• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

21:9 Ultrawide Gaming

Finally got 3840x1620 working again with my TV after a bit of Nvidia shenanigans :messenger_grinning_sweat: Feels good being able to enjoy ultrawide again. One curious oddity tho recently seems to be with Assassin's Creed Unity & Syndicate as they both display the resolution correctly aside from looking like stretched 16:9 instead. Ultrawide is supported but can be bugged apparently so may have to hex edit



Did you have to do anything to get Oblivion to run ultrawide? I've been playing it again recently and had no idea it was supported
Oblivion has native ultrawide support. The game gitches a little during loading screens since the art is 16:9, but ingame it's just perfect.
I don't remember Oblivion looking that bad, is that on low settings, unmodded?
No mods, but I'm running the game at max settings 5K resolution. Oblivion is 15 years old, so obviously it doest't look great by modern standards. But it still looks quite impressive at times.
 
337000_20201124185753w8krv.png
337000_20201124185757dajyk.png
 
oh by the way , i expect death stranding to have black bars on its wide screen support(ps5) , as it was created that way , more cinematic , supposedly lol.
 
Last edited:

benno

Member
Has anyone moved down in res from a 4k to 3840 x 1600? Did you feel the loss in detail with the vertical resolution?

I was using an 8k TV, usually in 4k, but it's died. Tempted to go ultrawide with either the LG 38" or Alienware 38". Anyone got any feedback on which has the best black levels, smearing, HDR etc?
 
Last edited:

Thebonehead

Banned
Has anyone moved down in res from a 4k to 3840 x 1600? Did you feel the loss in detail with the vertical resolution?

I was using an 8k TV, usually in 4k, but it's died. Tempted to go ultrawide with either the LG 38" or Alienware 38". Anyone got any feedback on which has the best black levels, smearing, HDR etc?
I have an Alienware aw3821dw arriving on Monday, so can let you know.

Going to it from 3 x Dell 25" 2k Ultrasharps.

Will retain at least one to use in parallel, maybe 2 running in portrait mode
 

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
Has anyone moved down in res from a 4k to 3840 x 1600? Did you feel the loss in detail with the vertical resolution?

I was using an 8k TV, usually in 4k, but it's died. Tempted to go ultrawide with either the LG 38" or Alienware 38". Anyone got any feedback on which has the best black levels, smearing, HDR etc?

I have both an LG 27GP950 4k 144hz monitor and an Acer Predator X35 thats 3440x1440 and when I first sit down to play on the Acer I can slightly tell it looks a little fuzzy but after playing for just awhile I think the picture looks great.

Then I go back to the 4k and can for sure tell its slightly sharper but its easy to adjust to the 1440 again and thats even the resolution you asked about which probably doesnt help all that much
 
21:9 is the cats ass... I wish it was the standard over 16:9.
I have a tale on the matter, for a while I had a 4k monitor... Liked it a lot, but saw so many threads about the awesomeness of 16:9 that I decided to sell it and get a 1440p 21:9 monitor (both IPS, both LG)... Anyway, the pixels were so chunky that I had instant regrets, I gave it a go for a while, but I couldn't get accustomed to the low details, 18 months later I am back to 4k and never looking back, even the form factor. Even for productivity, I prefer a good 16:9 monitor + a small one for the emails/social stuff while I work on the big screen.

Just a warning for others in my situation, it's not as good as it looks, and given the choice between sharpness and ultrawideness sharpness wins in my book, especially for text (code, web, etc) and still images (Lightroom at 4k+ kills). Movies this close also benefit a lot from 4k, as do games.

If you have an infinite budget the maybe a 2180p 22:9 monitor is the way to go ($$$$$)... Even then I suspect that I would prefer two 16:9 monitors.
 

AnotherOne

Member
I have a tale on the matter, for a while I had a 4k monitor... Liked it a lot, but saw so many threads about the awesomeness of 16:9 that I decided to sell it and get a 1440p 21:9 monitor (both IPS, both LG)... Anyway, the pixels were so chunky that I had instant regrets, I gave it a go for a while, but I couldn't get accustomed to the low details, 18 months later I am back to 4k and never looking back, even the form factor. Even for productivity, I prefer a good 16:9 monitor + a small one for the emails/social stuff while I work on the big screen.

Just a warning for others in my situation, it's not as good as it looks, and given the choice between sharpness and ultrawideness sharpness wins in my book, especially for text (code, web, etc) and still images (Lightroom at 4k+ kills). Movies this close also benefit a lot from 4k, as do games.

If you have an infinite budget the maybe a 2180p 22:9 monitor is the way to go ($$$$$)... Even then I suspect that I would prefer two 16:9 monitors.
How close were you sitting to the 21:9 monitor? I do agree 27-32inch 4k monitor is nice and crisp but I tend to sit a bit farther on the uktrawide.
 

SF Kosmo

Al Jazeera Special Reporter
I don't get it. Why would I want the screen to be bigger in one direction but not the other?

A person with two eyes has a natural aspect ratio of around 16:10 to their FOV. It makes sense to me that a screen should be somewhat in that proportion. Making it wide and skinny is dumb, that's not how humans see, and you'd be better off just making the screen bigger overall.
 

Armorian

Banned
I don't get it. Why would I want the screen to be bigger in one direction but not the other?

A person with two eyes has a natural aspect ratio of around 16:10 to their FOV. It makes sense to me that a screen should be somewhat in that proportion. Making it wide and skinny is dumb, that's not how humans see, and you'd be better off just making the screen bigger overall.

It's not about size of the screen but about seeing more than on 16:9.

We have gone from "square" 4:3, to 16:9 to 21:9 and there are wider screens too (32:9 for example)

Movies are made in "ultrawide" (2.39:1) for decades, why would they if humans see in 16:10? :pie_thinking: :messenger_grinning_smiling:
 

SF Kosmo

Al Jazeera Special Reporter
It's not about size of the screen but about seeing more than on 16:9.

We have gone from "square" 4:3, to 16:9 to 21:9 and there are wider screens too (32:9 for example)

Movies are made in "ultrawide" (2.39:1) for decades, why would they if humans see in 16:10? :pie_thinking: :messenger_grinning_smiling:
"Seeing more" is just a product of FOV though. You can widen the FOV to see as much as you want but it isn't always a good thing.

Movies are a little different, they're an art form with bespoke framing, and that's an artistic choice. A game where you are controlling the view is a little different imo.
 

Phase

Member
Decided to fire up Dark Souls for the first time in a long while (and first time on UW). Started a new item randomizer playthrough.

Screenshot-38.png
 
My apologies if this has been mentioned already: is there a "simple" fix for the Metal Gear Solid 5 games?

Last I checked, it was stuff involving cheat table matrices that had to run concurrent with the executable - not "simple", IMO. Like, is there's a .exe fixer, or package transformer (something that mutates the asset archives) type of thing?
 

Buggy Loop

Member
"Seeing more" is just a product of FOV though. You can widen the FOV to see as much as you want but it isn't always a good thing.

Movies are a little different, they're an art form with bespoke framing, and that's an artistic choice. A game where you are controlling the view is a little different imo.

FOV for games is really tricky. If we want to use the full 16:9 monitor but to see the same horizon information as a 21:9 for equivalent lens effect (not fisheye effect), you need vertical FOV modification which barely any games support, and it’s a bit tricky, as the formulas for proper ratio is : (taken from the Internet of course)

r = aspect ratio = w/h
r= 16/9
H = 2arctan(tan(V/2)*w/h)
H = 2arctan(tan(V/2)*r)

for V = pi/3 (60 degree vertical FOV), r = 21/9

H = 1.86
H = 106.6 degrees

Then we solve for the vertical FOV for this horizontal FOV on a 16:9 monitor:

V = 2arctan(tan(H/2)*h/w)
V = 2arctan(tan(1.86/2)*(9/16))
V = 2.35
V = 134.5 degrees

So the game renders even more view than a 21:9 now because you also render more vertical assets than 21:9 and a lot more horizontally and vertically than the original 16:9 (hit on performance).

All that information crammed into less horizontal pixels than the 21:9 solution too..

So yea… any arguments towards cheating 21:9 on 16:9 monitors, might look « ok » in screenshot comparisons, but in practice it’s total crap. Finding a game with vertical FOV by itself is even more of a niche than ultrawide support.
 

longdi

Banned
Last edited:
I did this morning. The vendor has not sent me the email confirmation yet, though.

I need this beast mainly for productivity but also a bit of PC gaming.
 
Last edited:
anyone pre-ordered the new 32:9 samsung meme monitor? First review is out.



86867ddc28102c6f38a162bdccfbe25a.png


3026f4fdea8425301b37b5a5ebde9533.png
More than double the price of my current G9 (at least of what I payed it, got in a good sale) is too much in such a short time. I'll be waiting for the next update.
 
Last edited:

MrFunSocks

Banned
I’m still on the fence tbh. I have my pc hooked up to a 34” 3440x1440 VRR monitor and my series x hooked up to a 4K HDR 55” LG OLED. It’s hard to decide where to play games tbh.
 

McHuj

Member
I’d love to get that tech in a 38” 3840x1600 size with Gsync.

I think an ultra wide will be my next monitor
 
Last edited:

RoboFu

One of the green rats
Nah for me to enjoy ultra wide I would have to have a 65” monitor so the objects on screen wouldnt be tiny.
 
Top Bottom