I’d be all for this, it’s just a matter of getting the right effect.
Ah… okay, yeah right, for sure. My bad.
I think its more a kind of example to express what he mean and how different helmets could be seen in first person, but you are correct, his examples are not correct for the era.
The fact is we already have an obscured view from our monitor. Humans have a very high field of view at almost 180 degrees (horizontally). Naturally, a screen can’t take up your entire cone of vision, and a usual field of view for games is around 90 degrees. I would imagine, that putting on a helmet only obscures your peripheral vision.
I would agree, that this concept would be possible, with the Rift. It’s able to simulate stereopsis, and a full field of view. It still can’t account for positional change of eyes, but that only has minor effect on vision.
But I don’t think that obstructing the players view with a flat image taped onto the screen is a good idea. I think this is a point, where you sacrifice fun for simulation. I also think, this would artificially inflate the difficulty, since it is next to impossible to simulate on AI.
1 Like
Yes, the helmet are no correct for the era, but the important is the concept, not the historicaly acuration 
Most of the helmets limit more in vertical, than horitzonal view. If your see the real helmets pics, and the image concept, the limitation is in the vertical view. Yes, exist some helmets with more restrictive horitzontal view, but if you have 90 FOV of monitor, and the helmet have 120 FOV, you not need make a helmet block image with all the hole for the eyes, only the part of the monitor FOV. This is not a problem with monitor FOV.
I not speaked about simple flat image, this image may be movement, reaction, as shown in the video ArmA2 or better. According to our movement, our attacks, and blocking enemy or blows, our picture of the helmet reacts.
I search for internet, and i think this is era correct, 1400.
1 Like
I’m all for implementing something like this, though it needs to be done like it is in Interstellar Marines with the visor of the helmet placed in front of the camera and not just some lame black decal placed over your screen. That way you can get really proper immersion with the Oculus Rift or other VR devices.
Needless to say you should also be able to raise your visor, and by having it actually be there instead of being a decal, you can see it in the top of your screen, as in IM.
2 Likes
“If the sight in medieval helmets were “that terrible” back than, they would have made them different.” - or they probably thought that giving up on some of the visibility is a fair trade when the alternate is the other guy using your eyeball as a cocktail cherry. 
I like the idea at first glance - I don’t know yet if it would be irritating, annoying in the long run. To be honest, I did not try too much of these helmets (I mainly fence in modern sport helmets with wire grids), but my experience is that limited field of view can and will screw over my distance perception. That’s usually a ‘slight’ problem in fencing, but at least I have a helmet…!
It also gives a good in-game reason for not running even to the toilet in full goddamned plate. In almost every other game, how can you identify a knight? He wears armor. Every time. Probably even on his wedding night. Gah!
2 Likes
I like the way the vision is blocked by the helmet during a combat situation. I’m sure it will be possible to open/ or put away the helmet when not fighting.
@PrasCo
I know that protection is more important than vision in this helmets, but I replied mainly to the pictures in the first post and not to the fact itself.
I agree with 213:
With all the due respect, I do not agree. Helmets are not ski masks, and also it is a possibility that most helmets were not tailored to one specific person, and his measurements of head. Padding also requires a surplus in extent, and keep in mind that you have to be able put on and take off your helmet, removable visor or not. Helmets also has to somewhat allow you the freedom of movement and breathing - the latter is not always self-evident, especially with relatively heavy and hot armor on which might have barely any ventillation and engaged in a long and exthausting combat and with the helmet itself potentially significantly obstruct the current of air; but is harder to model all this in a game than vision, if not impossible at all. To put it simply, eye slits in my opinion are not that close to your eyes.
Also, my point is - although it is purely subjective - helmets might have a more drastic influence on combat because of the partial loss of space/distance/depth perception and/or hearing, in general the ability to orientation than the plain reduction of the field of view directly.
It’s hard to explain, but in full helmet I often have trouble telling what’s going on on the side or the behind me, and I can’t really limit this problem purely on sight, since normally I don’t have eyes on my back either. By modeling this alienating, uncertain sensation, I am yet again fine with the OP’s concept.
But then again, it’s maybe that I’m just far too used to unarmoured fights, it would be good to hear of the opinion of a true canned meat as well. 
It’s probably worth the shot to get historically accurate data on helmets, and make simple models out of paper, for example, that’s something anyone can do without much effort and it might give a good impression.
2 Likes
That second helmet is not from the era, it’s from 100-110 years later.
The “Bazineto”, is the same of mine profile pic, also named Italian bascinet helmet.
I love it and was common here around Milan or in north Italy. A visor (face guard) was often employed from ca. 1330 to protect the exposed face. However the first recorded reference to a bascinet, or bazineto, was in the italian city of Padua (called Padova nowdays) in 1281, when it is described as being worn by infantry.
here this cool armor
Edit: to the OP: nice idea i like it
I think I like this kind of vision blocks… maybe even a little more stereoscopic one, so the black blurry effect in the middle spreads more to the sites. But I like this more blurry kind of effect.
I’d prefer to see an actual rendered helmet over your character’s head rather than a “cheap” filter. Compare original Operation Flashpoint iron sights with BF4 (disregard the time difference between these games, it’s only for showing the point).
But in general, I’m all for it, everything that would improve immersion without hampering the fun should be crammed in.
Little off-topic, but given the mobility of an armored knight and humans simply being humans, I’m fairly certain at least one knight in history had to have given armored sex a shot.
Yeah, Uther knows how it’s done.
Every time I see that scene all I can think of is the horror of pinched skin.
1 Like
As someone who Fights weekly in plate armor with the SCA (and I don’t use the modern bar helms) Visibility out of most helms sucks and did suck in period. The bascinet with the “hound skull” visor is especially bad because the vision slits are so far from the face. I like the idea of realistic helmet vision in the game but it takes a lot of getting used to and using your opponents body mechanics to tell you where his sword is, because most of the time you cant see it. I’m not sure if they can reach that level of fidelity with their animations.
Edit: Most of the OP’s attempts are close but with most period Helms take about and inch off the top and bottom of each pic and you would be close to the limited view. Side to side is usually good but up and down are very limited in any close Helm. Plus the vent holes give some light but are usually at such an angle to your eye that you cant really see through them with any real clarity.
1 Like
You should totally implement this at least as an option. Would help the immersion a lot, if you ask me.
I was about to write a thread on this myself, but used the search function instead. 
Perhaps that explains why foot soldiers almost never bothered with visors on their helmets. Only men-at-arms are commonly depicted with visors on their helmets and even they have it open a lot of the time. My theory is that it was only closed when charging with the lance and when confronted by a hail of missile weapons. Raising the visor for better sight and breathing outweighs losing protection on such a small part of your body. That would in turn also explain the predominance of head wounds shown by skeletons from medieval mass graves and the odd description here and there.
tha’ts because the average foot soldiers didn’t have access to that level of helmet
2 Likes
I believe one of the Burgundian ordennances specifically states infantry should get sallets without visors and mail collars for throat protection which doesn’t hamper breathing like a raised plate bevor would. That said very poorly made sallets with visors have been found. Keeping in mind the above average pay of many medieval soldiers in the later period I doubt a small movable piece of steel would add such a cost as to make it unavailable for the average foot soldier.
PS, here is an interesting article.
http://www.the-exiles.org/Article%20Towton.htm
The team was surprised to find no chest wounds. Although very few people could afford armor to protect themselves, most would have worn padded jackets. The head apparently was targeted. Nearly everyone wore helmets, but they “might have easily been dislodged with a hard blow,” said Novak. The skulls of many individuals showed healed head wounds from previous blows.
In addition to the information gleaned about the men’s battle scars, the University of Bradford team also documented histories of injuries on some individuals. Boylston said, “One man had a deeply piercing wound to the mandible, which he somehow survived, and it showed as a healed fracture. We also found trauma to the teeth, from the battle itself, and also previous trauma which suggested [some of the men] were using their teeth to string bows. Some of the men were archers. One skeleton [of an apparent archer] had a lesion on the elbow, such as you find in baseball players.”
THE soldier now known as Towton 25 had survived battle before. A healed skull fracture points to previous engagements. He was old enough—somewhere between 36 and 45 when he died—to have gained plenty of experience of fighting. But on March 29th 1461, his luck ran out.
Towton 25 suffered eight wounds to his head that day. The precise order can be worked out from the direction of fractures on his skull: when bone breaks, the cracks veer towards existing areas of weakness. The first five blows were delivered by a bladed weapon to the left-hand side of his head, presumably by a right-handed opponent standing in front of him. None is likely to have been lethal.
The next one almost certainly was. From behind him someone swung a blade towards his skull, carving a down-to-up trajectory through the air. The blow opened a huge horizontal gash into the back of his head—picture a slit you could post an envelope through. Fractures raced down to the base of his skull and around the sides of his head. Fragments of bone were forced in to Towton 25’s brain, felling him.
However
On the run from the battle, with Yorkist soldiers in pursuit (some of them doubtless on horseback), the men would have soon overheated. They may have removed their helmets as a result. Overhauled—perhaps in the vicinity of Towton Hall, which some think may then have been a Lancastrian billet—and disorientated, tired and outnumbered, their enemies would have had time to indulge in revenge
Or they simply threw helmets away at first chance.
http://www.eaines.com/archaeology/the-bioarchaeology-of-medieval-warfare/
Not only were archaeologists at all three sites able to determine which weapons produced which injuries in many cases, they were also able to detect weaknesses in armor and lack of adequate protection on certain parts of the body. For instance in Towton, only 33% of the perimortem trauma occurred below the neck, whereas all the other individuals in the grave had severe head injuries. This may indicate they did not have helmets, or that they had inadequate helmets (Novak, 2007). Similarly at Visby, such a large number of the dead exhibited injuries to their legs and heads that it was clear they did not have adequate armor and helmets to withstand the blows coming off the heavy Danish weapons