SP - General [Adjustable request] An independent FOV for weapons in first person view

[Terco_Viejo]

Currently in Bannerlord we can adjust the model's camera zoom when we have the third person view selected by pressing the + or - keys without affecting the FOV.

On the other hand, the many of us who sometimes use first-person view have difficulty visualizing the weapons held by the avatar's limbs or they make it difficult for us to see (a large shield blocks our view).

Another problem associated with this issue is the deformation (warp/fish-eye effect) produced in configurations of >80 FOV (I don't understand why there is so much vertical barrel deformation with your panini projection). As a result of all this and a recent thread in which we talked about the first-person view, I was curious to "fiddle around" with the monsters file parameters. After the attempt I share in nexus a small tweak (please, for this purpose allow me the spam: First Person View Tweak) that makes the first person view a little more decongested, allowing a visibility for the combat on foot and mounted, in my opinion much more broad.

A little comparison:

Having said all this, my question to Taleworlds is: could an independant FOV adjustable be implemented just for weapons? An slide in the settings menu under the "general" FOV that would only deal with how the weapons are shown and in-game with the first person view activated would be controlled with + or - keys.

If we look back and remember Crysis, it had this option. I took this example because this game showed the full body character in 1st person the same way M&B does.



There are different games that through their interface or through modifications, reproduce what we are dealing with here. In this case, a video of Doom Eternal demonstrating this function by hand of Flawless widescreen application.



I open this thread in the SP section, however this function might be extended to the MP mode in the same way.

 

[dijiTurk]

Could you make a detailed comparition with a video that half of screen shows modded one, and other side normal one? Same place, same armor but different equipments to see in both ways at every attack&block animations. I need this to realize and understand thread better.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Could you make a detailed comparition with a video that half of screen shows modded one, and other side normal one? Same place, same armor but different equipments to see in both ways at every attack&block animations. I need this to realize and understand thread better.

The point is I'm trying to make is to convince Taleworlds; I'm afraid you'll have to be content with the mod/tweak and the images.

 

[MRay]

Hey @Terco_Viejo , if I understood you correctly, you moved the camera/eye position up and back a bit. I have two questions so I can better understand your point of view:

1. I'm trying to justify an adjustable input this eye position option(coz you said "independant FOV adjustable"), since if this version is quantifiably better, why the need to be able to change it?
2. Did you check the weapon accuracy? Are the bow arrows more or less accurate compared to the previous version, with crosshair as the intended target in the short range?

 

[Terco_Viejo]

@emrozdemir

The tweak is like you said, it's that simple. Basically I wanted to achieve a higher degree of visibility of the limbs and thus a higher precision when using the weapons (better visibility on foot, much better improvement on mount). For example with a standard FOV, if we use a round sturgian shield; it's really complicated to see what's in front of you (and around)

Basically to give the user the possibility to configure that view; as implemented in the third person (+/- keys). There are people who like to play with a wide fov as it is my experience; however there are people who don't. In standard configurations of 1920x1080p the optimal fov would be around >85-100; the current problem is the position of the head, it doesn't have a neck. If we add this to the barrel deformation that the fov suffers in configurations of >90; the first-person experience is compromised.

The bow accuracy in the tweak is the same (it seems to me). Having a slightly higher view, I'd say it even makes it easier to aim.

The reason for this request is because with your current configuration the extremities are too hidden when the camera is looking at the front. If we use a FOV of 100 for example, the deformation that appears may be a little uncomfortable. And having an adjustable for this would provide a better customization for the user (just like the view in 3rd person - everyone has their own preferences).

To sum up, it would be interesting to have a weapon scaling modifier without altering the depth of field. Check this out:



Basically, first-person vision requires (imo) greater visibility of the extremities. In my opinion something halfway between this modification for warband and Dying Light (fps with full body view).

The limbs have a higher visibility, therefore more control and better accuracy. Min 1:44 (recover the deathcam in first person in Bannerlord please)	The whole extension of the weapon is framed in the screen. The vertical deformation (head-up-down rotation) is much less with an FOV 100 in Dying Light (fast and frantic fighting game like yours) compared to Bannerlord.

Keeping extremities visible is vital (POV Head)​

There are numerous threads that talk about it, however I provide you with the link to the last thread where different users comment on their impressions regarding the first person view. (Link)

I hope all this is helpful and thank you for commenting.

 

[Memoefe]

Hey @Terco_Viejo , if I understood you correctly, you moved the camera/eye position up and back a bit. I have two questions so I can better understand your point of view:

1. I'm trying to justify an adjustable input this eye position option(coz you said "independant FOV adjustable"), since if this version is quantifiably better, why the need to be able to change it?
2. Did you check the weapon accuracy? Are the bow arrows more or less accurate compared to the previous version, with crosshair as the intended target in the short range?

Hi emre, bannerlord just like other mb games is a mediaeval rpg simulation, it can be arcady sometimes but thats understandable. However there is definitely a special place for third person view i think this game could benefit greatly by tweaking its fps mode. I mean don't get me wrong but current fps mode has little if any thought put behind it.

I listed some of the core problems in another thread but not all have to be addressed. But please at least talk about what could be done in this regard.

Here is my post in that thread.

Spoiler

And I was Just trying to upload few pictures to show my point.

In these ones, animation-wise the player has literally nothing (except tiny arrows but since fps mode's purpose is to increase immersion this is a bad thing) to inform him/herself which is the swing direction up/down/left/right.

Spoiler: Direction attacks

In these ones, first one is default look when the player picks bow, other than cross symbol and bow symbol at right bottom in the middle, player doesn't have any clue of what he/she holds. Second one however happens when player holds right mouse button, look how informative it looks. Do you see the difference?

Spoiler: Bow position

And lastly graphical problems, generally texture quality in bannerlord is not the best but it does the job and honestly large scale battles high quality textures and models do bad more than good. However in close up view this can be irritating. Maybe devs should make high poly and better textured arm and weapon models for fps. In first photo chainmail textures need a bump map to prevent it from looking 'flat'. In second one look at the ropes of shield and edges of arm model, it needs to be more detailed in terms of polygon count. And last two is example for clipping issues.

Spoiler: Texture, models and clip problems

Again I know this seems like a nitpick but, if they were just a bit better you would see it is worth it.

 

[MRay]

@Terco_Viejo Ok, I mean this looks good to me I'll talk to the person who's in charge of this stuff and I'll show this to him. But no promises

Thank you for the post and your effort, it shows

 

[Terco_Viejo]

@Terco_Viejo Ok, I mean this looks good to me I'll talk to the person who's in charge of this stuff and I'll show this to him. But no promises

Thank you for the post and your effort, it shows

Thank you for your attention and for sharing this feedback with your colleagues in the studio.

 

[Faranox]

Great post Terco, I'm downloading this right now.
First person view has been in an atrocious state since I started playing Bannerlord and it makes me so sad.
While I'm here I'll +1 the suggestion to keep kill cams in first person on death, much like Warband.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Great post Terco, I'm downloading this right now.
First person view has been in an atrocious state since I started playing Bannerlord and it makes me so sad.
While I'm here I'll +1 the suggestion to keep kill cams in first person on death, much like Warband.

Thanks my boi!
Most users are inclined to play in 3rd person; however there are a large number of players who play in 1st person. The proposal is really simple and more or less in line with what the previous titles offered. The FOV addition to the weapon is to provide "quality of life" to the user so that everyone can configure the game and its immersion to their liking.

I particularly keep a special nostalgic remembrance for a special game, previous to chivalry-mordhau-KCD styles...etc; Dark Messiah of Might and Magic.

A similar approach that combines these concepts with the potential that Bannerlord has with directional attack/blocking (+ mod shield equity ) + weapon FOV + global FOV; oh mama.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

In spite of the small fix that resulted in Taleworlds' first-person view modification; through this comparative test it seems that there is still room for improvement. (check this out please @emrozdemir).


Warband (0:00-0:22) / Bannerlord current Native (0:22-0:44) / Bannerlord modified (0:44-1:08 )

Also, this first-person view would still need to incorporate the "death camera"

(*see warband part) and bring back the fading effect on the ranged reticle (in my opinion much more interesting that it is activated and therefore visible when it is used; when not, it is hidden)

 

[Lusitani 5th Empire]

Warband (0:00-0:22) / Bannerlord current Native (0:22-0:44) / Bannerlord modified (0:44-1:08 )

One thing I would like to see is an adjustment to the position of the bow in relation to the aim sight, both in native Bannerlord and in the presented modified version.

Native version
The aiming looks like you are properly aiming (I mean, the camera lines up closer with the arm), but also you have no neck and the bow and the arrow position makes it look like you are going to shoot more to the left (moving the bow, string and arrow closer to your "face" and lining up would give a better perception of where your shot is going, remove the aim sight and you know what I mean).

Modified version
Looks ok but now you are really not aiming the same way, the bow is further down, which is ok because now the bow looks correctly distanced from the camera (your right arm is further down and more laterally distanced from the camera, good because anatomy works this way...) The arrow looks kinda thicc and too close to your face compared to the position of the string (doesn't look like it's "locked" on the string). The problem I mentioned of the native version (bow and arrow position makes it look like you are going to shoot more to the left) is aggravated, imo.
Warband solved this problem by moving the camera to the left and having the arrow more parallel and closer to the arm.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

One thing I would like to see is an adjustment to the position of the bow in relation to the aim sight, both in native Bannerlord and in the presented modified version.

Native version
The aiming looks like you are properly aiming (I mean, the camera lines up closer with the arm), but also you have no neck and the bow and the arrow position makes it look like you are going to shoot more to the left (moving the bow, string and arrow closer to your "face" and lining up would give a better perception of where your shot is going, remove the aim sight and you know what I mean).

Modified version
Looks ok but now you are really not aiming the same way, the bow is further down, which is ok because now the bow looks correctly distanced from the camera (your right arm is further down and more laterally distanced from the camera, good because anatomy works this way...) The arrow looks kinda thicc and too close to your face compared to the position of the string (doesn't look like it's "locked" on the string). The problem I mentioned of the native version (bow and arrow position makes it look like you are going to shoot more to the left) is aggravated, imo.
Warband solved this problem by moving the camera to the left and having the arrow more parallel and closer to the arm.

But for that you should correct the position of the bow (it's crooked NY gangsta pew pew style) and also the animation... With the modification, the view is much less congested, there are almost no clipping glitches, the arrow goes where it marks the reticle and you're able to see forward when you carry a shield while keeping your guard with it.

Honestly both the 1st and 3rd view threads are an attempt to adjust the cameras as much as possible to what we had in Warband...

 

[Terco_Viejo]

@emrozdemir ...I'm sorry I've been tagging you lately with this topic ? .

The fact is that as a result of these last tests I have been able to observe that the relationship of draw posture with the position of the bow differs from the moment of mounted and ranged. Is this type of bow tilt (mounted) a design decision? Wouldn't a straighter posture like the one you guys used to have in Warband be more appropriate?

In the case that this observation and suggestion could lead to a change of stance in the animation and consequently a change in the cameras, I would like to refer you to @nGabor thread where he gave you feedback regarding this issue (Archery animation: issues and suggestions ).

 

[Memoefe]

Btw I just wanna say I dont think warband's first person view is any good either. I dont think the problem with m&b's fps mode is only about fov.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Btw I just wanna say I dont think warband's first person view is any good either. I dont think the problem with m&b's fps mode is only about fov.

We are in the same boat mate . If you think of something that can motivate a change for the better, contribute through good feedback here or if you prefer by a new thread.

 

[Lusitani 5th Empire]

In the case that this observation and suggestion could lead to a change of stance in the animation and consequently a change in the cameras, I would like to refer you to @nGabor thread where he gave you feedback regarding this issue (Archery animation: issues and suggestions ).

That thread is the real deal! His other thread https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...o-the-actual-flight-path-of-the-arrow.396042/ is what I meant by the

bow and arrow position makes it look like you are going to shoot more to the left

I find amazing the quality of of the threads some of this guys post. Just imagine what is buried on the forums.

 

[Memoefe]

I honestly think we did best of our capabilities to point out the problems and solutions. I don't like saying same things over and over again but probably that is the only way to get their attention, thus I would.

If I prioritize the problems I would say :

1. Animation

In fps its important for players to see what he/she does at any frame of time (like in the dark messiah, player can always see the katana or some part of the character). In Bannerlord player almost never knows where the weapon is what is going on with the character etc. There should be tweaks or rework to the animation while player is in fps mode. If the animation happens to be different than its tps version I don't think that would be a problem since there are many examples of that issue not being a problem.

In these ones, animation-wise the player has literally nothing (except tiny arrows but since fps mode's purpose is to increase immersion this is a bad thing) to inform himself/herself which is the swing direction (up/down/left/right).

Spoiler: Direction attacks

In these ones, first one is default look when the player picks bow, other than cross symbol and bow symbol at right bottom in the middle, player doesn't have any clue of what he/she holds. Second one however happens when player holds right mouse button, look how informative it looks. Do you see the difference?

Spoiler: Bow position

2. Fov

This is in the second priority because its relatively easier. Terco did a pretty good job explaining that I suppose.

3. Model/texture quality

Model and texture quality of armors and weapons are ok for tps camera, but when the camera is so close to the models they are pretty bad. shoulder, arm part of the armors and some weapon details need to be improved.

Spoiler

Maybe they are working on it who knows. Worst case scenario is waiting for a throughout mode about this matter. Which fixed fov, animations, modelling, clipping and other problems.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Yeah!

 

[Terco_Viejo]

That thread is the real deal! His other thread https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...o-the-actual-flight-path-of-the-arrow.396042/ is what I meant by the
[...]

That thread is gold, I hadn't seen it (thanks for sharing). I totally agree with his feedback.
A complementary video about the bow tilt/canter