Widescreen Gaming Forum

It is strange the effort he puts into this when he would be quite unaffected if we get our way (or even if we didn't). He is literally arguing against someone gaining something while nobody else loses anything... and he already has what he wants, so where does the motivation to rally against others stem from? It seems a bit self-centered and selfish to me.

Paddy showed you this one before I got time to answer. :) Take a note about his explaination about peripheral vision...

What he didn't explain is why it would not be better to see an undistorted image in your peripheral vision than a distorted one.

May I interpete this that you are reluctant to give a spesific angle and which part of the eyesight you base this upon?

If you talk about the angle occupied by the screen in your visual field and speak of our stereo vision, we are talking about a 180 degrees angle when the screen covers the whole visual field. Now, I ask you again, what angle do you refer to?

Calculating the angle is such basic trig that it didn't occur to me to give the formula. The angle is 2 * arctan(w/2d) where w is the width of the screen and d is the distance from your eyes to the center of the screen. What part of the visual field this occupies depends upon w and d. Regardless of what proportion of the visual field this occupies, perspective will be correct when the FOV equals this angle.

Your should read this before you answer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_perception

The article is correct but fairly basic. What is your point?

If your brain actually made such an assumption, you would find it terribly disorienting to look out a window. You would be expecting to see more to the sides when looking out a window two feet wide and two feet high than you see when looking out a window two feet wide and one foot high. Since perspective doesn't actually work that way, looking out windows of different shapes would be horribly confusing. But your brain understands perspective. It knows that looking through a two foot wide window from one foot away will show you the same horizontal FOV no matter what the window's aspect ratio is.

Our brains makes such assumption. So does widescreen users. We EXPECT to see more horizontal (hor+).

If your brain actually made such an assumption, objects would look smaller if viewed through a short window than through a tall window. I can't speak for you, but I don't experience this, and I don't know anybody who does.

When the perspective is correct in a first person game, you're brain and your wishes are to interpete the 3d world as if you are a part of it, not looking at it through a window. This is also one of the good parts with tripplehead, since it adds to the peripheral vision so to increase that effect. Increasing the horizontal FOV does just that. It makes it easier for the gamer to feel a part of the 3d world.

When you are looking out a window or doorway, you are looking at the world that you are part of. And your brain, with a lifetime of experience looking through windows and other types of holes, has a clear understanding of how perspective works in the world that you are part of, and especially the geometric fact that the horizontal FOV through a window does not depend at all upon how tall the window is, but only upon its width and how far you are away from it. If the FOV does not match the width of the screen, it signals the brain that what you are viewing is a picture, not a view of the world that you are part of.

the thing is in a game i dont want to be looking out a window
i want to be in the head of the guy/girl im playing

and in that case you would see more the sides playing in 4:3 would be like having blinders on

also have you seen how Quake wars does widescreen?
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/node/8124
that is how it should be done wide screen is WIDE and for 5:4 TALLER
then 4:3 seems to me id can write a better engine then EPIC could ever hope to

The more he posts, the more I'm convinced he works for them.

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6627&page=78

If not, I wonder why he puts so much effort into arguing about this...?

For the record, I am a scientist, with no affiliation with any videogame company. But I like videogames, and I'm also interested in the brain, perception, and geometric principles of 3D graphics. And I'm particularly enjoying Bioshock, and I think that the choice of FOV is one thing that makes it so much more realistic and immersive than any of the other FPS games that I've played.

As I've said before, I'm not dismissing the validity of your personal preferences regarding FOV, and it's fine with me if you choose to hack the game to your own specifications. Tastes differ. The only point that I am making is that it is a matter of taste, and the FOV chosen for Bioshock is consistent with valid principles of perspective, geometry, and perception--which probably has something to do with why it is receiving rave reviews everywhere and has already sold over 1.5 million copies. One thing that I've found is that after playing Bioshock, I find it unpleasant to look at games such as Doom3 or F.E.A.R. that use extremely wide FOVs. I suspect that the strong sales of Bioshock may start a trend toward more realistic choices of FOV in videogames.

and you still havent told us why every other game uses hor+

and i think we can all say id wrote the book on FPS games and if they thing hor+ is the way to do it THAT IS THE RIGHT WAY

Then if you really are a scientist, then you should have access to online journals and the like. Here is one for you to read and one that 2K should have read.

Future directions in visual display systems:

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=271301&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=28560830&CFTOKEN=56166811

Arrayed display systems are already providing a leap in simultaneous wide field of view and high resolution. These advances are fundamentally changing the way in which information can be represented by increasing information bandwidth and enabling a deeper engagement of our visual senses.

If you read that paper you will realise that by restricting fov to vert+/- a developer is being totally digressive to the direction of where the visual human interface industry has headed, and is heading.

It is not a design decision, artisitc design, scientific desciosn, that is all a complete farse to me. The reason I say that is:

UnrealEngine3 games are now vert+
UnrealEngine3 is the first major console porting engine
The previous UnrealEngine games have always designed for hor+
The previous UnrealEngine games have not been major console porting games

So to say 2K deisgned it like this is a farse. To say this was thier artistic decision is also a farse. On the scientific front, why would they go designing new procedures, new FOV's, new angles from thier previous data that now conflicts with previous engines, and previous game developers. The plausible answer is consoles to me. Its the only major difference.

Conspiracy, perhaps, who can tell. Still smells.

_________________
moboP8P67-M-PRO-V3 cpuI5-2500K-3.3GHZ ramOCZ8GB gpu260GTX hddOCZ-VERTEX II-SSD psuNEOHE550W hudBENQ20"

[quote]The more he posts, the more I'm convinced he works for them.

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6627&page=78

If not, I wonder why he puts so much effort into arguing about this...?

For the record, I am a scientist, with no affiliation with any videogame company. But I like videogames, and I'm also interested in the brain, perception, and geometric principles of 3D graphics. And I'm particularly enjoying Bioshock, and I think that the choice of FOV is one thing that makes it so much more realistic and immersive than any of the other FPS games that I've played.And everybody else clearly (it seems) perceives things in these video games differently to you ... as Bioshock's FOV to most people is wrong ...
As a "scientist" wouldn't you be better spending your time looking at why your brain and it's perception is so odd compared to everyone else's ...
Trying to justify Bioshocks poorly implemented FOV over and over again with such poor arguments (it seems in most peoples opinion) isn't going to help you or change their minds.
This repeated justification (with all its twists) to those that and disagree with you is also why people think you have an "interest" so to speak in your justification.

[quote]Paddy showed you this one before I got time to answer. :) Take a note about his explaination about peripheral vision...

What he didn't explain is why it would not be better to see an undistorted image in your peripheral vision than a distorted one.I don't need to as TripleHead gaming works fine as it is ... as I explained.
I didn't say an undistorted image across the three screens wouldn't be more or less desirable ... I have never seen it in a FPS game how can I know.
You haven't played a game in Triplehead but you poo poo it ... very scientific.
You would have more credibility if you didn't keep unscientifically twisting things as you did with that question ... you are making yourself look a fool not a scientist.

All of this just convinces me more that you are arguing for the sake of it ... and it is uncanny how you twist things to suit your point of view just as 2K did with ... it was an artistic or design decision ...
They got it wrong and they are changing it ... they even thanked us for pointing it out and said what an awesome forum we have here ... a forum that believes in Horz+ ... :wink:

What he didn't explain is why it would not be better to see an undistorted image in your peripheral vision than a distorted one.

Any distortion in the image is a limitation in either the game or the technology itself. Paddy was explaining how the extra content for the peripheral vision which you get with tripplehead increases the game experience. With a locked horizontal FOV as with Bioshock, you can't get this.

Calculating the angle is such basic trig that it didn't occur to me to give the formula. The angle is 2 * arctan(w/2d) where w is the width of the screen and d is the distance from your eyes to the center of the screen. What part of the visual field this occupies depends upon w and d. Regardless of what proportion of the visual field this occupies, perspective will be correct when the FOV equals this angle.

This is the same formula as the other one you have referred to earlier, just put in another way. I wasn't asking for the formula on how to calculate the FOV based upon the distance you are sitting. Bioshock have a locked horizontal FOV and its not adjustable to where you are sitting. As I have mentioned earlier, 75 degrees are too narrow for desktop widescreen gaming. Since we are talking about a locked FOV which you defend with this formula saying its optimal, I am asking you once again: Whats the relevance of the given "optimal" angle compared to human eyesight?

The article is correct but fairly basic. What is your point?

To give you some insight upon human vision, since you, despite calling yourself teacher, are operating with a 75 degrees optimal angle despite how the human vision functions.

If your brain actually made such an assumption, objects would look smaller if viewed through a short window than through a tall window. I can't speak for you, but I don't experience this, and I don't know anybody who does.

I think you misunderstand. We EXPECT to see more horizontal [hor+). The size of the objects registered with our brains are based upon our depth perception as mentioned earlier.

When you are looking out a window or doorway, you are looking at the world that you are part of. And your brain, with a lifetime of experience looking through windows and other types of holes, has a clear understanding of how perspective works in the world that you are part of, and especially the geometric fact that the horizontal FOV through a window does not depend at all upon how tall the window is, but only upon its width and how far you are away from it. If the FOV does not match the width of the screen, it signals the brain that what you are viewing is a picture, not a view of the world that you are part of.

This is where you don't understand the mission for first person shooters and people. We don't want to look through a window or stand at a doorstep. We want to be in the world. Our lifetime experience differ from yours. we are not looking at the world through a window or AT a window if to use Bioshocks FOV.

[quote]The more he posts, the more I'm convinced he works for them.

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6627&page=78

If not, I wonder why he puts so much effort into arguing about this...?

For the record, I am a scientist, with no affiliation with any videogame company. But I like videogames, and I'm also interested in the brain, perception, and geometric principles of 3D graphics. And I'm particularly enjoying Bioshock, and I think that the choice of FOV is one thing that makes it so much more realistic and immersive than any of the other FPS games that I've played.

As I've said before, I'm not dismissing the validity of your personal preferences regarding FOV, and it's fine with me if you choose to hack the game to your own specifications. Tastes differ. The only point that I am making is that it is a matter of taste, and the FOV chosen for Bioshock is consistent with valid principles of perspective, geometry, and perception--which probably has something to do with why it is receiving rave reviews everywhere and has already sold over 1.5 million copies. One thing that I've found is that after playing Bioshock, I find it unpleasant to look at games such as Doom3 or F.E.A.R. that use extremely wide FOVs. I suspect that the strong sales of Bioshock may start a trend toward more realistic choices of FOV in videogames.

Now I doubt I can put it better than the gentlemen who have already replied trrll, but...

I undertsand that you enjoy the FOV found in BioShock, I'm happy for you. I agree it's a matter of taste, you prefer the default FOV and I don't. However, the method in which they have implemented your favoured FOV, basically ruins the experience for users on wider monitors, such as triple head (and those of us who sit close to the screen)... That's hardly fair is it?

In its current state, BioShock also prevents the game from ever being run on superwide monitors, wouldn't you rather it were flexible and could cater for future technologies?

As BioShock is LOCKED into a 4:3 aspect ratio... the wider you go, the less you see... and the more restricted the view (or window, as you like to call it) becomes... Now I understand that the developers will have created the game with a certain view (or window) in mind, and didn't want to cater for wider setups, but that in my opinion, is stupid and short sighted.

But if you head read Paddy's thread detailing the fact that almost every recent U3 engine game uses exactly the same FOV/widescreen implementation method as BioShock, then you would know that your arguments on the side of 2K with regards to the "artistic" aesthetics was nonsense. Any man can see that, why you can't, a scientist, is beyond me.

URL: (I suggest you read it) [url]http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/node/8056]

EDIT: Also, when you call us a "very small minority of malcontents." it only serves to validate DestructoBots comments earlier that you come across self centered and selfish.

He is literally arguing against someone gaining something while nobody else loses anything... and he already has what he wants, so where does the motivation to rally against others stem from? It seems a bit self-centered and selfish to me.

I suspect that the strong sales of Bioshock may start a trend toward more realistic choices of FOV in videogames.

So that is why everyone bought Bioshock! 8)