|
I saw this picture at the "Nal_Ra trying out SC2" thread:
It appears all the monitors are widescreen LCDs. This is awesome, as I've been using a widescreen LCD for almost a year now. Since my monitor lacks 1:1 pixel mapping, and because I have an ATI card (only ATI MOBILE video cards have the "maintain aspect ratio" option), I'm forced to play BW with it stretched.
It appears SC2 natively supports widescreen resolutions. Though this is awesome for widescreen users such as myself, we would have a larger field of view than those on normal 4:3 monitors. I wonder if they'll leave it like this or if they'll force black bars on both sides (and have the game scale to 4:3 in the center).
|
Widescreen users will not have a larger view of the battle field.
Not going to happen, never.
|
On August 04 2007 05:42 Puosu wrote:
Widescreen users will not have a larger view of the battle field.
Not going to happen, never.
That's what I thought, until I saw it with my own eyes. In the blizzcon playable demo, those on widescreen monitors will get a larger view of the battlefield.
|
Widescreen monitors aren't that expensive anymore... why not?
|
We've been wondering, and now we see it in all the screenshots. So it seems to be in at this time.
Widescreen support would be bad. I would personally buy a wide screen monitor if the game supports it, but who else would? I'd hate to think i had an unfair advantage vs anybody.
And more importantly, maybe, is it would really screw with battles as ppl have mentioned before. Imagine fighting against siege tanks or carriers with your ground troops from side to side with huge view... or top to bottom with very little view.
Maybe they should go widescreen, but then put the UI bar on the left side or something. Have it a toggle. I dunno... but whatever they do, it needs to be better for the game.
|
but the extra sponsorship deals can go into funding more patches and expansions :/
|
Lol what sponsorship deals?
|
The original sc2 gameplay video was release in widescreen...
I do like the option for the UI to be at the side.
|
do they make widescreen CRTS? CRT vs LCD is a big enough deal to pass up widescreen entirely.
seeing as they are implimenting multiple resolutions for definite i hope they impliment a fake widescreen mode for people without widescreen monitors
|
The industry almost stopped producing CRTs. Why not all just move to LCD..?
|
On August 04 2007 07:43 gneGne wrote:
The industry almost stopped producing CRTs. Why not all just move to LCD..? CRT have higher fps and lower latency making them way better for professional gaming
your typical LCD can only do around ~60 fps with a delay of around 5 ms, a CRT can do ~120 fps with a delay of how ever long it takes for the signal to go through the wires.
|
CRTs have been better... hopefully the LCDs are getting closer to no delay. But no, i seriously doubt there are any wide screen CRTs for computers... although I haven't googled it. There are obviously wide screen CRT TVs though. Hmmmm. With DVI inputs. Hmmm.
|
Anyone knows what settings was SC2 running at blizzcon ? and the PC specs please !
|
There are widescreen crts (rarity O.O).
Just play quake to see the difference between a CRT and an LCD.
|
On August 04 2007 08:00 MarKoNiO wrote:
Anyone knows what settings was SC2 running at blizzcon ? and the PC specs please !
probably c2d, 2gb ram, geforce 8x series
|
Maybe it was scaled to wide-screen not wide-screen support haw do you know that this isn't the case everything scale to wide-screen by default (if there is no wide-screen resolution support).
|
It's true, CRTs own the hell out of LCDs for gaming. I've yet to see a LCD with a refresh rate greater than 60Hz at higher resolutions.
On August 04 2007 08:13 Polis wrote:
Maybe it was scaled to wide-screen not wide-screen support haw do you know that this isn't the case...
Because it would look like crap if it were stretched. Why would Blizzard, at the first hands-on demo of Starcraft 2 ever, have their game look like shit?
|
On August 04 2007 08:13 Polis wrote:
Maybe it was scaled to wide-screen not wide-screen support haw do you know that this isn't the case...
Because it would look like crap if it were stretched. Why would Blizzard, at the first hands-on demo of Starcraft 2 ever, have their game look like shit?[/QUOTE]
Why would they have sound proof booths that aren't sound proof, and looking like shit is overstatement whit small lcd you can hardly see any difference.
|
On August 04 2007 08:22 Polis wrote:
Why would they have sound proof booths that aren't sound proof, and looking like shit is overstatement whit small lcd you can hardly see any difference.
As stated in my original post, I've been playing Broodwar on a widescreen LCD for a while now, with it stretched. And let me tell you, it looks like shit.
|
On August 04 2007 08:16 ButtFace wrote:
It's true, CRTs own the hell out of LCDs for gaming. I've yet to see a LCD with a refresh rate greater than 60Hz at higher resolutions.
It's true that CRTs own the hell out of LCDs for FPS gaming. In RTS games like Starcraft LCDs are usually better because of proportions are fixed making it easier to know where to place buildings and units for optimal use. Knowing where you can fit a unit through or not etc.
In FPS games however the LCDs 60Hz and really around 16-24ms(everything else is marketing ploy) does make a huge difference as a 16ms+ produces up to 3 ghost pictures when things move fast on the display.
|
On August 04 2007 08:41 ButtFace wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2007 08:22 Polis wrote:
Why would they have sound proof booths that aren't sound proof, and looking like shit is overstatement whit small lcd you can hardly see any difference. And let me tell you, it looks like shit.
I looked at your screen name and I lol'd so hard.
|
That's why I bought a Plasma TV instead of a LCD TV. From my experience, the ghosting is too noticable on LCDs such as moving scenes in movie when the camera pans.
Can't wait to hook up Starcraft 2 to a 42" TV just for fun.
|
Ehh tv are shit for comps even high end plasma I think.
Wide screen worried me from day one. Cause of disadvantage non wide screen players get and theres also the difference of fighting vertical compared to horizontal.
|
On August 04 2007 10:50 HypersonicEspo wrote:
Ehh tv are shit for comps even high end plasma I think.
Wide screen worried me from day one. Cause of disadvantage non wide screen players get and theres also the difference of fighting vertical compared to horizontal. rotate camera
~~~welcome to the third dimension~~~
|
you totaly overestiminate the advantage anyone would get from this, its like complaining that ppl can use a different mouse or keyboard.
|
On August 04 2007 14:05 FA_Leinad wrote:
you totaly overestiminate the advantage anyone would get from this, its like complaining that ppl can use a different mouse or keyboard.
Umm, having a larger field of view in any competitive video game makes quite a significant advantage.
|
The ghosting and other performance issues with LCD monitors simply don't exist any more, and haven't for a couple of years - provided you have a decent quality monitor of course.
Also regarding widescreen field of view: yes it does give an advantage to players with widescreen monitors, but doing something like reducing vertical FoV to compensate (like WoW does) is a bad idea. The whole point about the shift to widescreen is that the wider FoV is more natural and will ultimately give a much better playing experience. Once everyone has made the shift to widescreen (which they will have in a few years) there will no longer be an advantage. In my mind it's similar to the shift from 56k to broadband a few years ago.
|
CSS and most FPSs let you play widescreen and YES you can SEE MORE
All you CRT fanboys try playing on a lcd.
i have a pf815 crt but much rather play on any LCD
|
On August 04 2007 05:40 ButtFace wrote:I saw this picture at the "Nal_Ra trying out SC2" thread: It appears all the monitors are widescreen LCDs. This is awesome, as I've been using a widescreen LCD for almost a year now. Since my monitor lacks 1:1 pixel mapping, and because I have an ATI card (only ATI MOBILE video cards have the "maintain aspect ratio" option), I'm forced to play BW with it stretched. It appears SC2 natively supports widescreen resolutions. Though this is awesome for widescreen users such as myself, we would have a larger field of view than those on normal 4:3 monitors. I wonder if they'll leave it like this or if they'll force black bars on both sides (and have the game scale to 4:3 in the center).
http://entechtaiwan.net/util/ps.shtm
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/FAQ#.22Scale_Image_Panel_to_Size.22_or_.22Stretching_is_UGLY.22
|
is awesome32278 Posts
They just said it would support widescreen in an interview, but they didn't specify if it would be streched or not.
|
The guy in the Q&A session asked if it would support widescreen but he didn't ask about the advantage unfortunately. But they answered 'Yes' to his question.
|
I hope they just keep it standard, playing SC is a pain in the butt with widescreen and I would assume the same even if there were no distortions because you want to have the maximum radius around you visible.
|
On August 04 2007 16:27 Asgard wrote:
The ghosting and other performance issues with LCD monitors simply don't exist any more, and haven't for a couple of years - provided you have a decent quality monitor of course.
Agreed, I have 2 Samsung 940BFs, and have never had any issue with ghosting in games like CSS and Battlefield, where stuff can be super fast and hectic. Strangely, I DO get the tiniest hint of ghosting when I'm scrolling text... but that doesn't really make a difference 99% of the time.
|
if u have enough money to buy starcraft 2 when it comes out, and have a good enough computer to run it without lag, and u pay for internet, oh and electricity.....then maybe u ought to consider getting a widescreen monitor
|
On August 04 2007 14:10 ButtFace wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2007 14:05 FA_Leinad wrote:
you totaly overestiminate the advantage anyone would get from this, its like complaining that ppl can use a different mouse or keyboard. Umm, having a larger field of view in any competitive video game makes quite a significant advantage.
having a bigger screen is also quite an advantage => easier to hit the right spot cause its simply bigger, should we now forbid to play on big screens?
Seriously, is there any REAL proof that it makes any difference? Do you honestly think that a few more pixels u see would change the result of a game?
Like i said its like complaning that some ppl use better mouse pads, keyboards or whatever. Also instead of moving a step backwards we could simply accept that widescreens will become the standard and thus either u adapt or live with the really minor disadvantage (im still sure that it wouldnt be a deciding factor in 99,9% of your games).
|
On August 04 2007 18:08 FA_Leinad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2007 14:10 ButtFace wrote:On August 04 2007 14:05 FA_Leinad wrote:
you totaly overestiminate the advantage anyone would get from this, its like complaining that ppl can use a different mouse or keyboard. Umm, having a larger field of view in any competitive video game makes quite a significant advantage. having a bigger screen is also quite an advantage => easier to hit the right spot cause its simply bigger, should we now forbid to play on big screens? Seriously, is there any REAL proof that it makes any difference? Do you honestly think that a few more pixels u see would change the result of a game? Like i said its like complaning that some ppl use better mouse pads, keyboards or whatever. Also instead of moving a step backwards we could simply accept that widescreens will become the standard and thus either u adapt or live with the really minor disadvantage (im still sure that it wouldnt be a deciding factor in 99,9% of your games).
Agreed
|
On August 04 2007 17:01 sc0rchedst0rm wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2007 16:27 Asgard wrote:
The ghosting and other performance issues with LCD monitors simply don't exist any more, and haven't for a couple of years - provided you have a decent quality monitor of course. Agreed, I have 2 Samsung 940BFs, and have never had any issue with ghosting in games like CSS and Battlefield, where stuff can be super fast and hectic. Strangely, I DO get the tiniest hint of ghosting when I'm scrolling text... but that doesn't really make a difference 99% of the time.
Disagreed, I mean the completely visible ghosting is gone, but that was from screens having like 40 maybe 50ms response times. Today’s 16-24ms, all current LCDs, screens you can easily see it by moving fast and taking a picture with a real cam of the screen. The latest LCDs just released reviewed by sites such as anandtech.com stated to have 8, 5 and even 2ms still get 3ghosts when you take a picture of the screen. 3 ghosts equals around 16-24ms. Of course as a casual FPS gamer you will not notice much, but if you really try to get good at a game like CS you will notice. I've friends who easily get 50-100% more kills playing at Internet cafe's without their own equipment just from the improvement a CRT is over the LCDs they use at home.
In the FS vs WS debate I think the question is. Who will see the least, you could take the FS mode and crop it giving the FS users the most visible area or you can as it seems to be now let WS users view a wider area.
|
In starcraft there was one set resolution that the game could be played in. In Starcraft 2 we're expecting the game to have multiple resolutions, therefore someone running a higher resolution also has the advantage of seeing more of the battlefield. I remmber back to Ra2 days where you were forced to play in 640x480 res in ladder matches so it wasnt unfair. Im curious to see if blizzard will do anything similar to make it more fair, or will they just leave it.
|
Germany2896 Posts
In 3D you can usually zoom. So I doubt there is a significant difference between widescreen and normal screens.
|
Our eyes register more in width than in heighth. FS is outdated.
|
Zooming and rotating the screen would be a huge a waste of time in an RTS like SC. They just need to make it fair out of the box. Having more screen showing is a definite advantage in battles, unless you just attack move 99% of the time. Vertical vs horizontal fighting is going to be way different.
And if multiple building selection doesn't stay, having more view of your horizontal base sure is going to be better than the player stuck in a veritcle base who has to scroll 3 times to get to all his factories.
|
At the SC2 panel at BlizzCon, someone asked during the Q&A session whether widescreen monitors would be supported. The answer was: "Yes."
|
On August 05 2007 10:46 Fen wrote:
In starcraft there was one set resolution that the game could be played in. In Starcraft 2 we're expecting the game to have multiple resolutions, therefore someone running a higher resolution also has the advantage of seeing more of the battlefield. I remmber back to Ra2 days where you were forced to play in 640x480 res in ladder matches so it wasnt unfair. Im curious to see if blizzard will do anything similar to make it more fair, or will they just leave it.
Play blizzard's latest released 3D RTS , aka Warcraft III , play with its resolutions etc , then come back here and comment...
|
Bah, the only thing that really matters is the fairness of the Korean Proscene. And they will all have the best equipment. :D
|
Hmmm, I was hoping that there wouldnt be any difference in sight difference due to advantages but I guess it was unavoidable (why would they ignore all widescreen users?). I wonder if multiple monitors will also be supported and how much advtanged would that give? If it is supported, I may get a second monitor (widescreen, as opposed to my LG1970, which is fine for all my gaming purposes currently).
|
On August 05 2007 14:07 XG3 wrote:
At the SC2 panel at BlizzCon, someone asked during the Q&A session whether widescreen monitors would be supported. The answer was: "Yes."
I guess dudes mostly want to know whether widescreen users will be able to "see more" or not.
I personally dont see why not. widescreen lcds have fast become the standard and at this point its almost hard NOT to buy one, 95% of lcds that come out are widescreen. lcds are about as good as CRTs for gaming now and arguably are better on a persons eyes(Are for me at least).
So it would make sense to support the standard and I think people overestimate the advantage widescreen would have anyway. The only reason why seeing 15% more horizontally in SC1 would be a big deal is because it would mean less scrolling around to make groups and macro. Anything else would be basically the same. And it wouldnt be an arbitrary advantage anyway, anyone could easily go out and BUY a widescreen monitor if they feel somehow cheated.
|
Wide screen worries regarding the Stalker. Does he really blink anywhere he has LOS (as in, widescreen makes a difference)?
via : http://teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=57525
Q: Can you blink up cliffs, or does it work like a World of Warcraft Mages Blink where you can only go in a straight line?
A1: You can blink anywhere that is visible (and trust me, I tried to blink to unreachable areas). That means if you are being chased by Zerglings, run your stalkers to a cliff and blink to the top of it and the Zerglings have to run around to kill them.
A2: You can only blink Stalkers to where you have a line of sight. I also tried to blink up onto a cliff expo that I couldn't see and it didn't work. Bring an observer along though, and blinking anywhere is possible.
|
the blink on the stalkers work EXACTLY like the one wc3 hero. (maiev)
only problem with it is when you have a group and you have 1 straggler, it all wont blink to the same spot, kinda like that storm spread trick
|
Widescreen is simply better, more fun, more in human eyes nature,... It's the future. So why not support it?
It would be silly from Blizzard not to do so, because in a few years most users will have a widescreen monitor anyways. And concerning CRT - I really doubt they have future and LCDs are getting better and better.
|
you can still have widescreen options on a regular monitor. It's just that the widescreen will fit the screen leaving black portions at the top and bottom like a movie screen
|
Widescreen doesn't have to mean more view space. 4:3 can show more on the top/bottom and 16 can show more on the sides. They can still display the exact same amount of actual unit space. Think about it.
|
That's not true Xiven!
You can display the same height with a widescreen monitor. But you will always have more view in the width (no stretching assumed).
If you want to have the same viewing angle with a 4:3 monitor you will have to accept black borders on top and bottom as in every 16: 9 movie displayed on a 4:3 TV.
Widescreen monitors have 16:10 though.
|
On August 10 2007 01:09 Burglar wrote:
That's not true Xiven!
You can display the same height with a widescreen monitor. But you will always have more view in the width (no stretching assumed).
If you want to have the same viewing angle with a 4:3 monitor you will have to accept black borders on top and bottom as in every 16: 9 movie displayed on a 4:3 TV.
Widescreen monitors have 16:10 though.
This is totally 101% true!
Do some research on the net people, it's all there..
|
For rts's crt and lcd makes absoloutely no difference...
|
On August 10 2007 06:01 Wizard[pl] wrote:
For rts's crt and lcd makes absoloutely no difference...
Considering CRT's superior flow that's not entirely true (100hz+ monitors)
LCD's of today have a slighty visual lag which can be annoying, even if it's mainly subconcious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/3395/kang1gj4.jpg)
