How would you create a good marksmanship simulation?

[micrometers]

I don't like games like Call of Duty or Medal of Honor because to me they don't feel that different from those arcade games where you shot up enemies as they popped up.

Even less so, since with lcd tech "light gun" aiming is not possible, so you're just manuvering a cursor around.

But...what if there were a system where you hold like a mock rifle that has two accelerometers built into it, one in front and one in back.

And those accelerometers are accurate, picking up your slightest move.

It would make marksmanship really interesting, no?

 

[Childs]

There is the Ultimate Battlefield 3 Simulator that The Gadget Show built.

Aiming is at 4:12.

 

[micrometers]

How about like a system where you handled a light gun or sorts, and manuver your character around with your feet? I could see this happening with the kinect for instance.

 

[Andy T]

They exist, but not for home use. Military and LE use "decision simulators" which employ real guns modified to work off of CO2 that provide a little feeling of recoil. Military simulator
Honestly, if you are aiming to improve marksmanship get a .22 or an air rifle and join a rifle club. Dry firing at home will also help.
While I would love a game that would allow me to use a replica rifle to aim, etc...there are just too many issues to make it doable at a home setting.

 

[12andy]

Airsoft

 

[micrometers]

Airsoft

It would be cool to have something simulate the physical handling of weapons while giving you the digital richness that can be had.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Go to range, rent firearm of choice, buy ammo, BANG!

 

[Craig234]

One choice is whether to make the game 'physics based'. That will determine what the player does to aim.

Some gameplay:

- one of the biggest issues in aiming at a still target is breathing. How to put that in gameplay? One idea: a moving wave where the player has to keep the mouse 'steady'.

- normal aiming at a static target. One idea in a non-physics design: have the computer move the gun a little and the player has to counter these moves to keep it 'aimed'.

- Find a way to do both of the above at the same time - say, one with each hand.

- Do you want just still targets, or moving like Skeet? Different gameplay.

- How about long distance 'sniper sim'?

Something like a police/military training sim where you go in a room and targets flash, do you shoot the bad guy or is it an innocent person?

It's not that easy to make such a simple activity all that 'fun'. Think 'bowling game' - but that has been done where people enjoy it, take a look at it.

Do you want a straightforward game, or one with things like good music and maybe some more animation, even 'fantasy' like talking targets?

For variety consider how to use different guns and have them be different playing, pros and cons. Of course, have things like 'achievments', stats.

Do you want the game to be 'educational'? Show the choices and making of bullets? The function of parts of guns? Commentary from gunmakers, olympic shooters?

Is this aimed at 'sim' players and serious shooters, or a general 'fun' audience? Kids?

Just like some chess games have hundreds of sets, how about different settings? Targets? Other players with voiced dialoge, like a poker sim?

I suspect it's not that easy to make a marketable marksman game, just like 'bowling'. I don't think I'd want to play one. So the heavy sim, educational, commentary parts seem like they might be good draws (ha, ha) for the game to the gun enthusiasts. I'd avoid things in poor taste like human targets, but that advice is what I think it right to do and might be against what could be a gameplay that would be right on target for good sales.

 

[Bulldog13]

Red Orchestra 1/2 does this pretty well. Its no Arma, but better than the usual shooters.

 

[Kalmah]

I'm thinking maybe a dual joystick or dual mouse setup could be interesting. You would have to coordinate each joystick together, one for each arm.

Perhaps some kind of tiredness indicator bar, the more tired you are the less steady you are.

Turn reloading into a minigame instead of a mindless push 'r' to reload? Maybe using the keypad on the right of your keyboard with a little diagram on screen simulating the actions involved to reload your weapon. 7 to open the chamber, 3 to grab ammo, 9 to push in ammo... shit I don't know how guns work. lol.

 

[micrometers]

I'm thinking maybe a dual joystick or dual mouse setup could be interesting. You would have to coordinate each joystick together, one for each arm.

Perhaps some kind of tiredness indicator bar, the more tired you are the less steady you are.

Turn reloading into a minigame instead of a mindless push 'r' to reload? Maybe using the keypad on the right of your keyboard with a little diagram on screen simulating the actions involved to reload your weapon. 7 to open the chamber, 3 to grab ammo, 9 to push in ammo... shit I don't know how guns work. lol.

Yeah, it would be more like guitar hero.

 

[Kalmah]

Yeah, it would be more like guitar hero.

If done in a good way, it would take some skill to do. It would also make you think twice about conserving ammo/when and where you are going to reload.

Practice until you re ninja at that shit.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Yeah, it would be more like guitar hero.

Yeah, we could call it Reload Hero.

Seriously, if you've never played Socom: Confrontation then you don't know how annoying a cumbersome reload really is...and it is very unrealistic. I could reload 4 clips in the time it takes to reload one in Socom.

 

[Phanuel]

The level of people who have never handled a firearm in this thread is astounding.

Holding a rifle? Right hand does the aiming, left hand just manipulates a trigger. Stock is shoved into your shoulder and requires no thought. Sight alignment - sight picture is what matters. Short distance, trigger manipulation can be utter crap and not make a difference. 50+ yards it starts to matter again.

Holding a pistol? Both hands are gripped together and move as one, only the trigger manipulation really matters along with a proper grip and not anticipating the shot or flinching (dry firing practice is what improves this).

Reloading is not at all complicated. And shouldn't be made into multiple buttons, that's just completely asinine. It's also a relatively fast ordeal as long as the operator is trained and is pretty much automatic. The only realistic thing that could be put back into 'military' shooters is that topping off of a magazine is either a speed reload (dump the existing mag and rounds) or a tactical reload (save the magazine and round count but you never refill that magazine, so at some point during a reload you only get a partial magazine back into the gun).

 

[Zargon]

Holding a rifle? Right hand does the aiming, left hand just manipulates a trigger.

silly lefty!!!

 

[12andy]

While we're still working towards a fully commercialized, affordable VR-glasses solution, I think airsoft is a great way to take military-based "gaming" to the next level.

Gas blowback guns - notably rifles - are about as close as one could get to their real life counterparts; they require tonnes of maintenance, are loud (as loud as Tippman paintball markers), have bolt catches and mag releases, and have recoil.

IMO, marksmanship is a whole 'nother ballgame when you're being shot at as well.

 

[diesbudt]

The level of people who have never handled a firearm in this thread is astounding.

Holding a rifle? Right hand does the aiming, left hand just manipulates a trigger. Stock is shoved into your shoulder and requires no thought. Sight alignment - sight picture is what matters. Short distance, trigger manipulation can be utter crap and not make a difference. 50+ yards it starts to matter again.

Holding a pistol? Both hands are gripped together and move as one, only the trigger manipulation really matters along with a proper grip and not anticipating the shot or flinching (dry firing practice is what improves this).

Reloading is not at all complicated. And shouldn't be made into multiple buttons, that's just completely asinine. It's also a relatively fast ordeal as long as the operator is trained and is pretty much automatic. The only realistic thing that could be put back into 'military' shooters is that topping off of a magazine is either a speed reload (dump the existing mag and rounds) or a tactical reload (save the magazine and round count but you never refill that magazine, so at some point during a reload you only get a partial magazine back into the gun).

You also never close an eye to aim and bring your head to gun level so your vision and the barrel of the gun are parallel.

 

[12andy]

You also never close an eye to aim and bring your head to gun level so your vision and the barrel of the gun are parallel.

Red dot sight = God's gift to shooters

 

[Phanuel]

silly lefty!!!

Derp, yeah swap that. I'm a normal person with a right eye dominance.

You also never close an eye to aim and bring your head to gun level so your vision and the barrel of the gun are parallel.

I don't close an eye while shooting pistol or rifle. Rifle has a red dot on it. I only close an eye while doing long range shooting, and even then, the eye is only closed briefly to focus that eye on the target and then the other eye is opened again to regain peripheral vision.

I'm not sure what you mean by "bring your head to gun level so your vision and the barrel of the gun are parallel." My cheek is definitely against the stock for a proper cheek weld, what else would I do? Sights are designed to really only function with proper sight alignment - sight picture.

 

[diesbudt]

Red dot sight = God's gift to shooters

Yes, although its accuracy varies with distance and gun type/barrel length, as the red dot normally is exactly on approximately X yards (Dependant on gun and calibrated red dot), since it ever so slightly points downwards by a few degrees.

Much closer, its probably going to hit below the red dot, much farther above the red dot.

Gods gift to shooters are remote controllable missiles that can be driven almost like an RC car. (Which a group of people have been working on doing the same thing with bullets out of a gun)

 

[Phanuel]

Yes, although its accuracy varies with distance and gun type/barrel length, as the red dot normally is exactly on approximately X yards (Dependant on gun and calibrated red dot), since it ever so slightly points downwards by a few degrees.

Much closer, its probably going to hit below the red dot, much farther above the red dot.

Accuracy has nothing to do with barrel length in a rifle. Barrel length determines projectile speed due to time allowed for complete propellant burn (longer is usually faster as it has more time to build speed and burn powder).

Barrel quality and ammunition quality definitely affect accuracy though.

You second point, that's just a height over bore issue and has nothing to do with electronic sights at all, know your holds.

My red dot is co-witnessed with my back up iron sights so they'll shoot the same point of aim - point of impact at their respective zero (100 yards in my case). Parallax will play into a red dot or holo graphic sight of course at extended ranges. But for most normal engagement ranges, 0-200 yards, both irons and an electronic should be spot on. And if they aren't, you have some issues.

 

[diesbudt]

Derp, yeah swap that. I'm a normal person with a right eye dominance.



I don't close an eye while shooting pistol or rifle. Rifle has a red dot on it. I only close an eye while doing long range shooting, and even then, the eye is only closed briefly to focus that eye on the target and then the other eye is opened again to regain peripheral vision.

I'm not sure what you mean by "bring your head to gun level so your vision and the barrel of the gun are parallel." My cheek is definitely against the stock for a proper cheek weld, what else would I do? Sights are designed to really only function with proper sight alignment - sight picture.

That was more for the "gansters" that think you can just raise a pistol up and shoot with great accuracy without bringing your face close to the gun to get a good accurate view of whats downside the barrel. Most/all guns with barrels (especially long range) is pretty much a "duh" to do that, but you would be surprised...

One except to aiming like that is if you bring out an automatic like an assault rifle, in which you can just gun things down, F*** accuracy!

 

[diesbudt]

Accuracy has nothing to do with barrel length in a rifle. Barrel length determines projectile speed due to time allowed for complete propellant burn (longer is usually faster as it has more time to build speed and burn powder).

Barrel quality and ammunition quality definitely affect accuracy though.

You second point, that's just a height over bore issue and has nothing to do with electronic sights at all, know your holds.

My red dot is co-witnessed with my back up iron sights so they'll shoot the same point of aim - point of impact at their respective zero (100 yards in my case). Parallax will play into a red dot or holo graphic sight of course at extended ranges. But for most normal engagement ranges, 0-200 yards, both irons and an electronic should be spot on. And if they aren't, you have some issues.

Right that would be a calibration issue with the sight. Also you can adjust the red dot on most guns now adays to adjust for distance. However if you don't, because how it is set up, it won't be as accurate. And by accurate I mean dead on the dot. Most times a bullet will be off by about 1/4-1/2 inch or more because of the red dot not being adjusted or calibrated. And for longer shots, gravity and wind resistance and air speed play an effect.

 

[Phanuel]

Right that would be a calibration issue with the sight. Also you can adjust the red dot on most guns now adays to adjust for distance. However if you don't, because how it is set up, it won't be as accurate. And by accurate I mean dead on the dot. Most times a bullet will be off by about 1/4-1/2 inch or more because of the red dot not being adjusted or calibrated. And for longer shots, gravity and wind resistance and air speed play an effect.

Ok, what you're referring to is when you shooting at distances that are not your zero'd distance. Then yes, the bullet path follows an arc due to gravity. So we set up the rifle or pistol so that bullet travels upward to meet our designated aiming point that we zero at, and then usually in the smaller calibers starts falling back to earth. So you need to understand your holds (where to hold the dot at a given range) to compensate for the expected difference between where the aiming point is and where the bullet is in its trajectory arc.

Most 0x magnified sights are only set to a zero and then left alone. When you move into longer range, 400+ yards/meters/etc then you start getting magnified optics with exposed adjustments, turrets usually, and you start using ballistic calculators or DOPE (Data Obtained on Previous Engagements) data to adjust your scope to meet where the bullet should be impacting at a specific range to increase your accuracy. Holding your target in space is generally less accurate than putting some crosshairs on it.


Honestly, the two main issues with making a realistic simulator for rifle or pistol shooting on a console or PC are 1) recoil management and all of the problems that come with that, flinching, shot anticipation, bad posture/positioning and 2) trigger control. Everything else you do while shooting is pretty basic stuff.

 

[12andy]

Sorry, guess I should've expanded my thoughts further.

What I meant was that the dot is definitely a boon in terms of quick target acquisition (ie. sighting a "foe" while on the run, etc.).