PC Feedback for The Fun Pimps on Alpha 17

Pssst...hey you two...in the tinfoil hats....yeah you....come ‘ere...
Just so we’re clear what’s your conspiracy theory about why you think the devs are lying? What’s your imagined nefarious reason for the lockdown on FOV?
Click to expand...
I should rephrase. I'm sure FOV has performance impact, but I think it was just a lazy fix and 'performance' was used as the excuse.

 
I should rephrase. I'm sure FOV has performance impact, but I think it was just a lazy fix and 'performance' was used as the excuse.
Click to expand...
What's your basis that it was lazy? How do you know how much time and effort went into trying to solve things another way? What was it a 'lazy fix' for if performance was just an excuse? What were they trying to solve by locking the FOV if not performance?

And if you do believe that it does have a performance impact and the devs aren't lying about it then why do you keep putting it in quotes like that?

 
Pssst...hey you two...in the tinfoil hats....yeah you....come ‘ere...
Just so we’re clear what’s your conspiracy theory about why you think the devs are lying? What’s your imagined nefarious reason for the lockdown on FOV?
Click to expand...
They broke it. Nothing more.

 
There are 3 main reasons companies lock down the FOV (to a too low value)

-performance (making the game run faster ... by limiting the users ability to choose this setting higher)

-related console versions (FOV on consoles is smaller due to a different typical screen-sitting position ratio, and they have stricter requirements)

-actual design reasons (like a fair playing field in an RTS, or due to carefully prepared cinematic sequences, due to UI element placement depending on it)

Since the 7DtD run totally fine when setting the Fov higher (via console), when the user has the required hardware, the decision to remove this option is just paternalistic.

It would be enough just to set the default to that low value, but let users decide how they want the game to render.

 
There are 3 main reasons companies lock down the FOV (to a too low value)
-performance (making the game run faster ... by limiting the users ability to choose this setting higher)

-related console versions (FOV on consoles is smaller due to a different typical screen-sitting position ratio, and they have stricter requirements)

-actual design reasons (like a fair playing field in an RTS, or due to carefully prepared cinematic sequences, due to UI element placement depending on it)

Since the 7DtD run totally fine when setting the Fov higher (via console), when the user has the required hardware, the decision to remove this option is just paternalistic.

It would be enough just to set the default to that low value, but let users decide how they want the game to render.
Click to expand...
#4 -occlusion of voxels requires a limit to the FOV so that the player doesn't have a chance to view voxels disappearing behind them as they turn

 
lol...then pray tell how is it that people can still select different FOV through console commands?
next.
Click to expand...
They can but it doesn’t stick... broken.

You are missing the point. It may indeed reduce performance, but so do all of the settings. Quite a few of the other settings are far more of an impact on performance, so why are those still able to be changed when applying this logic?

 
I’m not understanding such colloquialisms. Are you saying my statement is false or not backed by proof? Fataal recently mentioned this issue.
Click to expand...
No I'm saying the feature is unsupported and not broken which is why it doesn't stick and "on the bubble" means there are talks of canceling it. In other words, you may not be able to change FOV via console commands in the future depending on what the devs decide. It all depends on how the occlusion they are doing turns out.

 
#4 -occlusion of voxels requires a limit to the FOV so that the player doesn't have a chance to view voxels disappearing behind them as they turn
Click to expand...
Thats just a dynamic parameter in the culling mechanics. It obviously works currently with different FOVs. And however the cone for culling is calculated in the future, there is no reason for it to be a static parameter.

Plus noone is asking for a FOV of 190 ...

The reasonable range is between 60 and 100, depending on the players preferences.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thats just a dynamic parameter in the culling mechanics. It obviously works currently with different FOVs. And however the cone for culling is calculated in the future, there is no reason for it to be a static parameter.
Plus noone is asking for a FOV of 190 ...

The reasonable range is between 60 and 100, depending on the players preferences.
Click to expand...
Well I can't argue with that because I don't fully understand the technical specifics. I only know that when I brought this issue up in the dev chat this is what I was told. But maybe they are being lazy and untruthful to me even in our internal conversations...

 
FOV can be an accessibility issue for some users which is why it's disappointing for TFP to be talking about removing the ability to change it entirely.

Even though rendering a voxel world makes FOV more complicated, they should still be putting in the effort to make some amount of FOV adjustment available for those users who have vertigo issues and can be unable to play at the standard/current FOV setting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well I can't argue with that because I don't fully understand the technical specifics. I only know that when I brought this issue up in the dev chat this is what I was told. But maybe they are being lazy and untruthful to me even in our internal conversations...
Click to expand...
It easy to explain away an argument by referring to an obscure technical implementation.

So maybe a developer can make a statement then, if there is a hard technical reason behind locking the FOV, apart from pushing FPS and personal preference of whoever decided on that.

 
It easy to explain away an argument by referring to an obscure technical implementation.
Click to expand...
Sure, sure....and if I was cynical and had any reason to believe that the devs needed to resort to such manipulations in their internal chatting with each other and me I guess I might suspect such a thing. But I don't see the motive. They looked to see what the industry standard was and noticed that many other games have a locked FOV and they wanted to be able to guarantee that for any configuration the game would play right and look right. I don't have any reason to disbelieve what they were saying.

I'm not against a slider. I want a FOV slider. In fact, I wish the way some are going about trying to change TFP's mind about it were doing it more deftly than calling them lazy and inept which is why I am calling that part of their posts into question. THAT is a strategy doomed to fail...

So maybe a developer can make a statement then, if there is a hard technical reason behind locking the FOV, apart from pushing FPS and personal preference of whoever decided on that.
Click to expand...
maybe...but I can tell you they are extremely firm on this issue. As I said, when I brought it up and mentioned that people were hoping that they could at least make the console command stick or have it be exposed to xml they said that the console command capability might even be removed in the future. So...imagine them giving their reason and you either buying it or not buying it and they STILL double down on restricting access to FOV.

 
Roland, as always, delivering messages of hope.
Click to expand...
I forget that there are a lot of you that would prefer a professional community manager who will spin and massage these types of things to make you feel better. Here, let me give it a go:

"The Fun Pimps take the concerns of the community seriously and have heard you on this issue. They will continue to look into changing the locked FOV back to an options-based slider so that players can choose the most comfortable view while playing. There are a lot of factors to consider and it has proven valuable to have a uniform FOV during development so we can say for sure the change will not occur for A18 but moving forward towards the gold release of the game it may be a possibility. For the time being, you can still enable alternate FOV via the command console if you find it necessary. Thank you and game on Survivors!"

Now that that's done I bet $1 that someone will take that paragraph above and use it later to rant that TFP promised the slider would be back after A18..... <sigh>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let me rephrase. Fallout 4 doesn't have a slider and that is a great game.
Click to expand...
I can't say that.

People around here are sick and tired of FO4 being used as an inspiration for the game. After the perk system overhaul using FO4 as reason for not having a slider would be political suicide for me. :p

;-)

 
...spoiler...
Click to expand...
Using this later in A17 is better..

Hey everyone, A16 involved some major features that took more time than we originally planned. Electricity, sleepers, block overhaul, and socket cities were all major changes that took a lot of time to implement. Therefore, the following features won't be in A16 but they will be coming in the future.


Zip Line system (Delayed)

* Attach zip lines and use them for quick escape routes or safe passage down treacherous mountains, Cross rivers and gorges!
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top