Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ZeosPantera]

Since this is a small and devout group I thought I would share my " Passione' " for using a correct FOV in games. Now I am not talking Horizontals of 75-90.. No. I am talking Verticals of 20 and horizontals on my 16:10 screen of 32

I guess I first got annoyed playing race sim's and finding it never really was very "immersive". You know, that catch phrase for everything gaming? immersion gaming... OOOHHH

Well tinkering around rFactor you find it lets you change your Vertical FOV.

As low as 35 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v504/F12Bwth2/Game%20Screens/FOV35.jpg

and as high as 100 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v504/F12Bwth2/Game%20Screens/FOV100.jpg

And that sounds great but my math skill far exceeds the ISI coders apparently.

I have a 24" monitor (22.5" viewable) now that leaves 12" of actual "screen" height. Since rFactor only concerns itself with the vertical and automatically sorts out the horizontal based on the res you play in I can take that 12" and then just measure the lines from my eyes to the screens top and bottom.. Like so.



Now with an online calculator (http://ostermiller.org/calc/triangle.html) I can get the real V-FOV I should be using. 12" height... 34 inches from the top and bottom calculates to a 20 degree FOV.

So what rFactor allows is every car you download and use has a .cam file that lets you set the default cockpit FOV and camera angle and position. This you can edit so the game is forced to use it.

Let me tell you. Nothing like having your actual FOV custom coded into a game. It really does make it seem like you are looking through a window into the game world. It may seem "zoomed in" to most people but I can guarantee if you get use to the concept of it. You will never want to play in any other view again.

Only thing missing is a triple-head or large projector to really get the "IMMERSION" thing going.

I have also tried the "perfect" FOV in arma2 with less success. It isn't that I could not achieve it, I just couldn't play very well. Racing games make you drive forward. Always looking at a path and following it. Arma air-drops you into a field surrounded by enemies and tanks and wishes you luck. I settled on 40x64 for arma.

VIDEO OF rFACTOR 20 Degree V-FOV with customized viewpoint.



VIDEO OF ARMA2 Various FOV's 80,60,40 and 20


My dedicated tutorial for setting up rFactor with the correct FOV http://www.racesimcentral.com/forum/showthread.php?5691-Setting-up-your-Driving-view.

[ZeosPantera]

I am angry. Im bumping this because if I don't I am just going to start the same thread elsewhere.

Why can't people understand the psychological differences associated with a low vs a high FOV.

I'm on the portal steam forums and everyone there asking about a FOV adjustment wants to run it higher. HIGHER!

I want to run it lower. I see outerra and hope the ability to adjust the fov is reduced to vertical only.. and that it is limited to ~50°.

It's getting from an annoyance with other people to down right violent hatred. Will explain later if away... sleep.

[cameni]

I don't get it why you are fighting so hard.
I can understand both. Since most people don't have displays covering full human viewing angles, it is and always was a compromise between the realism of view angles vs. the ability to see more. Either can be worth more to various people, and apparently there's more of wide FOVers out there.

It's not like any group is absolutely right - translated to RL, they are going around with fish eye optics attached, whilst you are in a box with holes. Human brain can adapt to both with more or less comfort, so I think no holy war is needed.

But you said that people can't understand psychological differences, but then continued that people want higher FOV. Surely one can understand the psychological differences but still prefer a higher FOV, can't he? I, for example, perfectly know that FOV "should be" what you computed, with regards to view distortion and realistic perception, but I also feel that it's creepy and impairs my gameplay since I can see less than I would in RL in the same situation because of the limited hardware. So I choose a higher FOV, less than what I see in RL but more than I should really see through that opening to another world. And the brain knows it, and adapts, and I have no internal conflict between my internal compartments.

Knowing that one day we'll get to a point where all this will be obsolete .. unless people with 180° displays will be asking for 360° views

[ZeosPantera]

Calmer winds have prevailed. It just annoys the ____ out of me when people request 110 h-fov.

110 fov [video][/video]

It can be unfair to others playing at a normal level and destroys whatever beauty and atmosphere a game has to offer. You might as well replace all the textures with solid grey accept for enemies and vehicles because the colors are confusing.

Having the horizontal what is edited is one of the problems. When transitioning to triplehead people think they need more fov then what they had. which was usually 90.

Most games when going triplehead simply leave the standard view in the center monitor and continue the distortion essentially wasting those other screens . Examples

Serious Sam.
Crysis
Metro2033
AvP
wow
mafia2
COD:BO
TF2

If the fov's were lowered on the center screens automatically when  triplehead was detected the side monitors would show more than default but with much less distortion...BUT... the user would have to lose some of the top and bottom of their single display view.

I made this previously to show what setting a triplehead to 90degrees total horizontal would do in tf2.



Now using vertical as the adjustment would mean nothing changes when going triple-head. People would be more likely to adjust it properly because it isn't a common used adjustment even though it is superior for accuracy and ease of use. hint hint.

[ZeosPantera]

My official serious post concerning proper FOV use. I figured that forums would be the place considering nearly everyone their has the hardware to pull it off..

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=23361

[cameni]

Yea, that 25° FOVV definitely feels more real and drawing me into the scene, but the lack of peripheral vision is somewhat disturbing. I wonder if it could be helped by creating a dynamic distortion effect on the side borders that would hint at something moving to the side. Something that would be emulating the peripheral perception of movement we've got, not being able to know what it is without looking at it directly, but still being able to register the movement. In combination with Track IR it might be the thing ...

[pico]

FoV is a Indivitual Thing, between the Distance and the Size of your Monitor.

[ZeosPantera]

well actually Cameni the lack of peripheral is all in your head. Having a single 16:9 monitor set to 90° horizontal shows you 90°.. Adding on triplehead by default leaves 90 in the center and adds XX degrees to the left and right totaling somewhere in the ~150° range(guess). But calculating the center to say 40° Horizontal and then adding two more monitors each would show about 30+ more degree's each. So you end up with over 100° horizontal which is more then you were getting with a single monitor.

And Yes Pico? I agree?

[cameni]

I meant lack of peripheral versus RL, since you are arguing that you are going for real, undistorted views.

[ZeosPantera]

All you can do to help with that is grab three 32" screens. I've figured that is the minimum size screen you can use to get 180° real life wrap around assuming 1" bezels. You can go larger but anything smaller and you fall under my personal comfort distance of 26" from the screen.



Oh, I'll mention it here. I'd like to see a six screen eyefinity with a Hexigon of screens you climb inside of. Not do'able with current games but if OT can accommodate and then take track IR (or whatever head tracking data) you could turn your head (real head) 360° and when pressing forward you would simply move toward that direction or screen. In other words the worlds orientation would be fixed and you would have to spin around in real life to look and move in a direction.

[C. Shawn Smith]

Zeos, you are one very driven, OCD fellow

[ZeosPantera]

They finally updated Portal 2 to allow a lower (or higher) fov. Playing in a calculated is near impossible without a huge projector so I settled on 45 but think up to 60 still has benefit's over 90°

Here is 90°, the games default. Below is 45°
[video][/video][video][/video]

You can play them at the same time to sort of grasp what I am on about. The Scale and feel of 90 is off. You can see nearly the entire room from one corner. Plus you miss out on alot of the texture and model detail. Then in the moving scenes with 45 you can actually focus on whats outside the room. 90 makes me feel like there is a "drunk" filter on and I just took pills.

[Jagerbomber]

I prefer the default.

[Lawrs]

FOV should only be fucked with in racing simulators if you got triple monitors and g27 like I have

[ZeosPantera]

Fov is the first thing that should be fucked with. I'm hoping OT has a good FOV setup so that it can take advantage of triple-head setups and huge projectors so it can keep its simulator heritage intact.

It comes down to what you want out of a "game" Play as a character or play as yourself.

Besides arma 2 works real well with proper fov
[video][/video] Triplehead would be nice with this.