Bioshock: artistic vision - or not as the case may be

Tolyngee · Post by **Tolyngee** » 21 Aug 2007, 21:58

Stop posting those overlays, they're totally wrong.

Matter of fact, pictures taken with a digital camera seem to show a clear width gain and height loss with 16:9 settings as it should be.

Thx Lefty42o from neogaf.

Sorry for my poor english, but i just wanted to point it out. =)

Okay, both the 4:3 and 16:9 pics show the top showing the same thing...

But the 4:3 pic looks like you are five feet further away!

The rock at the bottom of the screen in the 16:9 shot is ABOVE the "still" box in the 4:3 pic! COME ON!

The brown box above the "still" box in the 4:3 display is to the side of the "still" box in the WS display!

All of those objects should stay at the same spot, which just more drawn off to the left and right...

Even if you are just standing at different spots (making a comparison harder anyway), then why is it in the WS view I cannot see my wrist tattoo, but you can in the SD shot? (obvious that the WS bottom of the screen is cut-off compared to the SD shot... which is the whole problem!)

Or is this just an attempt as shens???

khula · Post by **khula** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:03

The temp fix didn't work for me ... :(

hmm me too.. There. Has. To. Be. A. Way.

Post by **skipclarke** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:09

Fourth post by - Chris Kline, Lead Programmer, Bioshock

You will see more in widescreen. We use a different projection matrix; there is no squashing or stretching of the image involved.

Thanks!

I yield, it's a fair cop.

Still, it doesn't exclude the possibility that the current 16:9 mode is like they always intended it to be and that they changed their approach to how they implemented the 4:3 mode.

mva5580 · Post by **mva5580** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:10

I know it's not an immediate fix, but I'm sure at this point, 2K will issue a patch for it. It's picked up way too much steam from not only the PC community but it's also an issue on the Xbox 360. I have no idea what time frame could or should be on it, but it'll be fixed.

And I REALLY hope that all of this to-do about Bioshock not supporting TRUE wide screen is a wake-up call to the rest of the developers that there are TONS of people out there who care about having this support in games. Like others have said, it's 2007, and wide screen monitors and TV's are NOT that hard to come by anymore. This should be standard in every game by this point. I hope a big-name game like this having the problem and the community having this much of a problem with it make wide screen gaming more of a standard than some sort of a high end option, or whatever. It should be standard, period.

Post by **Paddy the Wak** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:14

Still, it doesn't exclude the possibility that the current 16:9 mode is like they always intended it to be and that they changed their approach to how they implemented the 4:3 mode.

Then why is there a tattoo on your characters wrist that you can't see in widescreen ? ... :wink:

Tolyngee · Post by **Tolyngee** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:16

[quote][quote]i think people expected it when the developers told us to.

Where? Citing (and linking) a source where thay explicitly state that the 16:9 AR will be wider than the 4:3 one would be nice.

And, no: A generic statement like "of course it will be designed for widescreen" won't do. It is quite possible (probable even?) that it is, and that the taller 4:3 ratio is the best way to convert from the 'proper' 16:9 ratio.Here ... http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=659

Fourth post by - Chris Kline, Lead Programmer, Bioshock

You will see more in widescreen. We use a different projection matrix; there is no squashing or stretching of the image involved.

But isn't that technically accurate?

They zoomed-in, instead of squashing or stretching...

(squashing or stretching to me means that both the 4:3 and 16:9 image show the same H/V FOV, but that one of the FOVs got squashed/stretched to accomplish it, which technically, they didn't do...)

http://images.pikapuff.com/games/bioshockws.png

like in the above pic: nothing was squashed/stretched, just zoomed...

if you take 1920x1080, and make it 4:3 with the vertical identical you get 1440x1080... now make that 16:9 with the width the same and you get 1440x810...

Now, 1920/1440=1.34, take 810x1.34=1080

It is just a 1.34 zoom of both X and Y...

So, zooming 1440x810 to 1920x1080 does NOT result in any stretching/squashing of anything...

So, technically what he said does appear to be accurate...

Maybe asking H+ versus V- would be the better question next time?

Elios · Post by **Elios** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:18

[quote][quote][quote]i think people expected it when the developers told us to.

Where? Citing (and linking) a source where thay explicitly state that the 16:9 AR will be wider than the 4:3 one would be nice.

And, no: A generic statement like "of course it will be designed for widescreen" won't do. It is quite possible (probable even?) that it is, and that the taller 4:3 ratio is the best way to convert from the 'proper' 16:9 ratio.Here ... http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=659

Fourth post by - Chris Kline, Lead Programmer, Bioshock

You will see more in widescreen. We use a different projection matrix; there is no squashing or stretching of the image involved.

But isn't that technically accurate?

They zoomed-in, instead of squashing or stretching...

(squashing or stretching to me means that both the 4:3 and 16:9 image show the same H/V FOV, but that one of the FOVs got squashed/stretched to accomplish it, which technically, they didn't do...)

http://images.pikapuff.com/games/bioshockws.png

like in the above pic: nothing was squashed/stretched, just zoomed...

if you take 1920x1080, and make it 4:3 with the vertical identical you get 1440x1080... now make that 16:9 with the width the same and you get 1440x810...

Now, 1920/1440=1.34, take 810x1.34=1080

It is just a 1.34 zoom of both X and Y...

So, zooming 1440x810 to 1920x1080 does NOT result in any stretching/squashing of anything...

So, technically what he said does appear to be accurate...

Maybe asking H+ versus V- would be the better question next time?

the the FOV needs to be wider and its not and so far no work around well... works

sirmonster · Post by **sirmonster** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:19

Still, it doesn't exclude the possibility that the current 16:9 mode is like they always intended it to be and that they changed their approach to how they implemented the 4:3 mode.

actually it does exclude the possibility. since they stated you will see more, and we dont. we actually see less. unless you mean they intended to mislead or lie.

Princess_Frosty · Post by **Princess_Frosty** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:20

Are you sure that fix didn't work, or that you applied it correctly, it's changing the FOV for me...

Elios · Post by **Elios** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:21

Are you sure that fix didn't work, or that you applied it correctly, it's changing the FOV for me...

take a screen shot
what you should get is a 4:3 screen that looks 'fish-eyed' if it works and its not working

mengzor · Post by **mengzor** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:27

:< :< :<

im seriously hoping 2k do something about this.
sounds like theres not much luck with the temp fixes...

Tolyngee · Post by **Tolyngee** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:27

[quote][quote][quote][quote]i think people expected it when the developers told us to.

Where? Citing (and linking) a source where thay explicitly state that the 16:9 AR will be wider than the 4:3 one would be nice.

And, no: A generic statement like "of course it will be designed for widescreen" won't do. It is quite possible (probable even?) that it is, and that the taller 4:3 ratio is the best way to convert from the 'proper' 16:9 ratio.Here ... http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=659

Fourth post by - Chris Kline, Lead Programmer, Bioshock

You will see more in widescreen. We use a different projection matrix; there is no squashing or stretching of the image involved.

But isn't that technically accurate?

They zoomed-in, instead of squashing or stretching...

(squashing or stretching to me means that both the 4:3 and 16:9 image show the same H/V FOV, but that one of the FOVs got squashed/stretched to accomplish it, which technically, they didn't do...)

http://images.pikapuff.com/games/bioshockws.png

like in the above pic: nothing was squashed/stretched, just zoomed...

if you take 1920x1080, and make it 4:3 with the vertical identical you get 1440x1080... now make that 16:9 with the width the same and you get 1440x810...

Now, 1920/1440=1.34, take 810x1.34=1080

It is just a 1.34 zoom of both X and Y...

So, zooming 1440x810 to 1920x1080 does NOT result in any stretching/squashing of anything...

So, technically what he said does appear to be accurate...

Maybe asking H+ versus V- would be the better question next time?

the the FOV needs to be wider and its not and so far no work around well... works

yes, but technically when you zoom in to something, you see more...

Example: grab a microscope... You can now see cells. Can you see cells without zooming-in with the microscope?

Listen, my whole point is that while what Chris Kline said is technically accurate, it's obvious he doesn't know WTF he's talking about in regards to what the question's intention to ask really was!

Asking H+/V- and having him answer THAT! That would keep all confusion from happening...

But, again, nothing got stretched/squashed in doing what we have now, and you can argue by zooming-in you see more.

Asking FOV/H+/V- seems to me what was actually needed...

sirmonster · Post by **sirmonster** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:30

[quote][quote][quote][quote][quote]i think people expected it when the developers told us to.

Where? Citing (and linking) a source where thay explicitly state that the 16:9 AR will be wider than the 4:3 one would be nice.

And, no: A generic statement like "of course it will be designed for widescreen" won't do. It is quite possible (probable even?) that it is, and that the taller 4:3 ratio is the best way to convert from the 'proper' 16:9 ratio.Here ... http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=659

Fourth post by - Chris Kline, Lead Programmer, Bioshock

You will see more in widescreen. We use a different projection matrix; there is no squashing or stretching of the image involved.

But isn't that technically accurate?

They zoomed-in, instead of squashing or stretching...

(squashing or stretching to me means that both the 4:3 and 16:9 image show the same H/V FOV, but that one of the FOVs got squashed/stretched to accomplish it, which technically, they didn't do...)

http://images.pikapuff.com/games/bioshockws.png

like in the above pic: nothing was squashed/stretched, just zoomed...

if you take 1920x1080, and make it 4:3 with the vertical identical you get 1440x1080... now make that 16:9 with the width the same and you get 1440x810...

Now, 1920/1440=1.34, take 810x1.34=1080

It is just a 1.34 zoom of both X and Y...

So, zooming 1440x810 to 1920x1080 does NOT result in any stretching/squashing of anything...

So, technically what he said does appear to be accurate...

Maybe asking H+ versus V- would be the better question next time?

the the FOV needs to be wider and its not and so far no work around well... works

yes, but technically when you zoom in to something, you see more...

Example: grab a microscope... You can now see cells. Can you see cells without zooming-in with the microscope?

Listen, my whole point is that while what Chris Kline said is technically accurate, it's obvious he doesn't know WTF he's talking about in regards to what the question's intention to ask really was!

Asking H+/V- and having him answer THAT! That would keep all confusion from happening...

But, again, nothing got stretched/squashed in doing what we have now, and you can argue by zooming-in you see more.

Asking FOV/H+/V- seems to me what was actually needed...

when you zoom into something you see less in greater detail.
with this game, you see less, in same detail, and a distorted POV.

and it was cropped, and stretched to fit a wide screen.

example, a man with one eye using a telescope, does not see more than a man with two eyes and no telescope/binoculars. he just sees further/ greater detail in a smaller area. man with 2 eyes sees more

Ice[DDZ] · Post by **Ice[DDZ]** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:38

The temp fix isnt working for me either. Making my screen stretch is giving an improper aspect ratio, and is no different than leaving the ini file alone. Adding fov 120 does nothing.

Blinky · Post by **Blinky** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:50

Looks like the game's default FOV is 75 which feels really zoomed in for widescreen, especially since I'm using to playing at 90-120 for other games.

This is EXACTLY the problem!

I noticed right away that something looked wrong with the demo, before I knew what it was. You know how a game will give you a zoom option, to better help you aim during a gunfight? That's how Bioshock looks, all the time. It makes it seem like I'm leaning forward with my face three inches from the monitor the whole time and just feels very unnatural.

It looked odd right from the start but I couldn't put my finger on it. I thought it had something to do with the game being on a console, but now that I know the widescreen is f_cked, it totally makes sense.

If you aren't familiar with proper widescreen, maybe it wouldn't bother you, but then--why would you be posting on this forum. If you know what widescreen is, you know why this is a problem.

Tolyngee · Post by **Tolyngee** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:52

when you zoom into something you see less in greater detail. with this game, you see less, in same detail, and a distorted POV.

and it was cropped, and stretched to fit a wide screen.

I was just trying my best to argue (and not well anyway) that was Chris said might be accurate in his mind... (heck, they shipped it with this problem, obviously there's a lot this guy doesn't comprehend, no?)

I'd still argue that although it was cropped, the math does NOT support the STRETCHED word...

Both X and Y are 3/4s of what they should be... They now did a 4:3 zoom of that... Where's the stretching?

I am trying to explain where Chris' misunderstanding of FOV in all of this fits in...

But, in case I am somehow mistaken on this "stretching" issue, someone please explain it to me? When you zoom in on something equally by X and Y, while it is not a proper widescreen FOV image as I would expect (my TH2G example points out the problem using this approach), I am not understanding how anything is stretched... Only everything equally zoomed-in... No?

HMPH!!!! Okay, the problem is the additional 480 pixels in width versus the extra 270 in height? Are you saying the correct way to zoom that is to make 1440x810 into 1710x1080? And that making 1710 to 1920 is where the stretch is?

if that is indeed what I am missing here, then here's still my question:

WHAT ON EARTH DO THE PROGRAMMERS NOT UNDERSTAND THIS?

Eh, the more I delve into the problems here, the more it appears to be that they got some rocket scientists together to make a great, great game, but along the way they all forgot how to understand the simplest of math?

Then again, NASA did this with their Mars program, so who knows?

The more I understand what might be going into this issue, the less I want to be bothered with this game, though...

(either way, it obviously won't allow a TH2G set-up to be used well at all, so something needs fixing! That example alone shows they didn't understand what they were doing...)

Post by **Paddy the Wak** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:54

Are you sure that fix didn't work, or that you applied it correctly, it's changing the FOV for me...

I'm sure it didn't work for me ...

Any chance you could show us a screenshot before and after the fix from exactly the same place in the game ... ?

Ice[DDZ] · Post by **Ice[DDZ]** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:55

Almost threw up when playing the game. This really sucks, I cant play it in widescreen. Im really sensitive to FOV adjustments like this, Like another guy said it makes me feel like im 3 inches in front of the screen. Had the same problem with STALKER but thankfully WSGF fixed that, and the devs patched it later. I wont be playing until this is fixed :|

[quote]Are you sure that fix didn't work, or that you applied it correctly, it's changing the FOV for me...

I'm sure it didn't work for me ...

Any chance you could show us a screenshot before and after the fix from exactly the same place in the game ... ?

You arent the only one, It didnt work for me as well.

Tanuki · Post by **Tanuki** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:56

So the Vert - is confirmed in the retail PC version? :(

EDIT:No reason to go out and pick it up today then? Will wait till Thurs and get Two Worlds as well. :D

Elios · Post by **Elios** » 21 Aug 2007, 22:58

So the Vert - is confirmed in the retail PC version? :(

yup it is and so far no work around has worked for it best thing to do is play in 4:3 piller box for now

Widescreen Gaming Forum