It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)What is wrong with Iron Sights in shooters?(39 posts)(39 posts)
(39 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 26, 2012
avatar
SimonG: I call your OFP and raise you for Hidden and Dangerous, 1999

http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/hidden-dangerous/screenshots/gameShotId,13524/
avatar
Bodkin: And now i want to play it again!

Well, maybe just the second one
The first one has been released as freeware, just in case you didn't know.
Posted June 26, 2012
avatar
SimonG: The first one has been released as freeware, just in case you didn't know.
Yes I know, but i have it three times already. Czech tactical shooter from WW2. How can I not have it?! :)

But thanks
Posted June 26, 2012
avatar
StingingVelvet: I like them in slower shooters, dislike them in faster ones. That's pretty much how they're used, so no problem there. The problem is no one makes fast shooters anymore.
avatar
keeveek: True

in fast multiplayer games like CS or Day of defeat, iron sights are WAY to slow. Normally in DOD or CS you day in less than a 1/3 of a second after you're spotted.

avatar
SoanoS: I really wish they also removed that crosshair from all shooter games alltogether.
avatar
keeveek: I know people who are painting the red dot on center of their monitor, because sniper rifles don't have crosshairs often.
Oh, dear... Some people REALLY want to win, and are ready to ruin a perfectly good monitor? :P

Seriously. They are games. And the crosshairs are more fun. I mean, it makes shooting more than just a glorified "whack-a-mole".
Posted June 26, 2012
Personally I don't really mind them from a mechanical perspective, but it annoys me that they tend to take up half the screen, and/or the guns have a silly miniature HUD display on them. I suppose I'm just a minimalist when it comes to onscreen obstructions.
Posted June 26, 2012
avatar
bevinator: Personally I don't really mind them from a mechanical perspective, but it annoys me that they tend to take up half the screen, and/or the guns have a silly miniature HUD display on them. I suppose I'm just a minimalist when it comes to onscreen obstructions.
The only thing I hate about iron sights is the fact that say when you aim a scopeless rifle everything in your field of view gets closer and that is unrealistic
Post edited June 26, 2012 by Elmofongo
Posted August 12, 2012
Bump

i read this user thread in the escapist and a user said iron soghts were unnecassary for realism and here is his explination.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.384012-Aim-Down-Sight-is-unnecessary-for-realism?page=1


of course I think its bullshit clearly he never held a firearm before I own a BB underlever rifle with sights and it did worked when I aim
Posted August 12, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: of course I think its bullshit clearly he never held a firearm before I own a BB underlever rifle with sights and it did worked when I aim
FYI, it's called "lever action", bolts are "bolt action", pumps are "pump" or "pump action", and if the action happens as a result of firing it's a semi-auto or automatic (probably someone on GOG has a full auto, but most people do not).

EDIT: I read the article, his whole argument is based on the "realism" angle and yet the guns are held so low in his preferred perspective that he's utterly wrong, the right eye is not sighting along the barrel (unless your head grows out of your right arm). I always felt the animations of going to iron sights did a fairly decent job of making you feel like you were bringing the gun to your shoulder and closing your left eye for better accuracy.

I kind of think that dude hasn't fired a lot of weapons.
Post edited August 12, 2012 by orcishgamer
Posted August 12, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.384012-Aim-Down-Sight-is-unnecessary-for-realism?page=1
Well, I think most of what can be said has been said already in the forum thread you have linked there.
Post edited August 12, 2012 by Fenixp
Posted August 12, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: of course I think its bullshit clearly he never held a firearm before I own a BB underlever rifle with sights and it did worked when I aim
avatar
orcishgamer: FYI, it's called "lever action", bolts are "bolt action", pumps are "pump" or "pump action", and if the action happens as a result of firing it's a semi-auto or automatic (probably someone on GOG has a full auto, but most people do not).

EDIT: I read the article, his whole argument is based on the "realism" angle and yet the guns are held so low in his preferred perspective that he's utterly wrong, the right eye is not sighting along the barrel (unless your head grows out of your right arm). I always felt the animations of going to iron sights did a fairly decent job of making you feel like you were bringing the gun to your shoulder and closing your left eye for better accuracy.

I kind of think that dude hasn't fired a lot of weapons.
I see thanks did not know it was lever action same way as correcting people that it's called suppressors not silencers
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)What is wrong with Iron Sights in shooters?(39 posts)(39 posts)
(39 posts)