EPT4 by 3:
+ Show Spoiler +
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8aZ9V8q.jpg)
16 by 9:
+ Show Spoiler +
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4wnXjhZ.png)
This would probably lead to all pros sticking to 4 by 3. Could also lead to a shitstorm when the entire new population realises that they have an inferior field of view.
StarCraft: Remastered coming in May? - Page 38
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Lorch
Germany3710 Posts
4 by 3: + Show Spoiler + 16 by 9: + Show Spoiler + This would probably lead to all pros sticking to 4 by 3. Could also lead to a shitstorm when the entire new population realises that they have an inferior field of view. | ||
|
Jealous
10361 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:18 ZenithM wrote: I can't really argue much against your points. This is all pretty obvious stuff. Yes, you see more of the game, you see more buildings, you see more units. Is it so impactful that you would say to potential buyers "fuck you and your standard 16 : 9 monitor", in 2017? It's like hotkeys really. Yes, maybe some races, in some situations, will benefit more from having a more comfortable layout than BW's original one. Would this balance delta even matter against balance variations brought by... maps, for example? If Blizzard really has BWHD in the works, and most BW players are like you and can't accept this kind of tradeoffs, then yes indeed, this release will not go well :D. Yes. Most of the BW community plays on 16 : 9 monitors by now and play just fine either in window mode or with black bars on the border. For a few years I played with BW stretched to fit the 16 : 9 of my monitor, which was a little ugly (everything was SUPER FAT) but this could be something that doesn't affect new players as much and will look much better in HD. I don't see the overwhelming reason to risk changes to gameplay just so that the game fits entirely on your big, wide screen. Aesthetics is secondary to gameplay, a philosophy that should apply even in an HD remake. To answer your second question, the issue as I've outlined in the aforementioned posts and in the one above yours, is that it will exacerbate positional balance in maps. Comparing its impact vs. map impact is sort of a faulty premise, because the two will be intertwined to some degree. However, in absolute terms, of course it is preposterous to consider that this would impact balance as much as some of the poorer maps in BW's history have, such as Tears of the | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:23 Lorch wrote: Thanks for the appreciation Jealous. Just out of curiosity I also made another mock up of the other way of doing 16 by 9 (reducing field of view): 4 by 3: + Show Spoiler + 16 by 9: + Show Spoiler + This would probably lead to all pros sticking to 4 by 3. Could also lead to a shitstorm when the entire new population realises that they have an inferior field of view. What the? You just cropped the top part of the screen :D. Obviously that's not what Blizzard is going to do, and obviously pros would stick to 4 : 3. By "reducing field of view", I thought you meant applying an appropriate level of zoom so that 4 : 3 and 16 : 9 players see the same surface area. Edit: Yes Jealous, I get it. Bad bad bad changes, no changes. You don't strike me as a guy who will buy BWHD :D. | ||
|
Lorch
Germany3710 Posts
Changing the zoom so building would be smaller/bigger depending on your resolution seems like a really odd idea. I don't really think that's a decent option at all as that'd make it harder/easier to click on stuff depending on your settings. Also if you'd want to keep it 100% the same area you'd have to stretch the sprites and it'd look ugly as fuck. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
| ||
|
Lorch
Germany3710 Posts
| ||
|
[sc1f]eonzerg
Belgium7013 Posts
| ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:41 Lorch wrote: Actually if both screens are the same size and one is 4 by 3 and the other 16 by 9 everything will have the same size. Obviously the only way to keep things the same size on a 16 by 9 screen would be the first option I presented on the last page. I just wanted to present an option that'd favour 4 by 3 in addition to the one that'd favor 16 by 9. I agree that a zoom-in effect is not a good solution, but I don't see why Blizzard would crop the screen for 16 : 9 players, unless Blizzard's dev team is somehow led by Jealous. | ||
|
Voltz_sc21
66 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:50 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: 4 more days,this gonna be long oh lord -_- It's like less than 3 days I thought | ||
|
[[Starlight]]
United States1578 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:50 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: 4 more days,this gonna be long oh lord -_- You said it, brotha.  | ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
I say it's worth the wait ^^ | ||
|
lestye
United States4237 Posts
It might be 3 calendar days in some places because Korea is a day ahead. | ||
|
Jealous
10361 Posts
I would buy Brood War HD in a heartbeat if the name is representative of what it is: Brood War, unaltered, in higher aesthetic quality. If it is anything but, then I will continue to enjoy BW classic as I have for nearly 20 years and continue watching my favorite progamers continue playing BW classic to increasing viewer numbers and in growing prizepool tournaments without shedding a single tear. Thanks for your concern. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
| ||
|
Sr18
Netherlands1141 Posts
While this is nice and all, it hasn't transformed me into a superior player all of a suddon. The impact on my performance is very minor if it exists at all. So while I wouldn't advocate for adding a 16: 9 resolution (I don't think the game needs any changes, other then making it easier to actually getting into a match), I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's not the end of the world. | ||
KwarK
United States44275 Posts
On March 23 2017 04:07 Sr18 wrote: To add to the discussion about aspect ratio's and increased field of view, Valve recently added 21  support to Dota2. Because of this, I can now play with an increased field of view. It's just as was shown on the previous page in the comparison between 16: 9 and 4:3 everything stays the same size, but I get a bit extra screen "real estate" on the left and right. I can see a bit further without scrolling.While this is nice and all, it hasn't transformed me into a superior player all of a suddon. The impact on my performance is very minor if it exists at all. So while I wouldn't advocate for adding a 16: 9 resolution (I don't think the game needs any changes, other then making it easier to actually getting into a match), I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's not the end of the world. If you'd just reduce the fraction to 7:3 you wouldn't have that first smiley. | ||
|
Jealous
10361 Posts
On March 23 2017 04:07 Sr18 wrote: To add to the discussion about aspect ratio's and increased field of view, Valve recently added 21: 9 support to Dota2. Because of this, I can now play with an increased field of view. It's just as was shown on the previous page in the comparison between 16: 9 and 4:3, everything stays the same size, but I get a bit extra screen "real estate" on the left and right. I can see a bit further without scrolling. While this is nice and all, it hasn't transformed me into a superior player all of a suddon. The impact on my performance is very minor if it exists at all. So while I wouldn't advocate for adding a 16: 9 resolution (I don't think the game needs any changes, other then making it easier to actually getting into a match), I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's not the end of the world. Comparing Dota2 gameplay to StarCraft is a bit of a stretch, but we can skip over that because it's self-evident. The thing isn't that making a bigger resolution will make you a stronger player, it's that it will change gameplay in some situations for anyone who has the capacity to take advantage of the resolution. I won't pretend to know much about Dota2, but wouldn't expanding the field of view make you potentially more aware of your opponent's movements, potentially making some aggressive options from the enemy harder to execute? That's the issue I foresee in Brood War, where people will be able to see Shuttles with Reavers/DT or other similar harass coming from a greater distance away, making that aggressive play more difficult to execute. It wouldn't make those players any better in any sense, it will just make it easier for them to notice and react to "surprise" situations. | ||
|
Sr18
Netherlands1141 Posts
On March 23 2017 04:22 Jealous wrote: Comparing Dota2 gameplay to StarCraft is a bit of a stretch, but we can skip over that because it's self-evident. The thing isn't that making a bigger resolution will make you a stronger player, it's that it will change gameplay in some situations for anyone who has the capacity to take advantage of the resolution. I won't pretend to know much about Dota2, but wouldn't expanding the field of view make you potentially more aware of your opponent's movements, potentially making some aggressive options from the enemy harder to execute? That's the issue I foresee in Brood War, where people will be able to see Shuttles with Reavers/DT or other similar harass coming from a greater distance away, making that aggressive play more difficult to execute. It wouldn't make those players any better in any sense, it will just make it easier for them to notice and react to "surprise" situations. In theory that's exactly what's good about the increased field of view. It just doesn't translate well into practice, at least not for me. Maybe it's because the sight range of your units doesn't increase, so you end up with a large part of your increased field of view existing of fog of war. It could also be that the function of the added vision overlaps with that of the minimap. The minimap also has the advantage of being in one place, so you don't have to move your eyes as much. And maybe there are other reasons. All I know is thay in my experience, the added field of view is not as beneficial as it would seem in theory. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4237 Posts
On March 23 2017 04:50 -Archangel- wrote: I have been trying to prepare you for days now so you are not too butthurt when BWHD turns out with more modern UI, but you all just keep to your illusions. Don't say I didnt' warn you. Even if you're right, that doesn't make it a good idea, and will cause the scene to fight and probably dismiss HD as a SC2 spinoff instead of a real re-release. | ||
| ||
