-Gews-

It was already reduced. Right now we sit between 0.54 and 0.55. As for that other BI game, A3, it's the same as A2. That's not a compromise you describe, it's a compromise right now in 0.62. Copy-paste: "This 'zoom' doesn't represent some intense kind of focus, the basic range of FOV, minFOV to maxFOV, represents simply a normal vision of the kind you are using while reading this text." And so it makes no sense to limit it because you're tired, or because you're standing upright instead of crouching down. The normal vision range needs to be consistent and it needs to be always accessible.

It's not possible to use 'zoom' in place of binoculars and scopes. Won't. See: patch 0.57.

Some horrifying news from Gamescom (via BarelyInfected). Q: "We can't zoom anymore." Dev response: [...] "I think, like, I was a, I was advocate of keeping the, that eye zoom, in [...] we wanted to throw it away like long time ago [...] I was like, okay guys, it's [...] great mark of ARMA [...] let's keep it and see how it goes [...] we lowered the zoom quite drastically [...] when compared to the ARMA, but now we had some issues with the [...] zooming value (?) in (?) the iron sights, so we tear it up (?), completely out, for this version, and I think, it will maybe... well, I like it, because [...] [talks about FOV and LODs] [...] so I think we will ditch it, probably." Receipts at 8 minutes 45: If the 'eye zoom' was removed I think I might ditch DayZ. The 'eye zoom' has always been one of my big concerns: https://forums.dayz.com/topic/165710-the-campaign-for-iron-sight-zoom/ https://forums.dayz.com/topic/225515-vision-nerfed-yet-again/ Patch 0.57, with extreme reduced zoom, was unplayable for me as I would run around squinting at things that were actually pretty close and should have been easy to see—myopic characters were not good for my blood pressure so I took a time out until they fixed it in 0.58. The only patch, the only decision which has bothered me to such an extent. The status report of 30 June 2015 gave a nice explanation of the 'eye zoom' feature, for those unaware. So it seemed the team was backing this feature and understood why it was there. But now I hear it will be removed? And the main reason seemed to be that transition between LODs aren't perfectly smooth? Is this related to console development or something? Seems unlikely, but I'm scratching my head. As far as I'm concerned removal of this feature would ruin the game. Much of the appeal of DayZ is the wide open map with long vistas and the ranged combat that can take place there. If my character doesn't have an 'authentic' visual acuity then those aspects of the game will not longer be 'authentic'. A variable FOV/zoom is a fundamental feature of any realistic game involving combat/shooting. I shouldn't need to use binoculars or scope to see a person a couple hundred yards away, instead of just a moving dot. My character is looking at someone all the time, which means that all the time, I will be seriously annoyed at my guy's gimped vision. And at that point it's no longer worth playing.

Agreed about their current value. I always grab binocs or even better, PU scope from hunting stands when gearing up. You can scan a huge area with such items, they are invaluable for spotting people. I don't get why they need to be even more valuable than now. They have a function, and they perform it... what more is needed?

Fair enough. Correct. I wouldn't say the ability to see a realistic distance is a 'supernatural ability'. Binoculars and scopes should be used when things are too far away to see properly. Binoculars and scopes should NOT be needed to distinguish people (as opposed to dark pixel blobs) a mere 200 or 300 yards off. In 0.62 I find a magnifying optic is extremely useful for spotting players—'eye zoom' alone does not match up. Naked eyes should be enough to observe your environment. Today I watched someone walking in a field of tall grass, and their two dogs running alongside, at approximately 950-1050 meters. Small, yes, but neither bionic eyes or binoculars were necessary to simply see them. Note that I can't do that in DayZ, even with 0.62 'eye zoom'. As mentioned above, the inability to see properly would lead to people simply not seeing other players, and walking by one another without ever noticing. See better = more interactions. Good to hear. "Correct perspective" = zoom? In this case, characters with guns can see better—which would not make sense. If we have a correct perspective, assuming this means appropriate minFOV, I don't think added zoom is necessary. And I don't think holding breath should affect eyesight. Since, 1. Focusing on a distant object is not something you can only do for a few seconds, 2. the correct perspective / zoom already represents 'focus', in a way, and 3. if we were after top accuracy we would be focusing on front sight anyways. Anyways it is nice to see a response on this topic and I hope the feature is kept as is. "Simulation of mid to long range engagement wouldn’t be possible without such feature ..." "We know that zoomed fov or ironsights must be 45° because it emulates the eye and we stated earlier that 45° is realistic."

Glad to hear it.

Realistically if you're eating a nicely prepared human steak there shouldn't be any notable risks to your character's health.

Did @eugenharton end up commenting on this?

Those small ones are more like a camp knife, not for working in the fields. Not sure why they made the game version this small, there were many people pointing out the small size when the machete was added. I think a machete should be a desirable weapon. It's capable yet relatively light. People shouldn't be cross country running with fire or splitting axes esp. when they're already decked out with multiple guns. 12" vs 18"

Only a 12" machete in this game. Kind of puny, I have kitchen knives larger than that.

Would have liked to see a comment on this.

Hyperbolic? Of course. Premature? Please elaborate. Last time I checked they showed off their new build at Gamescom 2017, that build was missing a longstanding and major feature, and when attendees mentioned this they said it's gone because they plan to 'ditch it'. 'Premature'? Are we supposed to pretend that whole thing didn't happen? Hop in a server and don't hold down your right mouse button. If you don't care about realism, then it 'feels' just fine. Kind of like this.

Upvotes don't really validate an idea, the argument for zoom stands on its own. But upvotes can show community opinion, and community opinion can sway devs. Because who are they making the game for, in the end? I posted this one today: https://www.reddit.com/r/dayz/comments/6y1ks0/devs_plan_to_remove_eye_zoomlets_change_their/ So far ~375 upvotes at 90%, a decent number for today's r/dayz, and again the great majority of comments support keeping the zoom. One guy complaining doesn't do much by himself. Fifty, one hundred, two hundred complaining, maybe just a little bit more. More momentum. You're getting a better sample size there. If they realize such a change would be quite unpopular with the community, would they still pursue it? Unfortunately they don't interact too much these days on subreddit or forum. Maybe some dev browses the sub and will see that topic, or this forum, and it could spark some discussion or change.

Heh.

It is a zoom technically, but not in practice, since compared to DayZ's scopes/binoculars, we are only 'zooming' in with our eyes to the scope/binocular's 1x power. We, the players, use the feature when we want to focus on an area, but the word 'focus' seems confusing to many people (eg, if it is 'focus' then there are questions on why things are not blurred when out of focus and how focus != zoom) and the zoom behaviour doesn't mimic the mechanics of focusing in optics, so I'm not a fan of the word 'focus'. Zoomed-in view gives our regular eyesight size+detail, but we can't play like that, so we also have zoomed-out to get a decent field of view. And of course in real life we get these two things simultaneously. So some suggestions, for example, "no zoom when moving" or "make it take longer to zoom in" don't make sense to me. In the end it's a variable FOV range, so I guess we could call it 'eyesight range' or something. But then most won't know what we're talking about. Hence 'eye zoom'.

Here's a comparison via ARMA 2. From left to right, the zoom we had in DayZ mod, our zoom right now in DayZ 0.62, and finally, the zoom in Gamescom 0.63. Like I said before, if you don't know exactly what 100 or 300 metres looks like IRL, one can easily measure distances near you via Google Maps and make his own impressions on which of these images fits closest with his observations. First, at 100 metres: And now at 300 metres: This.

In any case, don't try and modify game files or attempt to bypass the anti-cheat software to get such things to work.

RMB 'zoom-in'.

So this is interesting. Here's the reddit post made 4 days ago by u/RogerBadger3344 which is where I first heard this. Mr. RogerBadger is very much in favour of keeping the zoom. https://www.reddit.com/r/dayz/comments/6w7z48/my_thoughts_about_the_removal_of_zoom_feature/ Anyways: 112 upvotes, 92% of voters upvoted. And almost every commenter (44 total comments) says they support keeping the 'eye zoom' function. Those figures would be bigger but like this forum, r/dayz is pretty slow these days. Anyways: for who are they making this change? I'm sure the average gamer more interested in Overwatch or whatever doesn't care, but removal of 'eye zoom' doesn't seem to be something the core DayZ community supports, at all. And ARMA 3 manages to get along fine, even though it has a substantially greater zoom than we have in DayZ 0.62. I don't buy the idea that simple zooming in and out makes such a giant performance hit that it needs to go, despite being a fundamental feature for many years.

I can see it now, a new item for 0.63! class BiopticBase; // external class reference class BiopticGlasses : BiopticBase { scope = public; model = "\DZ\characters\glasses\bioptic_vision_aid.p3d"; displayName = "Bioptic vision aid"; lootTag[] = {"Civilian"}; descriptionShort = "Made of plastic with a fashionable horn rim design and tortoiseshell frame, this bioptic will allow your vision-impaired character to see properly."; handAnim[] = {"OFP2_ManSkeleton", "\DZ\anims\data\anim\sdr\ik\clothing\glases\bioptic_vision_aid.rtm"}; armAction = "OneHanded"; minFov = 0.4143;

We can calculate the appropriate size of a given object on the screen. For example, a 1.8 m tall figure at a distance of 100 m makes an angle of 0.018 radians. If my distance from the screen is 30 inches I can just go 0.018*30" = 0.54" as the size on the screen. If my screen is 11.25 inches high, and has a resolution of 1920x1080, that means 96 pixels per linear inch, so the 1.8 m tall figure at 100 m should be 0.54* 96 = 52 pixels high. That's the appropriate size to match the real-life apparent size. And that would demand a character minFOV very close to 0.25 (same as ARMA 2, 3). Appropriate value for configuration changes on distance and screen size. If I increased to a 27" monitor at the same distance that minFOV would need to be increased to about 0.30. A 15.6" laptop at only 24", lowered to about 0.21. (For reference it's currently at 0.4143 in DayZ standalone, and 0.25 in ARMA 2 and IIRC ARMA 3). Anyways, using the default settings, a man that appeared to be just 300 m away in the DayZ mod will appear to be 850 m away in DayZ 0.63. If you're like me and play on max FOV, he'll appear 1 kilometre off.

Not true. That is a video. Displayed on a monitor. Without digital zoom. So exactly like the camera in DayZ it's going to appear smaller than you see in real life. Go get a camera, take a 16:9 photo without any zoom, size that photo to your 16:9 screen and note how objects in the distance are smaller than they actually appeared. People at 100 m, or 200 m, or further, do not appear like 'dark spikes'. At 1 kilometre, sure, then they look real small. If you don't have a previously known distance or a laser rangefinder, you can use Google Maps measuring tool to find distances. Right click on a spot and choose 'Measure distance'.

I thought of the console thing as well. There's no evidence that is the actual reason behind it, but yeah, the thought did pop into my head. I don't completely get the binoculars thing. It was mentioned in the video, but: -They're already a very useful tool, why must they be even more useful? -No eye zoom also means correspondingly less binocular zoom at the same power magnification -Should we really need binoculars to see people instead of dots at 300, 400 yards? -Wouldn't this exacerbate disparity between scoped/unscoped weapons? I don't think that's important myself, but now various scopes could still see to edge of network bubble while eyes are handicapped, which seems contrary to the wishes of some. I think the binoculars thing is not that well thought-out.

Not a great solution. You can mod anything you like, but you need someone to play it. Only the large mods survive, the rest die very quickly. Besides being a huge amount of work, 'historically' those successful mods have all been quite different from vanilla DayZ experience. Better idea: give feedback (ie, complain loudly) and see if devs will change their minds. Has happened before. Your DayZ character doesn't have eyes, he has a virtual camera in his head and you are watching that on your monitor. No zoom, objects in the distance are too small. You can't see certain things you should be able to. So what can allow your character to see things clearly at a reasonable distance and also have as wide as possible a FOV? You've got to have a variable FOV, eg, zoom. Doesn't matter eyes don't zoom—it's not eyes. It's trying to represent the field of view and the visual acuity you get with eyes. We don't have a HUD elements or floating text either in real life, those are there to represent missing capabilities also. The zoomed-in view is your proper basic FOV, the zoomed-out view is just there so you can see around you. So you can think of it as being 'zoomed-out' by default. And the binoculars and scopes multiply based on your zoomed-in FOV, not the zoomed-out FOV. Nope—if it ends up being that annoying, why play? Already went through it in 0.57. If this terrible change stays, maybe I will mellow out and still get some enjoyment, and maybe not. By the way, for reference: looking at an old comment of mine and found this. Here's someone viewed at just 100 metres in ARMA 2, without any zoom (Initfov=0.7, IIRC). Would look similar in current 0.63 DayZ.

I've only played Squad, but I know Squad, RO2, PUBG and H1Z1 all have some form of zoom. Squad has a modest zoom on rifles and a much greater zoom on heavy machine guns (huh?). PUBG has zoom while aiming down sights. H1Z1 also zooms in while aiming in 3rd person. RO2 has zoom. All of the above zooms are while aiming, whereas DayZ has zoom during any activity. I don't think it matters if other games 'get along' without 'eye zoom', because if someone isn't interested in the realistic/simulation aspect, then it comes down to personal preference of gameplay. DayZ can get along fine without zoom, and it could also get along fine with hitmarkers, kill feeds, or bunnyhopping, etc. I am interested in the realism/simulation aspect and this is a core foundation. I always nitpick weapons and their statistics, etc, but all that is small potatoes compared to the basic way in which my character perceives the world. Yes, that's a more accurate summary.