Project Reality Forums

It is near impossible to shoot effectively with the .50 cal in a hummer as there is big triangle on top of the gun that blocks my view. I have my geometry set on low so I know that I can't get more detailed.

My suggestion is to lower the top vertex of the triangle so that it can be used to aim with (like in the Vodnik), that solution wouldn't require any more polygons and still allow people with low geometry settings to fire the .50 cal.

Cheers,
Fishbone

yes, I agree. They should fix it , theres no realism to a traingle iron sight.

I have no problem with a triangle being my iron sight. If you play with low geometry you shouldn't complain about low LOD models that save polygons.

Rhino, your link shows a high level of detail model and the post says nothing about having a sight that is actually usefull with low geometry settings. Or is the answer somewhere in the 10 pages?

Fishbone wrote:I have no problem with a triangle being my iron sight. If you play with low geometry you shouldn't complain about low LOD models that save polygons.

Rhino, your link shows a high level of detail model and the post says nothing about having a sight that is actually usefull with low geometry settings. Or is the answer somewhere in the 10 pages?

That there is very selfish. Players that use low detail ect are already at a disadvantage, mainly spotting enemies and so on. But something that directly interferes with our ability to use a weapon is just bang out.

To be fair - if your computer could barely handle BF2 when it came out 3 years ago ... and you are still using that computer today, then you don't have a leg to stand on
buy a new computer

@ rhino:...since the 50 cal from that mounted one was imported from the korea mod are those sights "outdated"...i wouldnt mind using those sights tho if it works good for both low and high geo

Ecko wrote:That there is very selfish. Players that use low detail ect are already at a disadvantage, mainly spotting enemies and so on. But something that directly interferes with our ability to use a weapon is just bang out.

You misunderstood me. I play with low detail and I am not complaining that the 50 cal only has a triangle to aim with instead of a detailed sight. The problem is though that the triangle is too big so that it obscures the target and you cannot aim with it. This only seems to be a problem with the British and US 50 cals. The vodnik doesn't have the problem. It is just a single vertex being too high in the model.

Conman51=US= wrote:@ rhino:...since the 50 cal from that mounted one was imported from the korea mod are those sights "outdated"...i wouldnt mind using those sights tho if it works good for both low and high geo

how is it out dated? I aint been able to get any feedback from our MAs yet on it thou if there is any major differences we will look to fix them, but from what I can tell its still the same basic gun to what it is now? Only bit that I can see is diffrent is the cocking handle is metal instead of wooden now.

Fishbone wrote:You misunderstood me. I play with low detail and I am not complaining that the 50 cal only has a triangle to aim with instead of a detailed sight. The problem is though that the triangle is too big so that it obscures the target and you cannot aim with it. This only seems to be a problem with the British and US 50 cals. The vodnik doesn't have the problem. It is just a single vertex being too high in the model.

The model is the EA model, it was not made by us, and it was never meant to have "iron sights" on it, just a crosshair in the center of the screen like it has on vbf2. the high detail one has a forward sight which you can aim with.

Yes, I thought so already. My suggestion was to make sure that the sight works properly on all LODs. If that is the stating the obvious and the new models are already working well; excellent!

It's tough to get your SL hammering on you for not hitting anything when you can't aim properly

/me wants optics on the .50 cal anyway

but raise your geometry at the cost of sth else and the problem will be gone

Jonny wrote:@ Rhino:
Make the 1p geom a mid/high detail LOD to fix the sight problem, I think it can be done in tweak files.

the stock one is on the highest geom it has... Like I said it was never made to be used like we use it...

Jonny wrote:Like hell it is.

If you try turning your Geometry down to low you cant use it. That seems like a low poly LOD to me.

Is it not possible to FORCE the engine to render the high poly model? I am sure I have seen code similar to it, but I cant remember where now.

Jonny, Jonny, Jonny. Try reading my post.

The model we have here dose not have a high poly model that can be used for iron sights well, the highest that is there we are using... You can't tell the code to use something that is not there...

Dont make me post the same thing a 3rd, or is it 4th time?

rhino your not understanding what he is saying.

he wants you to make the 1p geometry always use the geometry with the highest poly count.

high settings= best geometry
low settings= worst geometry

this is what he wants just for 1p

high settings= best geometry
low settings= best geometry

he was refering to the best geometry as a high poly model as it has the highest amount of polys.

here short version:

make the low settings use the same 50.cal 1p model as high settings.

ah k, not 100% sure if its possible to make low gfx users use the lod0 thou I do think there is some code for it thou not 100% sure.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:how is it out dated? I aint been able to get any feedback from our MAs yet on it thou if there is any major differences we will look to fix them, but from what I can tell its still the same basic gun to what it is now? Only bit that I can see is diffrent is the cocking handle is metal instead of wooden now.

I think the sights are fine. I just had a look at the US Army's field manual for the M2 located here: FM 23-65 Table of Contents. The publication is dated from the 19 of June 1991.

It would appear that the ladder sight is folded away in the model so the battle aperture is visible like so:

firing modes eh?........

now this i want to see in game

$kelet0r wrote:To be fair - if your computer could barely handle BF2 when it came out 3 years ago ... and you are still using that computer today, then you don't have a leg to stand on
buy a new computer

Send me a check than sure.