No widescreen support- WHAT?

[Noni]

The widescreen community is growing at an alarming rate. Most new TFT's are widescreen.

To have a game not support widescreen Is a crime, how can such a popular game miss something so simple?

Even 1942 supported widescreen.

There is a hack to do it, but it chops off bits from the top and bottom. We need offical support!

CMON!

[Deadeye313]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

They didn't "miss" it, they-probably rightly so (And I think the rest of the game makers think the same)- don't want to give widescreen users an advantage over non-widescreen users.

By adding support for widescreen, all the rich kids will be allowed to see further to either side. They won't have to move to see someone coming that otherwise would have been invisible if they had a regular screen.

It's a balance issue, not stupidity.

[oktoberrust11]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

They didn't "miss" it, they-probably rightly so (And I think the rest of the game makers think the same)- don't want to give widescreen users an advantage over non-widescreen users.

By adding support for widescreen, all the rich kids will be allowed to see further to either side. They won't have to move to see someone coming that otherwise would have been invisible if they had a regular screen.

It's a balance issue, not stupidity.

Rich kids? C'mon dude, you can get a 20" widescreen for $300. A 19" for $250.

To the OP, many including myself feel the same way.

[Lazza66]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

The widescreen community is growing at an alarming rate. Most new TFT's are widescreen.

What's alarming about 2%, is it alarmingly low?

On a 19" widescreen the height is a puny 10". To get a decent 'gaming screen' in widescreen format it needs to be at least 24".

When that size is affordable and mainstream, then it should be supported, but that's a couple of years away yet.

There is a hack to do it, but it chops off bits from the top and bottom. We need offical support!

It's not a hack, it's called a command line variable. It works as intended, and is in no way a change or 'hack' in the intended function of the executable for which it is a variable. It invokes a built in feature of that executable, removing it even further from the correct definition of a 'hack'.

Even 1942 supported widescreen.

But '42 didn't support a stats system that requires the element of fairness.

Rich kids? C'mon dude, you can get a 20" widescreen for $300. A 19" for $250.

If you think those sizes make good screens then your experiences must be very different to mine. In my experience the widescreen format is only 'better' overall than 19" 4:3 at 24" and above.

Unless.... are you very small?

[Talus]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

..every new game I have purchased supports widescreen. Every. One.

Heck..even some of my 'older' games support widescreen.

Lemme list the games I have installed currently that support widescreen (oh wait..that's EVERY game I currently have installed):

-Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
-Star Wars: Empire at War
-Age of Empires III
-Call of Duty 2
-Condemned: Criminal Origins
-Tomb Raider Legend
-Half Life 2
-Half Life 2: Episode 1
-Sin Episodes: Emergence
-Oblivion
-Hitman: Blood Money

...need I go on?

[Alabaster Slim]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

They didn't "miss" it, they-probably rightly so (And I think the rest of the game makers think the same)- don't want to give widescreen users an advantage over non-widescreen users.

By adding support for widescreen, all the rich kids will be allowed to see further to either side. They won't have to move to see someone coming that otherwise would have been invisible if they had a regular screen.

It's a balance issue, not stupidity.

That's the most retarded thing I've read today.

So should they also throttle frame rates? Because I hear some rich kids have a better video card then me and they can get more frames per second, that creates an unfair advantage.

While you're at it, you should also add mouse latency so that people with higher dpi mouses don't get an advantage with more accurate aiming.

Better ditch that 5.1 sound and EAX, since only the Rich Kids can afford surround sound, you don't want the paper bag princess to get fragged because she couldn't tell if those foot steps were coming from in front or her or from behind.

Also, I think you should add some lag to everyone's connections. It's not fair that some people pay a premium for faster internet connections and enjoy less lag while others on dial-up get killed.

Yeah, you'd have a view advantage with real widescreen support, but as it stands now, people with widescreens are at a disadvantage. And if you're really picky about it, you could always go the route that Call of Duty 2 did; allow the user to pick their aspect ratio independent of resolution. So if you've got a 1024x768 monitor you can still play at 16:9 but everything would be fish-eyed. An even better solution would be to let people play with black bars at the top and bottom.

[Talus]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

Yeah, all of these 'anti-widescreen' arguments are just so ridiculous.

Widescreen would be the LEAST advantageous of all so-called 'advantages'..after all, I'm staring at the MIDDLE of my screen most of the time and not looking to the periphery.

The rest of your computer specs will give you a MUCH better advantage. My friend who is running on a lower spec'd machine NEVER sees the things I do at the distances I do.

I'm always saying 'enemy soldier at the top of those stairs' or 'or the crane' and he just can't see them until we're MUCH closer.

Now THAT is an advantage.

[Alabaster Slim]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

Hax!!

[^Scott^]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

Look at valve's steam client. EVERY game that is released on there supports widescreen.

[oktoberrust11]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

If you think those sizes make good screens then your experiences must be very different to mine. In my experience the widescreen format is only 'better' overall than 19" 4:3 at 24" and above.

Unless.... are you very small?

So you have experience with the "smaller" widescreens? I sit about 2' away from my Dell 20.1" widescreen monitor..to me, it's a perfect size. Sure, bigger is better for alot of things, but for a monitor on a desk, I think it works really well.

And don't be a jackass with retarted comments like your last one.

[Talus]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

My 21" wide is PERFECT! It's as tall as my old 19" CRT monitor was.

Fits beautifully on my desk and I can still surf and play games with my chair back and my feet on the desk.

[RedDot]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

Rich kids? C'mon dude, you can get a 20" widescreen for $300. A 19" for $250.

To the OP, many including myself feel the same way.

Were do you live?
I need to pay at least $250 for a 'good' 17"

[Talus]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

Oh man, the prices of LCDs are plummeting. I live in Canada and we can get a good 19" widescreen for $250 CANADIAN!

[Lazza66]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

That's the most retarded thing I've read today.

So should they also throttle frame rates? Because I hear some rich kids have a better video card then me and they can get more frames per second, that creates an unfair advantage.

While you're at it, you should also add mouse latency so that people with higher dpi mouses don't get an advantage with more accurate aiming.

Better ditch that 5.1 sound and EAX, since only the Rich Kids can afford surround sound, you don't want the paper bag princess to get fragged because she couldn't tell if those foot steps were coming from in front or her or from behind.

Also, I think you should add some lag to everyone's connections. It's not fair that some people pay a premium for faster internet connections and enjoy less lag while others on dial-up get killed.

Yeah, you'd have a view advantage with real widescreen support, but as it stands now, people with widescreens are at a disadvantage. And if you're really picky about it, you could always go the route that Call of Duty 2 did; allow the user to pick their aspect ratio independent of resolution. So if you've got a 1024x768 monitor you can still play at 16:9 but everything would be fish-eyed. An even better solution would be to let people play with black bars at the top and bottom.

And that's the most retarded thing I've read today.

Even cheap onboard sound is up to 8.1 these days. Any argument regarding sound is total crap, I can play nearly as well with no sound at all.
In the early days of opticals (5 years ago) mouse latency was an issue, now it's a marketing ploy, not a real life consideration.
Regards lag and graphics cards, I kicked arse with a GeForce 2 MX, and dial up, and didn't upgrade until BF2 wouldn't install.

As DICE have said, too few people currently own widescreen, and the issue of fairness needs to be properly measured.

Widescreen would be the LEAST advantageous of all so-called 'advantages'..after all, I'm staring at the MIDDLE of my screen most of the time and not looking to the periphery.

All that proves is that you know nothing about vision, look into "retinal ganglion cells" and then decide.

And as we all know you can see further at the edges of your screen because BF2's horizon is flat. You'll see even further yet with an extra 23% width.

[Doctor]

Re: No widescreen support- WHAT?

Oh man, the prices of LCDs are plummeting. I live in Canada and we can get a good 19" widescreen for $250 CANADIAN!

thats not really true you can get a crapy 19" for $250 like a fujiplus or somthing a good one is more like 370-450

but anyway

it should have widescreen support just like any other hardware you buy you should enjoy the performance/advantage you get from the product