Dead-center weapons

People seem to forget that we have two eyes, and while you generally close one of them while you're steadily aim with a weapon, you generally don't do that when you're in a dog-fight.

My point is., unless you place your weapon under your nose, you will definitely still see it a bit angled.

kristus said:
My point is., unless you place your weapon under your nose, you will definitely still see it a bit angled.

If you shoot bursts in a pinch (as opposed to aiming carefully), you generally hold the weapon lower down, and if there is an angle there, it's negligible in relation to your view (the weapon might not even be steady). The angled weapon makes more sense when you're merely carrying it.

The AR in action doom, that seems to be about at least a more realistic position for the rifle. If more gun sprites were like that, then you'd have the ability to see plenty of detail on the gun AND have a more realistic aiming position.

There's a visual appeal factor too, centered weapons present no parallax on which to gauge form. To this day I still can't make out some details of Doom weapons (with the exception of those as the shotgun, plasma and chainsaw) simply because there's not a single hint of rotation for my brain to deduce shape out of.

Grab any common household item and look at it from dead-on top, front and side views, like a blueprint. They look "incomplete", and the brain has a hard time figuring them out spatially.

Zaldron said:
(with the exception of those as the shotgun, plasma and chainsaw)

It would be worse without the little inmap pickup sprites (where you see the Chaingun, Rocket launcher and the BFG9000 from the side, albeit in a very low level of detail). This does leave what's missing to the imagination, though.

But yes, the possibility to make 3D models for the weapons and to use greater resolutions must have encouraged the artists to want to show more of the weapons, while in DOOM, an early game, they merely wanted to give you a perspective (which was then taken more for granted in later FPSs). I bet in Quake they didn't bother to try putting them to the side as they were likely made rather quickly (they spent a great deal of time not agreeing what the game was going to be like), or maybe also liked the quickness those unloading weapons provided, balancing out any factors that may have been seen as possible slowdowns to the action, such as the new 3D movement functions.

Megalyth said:

Shooting from the hip looks cooler.

As opposed to shooting from your nostrils.

AndrewB said:

Really, people still play FPS games for fun? I occasionally play them for masochistic pleasure.

Depending on your definition of FPS there are still some good games left in the genre.

Zaldron said:

There's a visual appeal factor too, centered weapons present no parallax on which to gauge form. To this day I still can't make out some details of Doom weapons (with the exception of those as the shotgun, plasma and chainsaw) simply because there's not a single hint of rotation for my brain to deduce shape out of.

Grab any common household item and look at it from dead-on top, front and side views, like a blueprint. They look "incomplete", and the brain has a hard time figuring them out spatially.

Excactly, Ive always interpreted the sprite/animation as being a symbol which covers for the fact that It cant be aimed like a real gun in the simulation.