FOV

Have trouble running Grimrock 1 or you're wondering if your graphics card is supported? Look for help here.
sage2
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:32 am

FOV

Post by sage2 »

Has anyone discovered a way to increase the FOV? I play on a large display, and the FOV feels quite narrow.
User avatar
StormVR6
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:38 am

Re: FOV

Post by StormVR6 »

The slightly narrow FOV is undoubtedly intentional, adding to the claustrophobic feel of the game. Although I'd like a wider one myself, hopefully a simple .cfg edit will come to light soon.
It costs nothing to be nice.....but it can cost you much if you're not.
User avatar
Mameluk
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 1:52 pm

Re: FOV

Post by Mameluk »

It's supposed to be narrow...
FloorBelow
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:16 am

Re: FOV

Post by FloorBelow »

The low FOV makes it feel like Dungeon Master. This is a good thing.
sage2
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:32 am

Re: FOV

Post by sage2 »

The problem is this. I play on a 27" display that's set about 18" from my nose. That works great for most games, most of the time. But when a game has a really narrow FOV, it's very disconcerting. Narrow FOV is not a good thing; it might be a good thing for some people, but then they don't have to adjust it if they don't want to.
User avatar
Ice
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:35 pm

Re: FOV

Post by Ice »

FOV should be editable in general (at least within a reasonable range, e.g. 60 - 90) since some people can't cope with small FOVs very well, and some people actually get headaches off them.

This becomes a bigger issue when you use 16:9 and instead of widening the horizontal FOV to compensate, it narrows the vertical FOV. It essentially forces you to run it at a 4:3 resolution to get the best possible vision.
sage2
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:32 am

Re: FOV

Post by sage2 »

Ice wrote:FOV should be editable in general (at least within a reasonable range, e.g. 60 - 90) since some people can't cope with small FOVs very well, and some people actually get headaches off them.

This becomes a bigger issue when you use 16:9 and instead of widening the horizontal FOV to compensate, it narrows the vertical FOV. It essentially forces you to run it at a 4:3 resolution to get the best possible vision.
Yes. It's worse now that you can't even buy 16.10 displays; they're all 16.9, and it only exacerbates the problem.
User avatar
lFlapjackl
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:29 pm

Re: FOV

Post by lFlapjackl »

sage2 wrote:
Ice wrote:FOV should be editable in general (at least within a reasonable range, e.g. 60 - 90) since some people can't cope with small FOVs very well, and some people actually get headaches off them.

This becomes a bigger issue when you use 16:9 and instead of widening the horizontal FOV to compensate, it narrows the vertical FOV. It essentially forces you to run it at a 4:3 resolution to get the best possible vision.
Yes. It's worse now that you can't even buy 16.10 displays; they're all 16.9, and it only exacerbates the problem.
You can still buy big 16:10 displays. I have this 1920x1200 one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824254052 Got some ok reviews, but mine was amazingly perfect after some BC RGB tweaks in it's settings.
sage2
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:32 am

Re: FOV

Post by sage2 »

You are correct. I was exagerating. But I wasn't able to find a 120hz 16.10 display; and that was important to me. In general they have definited moved away from 16.10 displays.
User avatar
Ice
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:35 pm

Re: FOV

Post by Ice »

sage2 wrote:You are correct. I was exagerating. But I wasn't able to find a 120hz 16.10 display; and that was important to me. In general they have definited moved away from 16.10 displays.
A big shame, really. 1920x1200 is much better than 1920x1080, but the industry is all 16:9 now (unless you feel like paying a major premium for the surviving 1920x1200).
Post Reply