What a tracer should look like (before spazzing just look).

[ElAurens]

And now we get to the crux of this issue.

Gamers, like winney, want SFX, and will totally discount a professional's real world experience.

There is no room for Hollywood SFX in a simulation.

I can't wait for the new sound engine and complaints that the weapons don't sound right. Well, here is a clue to start chomping on, firearms in movies sound nothing like real weapons being fired.

Thank you SYN_Bliss for your post and putting sanity into this issue.

[/thread].

[winny]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

And now we get to the crux of this issue.

Gamers, like winney, want SFX, and will totally discount a professional's real world experience.

There is no room for Hollywood SFX in a simulation.

I can't wait for the new sound engine and complaints that the weapons don't sound right. Well, here is a clue to start chomping on, firearms in movies sound nothing like real weapons being fired.

Thank you SYN_Bliss for your post and putting sanity into this issue.

[/thread].

No SFX? Ok, so just model dots of light. Tracer by it's very nature is an effect. If you're happy with the current tracers then fine. They do however, defy the laws of physics, but it's only a game.

I'n not arguing for hollywood, i'm arguing for realism. No amount of 'i've fired 1000's of tracers' type posts can change some very basic laws of the natural world.

[skouras]

if SFX can represent the RL
Then fine with me
i'm looking for a close as its gets not an arcade style good looking picture


Salute..

[ElAurens]

Winny, enough with the pseudo science OK?

You are lobbying for a special effect designed in the manner that pleases your eyes and perception. It doesn't seem to matter to you that many folks who have seen the real thing are arguing that what we have is basically correct. You want it your way.

Have you ever fired a weapon winny?

[Mysticpuma]

Hi El, can I just ask your opinion of my point above and also if you think from r/l that the tracers are too thick for their calibre and also if they should decay, losing brightness as they dirperse in the distance? Currently they all look too thick and perfect (imho) and show no visible decay while the tracer is burning, they all seem to burn out equally and vanish, surely it should have a more evident decay. MP

[bongodriver]

Why do people think that calibre is relevant, the point of light is a glow produced by a phosphor based substance, it burns bright and bigger than the calibre, that phosphor also burns at constant rate like a match so its all or nothing, it just burns and dies suddenly, and tracer rounds 'will' appear as a streak of light even if viewed from directly behind...at least initially when the round has just left the muzzle, when the round gets further down range the streak becomes a point and then it just dies.

[ElAurens]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Why do people think that calibre is relevant, the point of light is a glow produced by a phosphor based substance, it burns bright and bigger than the calibre, that phosphor also burns at constant rate like a match so its all or nothing, it just burns and dies suddenly, and tracer rounds 'will' appear as a streak of light even if viewed from directly behind...at least initially when the round has just left the muzzle, when the round gets further down range the streak becomes a point and then it just dies.

Thanks, saved me the trouble.

[winny]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

Thanks, saved me the trouble.

I never said there was no streak, just that its angle is off. That's all.

[winny]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

Winny, enough with the pseudo science OK?

You are lobbying for a special effect designed in the manner that pleases your eyes and perception. It doesn't seem to matter to you that many folks who have seen the real thing are arguing that what we have is basically correct. You want it your way.

Have you ever fired a weapon winny?

I have fired a weapon. Not that it matters, i was pretty stationary at the time thought.
It's not pseudo science. It's simple geometry.
It's not my way, it's physics.
I don't want it the way i described, i just suggested it.

If you can tell me which part of my pseudo science is wrong i'll happily admit i'm wrong.

[fireflyerz]

What a nana.