that there is a good reason to get a desktop over a laptop. so you can have 3 monitors =). i bet those panoramic movies will be really nice like this.

Nazarid

United States445 Posts

November 17 2011 05:08 GMT

#102

FoV requires processing power to project. the main reason most games have such a low FoV, is so you don't have to have a god like computer to play them. Consoles games are forced to be built to a specific parameter to actually run well. I would love options to increase the FoV, this would make things much nicer for people that have the computers able to handle it.

@ RA, Halo 2 had a FoV of 60, it wasn't bad, if you kept falling off things then i think it was just your crappy playing skills....lol

Sanchonator

Australia490 Posts

November 17 2011 05:12 GMT

#103

On November 17 2011 13:31 Shikyo wrote:
It was actually super noticeable in Skyrim. It feels like I need to always look around and have no vision at all. The caves and tunnels are really confusing too. I played Human Revolution right before it and the difference is gigantic. This really feels like a pretty huge downfall for skyrim. When you play it, you should notice it immediately.

I'm actually playing Skyrim in 3rd person now, at least I can see what's happening...

there seems to be a lot of people posting about skyrims fov so im just gunna leave this here;

To change fov in skyrim open console (~ button on keyboard) and type fov #, eg. fov 90 = 90degree fov

GrapeD

Canada679 Posts

November 17 2011 05:19 GMT

#104

It would only work if you could, like people have said, fill up 200 degrees of your actual vision with the 200 degree fov. 45 is fine for games on a monitor that takes up 45 of your vision in my opinion.

RaLakedaimon

United States1564 Posts

November 17 2011 05:21 GMT

#105

BF3 has something like this but I haven't checked it out since I play on super low resolution (aka wouldn't change much). Very cool though that its there, hopefully one day we can have the standard vision like in real life, that would be so cool.

DannyJ

United States5110 Posts

November 17 2011 05:24 GMT

#106

If my screen was as wide as my viewing angle I'd care.

tofucake

Hyrule19269 Posts

November 17 2011 05:42 GMT

#107

Skyrim's default is 65, and if you have the PC version you can just use fov 200 in console :|

But it's not the same as normal vision. The screen is completely clear and crisp, and you get warped imagery as "peripheral vision", when instead only what you're focusing on should be detailed, with the rest indistinct.

Gummy

United States2180 Posts

November 17 2011 11:30 GMT

#108

On November 17 2011 08:35 unichan wrote:
Small FOVs give me motion sickness

. That's why I tend to stay away from first person games... but Skyrim is so fun...

I have the same problem.

Vain

Netherlands1115 Posts

November 17 2011 11:57 GMT

#109

Wierd shit man. you can even change your fov in minecraft thoughXD

Edit: fuck jeah, lurker!

Zanno

United States1484 Posts

November 17 2011 12:06 GMT

#110

the standard fov for next gen fps isn't 45, it's 70

previously the standard was 90

the reason all the game companies started doing this was for performance reasons. if you're looking at less stuff at once, you can cram more detail in

on a computer monitor you get extremely bad fish-eye with an fov of 180, let alone 200. i think the absolute threshold of sanity is about 130 but even that's pushing it.

terrible OP i'm afraid, if you're going to post on a subject you could at least do the bare minimum research to learn what the current values used are

you can't just crop an image and be like "well thats what this fov is like", it doesn't work that way at all

playing with a very narrow fov is like looking through a telescope. things that are very far away also appear close to you, but things very close to you are not proportionally closer, rather they seem about the same. there's much more visual transformation going on than just cropping a photo.

FlaminGinjaNinja

United Kingdom879 Posts

November 17 2011 12:11 GMT

#111

If you play on PC there is something called 'Eyefinity'. Some new graphics cards come with it, it basically does exactly what your saying.

Works with BF3, get 3 monitors and you can have the normal view on the middle and 'extra periferal view' on the other two

Edit: Someone else beat me to it

Legate

46 Posts

November 17 2011 12:32 GMT

#112

On November 17 2011 08:39 TheDraken wrote:
somebody make me a curved screen to use 200 degree vision and i'll buy it

Alienware Gamingscreen

couches

618 Posts

November 17 2011 13:24 GMT

#113

^That monitor playing Crysis looks really nice.

Large FoV looks really bad unless you have wide monitors with side monitors for your peripheral vision.

Lower FoV also means that for campaign design they only have to make events trigger directly in front of you. It's less work. If some fps game had 200 degrees for fov devs would have to add in things to happen on the sides. It would be more demanding of the system and cause a drop in frame rates.

I think for FPS games a low field of view is somewhat tolerable.

For driving games it's absolutely horrible. And FPS games with driving parts in that narrow fov? You wonder why it's so damn annoying to drive in those games. Especially one like Halo.

firehand101

Australia3152 Posts

November 17 2011 13:26 GMT

#114

If that happened, then all of my knife attacks from behind would be harder to pull off, and that is the only thing keeping my KD above 0.5 in MW2! Ah well, lets start again in MW3

Deleted_143

Australia256 Posts

November 17 2011 13:29 GMT

#115

--- Nuked ---

skipgamer

Australia701 Posts

November 17 2011 13:32 GMT

#116

I used to play quake (one) at 120fov I think that was pretty much standard for most people online (edit: snap guy above ^^), I quite liked it... I was really sad when games started dropping the option to change fov. (I think pretty much when hl2 came out most games stopped offering at as an option)

I don't think there should be one "set" fov for competitive play... There are trade-off's for increasing/lowering your fov (assuming screen size doesn't change) so there's no one best, and it would allow players a customisation that actually matters...

r_con

United States824 Posts

November 17 2011 13:32 GMT

#117

i like 90-120 but thats just from my many years with quake.

Noxie

United States2227 Posts

November 17 2011 13:48 GMT

#118

I am guessing it is so low due to monitors being small. As long as there is some option to change it, I think it is fine.

FinBenton

Finland870 Posts

November 17 2011 13:49 GMT

#119

With this monitor I normally use about 80 fov for fps games but before I had 30" monitor, I used like 90-100.

FinBenton

Finland870 Posts

November 17 2011 13:51 GMT

#120

On November 17 2011 22:48 Noxie wrote:
I am guessing it is so low due to monitors being small. As long as there is some option to change it, I think it is fine.

Its a lot to do with platform, consolegames you play from couch far away so small fov is not a problem but with PC you are really near to your monitor so wider fov needs to be used. Also consoles have so less power these days that they have to use tricks like smaller fov to make the game run better or have some extra on graphics somewhere else.