Feedback - Muzzle flashes 1.31.0.31+

[lutorm]

Vehicles:

- Muzzle flashes scaled down a bit

Unable to confirm, at least on Flak28. It may be that it's slightly smaller, but it's still a huge, opaque, white hot thing. Somehow it seems muzzle flashes should not have the same brightness as the Sun, and I doubt they're opaque, too.

[peegee77]

LMG muzzle flash looked much the same to me as well

[romzburg]

Their brightness does make them opaque, but in real life they are visible for a very short period of time, since we have infinite frames-per-second in real life.

In the game, that muzzle flash is up there for a couple frames (and we have so few frames persecond that the animation necessarily takes up a LOT of time) and then the next shot causes *its* flash, and so we end up with continuous white spot.

I suggest shrinking muzzle flash to about 2 or 3 times the diameter of the barrel, and making a 1 frame muzzle flash on shot # 1, then another shot number 4 or 5, etc. Tweak as needed to get a nice look that doesn't maintain a continuous white flash.

romzburg

______________

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[lutorm]

Their brightness does make them opaque' date=' but in real life they are visible for a very short period of time, since we have infinite frames-per-second in real life.[/quote']

Well, just being bright doesn't make them opaque... But even if they were, the visibility is my point. If, for example, IRL the muzzle flash is visible for 10ms and we have 60fps, then the frame time is 17ms, so it should really only be 10/17=60% opaque. If we have 30fps, it should only be 30% opaque, because we'll see it for longer. To

At night we can keep them as they are, because getting blinded by the muzzle flash is realism...

[romzburg]

Well, just being bright doesn't make them opaque... But even if they were, the visibility is my point. If, for example, IRL the muzzle flash is visible for 10ms and we have 60fps, then the frame time is 17ms, so it should really only be 10/17=60% opaque. If we have 30fps, it should only be 30% opaque, because we'll see it for longer. To

At night we can keep them as they are, because getting blinded by the muzzle flash is realism...

I'm with you.

One way or another, reducing the big white patch that stays there in the middle of the screen needs to get done.

____________

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[DOC]

We have scaled them back to the point where they are not a big hinderance to the sight picture at the aim point. We don't want to scale them back more because soom they will be so small they won't function as intended at all.

Yes it would be nice if they were not so "solid" looking but whether or not we can make them more opaque than they are now is not completely sure.

Size wise we really like the .31 version, and they look excellant in the 3rd person (you looking at the shooter not BEING the shooter) view. We'll continue to try and make them even better but at some point we're going to reach a dead end.

Not sure if we're there yet or not.

[GOPHUR]

Problem is they looked really extra awful when they were transparent.

[GOPHUR]

I think the flak 28 looks fine. Especially third person.

[GOPHUR]

Sure are getting a lot of feedback on this one.

[lutorm]

I still have the "diffraction spike" from the muzzle flash (see this thread) in .32. You see it at least with the infantry weapons and, for some roll angles, the cowl guns on the fighters.

Edit: Wait, there's a .33? How do I get the patch when the beta server isn't open?

Edited April 9, 2010 by lutorm

[lutorm]

Ok, tested with .33: Muzzle flash on moving vehicles seems ok. The vertical line is still there only it's not always vertical. It now seems to be randomly oriented for each shot, which makes it far less annoying, but I still maintain it shouldn't look like that. That kind of lens flare effect is never seen with naked eyes, and even through optics they only show up for really bright things, like the Sun. A muzzle flash surely is not bright enough except maybe at night.

[specterx]

Repost into this feedback thread:

IMO the muzzle flashes still need adjustment. The current beta implementation [.38] looks weird and fake/cartoony because the 'flame' graphic is present in every frame. The 1.30 implementation is far superior and the flashes appear at a more realistic-looking 'frequency'.

It's very easy to see the difference in slow-mo or frame-by-frame. In 1.30, if you hold down the trigger on an MG the actual muzzle flash graphic only appears in one-third to two-thirds of the frames depending on RoF of the weapon, which looks normal and realistic. In 1.31, sustained fire with MGs just gives you a solid ball of white-hot flame with shimmering at the edges.

Size and color-wise the flashes look fine to me, but they need an interrupter gear

[GOPHUR]

Haven't really gotten as much feedback as I would like. I'm sure it will be an avalanche post release when it matter much less.

I'll leave this up through the next couple of stress tests.