Scopes are wrong.

[SFRGaming 718]

Rocket, I highly suggest you go back and redo these scopes. I understand these might just be simple since you haven't had time to do these things. But, heed my warning. The Mod's version of "Scope Magnification" magnified your whole screen, rather that the area that is viewed through the scope.

Let me break it down for you. Here we have Red Orchestra 2 with the CORRECT way on how to do Scope Magnification:

 

As you can see, the area outside the scope is normal magnification and nothing is changed. (A blur could be added for eye candy)

As you move past the "ring" of the scope, you'll notice nothing lines up correctly with the outer edge of your screen. This is the effect magnification should give.

To give you a comparison, here's how it's done in Standalone with a different scope, but should have the same effect:

 

As you can see on the PU scope, the edges of the airfield tarmac on the outer vision of the screen match perfectly with the edges of the tarmac inside the scope. This is how the Mod did it, and hopefully Standalone willl NOT follow in it's tracks.

 

In defense of another gentleman on this forum, the PU scope in the Standalone has a 2x Magnification, rather than its stated Magnification of 3.5x.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Shadow134

[CarolKarine 8]

you understand that fixing this requires double rendering of the scene? you're asking them to do the one thing that impacts performance the most. by correctly doing scope magnification, you force the game engine to render two scenes, and show you both. this is incredibly taxing on the GPU, and leads to horrible frame drops. A number of game devs (including a DICE dev) have expressed interest in correctly showing scopes, but they also admit that it practically ruins the ability for the game to run on lower hardware.

 

another problem is that it increases latency. this is because the computer has to take the time to combine the two scenes that it rendered for the frame before the frame can be sent to post processing.

 

last but not least, combining a large frame drop with increased latency creates a drastically different feel when aiming down sights, making it harder to aim. This results in a worse user experience. This is why devs haven't implemented it. it's harder to render (thereby lessening the number of people that CAN run it) and makes it more difficult on the user. Red Orchestra is known for frame drops even on console, and as a result isn't highly regarded for it's "playability"

 

Also, gonna add to the end here, you sound pretty damn arrogant in your above post.

Edited December 20, 2013 by CarolKarine

[SFRGaming 718]

Well Mr. Tight Pants, if this feature is SO demanding from a system, why can it be supported easily by Valve's Source Engine hmm? Oh, you probably didn't know about this. There's a little game called Firearms: Source 2 which utilizes this perfectly and the Source Engine that supports it can be ran on a potato. Btw, GPU optimizations are right around the corner. And lastly, I don't see where in the OP that I make myself out to be arrogant. "Also, gonna end it here, you sound blah blah blah...." Well go ahead and slam your foot down as much as you want because you sound like a child that didn't get his toy at Wal-Mart. 

[AlcApwn (DayZ) 28]

you understand that fixing this requires double rendering of the scene? you're asking them to do the one thing that impacts performance the most. by correctly doing scope magnification, you force the game engine to render two scenes, and show you both. this is incredibly taxing on the GPU, and leads to horrible frame drops. A number of game devs (including a DICE dev) have expressed interest in correctly showing scopes, but they also admit that it practically ruins the ability for the game to run on lower hardware.

 

another problem is that it increases latency. this is because the computer has to take the time to combine the two scenes that it rendered for the frame before the frame can be sent to post processing.

 

last but not least, combining a large frame drop with increased latency creates a drastically different feel when aiming down sights, making it harder to aim. This results in a worse user experience. This is why devs haven't implemented it. it's harder to render (thereby lessening the number of people that CAN run it) and makes it more difficult on the user. Red Orchestra is known for frame drops even on console, and as a result isn't highly regarded for it's "playability"

 

Also, gonna add to the end here, you sound pretty damn arrogant in your above post.

i am not that much into directx-programming, but i have read an article about portal's way of rendering their scenes with their "recursive world" and i am sure that you do not have to render the scene twice.

and he is not arrogant, he does what he is supposed to do: he points out bugged/quick-and-dirty-coded aspects of this game that need to be taken care of.

[Tundra (DayZ) 1]

It's also in Insurgency. Source engine seems to handle it relatively easily..

[dannyag915@gmail.com 1]

 

Well Mr. Tight Pants, if this feature is SO demanding from a system, why can it be supported easily by Valve's Source Engine hmm? Oh, you probably didn't know about this. There's a little game called Firearms: Source 2 which utilizes this perfectly and the Source Engine that supports it can be ran on a potato. Btw, GPU optimizations are right around the corner. And lastly, I don't see where in the OP that I make myself out to be arrogant. "Also, gonna end it here, you sound blah blah blah...." Well go ahead and slam your foot down as much as you want because you sound like a child that didn't get his toy at Wal-Mart. 

Only one who sounds like they're crying is you with the tone of your post. The guy you answered to is right. Doing magnifications the right way means that you have to render a scene twice and it does give a noticable performance drop for a feature that isn't a big deal. The game is still in alpha and runs pretty poorly in some areas, adding this tiny feature to further drop FPS isn't worth it. The reason Red Orchestra and Firearms Source are able to do it is because they have smallish maps with relatively low player counts on well optimized engines. DayZ is shooting for a 125 km2 map with over a hundred players. Causing the players to render a scene twice just to have proper magnification is just going to further decrease FPS in this already taxing game.

[jBrick 116]

 

 

Only one who sounds like they're crying is you with the tone of your post. The guy you answered to is right. Doing magnifications the right way means that you have to render a scene twice and it does give a noticable performance drop for a feature that isn't a big deal. The game is still in alpha and runs pretty poorly in some areas, adding this tiny feature to further drop FPS isn't worth it. The reason Red Orchestra and Firearms Source are able to do it is because they have smallish maps with relatively low player counts on well optimized engines. DayZ is shooting for a 125 km2 map with over a hundred players. Causing the players to render a scene twice just to have proper magnification is just going to further decrease FPS in this already taxing game.

 

 

I wonder how Bf4 does i... oh wait they don't...  reducing FPS when you zoom is balls and I could care less about graphical changes if it impacts playability.

[SFRGaming 718]

 

 

Only one who sounds like they're crying is you with the tone of your post. The guy you answered to is right. Doing magnifications the right way means that you have to render a scene twice and it does give a noticable performance drop for a feature that isn't a big deal. The game is still in alpha and runs pretty poorly in some areas, adding this tiny feature to further drop FPS isn't worth it. The reason Red Orchestra and Firearms Source are able to do it is because they have smallish maps with relatively low player counts on well optimized engines. DayZ is shooting for a 125 km2 map with over a hundred players. Causing the players to render a scene twice just to have proper magnification is just going to further decrease FPS in this already taxing game.

 

And you obviously haven't seen Rocket's Network Bubble that he has added. The map is 250 km2 btw.

[macstanley 3]

As far as I know the Arma engine needs to render it twice, with picture in picture. If I didnt get it wrong, Rocket often mentioned this via reddit. And if things like this are verry important to some players, I am sure it will be looked over by the devs after the game leaves Alpha and later on beta status :) first we need to get rid of some bugs, making the loot respawn so you can survive as fresh spawn and then adding more features!

Edited December 20, 2013 by DirtyMike

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

If I recall correctly, Rocket was asked about this and said he would like to do scopes correctly, but it would be too taxing on system resources.

Edited December 20, 2013 by bad_mojo

[dannyag915@gmail.com 1]

And you obviously haven't seen Rocket's Network Bubble that he has added. The map is 250 km2 btw.

Way to be hung up on the details cause you know you're wrong. Even rocket has said what everyone else in this thread is telling you: it's too much of a performance hit to be done correctly. 

[crosa 93]

can you look through a scope and see everything around the scope perfectly? I think the DayZ optics are fine the way they are... and especially when they add in the blurring filter around the whole scope while aiming...

[daze23 549]

rocket mentioned they were gonna add a blur (similar to Arma 3)

[CarolKarine 8]

It's also in Insurgency. Source engine seems to handle it relatively easily..

 

you understand source is one of the easiest game engines to run, considering it's so old (mature would be a better word, because it's held up pretty well)?

[codeine 3]

you understand that fixing this requires double rendering of the scene? you're asking them to do the one thing that impacts performance the most. by correctly doing scope magnification, you force the game engine to render two scenes, and show you both. this is incredibly taxing on the GPU, and leads to horrible frame drops.

 

I dare the game do use the other 80% of my GPU. I DARE IT. Will actually get good fps.