Copied from Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/DestinyTheGame/comments/69okdq/destiny_aiming_issues_and_requested_improvements/ Hello everybody. This is a post illustrating some of the aiming issues Destiny has and improvements for the sequel that will improve the quality of the aiming controls and player accuracy. Many of the core aiming changes and options will basically be similar to Titanfall 2, so those that have played that should already know some of these options and mechanics. Deadzone: http://imgur.com/OlNMNKV Dotgraph: http://imgur.com/2fn06qn The deadzone was tested with a TitanOne device. The device has a resolution of -100 to 100, so there's some error with that on top of user error, which is most evident on the curved portion of the deadzone. You also might note that the acceleration jump(outer deadzone) extends outside of the deadzone graph in the dotgraph. This is actually a good thing, and how it should ideally be done with a squarish deadzone. To explain the colored graph more clearly, the blue regions are where no diagonal movement occurs. For example, any stick movement in the right blue segment will move perfectly(0 degrees) to the right. In the top blue section straight up(90 degrees), left(180), down(270). Destiny separates the acceleration jump in between the X and Y sections(like Halo does) and I can't easily test the vertical jump locations. It's very likely it's the same, but that's what the note mentions. [b][u]Core Issues/Options[/u][/b] [b]Deadzone[/b] So getting to the actual issues in Destiny, we'll start with the deadzone. There are two main issues with this. The first, and arguably the most important, is it's non-circular. This creates two sub issues, the first of which is that it requires more diagonal movement to cross the deadzone that cardinal. So for Destiny, pure cardinal movements are a 24% deadzone, full diagonal(45') are functionally 28%. The second sub issue, is the missing diagonal movement. This loss of diagonal movement is due to the square deadzone and this makes accessing subtle diagonals difficult. Even if the full range of diagonal movement is shifted and preserved, with these ranges you essentially have to "overshoot" the correct angle to see diagonal movement, and just in general this gap of diagonal movement makes aiming clunky. The second main issue is the size of the deadzone. 24% is average for many games, but it's huge, and makes it very difficult to easily make precise movements. The change for this is simply to add a slider for the size. Now, while I've mentioned the squarish shape is an issue, it's possible to give the player an option to select either. A "rounded square" deadzone is simply a circular deadzone built on top of a square deadzone. Destiny's deadzone is very slightly different from that, but it would take very little effort to convert it. Done that way, giving separate values from 0-25% for the square and circular deadzone would allow players to customize the exact type of deadzone they want to use. While I'd argue circular deadzones are objectively the best, the missing diagonal ranges may help players keep their cursor perfectly horizontal. For example, I've done this in Unreal Engine 4 here: https://youtu.be/e5fsPRJubOw The square, circular and rounded square(set up to be the same as Destiny's) are on the same aiming system. Only a "squareDeadzone" and "circleDeadzone" value change. I only show some extremes, but any combination of values is possible. These options are most important for aiming, but I'm pretty sure these issues apply to both the movement and UI cursor controls as well, and these options would help those feel better too. [b] Acceleration[/b] The jump in acceleration is pretty common in games, but it can be jarring compared to the curve and since you don't have direct control over the acceleration time, it's more difficult to gauge twitch motions. This of course is subjective, and there are countless players who play extremely well as is, but some simple slider options would accommodate everybody. One is just the multiplier. This would go from 1x(disabled) to whatever it is, or some higher value. Hopefully incrementing is smaller values for control. If there are separate options for X/Y jumps, then both are requested. The other option would be the ramp up time, from 0(instant), to .05 or 1 in seconds. Both these would allow you to control how much edge acceleration you get, and how long it takes to see your speed max. The 'normal' acceleration is something that's very difficult to illustrate, but the diagonal acceleration is something that feels a bit off. This I'm sure is due in part with the missing diagonal movement(you can see the janky movements in the linked video comparison), and may be the only actual issue with it, but there may be something else. It's possible the slightly different "rounded edges" of the deadzones are responsible for this(the outer deadzone is the right shape, but the inner circle seems to be a bit squashed), but if the deadzone was changed to a formal rounded square, the any other potential issue would disappear(acceleration range and the deadzone can be created in the same step[s]). I'm not sure what curve Bungie's using for it, and there's seemingly nothing particularly wrong about it, but it could use options. I'm always an advocate for using power functions, because and option for the degree gives you a great amount of control over the acceleration curve(this is what Titanfall 2's option does). Having this option would allow players to make their acceleration curve as precise as they could want it. Of course, it doesn't have to be a power function, but any options to control it are requested. [b]Interactive Graph[/b] https://www.desmos.com/calculator/or7b8bh4tz I've put together a graph of what some of these options would look like, with the default deadzone being Destiny's current setup. The colors represent the same thing as the graph I made above. The shading overlaps a bit, but anything red is the deadzone. The "c" circular deadzone value is relative to the remaining range from the square deadzone to the outer deadzone, so the square and circular deadzone don't directly add up. The values "d" and "b" aren't relevant to these requests. "d" restricts diagonal movement by angles rather than axes, and "b" is a slight augment to a power function. Higher degree functions are overly precise, and the value can add a linear curve that meets up with the power function. Misc Options [b]Separate X and Y sensitivities[/b] We should have both. This one, gives you more control over your sensitivity, and two, in almost any game an unequal X/Y ratio means the diagonal movement is incorrect. That can have it's uses, and there is a fix for that, but it's easiest to just add another option. Outer Deadzone This isn't a major issue because it's not wasting much space, but it'd be a nice option to have for the players that need it(the Halo community refers to these as "slow turn"). Aim Assist Aim assist needs options, at the very least the "sticky" portion. Whether it's a toggle or a slider, either work, and hopefully with 2 separate options. The reticle slowdown is jarring, and easily the biggest issue I had throughout my time in Destiny. I would love to play without having to adapt to a switched sensitivity every other second. It'd be nice to disable this for the cursor controls too. Tracking would just be nice so you're aim wouldn't be dragged off when you don't want it. Bullet magnetism could use one too, but that's not intrusive, so that's not pressing. And it's bound to the weapons, so it may affect balancing. TL:DR * Change deadzone shape to circular and at size options, OR, add size options for square and circular deadzone sizes. * Add options for the multiplier(X/Y if relevant) and ramp up time for the acceleration jump. * Some options for the acceleration curve. If a power function, offer the degree. * Separate X/Y sensitivities * Outer deadzone size options * Aim assist options: slowdown, rotation * Separate deadzone options for cursor and movement. [b][u]Console and PC Balancing[/u][/b] I don't care to see a platform/device argument arise around this section, but there's been some talk about the PC version and separate balancing and I'm going to throw my two cents in. Personally, with these options, I don't think balancing needs to be different between the platforms. With that I mean both gun damage, spread and bullet magnetism. With idealized controls, I don't think bullet magnetism is necessary at all. The only platform specific balancing that I'd imagine should be added are changes in the "sticky" aim assist. Of course, any details will have to been seen when the game actually comes out, but I think improving the controls and editing sticky aim assist values are easier than editing gun values. Conclusion Well that was a wall of text. Thanks for reading, and feel free to add things of your own.