Hello all!
Back again with another 'Game mechanics vs. Real life' kind of thing.
Earlier this morning, I saw this post from u/Swatymawe:
It makes sense. At least, at first glance.
The reason most iron sights are the way they are IRL is in order to get a proper sight picture, you have to hold the rifle in a very specific fashion. The less of the top of the rifle/barrel the user sees, the better. This helps the shooter keep shots level and naturally consistent.
Actually, this ties into and sight/bore axis offset. Irons are usually great in this respect, as you're effectively shoving your eye right against the barrel. Professional shooters utilize this to great effect, being able to tag 12cm diameter targets at ranges that an average Joe would never be able to hit with a magnified optic. (I'm talking 500m + kind of stuff. Seriously, look it up. Those guys are insane)
The two 'not Tarkov' photos have the shooter effectively holding the rifle at a mild angle with the muzzle pointed slightly upward. For close quarters, it wouldn't matter so much, but at range (100m+) Shots would start to land noticeably higher than expected. However, even people who've shot SKS's IRL (myself included) would agree that the top and bottom photos feel a bit more natural. Why is that?
It comes down to three very closely tied reasons:
1) Cameras versus Eyes:
-We as humans have two eyeballs (typically) that allow us to properly perceive depth and judge distance. That means your brain is actually seeing two images from two perspectives of whatever you're looking at, at any given time. Your brain is also really good at smushing those two images together into one cohesive blob of colors and stimulus for other parts of your gray matter to process.
It also omits stuff from your field of vision that you're not actively paying attention to. I'm not kidding. That squishy mass of neurons inside your head is terrifyingly complex and ingenious when it comes to tricking you so you don't implode from a constant barrage of stimuli.
(Try this. Hold your thumb out with your arm at full extension and cover up one of the words in this post. Without touching your screen, of course. Now, alternate closing one eye and opening the other. One eye should be able to see part of the word while the other cannot. Your brain is a crazy thing. Side note: you may also notice how one eye sees things in a slightly warmer hue and the other, cooler hues. That's not really related to this post, but a fun detail.)
However, games can't show us two images and expect our brains to process them the same way. Developers only have one camera to work with and as such only only image to present to the player at any given time. As a result, Game Devs are forced to pick a location for the camera to sit that looks the most comfortable/pleasing. This leads to our next point.
2) Animation:
–Because of where the game camera sits on the player model (Usually within the mid-upper portion of the head.), it is exceedingly difficult for artists to create animations, models, and weapons sets that look not only pleasing to both the player and other players, but for those animations to set up a practical and effective sight picture.
It's basically impossible unless the game camera is shoved right where the eyes are, but even then Designers would be forced to choose one eye or the other, which would then cause the player model to feel lopsided or off center to the user. This is the reason pretty much every game in existence implements 1st and 3rd person animations. What you see is not what other players see. EVERYTHING YOU SEE IS A LIE. (Okay, not really, but you get the idea)
'Big deal,' some of you may say. 'EFT uses those too! They made a whole big deal about how they overhauled 3rd person animations for .12! Why cant BSG just do the same thing?'
This is true. However, there is one REALLY BIG thing that makes doing what everyone else dose exceedingly difficult for BSG.
Tarkov is…well…Tarkov.
3) Tarkov is Tarkov:
-Pretty much every other FPS title out there uses a series of really clever tricks to make their weapons and animation look slick/more complex while still keeping them computationally cheap and fast to implement. If you've ever designed an FPS, either casually or professionally, you'll likely already know this. That tacti-cool looking AR from CoD? It's a shell. Nothing going on inside.
Typically, the system works like this: When a player clicks to fire, the game calls on the scripts that pull the animation cycles for 'X' Weapon firing. The casing model is spawned inside the gun, recoil and muzzle flash animations play out, casing model is thrown off screen, casing model despawns. Animation cycle ends. Throw in a few sound effects and BAM, you've got yourself a respectable recoil animation.
Not Tarkov. Not BSG.
They.
Model.
Everything.
Seriously, look at some of their devblogs and you'll see it. Every round in every magazine. The bolt carrier assembly. Round getting pulled from the mag and slapped into place. It's insane. You can see a round in the chamber if you look down the barrel. Stuff no sane Game-developer would spend resources creating. Literally no other game does this (That I'm aware of, at least.)
'Okay… I still don't see how that matters."
It matters because it sets up where the projectile spawns. Since BSG loves realism, the projectile begins its life from where the round sits in the chamber. Or, at least close to it.
Still confused?
Alright, in classic game creation, Developers typically spawn the projectile relative to the camera/what the player sees. Games like Rainbow 6 Siege have the projectile spawn from the crosshair, CS: GO, somewhere around the middle of the screen (Which also allows for 'head-glitching' where players can hit opponents even though 99% of the player's body/weapon are behind cover) More 'Realistic' shooters simply move the spawn point lower down so there's some apparent bore offset between the sights and the barrel.
This is great and a super easy system for Devs to use, as they can model any sight the want, because the projectile path is already set on screen relative to the player's camera. New assets can be built around it since they already know what the projectile is doing. It also can scale easily without issue, should players adjust their resolution or FOV.
For EFT, as far as I can tell, projectile spawns relative to the gun, not the camera.
This is likely one of the main reasons there is so much fuckery when it comes to sights and optics in general.
(Aside from FOV and EFT's in-raid time dilation possibly effecting the calculation for bullet drop)
As a result, BSG kind of have to work backwards. Bullet should hit there? Alright, line the weapon model up so the irons make sense. It's not super difficult in theory, but keep in mind they have to adjust camera position for every optic and sight for every weapon in the game so it makes sense to the player. And every time they 'fix' something, that fix likely doesn't get translated properly to every optic and everything breaks again. Eye relief, scope shadow, reticle size… the works.
Here's a visual if you're having some trouble seeing it mentally:
Consequently, this makes it exceedingly hard for BSG to 'Fix' these sights, as they can't really adjust the camera without throwing off where the round seems to be going. (You know how the 133 was/is busted and hits kind of low? This is likely why.)
TL:DR – Because EFT likes some good realism, projectiles seem to spawn relative to the gun model, not the player camera. It's a subtle but major detail that makes 'fixing' sights really really hard. Also, everything you know is a lie.
I hope I made sense and entertained everyone. Thank you for reading my mound of words. lol! If you have any comments or corrections you'd like to point out, let me know!
(On a side note the Breeki Battle Buddies – BFF's fan spinoff I'm doing should go into voice recording sessions this weekend. I'll probably update y'all Monday! Enjoy a promotional poster in the mean time:
