Hand covering and the rifle

[NetJedi]

It's always kind of bugged me that the hands holding the rifle are always bare regardless of what hand cover is worn. Then I got to thinking that it would be hard to use the rifle with, say, fleece mittens. Maybe that should be the mechanic. Maybe if you hold the rifle, you remove whatever hand cover you have on and are at risk of frostbite. 

It would mean no more walking around for the entire day with the rifle at the ready, which is itself not very realistic. You could even have the game automatically put the last hand covering back on when the rifle is stowed so the player doesn't have to do it manually each time. And it would only affect the rifle, you can use a bow even with mittens. Plus, it would make the bare hands animation make perfect sense.

Just a thought.

[Jigsawn]

It does break the immersion a bit when you see the character holding stones and other weapons bare-handed when they should be wearing gloves, especially when it's freezing cold and frostbite is imminent. I suspect it would be a fair amount of work to have all the glove types shown in the game. They would need to be modelled separately so they work in the first person viewpoint, and probably the weapon animations would need tweaking to avoid clipping. This is probably why they don't show it.

I like the idea though, I'd even be up for you going barehanded and getting the relevant cold penalty/ frostbite risk whenever you ready a weapon/flare, regardless of if you have gloves. It would add a layer of risk/reward - do you keep the weapon ready in a blizzard when you know wolves are around, or leave it till the last second to save your fingers. Problem is then the unrealistic argument becomes even stronger with players asking "why can't I even wear my biker gloves to chuck this stone?".

 

[XaldinVii]

I agree it would be a ton of work to model for ever type of glove in the game. Maybe if you are wearing gloves there can be just one default set of gloves the game shows you wearing. That way you still see gloves even if they aren't the ones your wearing.

[UpUpAway95]

How about if they introduced a standard set of glove liners to the game, so that the view is always not of a bare hand but of a hand wearing the glove liners.  These then would just stay on underneath any style of mitt or glove, with the exception of the driving gloves (which would only go over the bare hands). 

The liners could be automatically and always found with the first pair of mitts or gloves found in the game that are not driving gloves.  That is, not actually shown but assumed to exist inside the mitts or gloves you find and automatically put on when the player puts on a pair of mitts or gloves that are not driving gloves.

The liners could offer a slightly better warmth bonus than the driving gloves as well.  If the player does use a weapon before obtaining the liners (by finding some mitts or gloves that are not driving glove), then the view would show either the driving gloves (if the player has those on) or bare hands.  Otherwise, the view would show the weapon being held with liners only (and the assumption is that the outer mitt or glove has been temporarily taken off whenever the weapon was equipped in order to manipulate the weapon. 

With a weapon equipped, the warmth given to the hands would only be that of the liners or driving gloves, as applicable.

[Moll]

Nah, the most simple way is to allow use weapons without gloves only. You wanna shoot? take off cozy gloves.

[Willy Pete]

This really all boils down to game mechanics and the character model not changing with clothing. I agree with moll on the alternative, though. Simply adding a "You can't use this item while wearing gloves" or something of that nature for the bow/rifle if wearing mitts or other more cumbersome gloves. Could give the driving gloves a purpose as you should be able to use both items with those or other fingered gloves.