyway :[ buy THAT ? no, thanks :-/

p.s.
no color[24-bit color isnt perfect even for xVA/IPS screens, let alone TN], stoneageold-resolution, ridiculous refresh, dangerous[4 eye] backlight[in non-Led-monitors] and etc and etc.

[Herbal Influence]

Okay, time to bring this discussion around. How do we fix better fov in firstperson view?
Does increasing resolution and playing in zoomed out mode give more realistic fov?
Do trackir as infantry to an extend minilise the "nervous looking to side to side" behavior sence you get better fluent control?
What aspects of a monitor is important to look at for wanting to get better fov and still see things?
How do we tweak our setting?
Does it exist tri monitor that don't cost redicoulos amount of money?

Overall i think it's alright with zoomed out firstperson, if you need to fire at something at a distance, start fire then right click zoom and kill it. All tanks firstperson then use the normal view so this is a none issue. Cars don't matter, as much, you have a such high profile you really can't exploit corner and ridges like when infantry. Aircraft and helicopters i really don't know, maybe third person with track ir?

Up here, two years ago?, a war veteran and chopper pilot explained that he considers flying a chopper without 3rd view unrealistic.

[7th_Serf]

I have to say I've never used 3rd person except when we've been 'shooting videos' for youtube. Otherwise I never use it. Our server has it set off at all times and we train without it. To those guys who use it I figure they need the training wheels just to get a vehicle out of base or a helo to land.

I especially like it when some 14 year old 'expert pilot' can't fly at all without it...

I figure it all stems from Tomb Raider when folks got all excited about watching Laura's butt as she ran from here to there. I personally have always believed 3rd person has no place whatsoever in a military simulator except for camera/training video use.

While I sort of understand a little bit that Herbal is saying - especially in terms of peripheral vision and the ease at which we are used to it in real life, I think there are plenty of game aids (TrackIR, ShacTac HUD) that more than make up for the lack of a wide angle, over the shoulder/wall/rock/vehicle view.

I also firmly believe that if you use training wheels you become dependant upon them. If you never use them you learn how to adapt and overcome.

As to that helo pilot - he's full of it, every pilot I've ever met has never used 3rd person in the real world cause it doesn't exist. No pilot has ever been able to look at the rear of his aircraft when he's in the jump seat, so saying its unrealistic not to have it in the game is a load of concentrated BS.

As a car driver for over 30 years I can specifically say I've never missed 3rd person when I drive and I rarely hit objects (well...sometimes I scrape things).

[Hund]

While I haven't read the statements of the aforementioned helicopter pilot, my best guess would be that he felt that 3rd gives you a better sense or feeling for your craft, just as you would have in real life. So it's not only about being able to see your helicopter from behind, at least in the case of flying vehicles. I guess it comes down to one camp thinking that everything should look like it does in real life, at the cost of realism (because the platform is limited, and can't properly simulate real life consitions, so you end up simulating a slightly retarded person with a cardboard box on his head), and another camp that believes that you have to cut some corners to achieve realism through abstraction (3rd person is one of those abstractions, audio-visual suppression is another).

I use 3rd whenever I can because I like looking at my cool little green dude as he does cool shit in the game. And although I couldn't give a toss about being realistic, some would argue that your situational awareness is closer to realistic values in 3rd person (looking around corners and above walls is another matter though).

So call me a nooberito with training wheels if you must, I can live with that. I'd be rather pleased if they expanded upon the third person part of the game, since the current system is a bit bare-bones, but that is hardly going to happen.

[CarlGustaffa]

For me, the drawbacks and cheats of infantry 3rd person completely outweights the benefits, most of which to me sounds questionable anyway. I don't understand this "expanded awareness" from using 3rd. It may hold true in extreme CQB as engagement distances are very short. But at "normal ranges" moving a viewcone a few meters back doesn't reveal much extra. You don't get a wider viewcone like you do when holding num minus (unless built into that camera mode, haven't noticed or checked).

For planes it have no practical meaning if its on or off. For choppers I can agree that 3rd helps but only due lack of 6 DOF camera. If Arma3 gets what's already in TAKOH, 3rd is no longer needed there either.

That will also help on certain ground vehicles like trucks with unusable side windows or CROWE HMMWVs for same reason, as you may now be able to actually move/translate the head around for better views. Maybe even combined with PiP technology for working mirrors where appropriate.

Other vehicles like Abrams or Strykers, it's supposed to be awkward. 3rd here enables far too good positional awareness compared to what you will get in real life. As crew, you either use optics with whatever drawbacks that imposes, or you turn out and in the process expose yourself. I wouldn't mind better ingame indicators though for vehicles with unstabilized turrets, as you can't fully control what AI does and you would be able to lower your head to visually see orientation. Annoying? Yes. Even if improved. But it doesn't warrant something as extreme as 3rd.

I've done my fair share of chopper flying since OFP days, even if I don't consider myself a pilot (I prefer SAW and MG grunt). The few times I have crashed (20 or so?) due lack of realistic visibility (and no, I don't use 3rd even if enabled on server), I can only blame myself for not concentrating and visually assess the landing zone before touchdown. Of course I've crashed due to being shot down and of course due to Arma1 setPos bug, but 3rd wouldn't have helped anything there. Also some crazy loss of control, but I can't blame the view.

Conclusion: 3rd may help with chopper flying today, but considering my own merits, it's fully possible to do without it. And if TAKOH head control and PiP is implemented, including for ground vehicles, I can't imagine anything realistic left from 3rd. 3rd as an abstraction wouldn't be needed.

[Hund]

It gives you situational awareness because you can see, as opposed to feel, what is going on in the area around you, and you can see at exactly what your craft is doing, be it your average aircraft your own hot body. The viewcone does increase a little, but the effects are minimal as your say. Machineguns become a whole lot more effective in grassy environments, because they can use 3rd and tracers to somewhat effectively engage the enemy.

You might be a special case Gustaffa, but for me 3rd person increases my awareness a lot, and with awareness comes mobility. That is probably the reason why I only like 3rd person for dudes, not for vehicles. Firstly, vehicles don't tend to have that many cool animations so theres little to look at. Secondly, the behaviour of vehicles with only first becomes a lot more realistic suddenly when they can't see in 3rd. ACE made a little addon that disables 3rd except for vehicles and that's exactly what I want, just completely the other way around!

As long as you don't have a full pressure suit or a hydraulic cockpit to play around in, I fear that abstractions (3rd view among them) will have to make up for what you're missing.

I was thinking about something Mr Serf said above; about 3rd having no place in a simulation game. It struck me that although we bought the same product, Mr Serf and I play two different games. He plays a "military simulation" and I play a "war game", so there is bound to be some friction of opinions on these matters. It's a testament to the versatility of Arma, I suppose. :)

[galzohar]

While I agree first person is less manageable than RL, the problem is 3rd person is more manageable than RL, and considering all the many game-breaking advantages of 3rd person and the fact the game is still quite manageable with 1st person, I find 1st person a significantly better compromise. But I agree it is a compromise.

[Herbal Influence]

Thank you galzohar for your sober and reasonable explanation.

I am quite sure we all would already be dead, if we were to join real life with that what I call tunnelview.
We would have been already hit by some civil cars in our civil town after 30 min downtown.

I call it tunnelview because in real life your viewing angle is much bigger than that, what you see on the screen without 3rd view. Do you notice, without turning your head, someone standing 90 degree of you? In real life: yes, you sure do. In tunnelview: you are dead.

Noone of us would enter war with blindfolds ...

But as galzohar pointed out: it is a compromise.

My personal preference is the same as Hund's quoted above.
Sure 3rd view allows to "cheat" compared to real life, but it also reduces the beauty of the game (movements of character/avatar no more visible and extreme, irrealistic reduction of environmental awareness).

I never forget we already had this discussion in 2003 there was a "3rd-view is unrealistic!"-shoutier who nevertheless routinely killed himself when he damaged his vehicles or found himself too far away from the place he wanted to get to ... What do I want to say? We all chose the realism we want. That's the games flexibility. I love to constantly change between tunnelview and 3rd view during a big crcti mission ... that's in "veteran mode" which shows all the beauty of the game.

Before I began this thread the fraction of gamers who loved 3rd view were often cut off and called being noobs. It was a long and slow process for the ones who called themselves the "more reality-oriented" gamers to learn that they in fact cut themselves off a big way from reality by putting their blindfolds on and run-and-shoot-in-a-doom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_%28video_game%29)-mode of gaming only.

BIS games are far too beautiful for just the doom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_%28video_game%29)-mode of gaming.

[NkEnNy]

Doom as opposed to WoW mode? :P

The 'cheats' inherent in third person view are widely exagerated and generally limited in practical utility to laying prone behind low fences and peeking over. More to the point Third person view delays the act of shooting accurately-- or going in sights mode-- or just center screen instinct shooting.

Which is why I only use third person to observe or when laying behind the aforementioned fences.

I doubt 3rd person will be removed in the future. Why? Because I have a sneaking suspicion that BIS internally largely play with 3rd person constantly on. Find me a video of an official BIS developer doing a vid solely in first person.

-k

[galzohar]

Yeah, when you think about "doom vs WoW mode" I think it's another bonus point for 1st person :)

Not that I think WoW is terrible, but doom is so much more similar to Arma :)

There are definitely at least someone at BIS playing with 3rd person, as was shown in one of the demo videos of Arma 3.

[Herbal Influence]

Doom as opposed to WoW mode? :P

The 'cheats' inherent in third person view are widely exagerated and generally limited in practical utility to laying prone behind low fences and peeking over. More to the point Third person view delays the act of shooting accurately-- or going in sights mode-- or just center screen instinct shooting.

Which is why I only use third person to observe or when laying behind the aforementioned fences.

I doubt 3rd person will be removed in the future. Why? Because I have a sneaking suspicion that BIS internally largely play with 3rd person constantly on. Find me a video of an official BIS developer doing a vid solely in first person.

-k

For sure BIS will encourage freedom of choice as it has always done.
But the beauty of it all is much more visible than in tunnelview - so it comes that for demonstrational purposes you choose 3rd view. I chose tunnelview quite often during a game, especiall when shooting - but not constantly.

[Deathstroke]

Situation with 3rd:
I see some enemy soldiers I fire and quickly move to a house accross the street. A friendly players reports he also knows that at least 1 more soldier is west of my position. Given the guys position and good guess of his objective I flank him on his route in order to get behind him. I finally see him and engage, upon entering the building he ran into i get shot once entering.

After asking how he knew i was coming he said that he saw me flank with 3rd turned on.

This is for me the reason to no longer play with 3rd on. A player can give me hundreds of reasons to turn it on, but if even arcade shooters turn it off to avoid exploits, how serious can you take a game that doesnt.
A guy can, with 3rd turned on, lie on a roof watching your every move in a busy town till he decides to press x and kill you. Is that realism?

[DMarkwick]

Situation with 3rd:
I see some enemy soldiers I fire and quickly move to a house accross the street. A friendly players reports he also knows that at least 1 more soldier is west of my position. Given the guys position and good guess of his objective I flank him on his route in order to get behind him. I finally see him and engage, upon entering the building he ran into i get shot once entering.

After asking how he knew i was coming he said that he saw me flank with 3rd turned on.

This is for me the reason to no longer play with 3rd on. A player can give me hundreds of reasons to turn it on, but if even arcade shooters turn it off to avoid exploits, how serious can you take a game that doesnt.
A guy can, with 3rd turned on, lie on a roof watching your every move in a busy town till he decides to press x and kill you. Is that realism?

I should say that it is at least as realistic as playing with the equivalent of a cardboard box over your head with a hole cut into the front. But as you say, the great thing is that it's an option that can be turned off.
As soon as I can have fine 3D control over my avatar so I can just peep over a surface instead of standing up and lollipopping my position away, then I too will disable 3rd person :)

[Celery]

A guy can, with 3rd turned on, lie on a roof watching your every move in a busy town till he decides to press x and kill you. Is that realism?

But everybody knows that realistic firefights (like in Arma 2) don't happen at fewer than 500 meters. Your argument is invalid!

[TRexian]

... lollipopping my position away...

[h]

;) :)

[Deathstroke]

I should say that it is at least as realistic as playing with the equivalent of a cardboard box over your head with a hole cut into the front.

1st person feels that way because people who use 3rd dont adapt well to 1st person. Its like wearing a gasmask, if you wear it for 4 hours straight you dont walk into people or feel scared crossing roads anymore, because your brain adjust your headmovement to compensate. If you however pull it off all the time it will remain to feel unnatural
3rd person allows people to locate their enemies without the use of any realistic form of cover and/or concealment. Any person with any sense for fair play will see this as an exploit, but people wanting to engage their opponent in more realistic firefights will have to play bf3 in order to find this? Its not odd that most shooters are completely 1st person, with the exepcetion of some vehicles to keep a ballance between infantry, armor and air units.
People who see this as an exploit can do little to avoid when playing their favourite missions online as its depending on the admin preferecens whetever its on or not. Its not like if you join a 40+ player server for a certain gametype that there is another server just like it with 3rd on/off. This is therefor just another roadblock in gameplay consistency whereas arcade game offer better cosistency and therefor are more prone to becoming a populair game.

So in my eyes the allowance of 3rd for infantry units is a old long outdated concept in the world of fps shooters whetever it being an arcade or milsim.
It allows exploits, negates adaptation to first person mode and ruins consitency in online gaming experience. And the only reason why a person would want to use it because he misinterprets the feeling of safety and relaxation in 3rd mode opposed to unfamiliar feeling in 1st as a postive thing.

[DMarkwick]

And the only reason why a person would want to use it because he misinterprets the feeling of safety and relaxation in 3rd mode opposed to unfamiliar feeling in 1st as a postive thing.

This is why this discussion just keeps going round and round endlessly. The assumption that someone who cannot understand a point, believes that he understands it absolutely, and yet still makes an inaccurate assumption. I hardly ever play in 3rd person, but when I need it, I need it. Exploitation is not the reason. The reasons are many and varied, yet are relentlessly overlooked or simply dismissed by those who wish for the option to go.

However, it's an argument I have no real beef with, I'm pretty certain the option will remain, and therefore is consistent with my own preference, which is flexibility.

[CarlGustaffa]

If you don't like what you see, change servers.

It's that simple.

Not really. At least on the public scene (we have our own private servers), such servers which are also populated are hard to come by. Plenty of "veteran" servers with 3rd and crosshairs enabled, making me waste my time and the server waste its bandwidth on me connecting and immediately disconnecting.


I've already said in other threads the head bobbing is totally unrealistic, for the simple reason that shaking the monitor, when your brain is concerned, is a TOTALLY different effect than shaking your head IRL. Try it yourself. Luckily, we can turn head bob off though so it's no excuse for 3rd person.

I find head bobbing and blur to reduce my abilities to acceptable levels realism wise. Add 20-25kg of gear that is slightly loose and/or uncomfortable, a helmet banging your head (feel free to add NVGs as well), and a loaded rifle or better yet an M240. Jump up and down like running, and try to read the license place of an approaching car while you keep swearing at your load. I'm not as observant in high speed activity wearing full load out as I am standing still and concentrating on what I'm trying to observe. Maybe headbob should be loadout/weight determined? You don't like headbob, then don't carry, and I won't object ;) Only reason I prefer some (but not full) flexibility with a control, is that how the effect is perceived varies greatly with the frame rates you're able to achieve.


But everybody knows that realistic firefights (like in Arma 2) don't happen at fewer than 500 meters. Your argument is invalid!

Strange, I never got the impression that Arma firefights had anything to do with realism. Distances wrong, compositions wrong, not working suppression (AI, although they can be told to suppress in mission scripts), AI and humans way too effective shooters, ammo spent per kill not remotely near realistic levels etc etc etc.

But, I'd like to bring up this one again:

Dont forget less blur so you can actually see things!

I still always play in 3rd person, unless of course its disabled. Personally I think some of the issues can at least be helped by adding some limitations instead of foaming at the mouth and screaming 1st person.

- move it closer just a notch (ie reduce the view)
- limit vertical movement downwards (no point in aiming at the ground anyway, this will help peeking over walls)
- go to 1st person when clicking free-look
- remove the aimpoint in 3rd person regardless of difficulty setting (after all, its hard to see where your aiming when you're outside your head).

Anything else?
At least here is one user, 3rd lover even, that wants to and have suggestions to reduce the ridiculousness in the current 3rd implementation, with sensible reasoning behind it as well. I'm all for these changes to the 3rd system.

[Humvee28]

The only thing that´s keeping me playing in 1st Person is Track IR.
It doesn´t widen your LOS, or corrects the View to Humans View (Eyes and their Movement),
but you don´t have to mess with Keyboard Steerings for Headmovement anymore, and you
will be able to behave more natural in every Situation. If i would not own Track IR, i would switch to 3rd also.

Just my two Cents. :)

[Deathstroke]

This is why this discussion just keeps going round and round endlessly. The assumption that someone who cannot understand a point, believes that he understands it absolutely, and yet still makes an inaccurate assumption......
....However, it's an argument I have no real beef with, I'm pretty certain the option will remain, and therefore is consistent with my own preference, which is flexibility.
Well this discussion would not affect the outcome anyway as it has already been shown that arma 3 will have 3rd person. But conversations on the internet are mostly out motivation by frustation anyway and should the highly unlikely chance arise that some dev would read this and remove 3rd then :bounce3:

I am just trying to make a point to you, there is not a forum discussion about 3rd on 1st person games being it from cod or games even with vehicles such as red ochestra 2. There are discussions about 3rd on games like this and battlefield, only because its there. Lot of conversations about the bf3 having no cursors in 3rd anymore and that the camera is 2 close.

So my assumption to say that people using 3rd only do it for the feeling that 3rd gives them remains unchallenged. Because otherwise conversations like this would arise in other games as well.

Why I dont take comments pro-3rd seriously is because I use 3rd to when I "need" and I know that its just to be able to look at something, see how well you are positioned, see if your located well in a bush, how you are located between friendly units, how your chopper is touching down, quick overview of a town etc. and when that happens my brain gives me a bit of endorfine when I realise my surroundings and safety, because thats in my nature,

And to achieve that in 1st person you need to look around franticly like a bird and thats the moment you enter finger starts to itch like a smoker on break.
It doesnt matter if you use 3rd a lot indication of addiction is there once you feel unconformtable when its not there.

And this is just an aspect of 3rd, my previous post indicates the negative effects of it besides ruining fair play in pvp.
Any idea that makes the game more consistent and exploit free is in my eyes a good idea. So I am not always pro flexibillity.
Flexibillity was definantly there in the days of ofp but was restrained to low number programmers so the consistency in gameplay helped grow of clans within communities. Since arma1 consitency is not even there on a single server so clan forming only really happens in the coop enviroment. Maybe there are some cases i havent been envolved with but compared to the 3 tourneys for each game type like in the ofp days is long gone.

[DMarkwick]

Well this discussion would not affect the outcome anyway as it has already been shown that arma 3 will have 3rd person. But conversations on the internet are mostly out motivation by frustation anyway and should the highly unlikely chance arise that some dev would read this and remove 3rd then :bounce3:

I am just trying to make a point to you, there is not a forum discussion about 3rd on 1st person games being it from cod or games even with vehicles such as red ochestra 2. There are discussions about 3rd on games like this and battlefield, only because its there. Lot of conversations about the bf3 having no cursors in 3rd anymore and that the camera is 2 close.

So my assumption to say that people using 3rd only do it for the feeling that 3rd gives them remains unchallenged. Because otherwise conversations like this would arise in other games as well.

Why I dont take comments pro-3rd seriously is because I use 3rd to when I "need" and I know that its just to be able to look at something, see how well you are positioned, see if your located well in a bush, how you are located between friendly units, how your chopper is touching down, quick overview of a town etc. and when that happens my brain gives me a bit of endorfine when I realise my surroundings and safety, because thats in my nature,

And to achieve that in 1st person you need to look around franticly like a bird and thats the moment you enter finger starts to itch like a smoker on break.
It doesnt matter if you use 3rd a lot indication of addiction is there once you feel unconformtable when its not there.

And this is just an aspect of 3rd, my previous post indicates the negative effects of it besides ruining fair play in pvp.
Any idea that makes the game more consistent and exploit free is in my eyes a good idea. So I am not always pro flexibillity.
Flexibillity was definantly there in the days of ofp but was restrained to low number programmers so the consistency in gameplay helped grow of clans within communities. Since arma1 consitency is not even there on a single server so clan forming only really happens in the coop enviroment. Maybe there are some cases i havent been envolved with but compared to the 3 tourneys for each game type like in the ofp days is long gone.

Indeed, however the complaints of the no-3rd viewers have at least one, huge massive solution, that is to option it off. That it is not done is the *actual* complaint IMO, so it becomes not one of feature, but one of server setup.

I might make the suggestion that 3rd person views are disabled by default on MP games, meaning that if it is actively enabled, then it was the result of an actual genuine preference by the server admin and therefore a gameplay feature actively desired.

[galzohar]

3rd being an option would have been fine if default was 3rd person off. After all, it only makes sense that the default options in a game that can be played against other players will be the one with least exploit potential.

Right now for hosts/admins that don't understand the importance or are too lazy to figure out what each setting does, 3rd is not an option, it is enforced. Would have been much better if it was the other way around.

If people want exploits in their games, they should be allowed to have them, but don't force it on people who are unaware of the exploits.

[Herbal Influence]

If you wanna annoy a lot of people and make them stay away from BIS-games: reduce freedom by less free server settings and make it more 'special' and reduced. And then you can feel really hardcore!

Hardcore, but unrealistic - noone of us would enter real war with 1st-person-tunnelview ...
The reduction of environmental awareness is extreme and deadly.

Another thing that I look on with big sorrow, as I see numbers of players decreasing (http://arma2.swec.se/server/list): Add more and more mods so that a newcomer will need hours of additonal installing mods, missions and islands. I love mods but at the moment (espc. with BF3 coming out) as far as I can see it's quite unconvenient for a newcomer. Even I, doing BIS games since 2001, cannot explain which variant and composition of OA/Arma2, Combined Operations etc. you need to really find an enjoyable server. For newbies it must be a nightmare ...

Add both of us big number of mods and reduce to tunnelview: You will feel very private soon. Unique even. Hardcore even. But you will feel very alone with your elaborated maps and missions ... on a vast map.

[Atkins]

How hard it is to understand that both 1st and 3rd person views are unrealistic. The matter boils down to summing up upsides and downsides of these 2 viewmodes and afaik most ppl choose the 1st person cos 3rd person is basically cheating as it has been stated many times before with _good_ arguments. In a PvP gameplay it is kinda important that no one gets to cheat. Shooting-bots-servers should not care about such matter.
You can always play Tomb Raider or Mario Kart if u are unhappy :D


If people want exploits in their games, they should be allowed to have them, but don't force it on people who are unaware of the exploits.
QFT

[Colosseum]

I just like the ability to see my player model, weapon, backpack etc...

[themaster303]

why you call that tunnel view ??

use alt+mouse and look around. OR use trackir / freetrack.
no more tunnelview.

i call it pussy mode to play in 3rd person. its also a cheatmode. you can look
over walls/other things you wouldn´t do in 1st person.

my point of view.

[Hund]

Pussymode, eh? I guess that makes me the pussymeister, which is not at all a bad vocation!

Tunnelview pertains to your field of view, not to any rigidity of the shoulders and neck region. Put a box on your head and look around; you are now looking around with tunnelview.

:D

[Diesel Tech JC]

Personally I like the 3rd person...great for vehicles when backing up or getting them parked into tight spots..also if I use 1st person too much I get a bad headache..dont know if its an orientation thing or some type of vertigo but I cant play 1st person for more than a few minutes so I am constantly changing back and forth.

JC

[RogueTrooper]

its also a cheatmode

What everybody in MP can use/exploit is not a cheat, I would say.

However I am also under the (personal) impression that you miss something of the environment playing in 1st person in comparison to real life's view.