Widescreen Gaming Forum

Based on the conversation around the new War Hammer game, I wanted to pose this question to the board...

What makes an acceptable widescreen solution?

Now, I realize this is largely opinion, and will differ between people, but I wanted to get what everyone's take is. There are obviously games that don't support widescreen (Beyond Good and Evil), and there are those games that stretch the widescreen (Warcraft III). And we now realize there are two options for how games handle a "non-stretched" widescreen. One is to add real estate to the horiztonal (the left and right), showing you more of the game. Examples of this include City of Heroes and Neverwinter Nights. But several games have used the solution of cutting off the top and bottom of the game to fill the screen without stretching. This is the case with War Hammer 40k: Dawn of War, and I believe this happened with Max Payne 2 as well.

So the question is, do you consider a game like War Hammer a "widescreen game?" The game itself isn't stretched, and you can see all of the HUD, but it's not giving us anything more. Even if you don't consider this a true widescreen game, is it good enough for you? Would you rather cut off the top and bottom, to fill the whole screen, or would you rather play with horizontal letterboxing (black strips down the sides)?

What makes an acceptable widescreen solution ?

A game that give you the true FOV of the human sight, like it should be in a 16/9 ratio. that's my opinion.

FOV is greatly impacted by your distance from, and the size of the display, which really makes it subjective.

For example, the proper FOV for sitting 10 feet away from an 84" projection screen will be dramatically different than that of sitting 10 feet away from a 37" plama TV, even though both may be displaying a 16:9 ratio.

This has a lot to do with the stretching distortion at the periphery of your vision. If the stretching occurs all within your central view (as would be the case with the 37" screen @ 10') then it will be unrealistic, although if you were closer or the display was bigger, then this distortion would occur closer to your outside periphery, closer to a natural view.


what makes an acceptable widescreen solution to me is one that allows the content to fill the HDTV resolutions and the common PC widescreen resolutions like 1280x720 or 1440x900 without any distortion of 3D geometry. Distortion of 2d displays (HUDs) is acceptable, and expected.

I'd say the Warhammer game fits this description, although I propose that we create a new term to describe it for ease of communication, as it is definitely a different type of fix. Perhaps call it cropscreen or some such.

While we're on about defining things, Ibrin, I would really like to see a 'Widescreen Gaming Glossary' with technical explanations of Field of View, Viewing Angle, Aspect Ratio, Zoom, Camera Scaling, Cropping, HDTV, Interlacing, etc. It would be great to have plain english explanations to go along with them, too. This would help to ensure everyone is speaking the same language.

Also related, it would be nice to have some recommendations for widescreen solutions, for example recommended viewing distance relative to screen size (most home theater info points to sitting away a distance 3 times the diagonal size of your screen as optimal), but also pros/cons to different hardware setups (ie matrox parhelia w/triple monitors vs. geforce 6800 in span mode w/triple monitors)

I have been using the brilliant Parhelia and three screens for Surround gaming since it first came out ... and I have found that this is all down to the individual.
Some don't mind a restricted FOV ... some don't mind a stretched HUD ... etc... but whatever ... when there's a posting about a "solution" people want to hear the truth.
If there is a restricted FOV ... mention that there is a restricted FOV...
If there is a problem with the HUD ... outline the problem ...
People will find out when they try it for themselves so why not point this from the beginning so people can make informed choices and your credibility will remain intact ... :)
Matrox never announce a "Surround Game" that an individual has found without first seeing 3 or 4 screenshots ... so people can see for themselves.

It is all down to what the individual will accept ... honesty and clarity of the explanation of the "Solution" is what is needed.



BTW ... umbra you mentioned this ....

what makes an acceptable widescreen solution to me is one that allows the content to fill the HDTV resolutions and the common PC widescreen resolutions like
1280x720 or 1440x900 without any distortion of 3D geometry. Distortion of 2d displays (HUDs) is acceptable, and expected.

I assume when you say "without any distortion of 3D geometry" you mean a view that is squashed or has an incorrect aspect ratio.... because distortion of 3D geometry will nearly always take
place ...whatever screen you have.

... here for example in Tribes Vengeance on a normal 19" screen ...
Look at the guy in the middle of this screenshot ... the crosshair is on him ...



Now look at the same shot with the guy nearer to the edge of the screen ... he is fatter ... I haven't moved closer to him I have just turned so he is at the edge of the screen...



Here ... the same guy on my Surround setup ... even fatter as he gets further out in to the peripheral vision.



Try it on your screen for pretty much any 3D game ... you will see they nearly all stretch.
It seems ... the wider the screen and the nearer to the edge you get the bigger the stretch.

and the stretching is down to FOV settings.

You're just arguing semantics here, but I guess that's why I'm asking for a glossary.

So, yeah, by "distortion free geometry" I mean that a sphere in the center of the camera view should be round, not elliptical (ie. "squashed").

Whether you've got a really wide FOV or a really narrow FOV, a sphere in the center of view will always appear round, as long as the geometry is displayed correctly. Although an altered aspect ratio will sometimes affect this, it's not the cause of the problem. The problem is what happens to the displayed geometry when the aspect ratio is changed, as in most of our fixes the geometry remains correct whether the game is 4:3 or 16:9 or whatever.

Perhaps we need to make "squashed" a technical term. :D Which I also propose, unless someone knows of a phrase to describe this phenomenon with 3 words or less for ease of communication.

No ... stretching is not down to the FOV settings ... can you not see in the first two shots on a normal 4x3 (or there abouts) with an un-modified
setup the character is still getting distorted as it moves closer to the edge of the screen.

I don't get what you are saying ...

Firstly you say ... that the stretching is down to the FOV ... Then .... you say that "distortion free geometry" .... would mean a sphere in the center of the camera
view should be round, not elliptical (ie. "squashed").... :?

but

A sphere (the "Player" character) in the centre of the screenshots I have shown is not affected or squashed ... so it isn't the FOV
... objects are only affected/distorted as they move away from the centre. The "player" does not get distorted as he is always in the centre.... :D

... as I say try it on your screen you will see anything that moves closer to the edges will get
stretched/distorted... Whatever screen size or type of screen you have.... widescreen or not and pretty much whatever game.

This is not the same as having an incorrect aspect ratio ... which would make the characters look stretched/squashed ... even the "Player" (the sphere in the center)

An incorrect FOV would give a zoomed in feel.
An incorrect Aspect Ratio would give a squashed look to everything.
Pretty much all first person and third person games will distort geometry as it moves away from the centre of the screen.... whatever FOV setting... even the default.

Paddy, thanks for underscoring the need for a proper glossary here. We are obviously using the same words to describe different things.

Here is a pretty workable definition of aspect ratio: http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Aspect_ratio_(image)

Aspect ratio generally refers to the proportion of height vs. width of a display. That's all it describes. I don't understand how there can be
an "incorrect" aspect ratio, unless you're talking about having your HDTV type display select a false widescreen ratio, which then stretches the pixels.

If you're talking about using the term "aspect ratio" to describe a stretched pixel that is no longer square, then you're using it incorrectly in
this context, as your video card will not display a stretched pixel, only your monitor will stretch the pixels themselves.

When 3d games are "squashed" (see the need for a glossary?) the geometry displayed is either horizontally stretched or vertically
compressed, therefore a sphere in the center of the display would appear elliptical. However, the pixels creating the image would still be square.

I am not debating that things get more stretched the closer to the edges of the screen they are. That is a fact. The only time this would ever not
occur is if the view is completely isometric as you might see in a CAD program. Basically all 2d RTS games are isometric.

FOV determines how severe this outer edge stretching is. The wider the FOV, the more stretching you will see at the edges. The narrower the
FOV, the less stretching. Yes, this gives a "zoomed in" feeling. That's what zooming is - shrinking the field of view by increasing the focal length.

I think what is happening is that you are talking about the final displayed image, whereas I'm talking about the image that is output by the videocard.

If you still don't understand what I'm saying or think that I'm wrong, I will post some screenshots to demonstrate squashed geometry vs. stretched
pixels and some to demonstrate very wide vs. very narrow FOV.