Originally Posted by Phil Rhodes Did you like it, then, Joe?
P
Nah, he truly hated it. When he was talking about the game, you'd occasionally have to remind him to breathe. :D
Fear not though, his silence today isn't because he literally stopped breathing, it's because he's out of the office today playing a few more cool games... he'll be reporting on those soon. ;)
Regarding the widescreen/4:3 discussion, I've known girls to complain about a few inches, but I never thought us lads would be arguing over them:D
Made me laugh reading threw all that. I'm sure which ever way you choose to view the game, it won't lesson the experience. Now go play.:D
Yep, I was already gonna buy this one but now I think I'll splurge out the extra cash and get me the collectors edition with the Big Daddy figure.
Just have to keep it out of the wife's line of sight or she'll tell me to get rid of it just like my Master Chief figure - didn't do that though, I just hid it.
Originally Posted by Ibrin I dunno. If you buy an 8800GTX, do you think you're entitled to a better experience than someone with a 8600? How about a hi-res mouse? Should developers dumb down audio soundtracks to 2.0, because everyone doesn't have 5.1. Just because you buy a lot of speakers, and go through the trouble of sticking some behind your head, wouldn't you expect/hope that they would be supported - especially when the technology was mature?
And, to keep it on a monitor angle, if you buy a monitor with 1600x1200 resolution, would you expect a better experience than someone with 1024x768? What if the dev locked in the max res at 1024x768, and made you stretch the image across your native res?
This whole idea of "widescreen is cheating" or "everyone has to be the same," is pure tripe. If you *really* feel that way, then start up the petition to boycott devs who don't code games at 1024x768 @ 30fps, with no AA or AF, lock your ping at a fixed rate, and dumb your mouse down to 400dpi. FOV, faster frame rates, lower pings and higher mouse dpi all give a better experience, and possibly an advantage. Simply cherry-picking one to call out is intellectually inconsistent.
And we're not even talking a multiplayer experience here. Allow people to experience their single-player game in the best possible manner. If you want to force an FOV for competitive multiplayer, I could consider than. And one open could just as easily be forcing a widescreen FOV and letterboxing on the 4:3.
So, here's to developers who talk up "immersive and cinematic" experiences, without supporting the basic visual concept...
Originally Posted by Tim S not necessarily... but you do need a PC that's reasonably up to date. People are running the demo just fine on last year's mid-range for example - it'll also run on a 6600 GT... at 640x480/800x600 :)
I am rather pleased by this fact. I'm running at 1024x728 with my 6600gt just fine with HQ post processing/shadows, turned off, and medium actors.
Got this 2 hrs ago (it came before the actual release time) And its pretty awesome, it plays sorta like condemned. witch isn't bad i liked that game. and i like bioshock. i can't really criticizes the game i just started playing it but it looks amazing and feels great (360 version) i don't have a decent pc yet.
Top 5 fps
Hl2
system shock 2
bioshock
far cry
Cs/source (feel the same about both.)
Originally Posted by Ibrin I dunno. If you buy an 8800GTX, do you think you're entitled to a better experience than someone with a 8600?
And, to keep it on a monitor angle, if you buy a monitor with 1600x1200 resolution, would you expect a better experience than someone with 1024x768? What if the dev locked in the max res at 1024x768, and made you stretch the image across your native res?
An 8800GTX *is* better than an 8600. A 1440x900 screen (19" widescreen) is not better than a 1280x1024 screen (19" standard). It doesn't cost any more and it doesn't have any inherent better features. It simply has a different aspect ratio. Think of it as someone chapping some pixels off the top and putting them down the side.
Now explain to me why the owner of the widescreen should have such a radically different user experience to the standard screen owner.
The horizontal FOV is the most important metric - and the devs have chosen to keep that the same for 360 owners, widescreen owners and standard screen owners. Seems like a reasonable approach to me.
It seems like you guys are expecting something extra because you have widescreen - but all it means is that your pixels are arranged in a different configuration.
Although humans get more horizontal FOV than vertical, it comes at a price.
Humans cant see colours or shapes out of the central vision area, its the brain that "paints and shapes" the objects outside the central area.
If you put a coca-cola bottle out of your central vision its your brain thats telling you it is red, not your eyes.
The peripheral vision was designed to capture movement not details.
The central vision (the one that gets you colour, shape and movement) has a more or less oval shape, slightly more wider than taller.
As for monitors, what matters to me is the area of the monitor. A 19" full screen has a similar area to a 20" widescreen. The 19" wide screen is smaller than the 19" full screen.
Although humans get more horizontal FOV than vertical, it comes at a price.
Humans cant see colours or shapes out of the central vision area, its the brain that "paints and shapes" the objects outside the central area.
If you put a coca-cola bottle out of your central vision its your brain thats telling you it is red, not your eyes.
The peripheral vision was designed to capture movement not details.
The central vision (the one that gets you colour, shape and movement) has a more or less oval shape, slightly more wider than taller.
That doesn't sound very true, poor eyesight (short and long sighted) is caused (normally?) in the eyes, I reject the notion that there is something wrong with my brain because I cannot see past the end of my nose unaided
Originally Posted by Jamie Wrong, the game would have been built for widescreen and it would be absurd to reduce the horizontal fov for 4:3.
But it wouldn't be a reduction, 4:3 viewers should get the same view, it's just widescreen viewers get added view not reduced, that's the way I've always seen it, and that's why I watch targat SG- on TV. I remember an article here about triple monitors, that would be pointless if all it did was cut the top and bottom from your image. The whole point of widescreen is it's more like the aspect ratio you see in, but by cutting off the top and bottom, instead of adding to the sides, it makes widescreen utterly pointless.
Doesn't bother me too much though, wait, actually it does a little thinking about it, because the VGA system on the 360 is so retarded, on my 4:3 monitor I get a letterboxed picture :doh: Does Bioshock letterbox the picture via VGA? I can't remember myself from the demo.
In any case, the pixel stealage is a minor inconvenience, bit stupid though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar Greetings!
Although humans get more horizontal FOV than vertical, it comes at a price.
Humans cant see colours or shapes out of the central vision area, its the brain that "paints and shapes" the objects outside the central area.
If you put a coca-cola bottle out of your central vision its your brain thats telling you it is red, not your eyes.
The peripheral vision was designed to capture movement not details.
The central vision (the one that gets you colour, shape and movement) has a more or less oval shape, slightly more wider than taller.
As for monitors, what matters to me is the area of the monitor. A 19" full screen has a similar area to a 20" widescreen. The 19" wide screen is smaller than the 19" full screen.
But when you play an FPS you mainly focus on the centre of the screen, where you're aimer is, where you are looking, the rest of the screen is still in your periphs, it's not like you're focusing on the entire screen at once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim S Fear not though, his silence today isn't because he literally stopped breathing, it's because he's out of the office today playing a few more cool games... he'll be reporting on those soon. ;)
You forced him away from Bioshock? And there I was thinking you were a nice person :p
Originally Posted by LeMaltor That doesn't sound very true, poor eyesight (short and long sighted) is caused (normally?) in the eyes, I reject the notion that there is something wrong with my brain because I cannot see past the end of my nose unaided
Originally Posted by Veles But when you play an FPS you mainly focus on the centre of the screen, where you're aimer is, where you are looking, the rest of the screen is still in your periphs, it's not like you're focusing on the entire screen at once.
Also, its of the monitors manufacturers interest to sell wide screens instead of full screens. They get a much better use of the panels that way, manging to sell more monitors with the same use of area panel.
Originally Posted by Veles My the edges of my screen are still in my peripheral vision since I sit pretty close to is as it's a monitor
Exactly. People sit near their monitors monitor and dont use peripheral vision to play.
The justification of more horizontal FOV for wide screen monitor doesnt make sense because people sit near the monitors (not using peripheral vision) and, even if they used it, the quality of the vision wouldnt be the same.
Originally Posted by koffan I would like to know if the run speed is the same in PC build as 360 version, i thought it was kinda 2 fast on PC; information plz!
It's slower on the 360 version, but that's more to make up for the clunkier control system than anything else. :)
Im gonna save my money i think played the demo looks and feels good but its not my cup of tea tbh, didn't like the game play tbh . Im not a huge storyline fan I'd rather skip most of the story and get stuck into a game, cut schenes are not my thing. I'll be saving my money for a rainy day.
Pretty much the only major cutscene is the one at the start of the demo when you first go down into Rapture and I'm about 70% through the 360 version. Most of the story is delivered via audio diaries.
I guess this game isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, but you could say the same thing about any game. What it is though is a fantastic example of how an involving and dramatic story, coupled with everything else going on can result in a truly stunning game. :)
Originally Posted by Tim S Pretty much the only major cutscene is the one at the start of the demo when you first go down into Rapture and I'm about 70% through the 360 version. Most of the story is delivered via audio diaries.
I guess this game isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, but you could say the same thing about any game. What it is though is a fantastic example of how an involving and dramatic story, coupled with everything else going on can result in a truly stunning game. :)
You could say that but i don't see it as anything different from toher games that are out theres nothing new tbh. Bioshock has nothing that grips me or makes me want to play it, yeah it has a story line and it has good gfx but still has nothing to make me want to play it.
Game doesn't look that bad, looking forward to playing it eventually. I was looking at the box today, and I had to wonder why they didn't just call the game "Big Daddy". Everything on it had to do with killing him or protecting yourself from him.
Comments 126 to 150 of 256
Nah, he truly hated it. When he was talking about the game, you'd occasionally have to remind him to breathe. :D
Fear not though, his silence today isn't because he literally stopped breathing, it's because he's out of the office today playing a few more cool games... he'll be reporting on those soon. ;)
Made me laugh reading threw all that. I'm sure which ever way you choose to view the game, it won't lesson the experience. Now go play.:D
Just have to keep it out of the wife's line of sight or she'll tell me to get rid of it just like my Master Chief figure - didn't do that though, I just hid it.
QFT! and welcome to the forums ;)
Nevermind.
I am rather pleased by this fact. I'm running at 1024x728 with my 6600gt just fine with HQ post processing/shadows, turned off, and medium actors.
Top 5 fps
Hl2
system shock 2
bioshock
far cry
Cs/source (feel the same about both.)
An 8800GTX *is* better than an 8600. A 1440x900 screen (19" widescreen) is not better than a 1280x1024 screen (19" standard). It doesn't cost any more and it doesn't have any inherent better features. It simply has a different aspect ratio. Think of it as someone chapping some pixels off the top and putting them down the side.
Now explain to me why the owner of the widescreen should have such a radically different user experience to the standard screen owner.
The horizontal FOV is the most important metric - and the devs have chosen to keep that the same for 360 owners, widescreen owners and standard screen owners. Seems like a reasonable approach to me.
It seems like you guys are expecting something extra because you have widescreen - but all it means is that your pixels are arranged in a different configuration.
Although humans get more horizontal FOV than vertical, it comes at a price.
Humans cant see colours or shapes out of the central vision area, its the brain that "paints and shapes" the objects outside the central area.
If you put a coca-cola bottle out of your central vision its your brain thats telling you it is red, not your eyes.
The peripheral vision was designed to capture movement not details.
The central vision (the one that gets you colour, shape and movement) has a more or less oval shape, slightly more wider than taller.
As for monitors, what matters to me is the area of the monitor. A 19" full screen has a similar area to a 20" widescreen. The 19" wide screen is smaller than the 19" full screen.
That doesn't sound very true, poor eyesight (short and long sighted) is caused (normally?) in the eyes, I reject the notion that there is something wrong with my brain because I cannot see past the end of my nose unaided
But it wouldn't be a reduction, 4:3 viewers should get the same view, it's just widescreen viewers get added view not reduced, that's the way I've always seen it, and that's why I watch targat SG- on TV. I remember an article here about triple monitors, that would be pointless if all it did was cut the top and bottom from your image. The whole point of widescreen is it's more like the aspect ratio you see in, but by cutting off the top and bottom, instead of adding to the sides, it makes widescreen utterly pointless.
Doesn't bother me too much though, wait, actually it does a little thinking about it, because the VGA system on the 360 is so retarded, on my 4:3 monitor I get a letterboxed picture :doh: Does Bioshock letterbox the picture via VGA? I can't remember myself from the demo.
In any case, the pixel stealage is a minor inconvenience, bit stupid though.
But when you play an FPS you mainly focus on the centre of the screen, where you're aimer is, where you are looking, the rest of the screen is still in your periphs, it's not like you're focusing on the entire screen at once.
You forced him away from Bioshock? And there I was thinking you were a nice person :p
***Impar goes googling for two minutes***
Peripheral vision is good at detecting motion (a feature of rod cells), and is relatively strong at night or in the dark, when the lack of color cues and lighting makes cone cells far less useful. This makes it useful for avoiding predators, who tend to hunt at night and may attack unexpectedly.
http://imageshack.us
Image comes from here:
http://www.abledata.com/abledata_docs/Distance_Perception.htm
Also, its of the monitors manufacturers interest to sell wide screens instead of full screens. They get a much better use of the panels that way, manging to sell more monitors with the same use of area panel.
But it's not here :'(
The justification of more horizontal FOV for wide screen monitor doesnt make sense because people sit near the monitors (not using peripheral vision) and, even if they used it, the quality of the vision wouldnt be the same.
It's slower on the 360 version, but that's more to make up for the clunkier control system than anything else. :)
I guess this game isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, but you could say the same thing about any game. What it is though is a fantastic example of how an involving and dramatic story, coupled with everything else going on can result in a truly stunning game. :)
Maybe not where you are. I've been playing it all day.
You could say that but i don't see it as anything different from toher games that are out theres nothing new tbh. Bioshock has nothing that grips me or makes me want to play it, yeah it has a story line and it has good gfx but still has nothing to make me want to play it.