Dj Roberts It is a reference to Game of Thrones, the HBO television series. The Mountain is a character whom in a couple of instances puts his fingers over someones eyes and pushes them into their skull, removing their ability to have 90° vision.
it doesn't have to be beneficial, I much prefer a higher fov and as there is already such a degree of customisation with crosshairs and viewmodels (even to the point where you can change the hand the gun is held) I see no reason why fov changes aren't allowed
@@RolandTechnicalDesigner There's some truth to that, I got my paper work, university and so on, and kept getting told I lack experience, well duh, hence I am trying to get some :P
It only makes the player model LOOK wider, which can help visually with aiming (specifically for headshots) It doesn't actually make a difference to the hit box of the player model or anything.
@@Bross_D Sure it doesn't make the hitbox larger, but you're essentially zoomed in to the region of most interest. Just imagine the opposite, such high resolution that you can actually see 180°. Now try to hit the head of an enemy. Basically, playing at stretched 4:3 means that you see your enemies larger compared to the surrounding and in most cases, if you are aiming at the right places, the fact that you don't see the edges of the screen doesn't make a difference.
@@Bross_D yes and no, while it doesn't make the hitbox gain literal x,y size, it does make the box wider because the model is wider (and shorter) the hitbox on the head, neck, chest etc... IS actually wider (by perspective) and shorter. making tap firing for the head more effective, and giving you less space to work with for spraying (as an example) because if you aim for the head and pull down too far, you'll quickly start hitting the lower torso or legs.
It's locked so you cant lower you FOV to "zoom" in on an enemy. Say equip a deagle bind you right mouse key to change FOV between say 40degrees(zoomed) and 110 degrees(wide angle fow) and boom you have a mini AWP.
One benefit of 4:3 stretch is more consistent perceived aim sensitivity. i.e. a 106 degree FOV with a rectilinear projection as is used in FPSs, the sides of the screen appear stretched and distorted, unless your eye (singular. monocular vision) is close enough to the screen. for a 24" 16:9 display, this is very close... about 200mm/8" from the screen. with a 90 degree FOV 4:3 stretch to 16:9 24", the viewpoint goes up to a more realistic 265mm/10.5". plus the horizontal stretch means a bit of magnification for long range targets yet no loss of vertical FOV.
You didnt understand at all what he wrote, better laughing your ass off than crying your eyes out huh. Oh wait i forgot to write something dumb like lolol omfg stupid ahhhrgh haha...
oh my god that intro is gonna make me throw up stop. 1:23 damn that image gives me flashbacks how many references there are to older stuff about your videos in general is awesome.
I use an ultra-wide, and when I die I can sometimes see things on the edge that my teammates will miss. This has caused me to help teammates clutch on a few rare occasions when I saw an enemy that they didn't, because they were just at the edge of my screen. Usually though, if they don't see the enemy themselves, my call out will be too slow to save them before the enemy shoots them.
I used to always set my FOV sliders to max in FPS games for the benefit of having more peripheral vision (I played on 130 in Quake 3). Now though I prefer to strike a sweet spot between peripheral visibility and focus. Having a higher FOV tends to make objects look smaller and increase the "visual noise", potentially making things slightly harder to distinguish and/or focus on. For me I find the extra peripheral is less helpful than having consistently better clarity around my central point of vision, especially when it comes to long range engagements. I feel like this is part of the reason some people prefer 4:3 in CS:GO (aside from just being used to it of course). Personally I'd consider anywhere from 90 to 110 FOV (x-axis) to be the optimal range for most FPS games assuming a standard 16:9 monitor setup. In terms of CSGO: 4:3 for better target focus, 16:9 for better peripheral visibility.
From when you explained 4:3 I switched to 16:9. I also started caring more about the graphics. Graphics don't make a game but improve it. As always you have a high production quality and a good amount of knowledge.
Honestly, the pros use it because they're so accustomed to it, not because it's better. If it helps with FPS, then sure, but otherwise it's a strict disadvantage to use lower resolution. And the best example to showcase how stubborn pros can be is the AUG, no one used it at the top level for YEARS with exactly same stats and once valve decreased the price by 200$ they tried it and since price reversal back to 3350$ AUG is bought way more. Goes to show that old guard dont necessarily know better and can be stubborn.
@@nousquest Well, the models become "bigger" same way they'd be bigger if you were using a larger monitor. So if you think having a, let's say, 30 inch monitor instead of 24 inch monitor is advantageous because player models are "bigger" then sure. But the ratio on the screen is the same regardless. Some pro players like Ropz uses 1920x1080 and is still considered of the best aimers in the pro scene.
@@daenny6895 but what's the point of having them stretched? If you can set horizontal sensitivity independent of horizontal, then just lower it and it would be as easy to aim as in stretched.
I really wish they did Aspect Ratio changes while retaining native resolution like Rainbow 6. It allows you to change your Aspect Ratio without degrading the picture because it's changing it within the game. I made a post on Reddit about it but only people who had no clue on what I was talking about came in an argued it with me without testing anything. In Rainbow 6, because you can change it within the engine, not only does it not degrade the image just by being outside of your native aspect ratio, it's also retaining image quality because it's not using your GPU to stretch out a square image and it's being processed by the Engine. It's fantastic, and I think you should show comparisons because although 4:3 does the same calculations that you would use in order to use your native height (like 1080 or 1440) it's got almost 0 loss to quality. The reason I run 4:3 is not what you said, but it's because it's easier to see players from further away, minus how terrible the image quality is because of how poorly this game processes lower resolutions without allowing sharpening or better filtering.
by the way you mentioned that when using super ultra wide monitors in csgo the HUD is so far on the sides that you have to twist your neck to see it. well there is a console command that can move the HUD closer to the center of the screen. it is safezonex & safezoney respectively. Both these commands range from 0.2 and 1.0. safezonex is used to change the horizontal positioning, while safezoney changes the vertical. Sorry for rambling on for so long about that, just thought I would let you know. Love this video though. All the best, Jack
I love how valve is constantly listening to the community to improve Cs:Go. The 3 monitor feature has been added about 1-3 months after he made his video about it.
I agree that game developers should all just implement FOV sliders in their games. It would further expose ultrawide gaming as a fad and unecessary just in order to get more FOV.
after years i still love my 21:9 screen... holding 2 angles so far from each other normal 16:9 peasants cant see both at the same time is so much fun when they cant see shit and you just kill someone like you have radar hacks
3:34 A fix for that and the in game GUI is to enable Triple-Monitor mode, which will place the menu and other things such as the map closer to the middle (2/3 of the screen)
people who play at 4:3 stretched dont understand math. CSGOs input engine scales via focal length. if your X axis appears stretched, then your mouses X axis will ~appear~ to move faster than the Y axis; in reality they are always equal. the target "looks" wider...but it ISNT. to aim, your mouse still requires exactly the same fine motor control per pixel! the same proportionally equivalent ignorance perpetuated the low resolution fad in earlier CS, decades ago. rendering the game at a lower pixel density doesnt change the size or location of hitboxes in relation to the environment, whose parameters are constantly calculated independent of your graphics cards current pixel density of rendered output.
Valve removed this option on purpose. Hence the command "fov_cs_debug", in the past it was "default_fov", there is even support on earliest versions of csgo. The reason to see more was the motivation to fix this. It was a try to force players on their thinking of "how players should see when what". Like, you need a 360° setup to see 360°, but you still wont see more than 180.
I've never heard FOV being pronounced like you did at the end, but at least we finally have an answer to as why the title had a instead of an on the other video
our binocular vision (using two eyes at once) can only cover 120 degrees, yes, but our peripheral vision goes further than that (as 3kliks said, you can see your arms if you T-pose).
This video helped me out A LOT to understand the relation between aspect ratio, resolution and FoV. It means, that there is actually an "effective FoV" in certain games in relation to the resolution and aspect ratio you use, as well as how the game is supposed to be rendered. Quake Live's natural is rendering occures in 4:3 aspect ratio, but that doesnt mean The picture is stretched when playing on a monitor with native resolution of 1920*1080 in 16:9 aspect ratio. It simply means that in contrast to pictures, where the picture is cropped to the actual size, it is increased in games. This however has an impact on the actual Field of View. If you play quake like in that said settings with 90° FoV, you actually have 106°. If you would play OW with those settings and 103° FoV, it actually stays 103°, since it's naturally rendered in 16:9. Before this video I always thought aspect ratios belong to certain resolutions, while the ingame- FoV-settings actually set the FoV, which is both not correct. Thanks!
Using 4:3 stretched actually makes it easier to play, it’s basically 4:3 render, stretched to a 16:9 display. It makes enemies way bigger and forcing max amount of AA makes it as crisp as 1080p this makes enemies way easier to spot and a lot more body to shot at... However there is a learning curve to take advantage of this and also the reason it’s hard to switch back to 1080p... horizontal mouse movements are quicker than vertical movements meaning you would need to relearn mouse movements but ones you get used to it, shooting enemies that are about 1.5 to 2 times the with of 1080p is a noticeable advantage Also playing lower resolutions in csgo only improves FPS on low end hardware, modern hardware isn’t fully used by csgo meaning your gpu will be working at 50% or less and cpu at 40% or less so a resolution change will simply bump up the usage or reduce it (but half the time it just does nothing cuz source engine is awful at utilizing modern hardware... Less than 100 FPS in danger zone on a 2070 compared to 140 FPS in pubg gj valve)
Still having a wider fov is useful for holding multiple angles like in clutch positions. I see stretched as always on zoom, sometimes you don't want to be zoomed
or to get ppl commenting, thus increasing the likelihood of the video beeing watched throught algorithm trickery? tho I dont see him as that kind of person.
Oh man, that link to the video of Blinky Quake at the end of the video. I highly suggest people to check that out. There's some really interesting fov projections to experiment with in there.
As an ultra widescreen gamer I sometimes get hackusastions from seeing players running next to me, it's awesome. By the way, the TF2 team fixed this by locking the 3d view to your monitor width, but that makes me feel kinda weird. I hope for the sake of comfort that the CS team don't fix this.
I completely agree with you to give the players the choice of the FOV. A slider won't be that much work and on the other hand a big benefit for the players.
The Fov in cs:go is approximately 74 vertically, and 106 horizontally. Since the fov in games is calculated horizontally in most cases, the fov is 106.
CSGO had a FoV slider years ago, but they disabled it to counter issues regarding camera clipping. You could look through walls with super widescreens and high fov.
I have a theory that 4:3 is "better" because it is easier to see through gaps because they are wider and it is more the vision that makes it better and not the game
The viewmodels need to be fixed for ultrawide screens. IIRC on some guns, while you reload, parts of your left arm would stick out onscreen for a few seconds (even on the closest viewmodel FOV).
If you notice the eye focus of a top tier pro or a really good player , youll notice that the player only focus on the actual crosshair all the time, occasionally temporarily focus in the hud/minimap at times. Having 4:3 ratio helps the focus while bringing the hud closer to the crosshair. A good player usually predict and have the crosshair where the enemies are going to appear so a wide monitor is just distracting. Maybe its just that most pros grew up with a boxy ratio though.
I've just picked up a 32:9 display and found a console command, something like xsafezone related to that HUD position slider in the config. 0.4 was a good fit for me and better than the 0.33 you get with 'triple monitor mode' enabled. Everything's still visible but it isn't crowded in and it only affects the in-game HUD so the main menu doesn't get all squished in the middle.
it should be in no way surprising that when a thing occupies a larger percentage of the screen, it becomes easier to be certain that your crosshair is, in fact, on the thing.
Playing at 4:3 stretched to 16:9 definitely makes the models wider, but unless you lower your horizontal mouse sensitivity accordingly, (with the m_yaw command) they're not actually easier to hit. Maybe easier to see, but the precision you need with your hands is the same if you don't change your mouse sensitivity at all.
You can move the HUD - you can calculate diagonal HUD. In HLAE you get fov as well. A 3 monitor setup does look awful because you are still rendering from one eye - which shouldn't be and is properly done in driving or flying games. The 90fov is chosen because it is most natural to the fov a normal monitor takes. So you look through a window in first person. This messes up when you get closer to the monitor or use streched pixels. I am currently thinking a lot about getting a new monitor and also how to use a VGA resolution camera best with anamorphic lenses.
Smaller horizontal FOV will give the impression of being zoomed in. If CS:GO allowed FOV adjustment I'd use 16:9 instead of 4:3 and I'd lower the FOV so it would be 90 degrees vertical in practice. Locking the FOV when changing aspect still allows you to see as wide or narrow as you want is just as silly as locking m_pitch but not m_yaw.
It'd be nice if CS:GO was like TF2, where you can get custom HUDs, the one I use has health and ammo fairly centered and it's so much better for getting crucial information quickly, though that game is more fast-paced, being able to see your ammo quickly and how much damage you've taken would be quite useful in CS:GO
There's also the stuff in between, for example I play with an aspect ratio of 1.81818181... Also you don't need a bigger monitor to increase fov, just need to keep changing the aspect ratio
3:25 I would argue that a wider FOV is always better, considering that your brain has work harder to process the extra information displayed, hence you'll get exhausted faster and your reaction time as well as accuracy might start to degrade.
@@3kliksphilip Nah, but I also don't constantly try to aim and shoot ppl while I walk, either. :P If you can get past the "unaesthetic" aspects of 4:3 windowed/centered, it has it's benefits, mostly higher FPS, but can also (potentially) help (to at least some) players focus, given that in CSGO your attention is almost exclusively dedicated to the center of your screen anyways, you're not losing much. Imo, a slightly wider FOV can and technically does bring you some advantage, but it also brings some drawbacks too. Like hurting your FPS count, which if ever more important these days and it can can be inferior even in terms of UI, like the position of your HUD elements. For starters, you have roughly 2 options: Ultrawide monitors with a typical 21:9 AR or Triple Monitor set ups. The latter of which actually uses the equivalent of 1 monitor + 1 split in half and stretched over the two side monitors (evident in your own screenshots both @ 3:11 and @3:16 and these videos ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TshPXlg3xRM.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4xIWrFoH8Bc.html). This is both less nice to look at and less useful for aiming and other other aspects like your radar f.e. The 21:9 UW gives you a consistent image in addition to a more efficient UI, it also is considerable less FPS consuming with the 2560@1080 resolution, while the 3xM set ups need more than double (1920x2=3840@1080) or even more if you run the 5760@1080. Of course, you can lower the res, but 21:9 will still be the better overall option. There are all other aspects to consider, like the Ratio between the FOV and your Monitor Real Estate. The higher the FOV is over the same Real Estate, the smaller the enemies. Scoring headshots can become much more challenging with something like 200 FOV on a 24" Monitor compared with the 90 FOV over the standard resolution range.
I think there should be a command to change vertical fov from 74 to 60. The command could be like a launch option so you cannot change it mid game to abuse it like a zoom toggle. I don't think there is any reason to not do it since people can play strecthed or use overscan anyway so it wouldn't really change anything.