Please make FOV a client setting

swalkswalk Say hello to my little friend. Join Date: 2011-01-20 Member: 78384Posts: 1,868Members, Squad Five Blue
edited February 2012 in NS2 General Discussion
There are still people with 4:3 CRT monitors!
195 just came out, great work!
I personally noticed the zoomy feel that others with widescreen have been talking about before, due to the FOV change.
And I am on a 19" CRT monitor(oldschool), anyways, please make FOV a client setting instead of a server setting, it is really annoying now.
There will always be people with different aspect ratios, so can you put a few adjustments in the upcoming menu UWE?
I'm sure there are someone out there that would agree with me.
I'm practicly only seeing 75% of what I could see before, and I am sad.
Post edited by Unknown User on

NS2 6v6 Gathers
QUOTE (Floodinator @ Feb 28 2012, 08:41 PM) »
it's always a good idea to kill swalk or he will kill you.
«1

Comments

  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Posts: 1,677Members
    Allow clients to request custom FoVs, but leave it to the server to set the boundaries (as in, never allow clients to go higher\lower than what the server specifies).
  • swalkswalk Say hello to my little friend. Join Date: 2011-01-20 Member: 78384Posts: 1,868Members, Squad Five Blue
    QUOTE (player @ Feb 10 2012, 11:45 AM) »
    Allow clients to request custom FoVs, but leave it to the server to set the boundaries (as in, never allow clients to go higher\lower than what the server specifies).

    I was thinking that the menu would set those limits depending if you use widescreen or 4:3 resolutions?

    NS2 6v6 Gathers
    QUOTE (Floodinator @ Feb 28 2012, 08:41 PM) »
    it's always a good idea to kill swalk or he will kill you.
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    I agree fully. I will have no chance as a skulk now, only seeing 75% of what I did before in horizontal FoV. It was hard enough to track marines at it were, but with a horizontal angle of only 78.75 degree compared to 105 before, it will be a nightmare.

    CODE
    4:3 vs 16:9
    Getting same vertical aspect:
    12:9 vs 16:9
    Before we had:
    16:12 vs 16:9
    Those 4 horizontal are now lost to me.
    Comparing new to the old:
    12/16=75% of the old


    Guess I will only play gorge or commander this patch.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • HarimauHarimau Join Date: 2007-12-24 Member: 63250Posts: 3,883Members
    Why not use black bars if you want to enforce a viewing space?
    Suggestions: ! @ # $ %
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    QUOTE (player @ Feb 10 2012, 11:45 AM) »
    Allow clients to request custom FoVs, but leave it to the server to set the boundaries (as in, never allow clients to go higher\lower than what the server specifies).


    Did they decrease the vertical FoV then? They must have if they kept the same horizontal (for widescreens) and not distorted the screen.

    The problem is that if you make the 4:3 ratio see as much horizontal as the 16:9, then you will eighter have to distort or allow the 4:3 a larger vertical view angle. You can't keep them both see the same amounts and not distort it. I would rather have a black "movie" border up and down then this small horizontal FoV though....
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • _Necro__Necro_ Join Date: 2011-02-15 Member: 81895Posts: 1,903Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    From the anti Onos - Thread:

    QUOTE (LUSITANER @ Feb 8 2012, 11:37 AM) *
    Also, i say here again that the 1st view model of onos needs fixing, it is not bounded to an "onos" i can see gaps through it, making it separated of a body and floating.


    This is because when you currently change resolution to a non widescreen format the game adds more vertical space, rather then removing horizontal space. So, running in a res that has a lot of vertical space shows more of the bottom of the view model (which is just the horn, there's no Onos attached to it, the same way the marine arms in the view model are just arms that are floating) and in some extreme cases of animation where it moves a lot, you may be seeing the bottom of the model, where there is no geometry.

    The way we'll probably address this, and what is planned, is to have the resolution add more horizontal viewing space in widescreen formats, rather then changing the vertical viewing space. And that should solve the Onos view model issue.

    --Cory

    ---
    ...and...
    ---

    QUOTE (_Necro_ @ Feb 9 2012, 09:53 AM) *
    Uhh, are you sure about that? That means that players with a widescreen will get a higher FOV as players with 4:3 or such. I'm not sure if this will keep it fair. Besides, I have a 16:9 screen, so it won't hurt me. But having a lower FOV with 4:3 will be a huge disadvantage for a player.


    Yes. The reasons you state were why we implemented it the other way, first, so that players running the game in widescreen didn't get an unfair advantage. However, the majority of players have requested it be changed, since many people are running in widescreen. Also, NS2 is actually a bit different from other games, and having more vertical space can actually give players more of an advantage then horizontal space, with skulks running around below your view on the floor and up on the ceilings. So, really, there's no perfect way to do it, but for a variety of reasons we think it will be better to change it for widescreen formats.

    --Cory
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Posts: 1,677Members
    QUOTE (swalk @ Feb 10 2012, 10:49 AM) »
    I was thinking that the menu would set those limits depending if you use widescreen or 4:3 resolutions?

    A high FoV yields a considerable advantage, so you will want the server to limit just how far a client can go. Pubs may set the ceiling to 90-100, whereas competitive servers (or high-skilled pubs) might want to push it to 110-120.

    To re-iterate, the idea is that you can set it to any FoV which is comfortable to you (and your monitor-ratio), but the server keeps tabs on just how far you're allowed to go, in order to prevent malicious behaviour (like a FoV of 150 or something insane).
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    Ofcourse I would rather see 4:3 ratio have a bigger vertical FoV then the 16:9 screens and the same horizontal. Natural selection is a largely horizontal focused game, and it would have larger impact there. If you want to argue that it would give the 4:3 a competitive advantage in an FPS, there is no reason you should want a widescreen for gaming other then enforced artificial reasons. The same size screen will have a bigger area the closer it is to 1:1 ratio.

    Do a quick test yourself, hold out your arms to your sides and look straight forward. I can notice my finger in my peripherial vision at about 120 degrees, and for vertical at about 90 degrees. How odd that this aspect ratio is 4:3... Ofcourse, the estimation is rather rough. I would say that the vertical angle is pretty accurat though, 90 degree is easy to meassure. Setting this as true, you would need to spot your fingers at 160 degrees to get a 16:9 ratio. I can only speak for myself, and last time I checked I didn't have any problems with my peripherial vision, but I'm nowhere close to 160 degrees horizontal FoV.

    So why limit a game that seek to mimic our feel of the world to an unintuitive aspect ratio? A competitive gamer should want to use a 4:3 screen unless the game has forced the odd aspect ratio as the standard. Widescreens sure have their place in movies, but it should not have a negative impact on the game feel.
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Posts: 1,677Members
    Wait, what are you suggesting exactly? If you can set your FoV (within a certain range), what further issue is there?
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    QUOTE
    QUOTE (_Necro_ @ Feb 9 2012, 09:53 AM) *
    Uhh, are you sure about that? That means that players with a widescreen will get a higher FOV as players with 4:3 or such. I'm not sure if this will keep it fair. Besides, I have a 16:9 screen, so it won't hurt me. But having a lower FOV with 4:3 will be a huge disadvantage for a player.


    Yes. The reasons you state were why we implemented it the other way, first, so that players running the game in widescreen didn't get an unfair advantage. However, the majority of players have requested it be changed, since many people are running in widescreen. Also, NS2 is actually a bit different from other games, and having more vertical space can actually give players more of an advantage then horizontal space, with skulks running around below your view on the floor and up on the ceilings. So, really, there's no perfect way to do it, but for a variety of reasons we think it will be better to change it for widescreen formats.

    --Cory


    To comment on this... Ofcourse it will seem like the "majority" have requested a change. You don't get vocal and make big threads about things working like you want them to. It is a great misstake to take what you read on forums to represent the will of the majority of the playerbase. It is a great way to get feedback on what people are having issues with, or want to see in the game, but to accept it for true and decide to "do what the players want" for that reason, is wrong. You can try to adress something from the feedback, but it should never be the reason for a change.
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • swalkswalk Say hello to my little friend. Join Date: 2011-01-20 Member: 78384Posts: 1,868Members, Squad Five Blue
    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 11:53 AM) »
    Why not use black bars if you want to enforce a viewing space?

    Because I want to play in a 4:3 resolution that fits my monitor.
    I guess fluid(and others) feels the same.

    NS2 6v6 Gathers
    QUOTE (Floodinator @ Feb 28 2012, 08:41 PM) »
    it's always a good idea to kill swalk or he will kill you.
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (player @ Feb 10 2012, 12:15 PM) »
    Wait, what are you suggesting exactly? If you can set your FoV (within a certain range), what further issue is there?


    Eighter set it back to same horizontal FoV, or make you able to pick one of the two: fixed vertical or fixed horizontal view. That's what I think atleast. I would pick fixed horizontal any day.

    Depending on what you set the standard resolution at (preferable something between 4:3 and 16:9, like 14:9) you would get different results:

    CODE
                    Fixed horizontal                Fixed Vertical
    Widescreen         croped vertical             black bars on sides
    Normal screen      black bars up & down         cropped sides


    I think that's the most balanced way to set it.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Posts: 1,677Members
    edited February 2012
    Oh wait I get it, well in that vein yea put back the horizontal-fov, and make THAT configurable.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    QUOTE (swalk @ Feb 10 2012, 12:20 PM) »
    Because I want to play in a 4:3 resolution that fits my monitor.
    I guess fluid(and others) feels the same.


    I do! I don't want to buy a movie monitor to play the game I love at a decent level eighter... Good think that atleast one in duplex will have the same issue when we fight next...
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • HarimauHarimau Join Date: 2007-12-24 Member: 63250Posts: 3,883Members
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (swalk @ Feb 10 2012, 07:20 PM) »
    Because I want to play in a 4:3 resolution that fits my monitor.
    I guess fluid(and others) feels the same.

    I thought this was a balance issue, though. The 4:3 resolution would of course have an advantage over widescreen with fixed-horizontal, so if we were enforcing a specific viewable space, then we might use this as the baseline (so 16:9 monitors would have black bars to the left and right). The 16:9 resolution is far more prominent these days though, so we'd use 16:9 as the baseline (so 4:3 monitors would have black bars to the top and bottom). What Fluid Core seems to be describing is an aspect ratio between the two (so basically both 4:3 monitors and 16:9 monitors would have black bars, but in different positions), but I'm not sure about that idea, I think this should be more of a majority rules thing (16:9 is the most prominent, and is considered modern, so use that as the baseline). Actually, my own monitor is 16:10, so it is between 4:3(16:12) and 16:9.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Suggestions: ! @ # $ %
  • WilsonWilson Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Posts: 1,397Members
    I don't want black bars on my widescreen monitor though. I was playing with it all stretched until this latest patch. The current way is the same as it's done on source games. Perhaps they need to increase the default FOV (or allow custom FOV) a little so it doesn't look so zoomed in, but I don't think forcing players to choose between horizontal or vertical space is a good idea.
    In-game name: Wilson

    My Crosshair Pack: LINK
  • HarimauHarimau Join Date: 2007-12-24 Member: 63250Posts: 3,883Members
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Wilson @ Feb 10 2012, 07:44 PM) »
    I don't want black bars on my widescreen monitor though. I was playing with it all stretched until this latest patch. The current way is the same as it's done on source games. Perhaps they need to increase the default FOV (or allow custom FOV) a little so it doesn't look so zoomed in, but I don't think forcing players to choose between horizontal or vertical space is a good idea.

    My suggestion was actually that there be black bars on non-widescreen monitors :P

    Actually, you bring up a good point. Assuming that we keep FOV constant (to keep the game balanced), you could have a setting where players get to choose the horizontal or vertical space - so they (players without the standard aspect ratio) could either have black bars and no stretched/squeezed effect, or have stretching/squeezing and no black bars, or have something in between.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Suggestions: ! @ # $ %
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 12:42 PM) »
    I thought this was a balance issue, though. The 4:3 resolution would of course have an advantage over widescreen with fixed-horizontal, so if we were enforcing a specific viewable space, then we might use this as the baseline (so 16:9 monitors would have black bars to the left and right). The 16:9 resolution is far more prominent these days though, so we'd use 16:9 as the baseline (so 4:3 monitors would have black bars to the top and bottom). What Fluid Core seems to be describing is an aspect ratio between the two (so basically both 4:3 monitors and 16:9 monitors would have black bars, but in different positions), but I'm not sure about that idea, I think this should be more of a majority rules thing (16:9 is the most prominent, and is considered modern, so use that as the baseline). Actually, my own monitor is 16:10, so it is between 4:3(16:12) and 16:9.


    We are the majority, so let's ###### up the minority. Or w/e

    My suggestion meant you could pick. Cropped with no black bars, or full with. Your standard resulution would affect the positions of the crop and bars.
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • Soylent_greenSoylent_green Join Date: 2002-12-20 Member: 11220Posts: 2,788Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 05:53 AM) »
    Why not use black bars if you want to enforce a viewing space?


    There's a lot of stuff happening on the vertical axis in NS; I'd be fine with black bars on the sides for wide screens, enforcing the more natural 4:3 aspect ratio.

    Or, if you don't want to be a jerk, you could just keep the solid angle subtended by the screen the same regardless of aspect ratio. This means wider formats see a little more on the horizontal axis and a little less on the vertical axis.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • HarimauHarimau Join Date: 2007-12-24 Member: 63250Posts: 3,883Members
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Fluid Core @ Feb 10 2012, 07:50 PM) »
    We are the majority, so let's ###### up the minority. Or w/e

    My suggestion meant you could pick. Cropped with no black bars, or full with. Your standard resulution would affect the positions of the crop and bars.

    I think it's more of a modernity than majority thing, actually.

    Have a look at my suggestion: Keep FOV (degrees) constant. Skewed with no black bars, or unskewed with. Your standard resolution would affect the positions of the bars and the degree of the skew.

    QUOTE (Soylent_green @ Feb 10 2012, 07:51 PM) »
    There's a lot of stuff happening on the vertical axis in NS; I'd be fine with black bars on the sides for wide screens, enforcing the more natural 4:3 aspect ratio.

    Or, if you don't want to be a jerk, you could just keep the solid angle subtended by the screen the same regardless of aspect ratio. This means wider formats see a little more on the horizontal axis and a little less on the vertical axis.

    As in, the... diagonal?
    It still means people are playing with different FOVs.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Suggestions: ! @ # $ %
  • DghelneshiDghelneshi Aims to surpass Fana in post edits. Join Date: 2011-11-01 Member: 130634Posts: 941Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
    I'm fine with the vertical FoV since it's a majority playing on 16:9 right now (unfortunately... dunno why). Let them have more space on the sides since this seems to be the trend. What I want is a playable game and it's not playable on 70 degrees FoV. So please put slider into the game with reasonable maximum values and all are happy, because they have choice.
  • Soylent_greenSoylent_green Join Date: 2002-12-20 Member: 11220Posts: 2,788Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 06:54 AM) »
    As in, the... diagonal?


    No, as in the solid angle. Imagine that the field of view is projected onto a unit sphere around the camera; the area of that projection is the solid angle subtended by the screen. The unit of solid angle is square degrees(or square radians); it measures how much you actually see.

    The formula for solid angle subtended by a rectangle on a globe is (sin N - sin S)*(E - W) in radians. With an FoV you don't want distortion, you minimize it by having half the screen on the "north" and half on the "south" side of the sphere. This gives 2*HFoV*sin(VFoV/2). For a given aspect ratio n(e.g. 4:3, 16:9) you can express vertical fov in terms of horizontal fov and solve for some constant solid angle.

    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 06:54 AM) »
    It still means people are playing with different FOVs.


    Yes, and that's the correct behaviour; people have different aspect ratios. If horizontal and vertical FoV is the same in different aspect ratios you either get squashing/stretching or black bars on the top or sides. Neither of those is acceptable.

    Nor is it acceptable to keep vertical FoV the same for all displays, as this gives an advantage that scales in proportion to the aspect ratio of your screen(and dual or triple monitors get such a wide FoV that the game is unplayable).

    Constant solid angle is fair and aspect ratio agnostic.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • HarimauHarimau Join Date: 2007-12-24 Member: 63250Posts: 3,883Members
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Soylent_green @ Feb 10 2012, 08:07 PM) »
    The unit of solid angle is square degrees(or square radians)

    Ah okay, now I understand. Would the calculation be something like vertical angle x horizontal angle?

    Still, with such an implementation, dual and triple monitors would get such an absurdly thin view as to be unplayable (for them).

    QUOTE (Soylent_green @ Feb 10 2012, 08:07 PM) »
    Yes, and that's the correct behaviour; people have different aspect ratios. If horizontal and vertical FoV is the same in different aspect ratios you either get squashing/stretching or black bars on the top or sides. Neither of those is acceptable.

    Is this not acceptable because of aesthetic reasons?

    And fairness is subjective, really: it largely depends on the relative importance of viewing height or width. If they were equal in importance, then it would probably be perfectly fair (viewing area lost at the top and bottom is equal in importance to viewing area gained at the sides), but I don't think this is the case. For marines (versus skulks), the vertical may be more important; while for skulks (versus marines), the horizontal may be more important.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Suggestions: ! @ # $ %
  • WilsonWilson Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Posts: 1,397Members
    This is how I roll: image
    In-game name: Wilson

    My Crosshair Pack: LINK
  • Soylent_greenSoylent_green Join Date: 2002-12-20 Member: 11220Posts: 2,788Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 07:11 AM) »
    Ah okay, now I understand. Would the calculation be something like vertical angle x horizontal angle?


    There is some squashing involved so its not quite as straight forward as that.

    I think of it as a mercator projection in reverse. Mercator projections are the normal sort of world map where a single point on the north and south pole stretch along the entire upper and lower edges of the map. If you make a smaller map that covers only part of the globe you get much less distortion and vertical angle x horizontal angle becomes a decent approximation.

    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 07:11 AM) »
    Still, with such an implementation, dual and triple monitors would get such an absurdly thin view as to be unplayable (for them).


    It must be that way unless you stack displays in a circular arrangement and somehow inform the game how your displays are arranged so it can correct for it.

    If vertical FoV is kept constant and if a single 16:9 display gets 100 degrees wide FoV you will get 300 degrees wide FoV with 3 16:9 displays side by side. Squashing 300 degrees into what occupies perhaps 90 to 120 degrees of FoV on your retina will look insanely distorted.

    The black bars solution means that if 16:9 is the reference case, then with 3 16:9 displays arranged side by side both the left and the right monitor are completely covered in a black bar(they display nothing).

    QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 10 2012, 07:11 AM) »
    Is this not acceptable because of aesthetic reasons?


    As I said. If you widescreen people want to play with black bars along the sides, enforcing the more natural 4:3 aspect ratio, that's fine with me.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • WilsonWilson Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Posts: 1,397Members
    edited February 2012
    You can fix it in the current build. Just go to Client.lua and change "local standardAspect = 4 / 3" instead of the default. I did this with my widescreen and it also looks better with the slightly increase fov (that screenshot above was me just experimenting with much higher FOVs). The default FOV is just too low which makes things appear to be zoomed in. If they just made this change then I think most people would be happy.

    It does let you see under the Onos viewmodel but that's a problem with the model, not a fov issue.


    Basically they made it so that the default FOV value would work at widescreen resolutions but when you went down to a 4:3 resolution you get less. So for example if the FOV for the marine is 90 then you'd only get 73 when playing on 4:3. This isn't how it should be. They should keep the standard FOV value working at 4:3 resolution and then increase the horizontal FOV a bit for widescreens. Changing that line of code will do just that. Meaning that playing on 4:3 will have 90 FOV and then at 16:10 you'd have 100. Much better :)
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    In-game name: Wilson

    My Crosshair Pack: LINK
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Soylent_green @ Feb 10 2012, 12:51 PM) »
    There's a lot of stuff happening on the vertical axis in NS; I'd be fine with black bars on the sides for wide screens, enforcing the more natural 4:3 aspect ratio.

    Or, if you don't want to be a jerk, you could just keep the solid angle subtended by the screen the same regardless of aspect ratio. This means wider formats see a little more on the horizontal axis and a little less on the vertical axis.


    Can't you make it so that "normal" formats have a fixed horizontal, i.e have a higher vertical FoV, while widescreens have fixed vertical, thus getting more horizontal FoV? That may be the effect of your suggestion, but I have no experience with the solid angles and didn't feel like getting into the math now.

    That seems the most fair to me. If you choose to have a widescreen, you get a horizontal advantage, if you choose to have a normal, you get a vertical advantage.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2012
    QUOTE (Soylent_green @ Feb 10 2012, 01:25 PM) »
    If vertical FoV is kept constant and if a single 16:9 display gets 100 degrees wide FoV you will get 300 degrees wide FoV with 3 16:9 displays side by side. Squashing 300 degrees into what occupies perhaps 90 to 120 degrees of FoV on your retina will look insanely distorted.


    Buy the Black Armor Gaming Helmet today and get a copy of NS2 for free! The gaming helmet use your standard screen connection and allows you up to 180 degree horizontal and 120 degree vertical view, what your eyes could see, you can see ingame! Integrated speakers and microphone included!


    That would be awsome :)
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
  • playerplayer Join Date: 2010-09-12 Member: 73982Posts: 1,677Members
    QUOTE (Fluid Core @ Feb 10 2012, 12:42 PM) »
    That seems the most fair to me. If you choose to have a widescreen, you get a horizontal advantage, if you choose to have a normal, you get a vertical advantage.

    I'm seeing people switch to 16:9 for the alien-side, and back to 4:3 for marines. Can we settle on 2 different field-of-view options then? X- & Y-axis, independently configurable.
  • Fluid CoreFluid Core Join Date: 2007-12-26 Member: 63260Posts: 399Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    QUOTE (player @ Feb 10 2012, 01:59 PM) »
    I'm seeing people switch to 16:9 for the alien-side, and back to 4:3 for marines. Can we settle on 2 different field-of-view options then? X- & Y-axis, independently configurable.


    This would be hard-ware set, or you would have the same effect as now, cropped top-down if you set normal and use wide-screen and cropped sides if you use a normal screen and set it to wide-screen. But you could of course make it an option, and if you set the wrong you get zoomed view. Having it hardware you couldn't set the "wrong" one.
    .....//\\......This is a pylon
    ....///\\\....Copy this to your
    ....\\\///....Signature if you
    .....\\//......Must Construct
    '''''''''''''''''''''Additional Pylons
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.