Proof that Bioshock's FOV was no ... design decision ... ?

Post by **Paddy the Wak** » 29 Aug 2007, 00:07

Hey ... welcome to the forum Sectus ... 8)

You say ...

I don't think the UE3 engine always makes wider aspect ratios have the same horizontal fov. I just think they made 16:9 the new "default". So that wider aspect ratios than 16:9 will have wider fov (triple heads for instance). And that taller aspect ratios (4:3 for instance) have a taller fov.

Re the bold bit ... only Rainbow Six: Vegas on the PC has an automatic increase in the horizontal FOV as the aspect ratio got wider ... unfortunatly that game doesen't have many options for widescreen or TripleHead resolutions ... without the hack.
All the other Unreal III games so far have not had an increase in the horizontal FOV ... See the screenshot overlays above.

When you think about it that way, it makes perfect sense.

Yes it would make perfect sense but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be the case.
As I say ... See the screenshot overlays in this thread.

I'll get some screenshots of Gears of War and Rainbow Six: Vegas on the 360 in 4:3 and 16:9 so you can compare the actual images.

There are some Gears of War shots shown above but more of both those games would be great !

Sectus · Post by **Sectus** » 29 Aug 2007, 00:24

Yes it would make perfect sense but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be the case.
As I say ... See the screenshot overlays in this thread.

Oh, my point is that it would be working correctly with 4:3 getting a taller fov if they had defined 16:9 as the new default.

It's hard to define what's right and wrong fov for each aspect ratio. For instance... people wouldn't be thinking Gears of War had a "wrong" fov if they'd never compared it to 4:3.

And while people got mad over the fov for Bioshock... what if the dev team decides to fix it by giving the 4:3 view a smaller fov? That would make 16:9 have a wider fov than 4:3, but it wouldn't actually change how 16:9 looks.

By the way, this comes from someone who displays things in 4:3 on my computer and 16:9 on my 360. So I don't feel biased. I don't really care how whatever aspect ratio compares to another, as long as I can sit down and think it looks fine on its own terms that's all I need.

BlueMak · Post by **BlueMak** » 29 Aug 2007, 00:25

only Rainbow Six: Vegas on the PC has an automatic increase in the horizontal FOV as the aspect ratio got wider ... unfortunatly that game doesen't have many options for widescreen or TripleHead resolutions ... without the hack.

Hasn't the latest patch released recently fixed this? I run it widescreen (1920x1200) without the hack and though I haven't test it, it feels right.

Sweetz · Post by **Sweetz** » 29 Aug 2007, 00:31

[quote]Having played a lot of GoW the current FOV feels right to me at widescreen. Looking at the 4:3 shots the game looks too zoomed out. I think in the case of GoWs case it is a matter of 4:3 vert+ and it's 4:3 users that are getting the incorrect "experience."

As said, vert- (or vert+ as the case may be) is definitely wrong regardless, but I think from this point forward we're going to have to consider if it's widescreen users or 4:3 users that are getting the short of end of the stick.

No one is asking the 4:3 users to get anything less than they would in the first place. This isn't about 4:3 getting less, it is for WS to get more. It's an endless supply of FOV and pixels. When a game supports properly WS screens, it is not stealing pixels from 4:3. This isn't the state budget, this is pixels. Both CAN be winners. Don't fall for the propaganda, we are equals.
I'm not really making that argument so I'm not sure what you're replying in reference to exactly.

Post by **dopefish** » 29 Aug 2007, 00:49

Apple · Post by **Apple** » 29 Aug 2007, 05:44

Dopefish I know it just scales... I allready said that in another thread.

Please stop pointing out something I allready know.....

1080p on the 360 is 720p upscaled. On my monitor it has a slight increase in image quality when in 1920x1080, because my monitors native resolution is 1920x1200. Then as you can tell by the pictures I took, the monitor has aspect scaling.

Also some games do actually run in 1080p on the 360. Apparently Halo 3 is 1080p native.

For lower resolutions, it just downscales and either letterboxes it, crops it at the sides or in the case of Gears it adds more to the top and bottom. According to your pictures, I can see its 960x720 that is downscaled.

What did you use to capture those images? Looks good.

Frag Maniac · Post by **Frag Maniac** » 29 Aug 2007, 06:10

Maybe it is something to do with the way you were running widescreen on a 4:3 ... dunno ...

BTW ... they fixed widescreen for Stalker in a patch (just in case you didn't know).

Yeah I thought it might have been running it on the 4:3 CRT too. I don't play STALKER much anymore though. Thanks for the screenie btw Paddy. :wink:

On Gears of War, I just found out it's going to be on PC, a big WOOT for that!

Post by **dopefish** » 29 Aug 2007, 06:41

Apple · Post by **Apple** » 29 Aug 2007, 07:14

Hey man, just making sure you knew I do know it is scaling... :lol:

I don't know where I read that Halo 3 was in 1080p.. I just remember it. I think it was even boasting 60 fps. So we will have to wait and see.

Seriously, some games arent even 720p? Thats sort of false advertisement then.. even if it is scaled.

Post by **Paddy the Wak** » 29 Aug 2007, 09:54

Ok ... guys ...
I have managed to change the FOV in the Medal Of Honor: Airborne demo because ... logical did it and I then new there was a way ...
I did it differently from him ... but the point is it is possible ... :D

Thanks logical ... look here ...

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/node/8037#comment-159877

FramerateUK · Post by **FramerateUK** » 29 Aug 2007, 11:58

I'm not surprised about Gears of War. I did think at times during gameplay that i couldn't quite see enough of what was going on - but i assumed it was just the way the game was designed, to feel more real. I didnt think for a second it would be vert-.

slapnutz · Post by **slapnutz** » 02 Sep 2007, 14:58

FYI, another Gears of War example of -Hoz "widescreen". (not my image)

At first its easy to blame Irrational for the whole Bioshock widescreen saga but these type of screenhot seem to be pointing the blame at Unreal Engine 3.0 more and more? :?

Post by **Paddy the Wak** » 02 Sep 2007, 16:45

... At first its easy to blame Irrational for the whole Bioshock widescreen saga [...

2K say they designed it that way ... :roll: ... seems to me to be a pretty good argument to blame them ... :wink:

but these type of screenhot seem to be pointing the blame at Unreal Engine 3.0 more and more?

Exactly ... and the point of this thread ...

It is possible to make the engine horz+ ... providing the developers don't lock the FOV as they did in Bioshock ... to me it is clearly the developers fault.

BlueMak · Post by **BlueMak** » 02 Sep 2007, 16:49

FYI, another Gears of War example of -Hoz "widescreen". (not my image)

At first its easy to blame Irrational for the whole Bioshock widescreen saga but these type of screenhot seem to be pointing the blame at Unreal Engine 3.0 more and more? :?

(img removed for faster loading)

Since it has been proven, that even someone (member of this forum) that has no direct knowledge of the programming in the game (Bioshock) is able to make the game Hor+, then what I said earlier seems to me that still is the case.
They (developers) get the engine, which has some presets, including the one about widescreen support, that is as it is. The developers don't care, don't wan't to, are incapable due to limited skills, to change it. Thus, they leave it like this. Cause, if they had the skills, then since they have the knowledge of the game, they could do it in, perhaps a day? less?
So, what it looks to me, is either some deep hatred for widescreen users, or the old time classic of total incompetence.

In a way reminds me of how factories in china or whatever produce high technology pieces. They get the instructions from the Intels of the world but have absolutely no clue what they are doing beyond some steps that need to be done to have a product out of the line.

slapnutz · Post by **slapnutz** » 03 Sep 2007, 00:41

It is possible to make the engine horz+ ... providing the developers don't lock the FOV as they did in Bioshock ... to me it is clearly the developers fault.

Thats true. Since hacks exist, it definately means that the Engine can do proper widescreen.

I just find it wierd that even Epic (who wrote the Unreal engine) didnt bother doing proper widescreen themselves. :?

If bedroom hackers can archive this, why cant devs?... lazy, incompetent, misinformed? :(

Post by **Paddy the Wak** » 03 Sep 2007, 07:31

All three ! ... :lol:

The Unreal III engine has ini files where the user can easily change various setting in their game.

2K removed the ability for the users to change the FOV.
EA left in some of the ability to change the FOV in MoHA demo ... but not all.

Lets hope that Epic leave it all in.

slapnutz · Post by **slapnutz** » 03 Sep 2007, 07:46

All three ! ... :lol:

The Unreal III engine has ini files where the user can easily change various setting in their game.

2K removed the ability for the users to change the FOV.
EA left in some of the ability to change the FOV in MoHA demo ... but not all.

Lets hope that Epic leave it all in.

I guess we should start a betting pool to see if GOW PC will have -Hor :P

BlueMak · Post by **BlueMak** » 03 Sep 2007, 08:14

It would be nice if either developers or publishers knew of this site. I don't doubt some of them have no idea we exist.

Tolyngee · Post by **Tolyngee** » 03 Sep 2007, 10:23

It would be nice if either developers or publishers knew of this site. I don't doubt some of them have no idea we exist.

But being ignorant of us means those devs can plead... Well, ignorant...

Unlike Bioshock devs, who must plead "Irrational" (Games)...

Ignorance can be cured... It's those other human conditions that tend to be forever...

Widescreen Gaming Forum