New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Glenwing

1440p at 60Hz is about the same difficulty as 1080p 144Hz for the GPU, but 1440p 60Hz is much easier for the CPU since resolution doesn't affect CPU load. So at 1440p 60Hz the CPU only has to be capable of getting 60fps, whereas 1080p 144Hz, the load on the CPU is exactly the same, but it has to be capable of getting 144fps now. So 1080p 144Hz is "harder" in that sense as you're more likely to be limited by your CPU. But for the graphics card it's about the same.
There's no plea. You seem to have wandered away from the discussion, so let me clarify again. This debate isn't about what's better. It's about how things actually are. I don't really care if ultrawides have a wider field of view or not. I use 16:10 primarily so I'd stand to benefit over 16:9 users if HOR+ was gone. I'm simply stating the reality of how things are, since you seemed to be in denial about it and I didn't want you to keep spreading false information about how...
No, console edition software doesn't "have" to have a lower FOV than the PC version. It is that way because the software developers decided to set it that way. Yes, the actual vertical FOV is adjustable (so it may not be "locked" in that sense, if the developer provides an option to adjust it), but the point is that it doesn't change with aspect ratio. Whatever value the vertical FOV is set to (as determined by the developer, and they may choose different values for...
Yes, and I explicitly stated so more than once in my other posts. You might learn something if you go and read them.All displays with the SAME aspect ratio will display the same ingame image, REGARDLESS OF RESOLUTION. A higher resolution monitor will just render the image with finer detail. Yes, a 1600×900 display will show just as much stuff as a 3840×2160 display, it will just be rendered with much finer detail on the higher resolution display.Any display with a wider...
But it doesn't work that way, that's what I've been trying to explain this entire time.
I don't think you understand. There is no special support to add for UHD monitors. It is a 16:9 ratio, the FOV is the same as any other 16:9 resolution, which was already extended years ago, as you just said (though most of that was just lack of proper support for extending the FOV that far horizontally; HOR+ was still in place and could be observed with 5:4 vs 4:3 monitors if you want). You think game developers will "add support" for the thing that is already the...
Yes, if you do the same horizontally it is ok, to a point, just as doing it vertically is ok, to a point. In games, the vertical field of view is essentially set close to its maximum by default then stretched to fill as much horizontally as the game will allow. If you'd like instead for the vertical field of view to shrink on wider monitors instead of staying at its maximum, then ok. Most people prefer the other way. Either way it doesn't affect reality. You need to look...
^ This is correct.I'm sorry, but you are simply wrong. I'd suggest you actually just test things and see what happens before you go arguing for one side or another.For HOR+ scaling, there's really no other scaling method that would work. If you try to extend the scene vertically too far you get stretching and other weird issues pretty quickly, particularly on FPS games, with gun models and such. With horizontal field of view, you do get stretching as well (as seen on...
I am not implying that 34" ultrawide is wider in physical width or pixel count. I am explicitly stating that wider aspect ratios allow you to see a wider field of view in almost all games. The resolution is irrelevant. Almost all games use HOR+ scaling, which means that the vertical field of view is fixed and scaled to the vertical pixel count of the monitor, and the image is extended to both sides until you hit the edges of the screen. Having a higher resolution monitor...
Ultrawides are popular for gaming due to HOR+ scaling used in almost all games. Having a wider aspect ratio allows you to see a wider range in the game. The display has exactly 50% more area than a 2560x1600 monitor with the same pixel density. If you are going to compare against different pixel densities then you can do anything you want. 1024x768 has a much larger area than 3840x2160 if I compare a 17" monitor with a 4K phone display.Of course, ultrawides are not for...
New Posts  All Forums: