Widescreen Gaming Forum

[-noun] Web community dedicated to ensuring PC games run properly on your tablet, netbook, personal computer, HDTV and multi-monitor gaming rig.
It is currently 28 Mar 2024, 10:15

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Guild Wars
PostPosted: 02 May 2006, 15:24 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2005, 22:58
Posts: 1045


Widescreen Grade: C
Multi-monitor Grade: C

Read Full Detailed Report - Guild Wars

Guild Wars is an online game with some resemblance to Roleplaying games. It's quite popular, no doubt due to having to pay no monthly fees. The game offers an MMO experience in the different town, where the "countryside" and missions are "instanced."







Last edited by X-Warrior on 11 May 2013, 21:04, edited 3 times in total.
Edit


Top
 Profile  
 


PostPosted: 02 May 2006, 22:11 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders

Joined: 07 Nov 2005, 04:16
Posts: 3010
From those screenshots, the Vert- seems a LOT more profound than the Hor+.

About zooming the camera out, I've given this some thought thanks to the FAKK2 report, and I've realized that zooming out is not the same thing as increasing the FOV. While both of them have the effect of giving you more peripheral vision, zooming out affects depth perception too. Therefore, zooming out is not a substitute for having a wider FOV.

I am open to debate on this topic, but if there is none, I would say that the current MGL classification of Vert- should stay, giving Guild Wars a grade of C+.

A few other notes of lesser importance (fixing these won't change the grade one way or another):

==Game Information==

Do the two "campaigns" correspond to two different executables, or are they selectable from the same menu? If the latter, I think it would be more intuitive to just say that this information applies to Guild Wars as a whole - I can't think of any reason why information would apply to one campaign and not the other if they use the same executable and are essentially the same game.


==Supported Resolutions==

I don't like to assume certain resolutions are supported, especially not when it's possible to check for sure. If you have an nVidia card, you can test 1920x1200 resolution using this method.
I also noticed that 1280x800 isn't in the list.


==Singleplayer Anomalies==

It is unnecessary to mention HUD stretch (or lack of thereof) here. HUD stretch is common enough to get its own section, and can't really be considered an "anomaly." In fact, since Guild Wars is multiplayer-only, it's unnecessary to mention ANYTHING here except that it is multiplayer--only.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 May 2006, 13:06 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2005, 22:58
Posts: 1045
From those screenshots, the Vert- seems a LOT more profound than the Hor+.

This may be partly to blame on using 1280x1024 instead of 1280x960, causing the effect to appear stronger.

About zooming the camera out, I've given this some thought thanks to the FAKK2 report, and I've realized that zooming out is not the same thing as increasing the FOV. While both of them have the effect of giving you more peripheral vision, zooming out affects depth perception too. Therefore, zooming out is not a substitute for having a wider FOV.

I am open to debate on this topic, but if there is none, I would say that the current MGL classification of Vert- should stay, giving Guild Wars a grade of C+.

Interesting theory. But doesn't that only apply when there's some kind of distortion at the sides (like X3 has, should you know that game), like a fishbowl effect. In that case indeed it wouldn't be the same. I'm still unsure though whether this goes for GW as well.

A few other notes of lesser importance (fixing these won't change the grade one way or another):

==Game Information==

Do the two "campaigns" correspond to two different executables, or are they selectable from the same menu? If the latter, I think it would be more intuitive to just say that this information applies to Guild Wars as a whole - I can't think of any reason why information would apply to one campaign and not the other if they use the same executable and are essentially the same game.

Both. GW: Flameseeker Prophecies and GW: Factions are standalone games. However, if you have both, they are run as one game - all your characters can go to all places on either map for example. All game settings are the same. However, the main reason I mentioned both chapters is that I cannot say anything about future planned released.
In any case, potential buyers who might be wondering which of the chapters supports what will get to know what they want this way.


==Supported Resolutions==

I don't like to assume certain resolutions are supported, especially not when it's possible to check for sure. If you have an nVidia card, you can test 1920x1200 resolution using [http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/node/6205]this method[/url].
I also noticed that 1280x800 isn't in the list.

Guild Wars supports all resolutions Windows does. On my system, this excludes 1280x800. I see no good way to check myself - I do not have an nVidia card. There are plenty people who play this game though, maybe I could ask around about this matter.


==Singleplayer Anomalies==

It is unnecessary to mention HUD stretch (or lack of thereof) here. HUD stretch is common enough to get its own section, and can't really be considered an "anomaly." In fact, since Guild Wars is multiplayer-only, it's unnecessary to mention ANYTHING here except that it is multiplayer--only.


Updated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 May 2006, 23:17 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders

Joined: 07 Nov 2005, 04:16
Posts: 3010
Interesting theory. But doesn't that only apply when there's some kind of distortion at the sides (like X3 has, should you know that game), like a fishbowl effect. In that case indeed it wouldn't be the same. I'm still unsure though whether this goes for GW as well.

It doesn't have anything to do with the fishbowl effect. Moving the camera backwards will affect depth perception in ways that increasing the FOV does not, fishbowl effect or not.

Try focusing on an object, and make sure there are smaller objects nearby that are closer to you than the object you are focusing on (it helps if they are also above and/or below the object of focus). Now put your hands near your eyes like a horse blinder, so that you can only see the object you are focusing on and the other objects that are closer. Now, slowly move your hands apart so you can see more to the left and right. You will see more, but your perspective of the other objects will not be affected. You are simulating increasing the FOV.

Now repeat the experiment, but this time do not move your hands from their position. Instead, move backwards while continuing to focus on the object. The apparant perspective of the objects not in focus WILL be affected. You are simulating moving the camera backwards.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 May 2006, 18:29 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2005, 22:58
Posts: 1045
The perceptive distance between object remains the same, as I hope to prove through the same screenshots. I've drawn random straight lines, and PSP7 was so nice to provide me with the angle of the line (you'll have to trust me I took them as they were given).

1280x1024:


1680x1050:



I've drawn the lines through the same points at each screenshot. Ok, with the lower two I drew them at a specific angle, but it doesn't matter as is apparent from this. There's no significant difference between the angles. Therefore, for this moment, I remain at the opinion that, at least in Guild Wars, zooming out does not affect depth perception significantly. I blame the slight difference between the two to doing it by hand, so there's some difference in beginning and endpoint of the line.


By the way - I just noticed, the general zoom level is closer on the widescreen aspect. The character is larger on the display - another explanation for the extra loss of top/bottom view. Rather strange that...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2006, 00:50 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders

Joined: 07 Nov 2005, 04:16
Posts: 3010
The perceptive distance between object remains the same, as I hope to prove through the same screenshots.

Yes, but you haven't moved the camera backwards in the widescreen shot. If you did that (to compensate for the Vert-), the perspective would be altered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2006, 02:04 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders

Joined: 07 Nov 2005, 04:16
Posts: 3010
Let me demonstrate, using FAKK2, how moving the camera out affects perception in a way that increasing the FOV does not. No angle drawing will be necessary.

Here is a 4:3 screenshot with all the default settings. FOV is 90, cg_cameradist is 120.


Look at the platform in front of Julie. The edge closest to the camera, appears to intersect Julie's head, around the ears.

Now I'm going to switch to 16:10, but I'm also going to pull the camera back to a distance of 175 to compensate for the Vert-.


Now the edge has dropped down to her shoulders, indicating an altered depth perception.

Now I'm going to go back to a camera distance of 120, but increase the FOV to 100 (sadly, there is no permanent method of increasing the FOV to my knowledge).


The edge is back to ear level, indicating no altered depth perception.

Finally, just for kicks, I'm going to pull back the FOV as high as it will go, but keep the camera distance at 120.


The edge is STILL at ear level.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2006, 16:21 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2005, 22:58
Posts: 1045
You are right, this also happens in Guild Wars:





However, when I slightly move the camera up:




After that, I might start another discussion - perhaps the 4:3 aspect point of view is the wrong one. Why should widescreen be measured in terms of 'normal' aspect, where 'normal' would, by definition, be right ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Aug 2006, 06:19 
Offline
Founder
Founder
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2003, 05:00
Posts: 7358
Added note about Nvidia testing at 1920x1200


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Sep 2006, 18:25 
Offline
Founder
Founder
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2003, 05:00
Posts: 7358
I have tested this at 1920x1080, 1920x1200 and 2560x1600. They all work fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  




Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group