Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Razumen

Real Name Razumen   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Mar 13, 2010, 15:29
Total Comments 611 (Apprentice)
User ID 55599
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > DOOM Adds Vulkan Support
36. Re: DOOM Adds Vulkan Support Jul 18, 2016, 15:15 Razumen
 
jdreyer wrote on Jul 18, 2016, 14:08:
I wouldn't have thought a game like Doom would benefit much from something like Vulcan.

You thought a game using one of the latest and most graphically impressive engines on the market wouldn't benefit? What did you think Vulkan was for?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Patches
5. Re: Evening Patches Jul 15, 2016, 12:22 Razumen
 
Nullity wrote on Jul 15, 2016, 12:15:
Daikatana 1.3 for Windows, Linux, OS X, and FreeBSD.

Is this the patch that finally makes me Romero's bitch?

Sorry, someone had to.

It's ok, denial is the first step
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Patches
3. Re: Evening Patches Jul 15, 2016, 10:59 Razumen
 
(Patched) Daikatana was actually not that bad past the first episode, pretty cool weapons and enemies later on, and sweet music. too bad it has to live alongside Romero's infamy forever.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
36. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 23:54 Razumen
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 20:42:
Razumen wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 18:51:
eRe4s3r wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 18:31:
Razumen wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 11:16:
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 11:09:
Increased FOV lets you see more to your sides without turning increasing your situational awareness. It doesn't improve your aim.

Increased your situational awareness can be argued as an advantage, whether it's unfair or not, that's a bit more contentious.

It makes aiming harder. And if you don't have relative fov adjustment on "zoom" weapons it also makes those weapons zoom *less* so there is no advantage. In fact too high FOV often breaks first person aim entirely, only BF4 (The only REAL shooter currently) as adaptive fov when you have a zoom scope or just merely "aim down sighs" allowing you to actually see as far as someone on a 4:3/5:4 screen would.

Not when switching between a 16:9 and 21:9 screen, there would be no real difference in character sizes on screen, or zoom levels for that matter, because you'd only be gaining horizontal screen space, thus there are no changes to aiming...

In Overwatch you do not gain horizontal screen space though thanks to their idiotic "FOV / Aspect Ratio" implementation. On 21:9 you are zoomed in more, meaning you have to move your mouse pointer more than someone at 16:9.


Sorry, I meant if they implemented it correctly.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
34. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 18:51 Razumen
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 18:31:
Razumen wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 11:16:
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 11:09:
Increased FOV lets you see more to your sides without turning increasing your situational awareness. It doesn't improve your aim.

Increased your situational awareness can be argued as an advantage, whether it's unfair or not, that's a bit more contentious.

It makes aiming harder. And if you don't have relative fov adjustment on "zoom" weapons it also makes those weapons zoom *less* so there is no advantage. In fact too high FOV often breaks first person aim entirely, only BF4 (The only REAL shooter currently) as adaptive fov when you have a zoom scope or just merely "aim down sighs" allowing you to actually see as far as someone on a 4:3/5:4 screen would.

Not when switching between a 16:9 and 21:9 screen, there would be no real difference in character sizes on screen, or zoom levels for that matter, because you'd only be gaining horizontal screen space, thus there are no changes to aiming...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
31. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 17:21 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 15:43:
It would not be the same! You don't just lock one FOV and change the other!

21:9 in OW literally runs at a lower vFOV RIGHT NOW than it does at 16:9 because it is limited by hFOV of 103. This moves the viewmodel closer to the screen at 21:9 than it is at 16:9 and does not break anything. You just can't see as much of the gun.

If they raised the horizontal limit to support 21:9 at the same vFOV as 16:9 is currently (probably FOV108-110 would match it), they would also need to allow 16:9 to use FOV110 too or it wouldn't be "fair" due to the ability to see farther to the sides. If a 16:9 player then increased his FOV to 110, this would push the viewmodel farther away from the screen and BREAK IT because it would be displaying parts of the viewmodel they never intended you to see.

You can't possibly increase one without increasing the other. Your field of vision is a bubble that operates at a fixed ratio.

They would have to adjust the way every viewmodel is displayed in the entire game to match the new maximum hFOV setting.

Please stop giving me the wikipedia version of how FOV works.


Going from a 16:9 screen to a 21:9 screen you definitely CAN lock the v.fov because their height ratios are THE SAME. This isn't rocket science.

They don't NEED to have 16:9 support the same h.fov as 21:9. The point is that that can fully support 21:9 monitors without breaking the game.

If you wanna argue about it being "unfair", which never was one of my points, an extra THREE DEGREES of horizontal FOV isn't going to give anyone a competitive edge. Furthermore, if you wanna simply go down that route, I could argue that 16:9 players have an unfair advantage because they can see more vertical space, which is an actual issue in Overwatch's more vertical gameplay.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit
22. Re: Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit Jul 13, 2016, 15:46 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 15:38:
As for it not being a widespread issue, that's literally why they're changing it in Ranked.

You don't read so good.

I literally just said "I'm not denying that it is an issue in ranked play, that is literally why they are changing it."

They don't consider it a widespread issue in quick play, that's why they aren't changing it there.

Sigh.

Actually they said that "In Quick Play, where things are intended to be more relaxed, this is fine." That doesn't make it less common or not a balance issue.

Regardless, I've already explained why this is a bad move.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
28. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 15:41 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 15:33:
There are technical reasons for setting an upper limit to FOV like broken viewmodels, rendering glitches and lower framerates overall.

What I actually said. It was an example of what types of things could be causing the reason for them to not change the FOV that you've wasted a lot of posts picking at for no reason.

The reason they have stated: "That it would be unfair"
This does not explain why they can't increase the FOV limit to match the higher FOV of the 21:9 players at all.

Sigh... yes, yes it does. Having the same horizontal FOV on a 16:9 monitor as you would on a 21:9 would increase the vertical FOV as well, which actually WOULD break viewmodels.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit
20. Re: Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit Jul 13, 2016, 15:31 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 15:15:
Just because someone did it once and put it on youtube doesn't mean it's a widespread issue. When I see it happen in a quick play game I'll let you know. I'm not denying that it is an issue in ranked play, that is literally why they are changing it.

All I see in most of these videos is one well organized team beating another unorganized team. The stacked heroes are not the only cause of it. They are communicating better than the other team is and that team will most likely win any game.

Bastion, zenyatta, reaper, zarya... these are powerful counters that makes this 6 DVA thing pretty moot anyway.

Read the click through: http://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20746674467#1

They explain why it's only important to change this in ranked queue.

You're going to have organized teams in Quickplay as well, which is going to ruin the game for a lot of the casual crowd when they keep running into it.

As for it not being a widespread issue, that's literally why they're changing it in Ranked. If it wasn't common, they wouldn't resort to drastic measures like this.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
26. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 15:26 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 15:21:
Yes, you're right, a 16:9 screen is going to have the EXACT same vertical FOV as 21:9. So again, there wouldn't be any issues there.

What? There is obviously an issue with it being any higher than 103 since they limit it to 103 for everyone. They don't want to only increase FOV for 21:9 giving them an advantage, so they would have to allow the increase for everyone and that must not work or they would just do it.

If there was a valid technical reason, they probably would have said so. But I guess you know better right?

I certainly don't know but I'm not the one making up reasons as to why they should be able to "just do it". What possible reason could there be for them to not do it if it's as easy as you seem to think? Isn't it far easier to just change the slider limit to 110 than to go out of their way to tell people they aren't going to do that even though they could?

Um, you were saying that changing the FOV would cause issues with the view-models, and that's why they're not supporting it. But that really can't be the case, as I've already explained.

"What possible reason could there be for them to not do it if it's as easy as you seem to think?"

Umm, the reason they've already stated? LOL
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit
18. Re: Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit Jul 13, 2016, 15:05 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 14:10:
I have not been playing much in ranked. It's obviously happening there since that is where the change is being made so I believe it is a thing. I have not seen anyone doing anything nearly that organized in the quick play queue since the day they opened up ranked play. :p

I can think of a few ways of countering 6 DVA's (or 6 of anything really), I'm kind of surprised you're making that big a deal of a strategy that shouldn't actually work that well. The shock value of seeing them all show up the first time is effective, but that should be the extent of it.

I would like to see them disallow character changes in the last minute or two of a round. That should be more effective at stopping cheese tactics to force OT than any amount of balance attempts. There will always be character combos that are highly effective when they are unexpected.

I'd recommend watching some very easily found videos demonstrating these tactics, they are much more effective beyond the initial surprise factor.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
24. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 15:03 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 14:04:
I'm under the impression that the aspect ratio is what actually determines the Horizontal to vertical FOV ratio. Games only let you adjust one FOV or the other, but the ratio stays the same so it doesn't actually matter which one you are changing. I guess technically they would only need a viewmodel position adjustment, they wouldn't actually have to make new models.

It's far simpler than any of this though. If there wasn't something wrong with the way the game currently works at higher than a 103 FOV, they wouldn't be saying any of this. They didn't wake up and decide "you know what, fuck those 21:9 guys even though we can fix this easily and give everyone better FOV options".

Everyone wants more than 103, even people on 16:9... but they haven't budged on any of that. The smaller subset of 21:9 users wasn't going to change that.

Yes, you're right, a 16:9 screen is going to have the EXACT same vertical FOV as 21:9. So again, there wouldn't be any issues there.

If there was a valid technical reason, they probably would have said so. But I guess you know better right?

ForgedReality wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 14:10:
Actually, they used "21:9" because it sounds cooler to consumers than "7:3". Bigger numbers == better, right? RIGHT?!

No, it makes more sense to call it 21:9 than 7:3 because there's already the common 16:9 ratio out there, it makes it a lot easier to visualize the size difference. Either way, you still get the same amount of vertical real estate.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit
16. Re: Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit Jul 13, 2016, 14:00 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 13:44:
There is a difference between wanting to win and that being the only determining factor in your level of fun. Does it suck to come around a corner and get surprised/owned by a wall of DVA? Sure... is it the worst thing that has ever happened and ruined your entire night? Jesus I hope not.

It's cheesy and broken sure... for like 30 seconds until your team switches to the counter and rolls them. These 6-man 1-class teams are not winning any games they weren't already going to win. It creates unexpected and new situations... teaches you that you can't just play one way the entire game and you have to counter other heroes...

Your idea of fun sounds very boring to me.

Blizzard choose this because for some hero doubling, there IS no counter, except for the opposite team to choose the exact same combo. There's just no way they can balance it for it to be a fair and fun experience for all. No balance = no fun.

Also if you knew anything about current cheese strategies, hero stacking definitely helps teams win games they wouldn't normally, such as everyone choosing a fast tank character like D.va to force an overtime on a capture map.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
18. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 13:48 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 13:37:
glitches should be fixed anyways

If there were enough people using 21:9 to justify the expense to fix it... they probably wouldn't be making this announcement.

Adding horizontal FOV absolutely breaks viewmodels. Go turn the FOV up over ~110 in any quake engine game and you'll see your gun floating out 5 feet in front of you. In some games you start the see inside the head of the firstperson model... It's far more complicated than just changing a setting.

They're not citing glitches though, are they? They're using the "unfair" competitive angle as their excuse. Besides, this is Blizzard, it's not like they can't spare the QA to squash a few bugs on their latest smash hit.

Also, changing the FOV in Quake through the console is not the same thing, at all-You're adding vertical FOV when you do that, which is what breaks the viewmodels. Going from 16:9 to 21:9 won't add any vertical FOV when done correctly, only horizontal, which will preserve the representation of any player model on the screen.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit
14. Re: Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit Jul 13, 2016, 13:28 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 12:57:
Yeah coming up with solutions to new and interesting scenarios in a non-competitive setting... no fun to be had there!

I don't think I'm the one thinking narrowly here :p

Playing the game is fun. If winning if the only part you find fun then you need to find something else to do or stay out of the casual queue.

Like I said, unlimited heroes makes playing the game NOT fun a lot of the time, especially when it's abused and one team goes all DVA or something similarly cheesy and broken. Furthermore, it fragments the player-base and creates a subset of the game that will not teach people how to properly play the game should they want to move into competitive modes from then on.

This is a matter of game balance and doesn't have anything to do with your obsession with people wanting to win the game. (BTW, everyone wants to win at the game they're playing, whether they admit it or not)
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
15. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 13:23 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 13:03:
Wouldn't matter if the limit was 103 or 107 or 115 or 120... someone somewhere would still feel disenfranchised by it's existence. There are technical reasons for setting an upper limit to FOV like broken viewmodels, rendering glitches and lower framerates overall.

The number of people using 21:9 simply do not outweigh what it would cost to support the higher FOV. If it were simply a matter of increasing the limit there is no real reason they would shy away from that.

Adding horizontal FOV won't break viewmodels, FPS argument is kinda irrelevant, and glitches should be fixed anyways.

It's not like adding in support for a standard monitor ratio is going to cost them that much, much less than supporting something even less used like SLI.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
13. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 12:34 Razumen
 
Creston wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 12:17:
ForgedReality wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 10:35:
21:9 is dumb because it's too fucking short.

But... but... it's just as tall as a 16:9 monitor? (relatively)

Thus the ratio 16:9 -- 21:9...

I guess they don't look as "cool" as widescreen, but I do kinda miss the 4:3 days...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit
12. Re: Overwatch Adding Support Sniper, 21:9, and Competitive Hero Limit Jul 13, 2016, 11:19 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 11:07:
Yes and no? Quickplay is supposed to be casual and fun... and sometimes you just need a team of 6 Mei's to have that fun :p

People are entirely too concerned with winning every single game in the QuickPlay queue.

You're thinking of it too narrowly, fun for one side of the game doesn't equate for fun for all.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up
8. Re: Overwatch 21:9 Support Follow-up Jul 13, 2016, 11:16 Razumen
 
descender wrote on Jul 13, 2016, 11:09:
Increased FOV lets you see more to your sides without turning increasing your situational awareness. It doesn't improve your aim.

Increased your situational awareness can be argued as an advantage, whether it's unfair or not, that's a bit more contentious.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > DOOM Adds Vulkan Support
33. Re: DOOM Adds Vulkan Support Jul 13, 2016, 11:13 Razumen
 
yuastnav wrote on Jul 12, 2016, 02:51:
I went ahead and bought DOOM while it was on sale. The demo didn't impress me but I decided to give the game another chance. It's really a mediocre shooter. All I want is shoot but I'm constantly hindered by the gore kill mechanic where the enemies are dazed instead of just dying. Furthermore the chainsaw is absolutely ATROCIOUS in this game. I cannot believe they were able to fuck this up so badly. What's wrong with the original chainsaw from Doom? I will never understand this.
I'm happy that it has Vulkan support but I'd be much happier if more games would include it.

Oh yes,the ol' being "forced" to glory kill dazed enemies argument, never gets old lol.

BTW the chainsaw is great in this game, it's much more useful than it ever was before. Taking down Barons of Hell with it is hella fun.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
611 Comments. 31 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo