Lock sniper rifles in first person?

[Trizzo 632]

Hey,

Lots of people whinge about sniping, from the weapons, damage done and general balance. An aspect not really discussed is the impact that third person view (TPV) has on the game, especially sniping. TPV gives players an incredible line of sight (LOS) and snipers are the only class able to exploit this. Heres how.

Third person lifts the LOS of a concealed sniper out to ranges not typically avalible to players if they were locked in the first person view. For exmaple, you're lying in thick grass behind a stone wall with a with an AS- 50 using third person free lock to scan over obstacles (such as the stone wall) that would be impossible to see over in first person. You see players in the distance and unlike the chum lying in the next field with an axe you can can use your LOS + long range rifle to engage those players.

If picking up a sniper rifle locked you're view in first person snipers would need to consider their postions in order to raise themseleves above obstacles such as uneven terrian, grass, defilades etc that would block their LOS in a first person view. Snipers would have to behave like snipers and not rely on a magic third person camera to do the spotting for them.

Thoughts?

Edited September 14, 2012 by Trizzo

[ZomboWTF 527]

Solution: Play on servers with first person only

this makes no sense whatsoever, why do you want to even punish snipers? I know the AS50 and M107 are outright overpowered because of the one-shot no matter where, but all the other sniper rifles are balanced in terms of giving up close quarter combat ability

[Haf - PheoniX 11]

no third person shouldnt even be in the game its a terrible thing to have because its not realistic im not saying dayz im saying arma in general

[Trizzo 632]

Agree the tension would definitely go up! But tpv looks so damn nice...

[nyk_nunya 40]

Like the guy above said, don't play in servers with it. The point of giving the option on servers is to give some diversity to game play, and allow people to play how they want, not force them to play the way you want to.

[Flam625 8]

Arma 2 is mostly a co-operative game so 3rd person was just something they added just for the hell of it. In DayZ you can play 1st person servers only. Also anyone can use 3rd person to there advantage, like looking over walls and around corners. Snipers just get one more reason to use it.

[Heiduk 265]

no third person shouldnt even be in the game its a terrible thing to have because its not realistic im not saying dayz im saying arma in general

Agreed, third person shouldn't have any place in this game.

[Lights Out 141]

I don't think third person has any place in this game at any moment. As mentioned it's not realistic. You should only have your view as you would see it through your eyes. I hate how people use it when sniping as mentioned above and hiding behind walls/objects and looking around the corner in third person to see whats going on. If you want to look, you should have to take the chance of leaning and peaking out.

[liquidcactus 719]

3rd person needs to be scrapped defentley no questions asked !!!

[doom4mr 135]

I don't know why but 1P makes me feel like I can't see things, I think there is something to do with the FOV, or it just me...

as Zombo said, play on 1P only servers, this is the best solution...

[AwesomeLemon 14]

Most FPS games that involve gunplay (CoD, Battlefield, Halo, etc), don't generally have 3rd Person mode. You're forced to view the world through the eyes of your soldier. If a Battlefield player had a sniper, he would have to expose himself over a low wall to get the same effect your implying. If Battlefield had 3rd person for Soldiers, then most players would have snipers for the very reason.

Gears of War is a popular 3rd Person shooter. There is a sniper available to the players on the map, as in DayZ. A player could grab the sniper and hide behind a wall and wait for a unsuspecting player to stand still too long or wall in a straight line. However, this is off-set by the ability of the players to dive and slide into cover themselves. So its not nearly as bad.

DayZ 3rd Person does not work the same as GoW. Since players walk and move like a normal human being, you cant just dive out of the way when you catch sight of a hostile sniper. For this reason, DayZ, like most shooters are, should be restricted to 1st Person. It would immerse you further into the world since you'd have to look over a wall, around a corner, or over your own shoulder to check your surroundings. 3rd Person makes the game feel a little too easy. It makes the point of leaning useless if you can just go into 3rd Person and see around it without any negatives for doing so.

Edited September 14, 2012 by AwesomeLemon

[jblackrupert 308]

I know the AS50 and M107 are outright overpowered because of the one-shot no matter where

You sure as hell ain't gonna get up and walk away from a hit from a .50

Edited September 14, 2012 by jblackrupert

[Fabik 71]

The 1st person FOV is NOT realistic!

Not being able to move your eyes without turning your head is NOT realistic.

When I use it, I feel like a horse with blinders.

The human field of vision is about 160-180° laterally and 60-80° vertically. How many displays to you need to simulate that ? 6 ?

In fact I find TPV more realistic when it comes to your immediate surroundings.

Of course there is the problem of getting a point of view from outside your body, but one can't say that 1st person is more realistic than TPV.

[nobody 31]

oh damn.. again.. stop hating sniper rifles.. why do you think they should have a disadvantage??... WHY?

[OrLoK 16182]

The 1st person FOV is NOT realistic!

Not being able to move your eyes without turning your head is NOT realistic.

When I use it, I feel like a horse with blinders.

The human field of vision is about 160-180° laterally and 60-80° vertically. How many displays to you need to simulate that ? 6 ?

In fact I find TPV more realistic when it comes to your immediate surroundings.

Of course there is the problem of getting a point of view from outside your body, but one can't say that 1st person is more realistic than TPV.

Hello there

You can turn your head in DAYZ/Arma.

You can change your FOV.

I'm not a fan of 3rd person views, but I'm glad the game gives the user the choice. There are so many games I havnt bought because they are 3rd person POV only.

If one doesn't like it simply join a server where it is disabled.

rgds

LoK

[nev2k 16]

no third person shouldnt even be in the game its a terrible thing to have because its not realistic im not saying dayz im saying arma in general

Well i think the third person, as well as the possibility to zoom in arma as well as in dayz, is neccessary, because sometimes the control of your char is to odd to get things done propaply, espiacally inside buildings. but to the OP i'd rather say, that you should make long range shots harder by adding a bit more scope sway, so that snipers have to be proned for +400 shots, which would force them to get out from behind the obstacle and force them to offer both players a good line of sight.

[starwarsfan@gmx.de 450]

All this 'it's not realistic' stuff is bullcrap. Third person is there to compensate for the fact that first person is in fact not realistic at all either. If you watch a few interviews with the people from bohemia about Arma 3 they explain why third person is in the game pretty well.

Also, I hate running in first person. The way the screen shakes makes me feel sick. I like to look at my character too.

[John Spectre 32]

drop screen shake and 1st person view only. 3d person allows you to see things that are literally impossible, meaning you must now compensate for a spotter who has an invisible periscope.

[Sutinen 635]

50. cal rifles should remove your secondary slot and should take 50 slots in a backpack and a tent, so you can't pack them anywhere. Balanced. Also, the mags should take 2 slots in inventory. U mad, uber clanz?

Balance idea for third person if it doesn't get removed: Remove the crosshair in third person. It's more like something to prevent headache when running in the wilderness than useable in combat.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Sutinen

[Zeppa 562]

@Sutinen

I think U mad cuz got snipzzzz

moving on..

I have to say, I havent died a single time in game to a sniper... wonder why is that? Maybe because I dont run like headless chicken waiting to get shot.

And people who is complaining about the 1person "shaking", you can remove that from options..

[Bratalise 26]

@Sutinen

I think U mad cuz got snipzzzz

moving on..

I have to say, I havent died a single time in game to a sniper... wonder why is that? Maybe because I dont run like headless chicken waiting to get shot.

And people who is complaining about the 1person "shaking", you can remove that from options..

If you haven't died a single tiem to a sniper you either haven't been playing the game that long or your running around in a forest and going no where near the major cities or NW Airfield, and that sir is the most boring way to play the game.

[Sutinen 635]

@Sutinen

I think U mad cuz got snipzzzz

moving on..

I have to say, I havent died a single time in game to a sniper... wonder why is that? Maybe because I dont run like headless chicken waiting to get shot.

And people who is complaining about the 1person "shaking", you can remove that from options..

Actually, one guy tied to take me out with an M107 but still failed. My problem with the 50. cal snipers is that they do massive amounts of blood damage. They literally kill you in one shot, no matter what body part they hit.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Sutinen

[AwesomeLemon 14]

Actually, one guy tied to take me out with an M107 but still failed. My problem with the 50. cal snipers is that they do massive amounts of blood damage. They literally kill you in one shot, no matter what body part they hit.

Have you seen what a .50 Cal bullet looks like and does to a target that it hits? Its massive. Regardless of where it hits, its going to mess you up. In real life most people dont walk away from a .50 cal shot.