-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Turok: FOV Issues or UE3 Default settings strike again!
- Thread starter Dot50Cal
- Start date
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
chapel said:Not really a dig at sony, but remember when they were talking about how the PS3 could support two HDTV's at 1080p, it was that powerful.
Crysis is probably the only game that really is next-gen, for that matter current stuff can barely play it.
That's was simply from the old bullet point of the PS3 once having 2 HDMI ports.
As for Crysis, why sure it's next-gen when you simply skip his gen by having top specs that require hardware that doesn't exist yet!
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
chapel said:
Why? To derail the thread on purpose?!?
godhandiscen
There are millions of whiny 5-year olds on Earth, and I AM THEIR KING.
So you already saw Ironman? WHERE?Doc Evils said:
NameGenerated
Who paid you to grab Dr. Pavel?
You got to see Ironman? Wow, is it even done?Doc Evils said:
EDIT: Ridiculously beaten
Dr. Zoidberg
Member
Spider_Jerusalem said:
Who cares about the 4:3 users? Let them eat cake! 16:9 is the future.
BudokaiMR2
Member
Smokey Bones said:
Hmm that might explain something. I tried it a couple of times and I just couldn't get into it.
Honestly devs, I didn't pay ridiculous amounts of cash for my fucking Bravia in order to get the 'Full Experience' just to have you guys fucking cop out when it comes to actually I don't fucking know delivering the 'full experience'.
I also get motion sickness with certain shooters, console and PC, and yeah the PC version has a default fov of 70 or 75, which is shitty. As for the console versions, I have both the 360 and PS3 versions of Orange Box, and for some reason it doesn't make me sick. I can't say for sure if the fov is set to 90 or 75, but if I don't get motion sickness when playing I have no further need to investigate. I was happy when Valve released the demo on XBL because this was one of the issues I was worried about.rc213 said:
gregor7777
Banned
xbhaskarx said:
This. 1080p is a fuckload of pixels to push.
Witchfinder General
punched Wheelchair Mike
madmook said:
Yeah, Turok was the first game to ever make me feel a bit ill, and I play FPS all the damn time.
Joe Molotov
Member
RubberJohnny said:
In Soviet GAF, the bishop beats you!
Randy Lanzarote
Member
chapel said:
The PS3 can play two HD streams at the same time, the h264 decoder on the PS3 uses 3 SPEs per stream, and then one thread on the PPU for the audio. The target for the PS3 was to be able to decode two h264 streams simulataneously, and that it does.
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2006/1130/mobile358.htm (Note: Japanese, this is a translation)
I think the talk of 1080p @ 120hz was in reference to its video playback, rather than actual gaming. However with the amount of spin coming out about Cell all those pre-launch years ago, I think some wires got crossed in SCE.
*sigh*
I'd like to see you guys play any PC game where you can manually change the FOV. What would you do, always put it at maximum because otherwise you're not seeing as much as you could?
The game isn't cropped at widescreen. It doesn't render the same as a low 4:3 resolution only cropping away a part of the image and upscaling it. It renders it properly in a widescreen resolution. The developers has a choice of having a low FOV which looks natural and makes it easier to see things in the distance and the middle part of the screen, or a high FOV which can create ugly unnatural stretching to the sides of the screen but you see more to the sides. There's no "right" way to do it, developers are free to make the widescreen FOV however they think it looks best with the game.
It's probably the exactly same case as with Bioshock. The developer chose the FOV they thought looked best with widescreen and let the UE3 engine automatically handle other aspect ratios.
Of course, an ideal solution would be to simply add a fov setting to the game. But apparently console developers thinks that adding any settings to console games is a sin.
I'd like to see you guys play any PC game where you can manually change the FOV. What would you do, always put it at maximum because otherwise you're not seeing as much as you could?
The game isn't cropped at widescreen. It doesn't render the same as a low 4:3 resolution only cropping away a part of the image and upscaling it. It renders it properly in a widescreen resolution. The developers has a choice of having a low FOV which looks natural and makes it easier to see things in the distance and the middle part of the screen, or a high FOV which can create ugly unnatural stretching to the sides of the screen but you see more to the sides. There's no "right" way to do it, developers are free to make the widescreen FOV however they think it looks best with the game.
It's probably the exactly same case as with Bioshock. The developer chose the FOV they thought looked best with widescreen and let the UE3 engine automatically handle other aspect ratios.
Of course, an ideal solution would be to simply add a fov setting to the game. But apparently console developers thinks that adding any settings to console games is a sin.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
There's no law stating that a 16:9 view must contain "more image" than a 4:3 view or vice-versa. If the view is defined by a certain width, 4:3 will end up with more height tacked on. If the view is defined by a certain height, 16:9 will end up with more width tacked on.urk said:
darkressurection
Banned
I knew something felt "off" while playing this, I hope Propaganda can get a patch ready for release.
DeadlySchnauzer
Member
darkressurection said:
*sigh*. And once again people jump on the "I always felt something was wrong i just never mentioned it before" bandwagon.
This is a developer choice. There is no right or wrong way to do this. There is no way you can "sense" that the screen is being cropped horizontally or vertically without actually physically comparing 4:3 vs 16:9.
A 16:9 game that is "cropped" from 4:3 feels and looks exactly the same as a 16:9 only game that happens to have used a lower default FOV.
A 16:9 game that is "expanded" from 4:3 feels and looks exactly the same as a 16:9 only game that happens to have used a higher default FOV.
DeadlySchnauzer said:
Well, your certainly entitled to your opinion but I'd have to disagree from playing the games myself. When I play a widescreen game that is cropped in this manner I get the feeling that I'm are playing from a viewpoint thats a few feet in front of where the players head is. It can be very disorienting to play this way. Having known about this issue during the Bioshock release, I checked it out and confirmed my suspicions.
Theres a nice gif explaining this. Edit: Found it:
FromTheFuture
Member
I was wondering why they showed so little of the gun in Turok. Now i know.
futnownarcade
Member
60 pixels is nothing. You mean 60 pixels tall right, meaning, you know, 60 rows of pixels?
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
chapel said:
Dugg..
Start digging people!
FirstInHell
Banned
shagg_187 said:
I don't think that this will get the kind of traction you think it will. Outside of NeoGAF, this game seems to be falling under the radar.
GrayFoxPL
Member
Wider FOV would've helped the combat. Try to dodge raptor and find where he is. In Turok close quarter battels are really confusing. If you could see more on the sides it would be a lot better.
The game's coming feb 5 so I don't see it being fixed before release or even after really.
The game's coming feb 5 so I don't see it being fixed before release or even after really.
WTF are you on about? Dead Rising was already and clearly next-gen two years ago. Let's cut this retrobullshit, please.chapel said:Not really a dig at sony, but remember when they were talking about how the PS3 could support two HDTV's at 1080p, it was that powerful.
Crysis is probably the only game that really is next-gen, for that matter current stuff can barely play it.