Widescreen Gaming Forum

[-noun] Web community dedicated to ensuring PC games run properly on your tablet, netbook, personal computer, HDTV and multi-monitor gaming rig.
It is currently 01 Dec 2024, 23:30

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 805 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 81  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 15:51 
Offline
Editors
Editors
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jul 2004, 17:42
Posts: 3436
Would it also be fixed for Vista 64 bit? I really appreciate the work you're doing (that the devs should've done).
It is our plan to get it to work in all versions of Vista ... but there is no guaranties ..
Racer_S thinks he can do it ... it will just take a few days.


Top
 Profile  
 


PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:03 
Offline

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 15:52
Posts: 49
I registered here (I've lurked for ages) because of this whole bioshock farce. I got fed up of going around in circles on the 2kforums trying to explain to people who didn't understand the issue or didn't want to understand (trolls) and it's beyond a joke.

I think it's safe to say that most posters here are WS gamers who understand this stuff so it can be discussed without having to teach the basics of 3D programming and widescreen gaming to every other poster who decides to flame us for wanting proper widescreen support.

Seriously they make me sick, it's not actually any concern of theirs if they are happy with their WS or play at FS so why keep stirring it up instead accepting it as a valid issue? Ignorance mainly, and possibly for some 'entertainment' value they get out of arguing for the sake of it.

I'm also grey lantern over there and have been into this issues since Paddy first posted about it (I was running 4:3 at the time on the demo because I hadn't got my WS monitor hooked up). I've done my bit trying to explain to the idiots over there, now someone else can do it (pref 2k when they release a fix) ;)

Anyway, that's there - this is here.

Apart from getting that off my chest I wanted to say another thanks (also on 2k forums already) to Racer_S for the workaround/hack. I can't work out why the devs didn't put such a simple (even simpler for them cos they didn't have to hunt for memory locations) selectable FOV (or more standard just a selectable and properly implemented aspect ratio drop down box or something like most other games have).

I confirm it works perfectly for me on a 19" WS 1440x900 @ 0.7/0.7 - I know these are not accurate but it's what felt right when I A/B it and it's fine for now, will try the numbers above later to see if I can get it perfect.

I played it first with the hack on and it seemed great, then I toggled it off and my god it was terrible. The virtual head about 2 feet in front of the virtual body is ridiculous. The zoomed in FOV is never going to be 'correct' no matter how many people keep assuming it was an intentional design choice.

And for the record if that fov WAS intentional then I have severe worries about the design team, I hope for their sake it wasn't a choice but a mistake cos it was ridiculous.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:08 
Offline
Editors
Editors
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jul 2004, 17:42
Posts: 3436
Hey greylantern ... welcome to the WSGF ... 8)

That thread over at the 2K forums just got out of hand ... but you have to laugh at the idiots ... no point trying to explain they don't want to really know ... :wink: ... :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:09 
Offline

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 15:59
Posts: 2
Errrr guys.... does anyone know what would be the settings for 2560 X 1600 ?? this is way to complicated for on top of my normal working day :-)

thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:11 
Offline
Editors
Editors
User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2006, 16:57
Posts: 1317
:welcome

I stopped reading the 2K thread long ago. The people who it is effecting are mature and level-headed about it, while those it has nothing to do with go on rants and flame (mostly with profanity). Bizarre.
Rather have a much more mature discussion about it here methinks. :wink:

_________________
Formerly eZ`

Follow me on twitter: @theg00seberry and find me on Steam


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:12 
Offline

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 14:07
Posts: 17
I confirm it works perfectly for me on a 19" WS 1440x900 @ 0.7/0.7 - I know these are not accurate but it's what felt right when I A/B it and it's fine for now, will try the numbers above later to see if I can get it perfect.

Check out my tables above, your 0.7 sliders are quite close to the 16:10 monitor numbers of 0.694 in table 3 :)
Errrr guys.... does anyone know what would be the settings for 2560 X 1600 ?? this is way to complicated for on top of my normal working day :-)

thanks

Try 0.694 (or 0.7 which is close enough) for the sliders on your 16:10 monitor and see what you think.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:13 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 09 Apr 2007, 14:39
Posts: 578
Errrr guys.... does anyone know what would be the settings for 2560 X 1600 ?? this is way to complicated for on top of my normal working day :-)

thanks


Use the 16:10 A/B because that resolution is just the 30" 16:10.

_________________
Current build: Intel i5-4670k | 32GB DDR3 | RAID0 2x250GB 850EVOs | nVidia GTX980Ti (MSI G1 Gaming Edition) | SoundBlaster Zx | Dell 2405FPW (Landscape, primary) & HP w2338h (Portrait)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:24 
Offline

Joined: 12 Apr 2005, 01:58
Posts: 64
So Vista users with problems, try running it in DX9 mode, see if that works.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:28 
Offline

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 15:52
Posts: 49
Thanks for the welcome guys.

Yeah i'm not posting anymore on that issue over there because I end up looking just as bad as the trolls. :shock:

Will use the theoretical perfect number 0.694 for my 16:10 then, I knew I was in the right ballpark because I was staring at the bathysphere as I adjusted and it was 'out of round' until I got close to those numbers (and the door was too rectangular).

2K should be donating money to Racer_s as with his fix there may be a lot of those who were cancelling orders now changing their minds.

And it looks stunning in 'proper' widescreen (just as we knew it could, just like other good games like HL2 look great in WS). What's more it now feels good too (except some mouse acceleration issues that were never there in 4:3 as far as I could tell).

Thanks again and keep up the good fight!


edit > another good reason to prefer this forum, it has the commonly accepted as needed 'edit' feature which is a pain in the... over on 2k.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2007, 16:29 
Offline

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 16:26
Posts: 4
Big thankyou to Racer_S, Googlestater and anyone else what has helped in some way to this hack.


I wasn't overly concerned when I heard about the vert- problem to be honest because I thought I wouldn't notice a difference.

But I used the hack along with Googlestater's numbers and the difference is unreal. It just looks so stupid with what the devs made it on my 1440*900. The hack set at 0.694 for me makes things look great, rather than the zoomed in rubbish from before.


Thanks to all involved!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 805 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 81  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  




Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group