![]() sampling CustomDepth in the base pass is a feature that doesn’t seem to meet any of this criteria Throughout the years it’s become clear that Epic will only be interested in things that will either: benefit their ongoing projects, seem beneficial for a majority of the users, and/or make a significant progress to keep up with the state of the art. you can focus more on gameplay if you save time on tedious/finnicky things I thought that was immediately obvious but maybe I’m misunderstanding what makes it a problem in your eyesĪ better solution won’t make the gameplay any better per se, but it would save time of setup and tweaking the positioning/sizing/aligning of the clip-through params in the material per-weapon per-attachment. but the point is still that each of these are differently positioned and sized (even shaped) so each of these will ‘clip through’ the weapon body in a different way, hence the need for a more robust system than vertex paint.įor multiplayer: this system is only relevant for the 1st person view meshes (the whole functionality should be disabled -except- for the currently controlled/viewed meshes from 1st person of the local client), so of course nothing the enemy does should have any impact on your own weapons, and of course you shouldn’t see clipping on the enemy weapons when you or the enemy does ADS. ![]() My bad those are attachments with optics, not the optics themselves. Midgunner66: that’s a good effort! though, how would it behave when the gun moves from animation, and how would it work if the scope was a rectangle rather than a circle? in most games first person arms and guns are rendered detached from the 3rd person mesh (what other players see), which is in turn not rendered in the eyes of the player (except a cutout of the waist and legs). personally I find that more stimulating than questioning his (quite reasonable) motivesĪnd I don’t see how multiplayer is involved in any way. Lacking the good solution (simply because Epic has no interest in spending effort making CustomDepth sampleable in the base pass), maybe at least we could spend the time here contributing to a more robust solution (one still doable without engine changes). the important part (the position and shape of the scope lens to clip through, per-pixel) is there. you can still filter what you want to clip however you wish, be it by distance from the scope or by vertex paint or whatever else you want to muster in your material. I’ve seen it in action, it’s pixel-perfect removal of the gun geometry based on the scope lens, whatever position or rotation the animation might cause it to do. With the solution I proposed in my previous post, it really is a “cure all” solution. you just scale the FOV, easy, no render targets. Sniper scopes (x36 or whatever) usually obscure the outside of the scope (see that same video at 18:50). they are just optics, so no they are not tied to a specific weapon (sure you won’t use a snipe scope on a gun, but each of these scopes can go with any of the different rifles). (BTW Trijicon now has some ACOGs with PA's ACSS reticle.Look at 7:17, there’s 21 different scope optics models. Funny how a ACOG with a BDC reticle is the best thing since slice bread, but any other scope with a BDC reticle is a total POS not worth using as a paper weight. #Acog scope lookthrough full size#Before I get flamed and accused of being a mall ninja for suggesting a PA with the ACSS reticle I am not saying it's good for bench rest or F-Class competition that's not what it is designed for, but for banging full size 18"x 30" steel IPSC targets out to 800yds it works great. BTW if you want a BDC reticle in a LPV scope the Primary Arms ACSS reticle is pretty good and I have found it pretty spot on out to 800yds. ACOGs are great, but at the end of the day I had a really expensive fixed power scope with very poor eye relief and no diopter adjustment. ![]() For me a LPV 1-6 or 1-8 is so much better. I found the ACOG was just sitting in the safe not being used so I sold it. I finally got LPV scope a 1-8 to be exact and started using it for the same thing I was using the ACOG for. I am just a civilian that used them to bang steel IPSC targets out to 800yds for fun and because they are built like tanks also for a unlikely SHTF situation. I have had two ACOGS over the years the TA31D-100581 4x32 BAC USMC RCO and another one that was calibrated for a 20" barrel I don't remember exactly which model, but I will echo what has already been said about the eye relief and needing great vision to see the reticle. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |