Quake3World

lol....Tsakali...showing everyone he missed the point since March 2000.

Memphis wrote:

GONNAFISTYA wrote:
For me, what is at issue is why video games (the only entertainment medium wherein the user can potentially change the FOV) are what people point to whenever they want to talk about viewing issues. When you sit down at your computer to play games, watch a full-screen YouTube video, a television program, a sports event or even a full-length feature film, why is it that ONLY GAMES are somehow not comfortable? Why is that the ONLY the developers of games are to be bitched at?

Hey guis, all i'm sayin' is an first person field of view is like watching the Gummi Bears intro on Youtube. Nnd I dunno whow I gots so fucking stupid, lols.

Uhm....lol?

I thought the main argument for adjusting the FOV in games was to compensate for the distance from the screen to make a few people more comfortable while playing games on a computer? I would love to have someone explain to me how the distance to the screen has changed for someone either playing a game on that screen or watching a movie on it?

I can't wait....

because movies use different angle lenses and perspectives in almost every scene. Lotr for example goes from massive war scenes one minute, to close ups of queer little hobbits, putting their tongues down each others throats. A fps usually has a fixed perspective for the entire game, so the brain interprets it differently. Ever wondered why fov only tends to be a noticable issue with first person games?

I know what you're trying to say, but this is a pc specific issue like I mentioned before.

@gky:
not sure where you're going with this - how many movies have you seen that were shot entirely with the camera at one end of a cardboard tube? filmmakers are careful not to overuse angles/techniques (e.g. first person) that can nauseate the viewer. beyond that the mediums aren't really comparable in such a way - mainly for the screamingly obvious reason that the player controls the camera. a better comparison with film/tv might be the reduction in format from widescreen to 4:3 pan/scan, which plenty of people do hate.

..and i don't get the thing about hardcore gamers. adjustable FoV has been an option in FPS games for a long time and people are used to having it (maybe because all the good ones were on the same handful of engines), it's only recently that it's started to drop away (granted, along with a lot of other things that hardcore players complain about). A tiny FoV (i.e. less that 90 or non-adjustable) is something that sucks for everyone, not just hardcore players. there are plenty of folks like myself who might've been gaming for a long time but have rarely ever taken it seriously - and i am spending less on games. partly for all the obvious reasons (shitty DRM, piss-taking DLC and licenses, buggy releases as standard etc) and partly because now that games have to be made with consoles in mind, the cameras tend to be shit.

i understand why - if you're on crappy hardware then you need to limit how much the player can see - and it probably makes QA easier too, but it really drops you out of a game when you get attacked by an NPC that's standing RIGHT FUCKING NEXT TO YOU because you're essentially wearing a diving helmet. that's not a 'pro' problem, it's a basic immersion problem. even on a console, i'd rather have a clear view of the world than an excellent view of the shiny crap just in front of me.

reducing the FoV seems like it was a necessary corner to cut for consoles, hopefully with the next generation things will go back to the way they should be.

brisk wrote:Lotr for example goes from massive war scenes one minute, to close ups of queer little hobbits, putting their tongues down each others throats.

I don't like you anymore.

He's not wrong. Fuck hobbits.

This thread is amazing

Anyway, I pirated the shit out of this game to give it a try and although the FOV/bloom is ridiculous, it has a few nice ideas. I like the breach system and the UI/2D artwork is really nice. The level designs are pretty bad for the most part, though when you get to the downtown area, it's PURE bladerunner/dx style cyberpunk goodness. Just a shame you can't actually do anything while you're there except take in the sights and then move onto the next kill zone, but very pretty nonetheless. The boss fights seem quite good so far too, with each one very different to the next. Much better than DX:HR in this respect.

Story is pretty gash so far and it's generally herpderp shooting all the way through, but it has just enough new ideas to push it beyond the standard COD crap. I'm kinda enjoying it and it's certainly a lot better than I expected it to be. Probably worth picking up when it's a tenner on steam or something. OH WAIT IT'S NOT ON STEAM LOLOLOL.

brisk wrote:The boss fights seem quite good so far too, with each one very different to the next. Much better than DX:HR in this respect.

Barbie: Jet, Set & Style! has better boss fights than DX:HR, so that's not saying much.

brisk wrote:Anyway, I pirated the shit out of this game to give it a try and although the FOV/bloom is ridiculous, it has a few nice ideas. I like the breach system and the UI/2D artwork is really nice. The level designs are pretty bad for the most part, though when you get to the downtown area, it's PURE bladerunner/dx style cyberpunk goodness. Just a shame you can't actually do anything while you're there except take in the sights and then move onto the next kill zone, but very pretty nonetheless. The boss fights seem quite good so far too, with each one very different to the next. Much better than DX:HR in this respect.

Story is pretty gash so far and it's generally herpderp shooting all the way through, but it has just enough new ideas to push it beyond the standard COD crap. I'm kinda enjoying it and it's certainly a lot better than I expected it to be. Probably worth picking up when it's a tenner on steam or something. OH WAIT IT'S NOT ON STEAM LOLOLOL.

So after establishing that the game is actually rather good you still refuse to pay for it? You're the worst kind of pirate scum.

Eraser wrote:So after establishing that the game is actually rather good you still refuse to pay for it? You're the worst kind of pirate scum.

brisk wrote:In before someone says it's a cyberpunk game, so we should be wearing sunglasses to play it.

And yep gky, art direction is good on this one. Will play.