>>> Field of View. <<<

Games Other Halo
1

Let me get straight to the point. Some of the most important decisions that employees at 343i need to get right - are not being discussed here on these forums.

So:

I will start with field of view.

What is field of view?

Field of view is how zoomed in/out you are. Field of view is how far your vision reaches within the limit of your screen. It is the extent of your peripheral vision.

+H2/3 featured a 60deg field of view.
+Reach, 78 degrees.

In halo reach players can see more area in less space. This sounds great in theory - as more visibility is nice to have - however there are serious downsides.

Changes in field of view effect everything. Your perception of:

-Movement
-Speed
-Height
-Distance
-Map size etc etc.
-Turning and sensitivity

The changes here give Halo Reach a distinctly different feel. The way your gun feels when it is shot changes. How aiming feels changes. The closeness and comfort of close quarters changes. The breadth and size of giant landscapes changes. Field of view effects everything.

I suspect that field of view has been increased (zoomed out) for graphical purposes. This allows textures to appear at higher resolutions etc etc. Other reasons could be to increase player awareness. I will be very sad if I hear that reach is set at anything other than 60 degrees. This is not a fair tradeoff. Nothing is more important than how alive a player feels in game. Nothing.

Zooming out effects how alive you feel. It effects how sloppy your movement feels etc etc. This is essential to the halo feel that I have fallen in love with. 343 can throw in classic gametype after gametype, however if field of view is not correct then the game will feel and play differently than the Halo games we know and love.

When I play Halo 2/3 I feel connected to the game. I feel like I am there, alive, moving, breathing in actual space. Changes in Reach’s field of view have destroyed this - among other factors.

I would love to hear from 343 on Halo 4’s field of view settings. I truly hope that decisions like this have been well thought through.

> For people who dont know what to think of this, let me just refer you to a little demonstration I made months ago:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se95M2ySzDI

2

I hope Halo 4’s FoV settings are like Halo 2/3s.

3

I agree with this and giving it some serious thought I totally get it. In Reach everything feels so “floaty” where as with previous Halo games my actions have always been snappy and deliberate.

4

> I agree with this and giving it some serious thought I totally get it. In Reach everything feels so “floaty” where as with previous Halo games my actions have always been snappy and deliberate.

^ Movement acceleration also plays a role in this.

Note: Speed is how fast you can run. Acceleration is how quickly you can reach top speed/stop.

5

First off great post im glad some one made this.

Halo 3 FOV is best …

Reach Fov is broken…

lets hope halo 4s is good as its unlikely they can change it at this point in time…

here’s to hopping

343 <3

6

This community is amazing at how well they pick up on these things. Just came from an anti sprint thread that outlines all the important points that noone ever got on the bungie forums. And now this masterpiece. I agree completely, I used to be pro-high FoV but the change in feel made me regret it.

7

Having gone trough many threads regarding this topic, I think the best and only solution is a FOV slider in the video settings.

As you guys probably know, there’s a reason why the more hardcore Quake3 players, for example, play with a very high FOV. That some reason applies to Halo too. So, high FOV all the way for me!

For people who dont know what to think of this, let me just refer you to a little demonstration I made months ago:

8

> Having gone trough many threads regarding this topic, I think the best and only solution is a FOV slider in the video settings.
>
> As you guys probably know, there’s a reason why the more hardcore Quake3 players, for example, play with a very high FOV. That some reason applies to Halo too. So, high FOV all the way for me!
>
> For people who dont know what to think of this, let me just refer you to a little demonstration I made months ago:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se95M2ySzDI

I love this video - it really puts things into perspective - however do you mislabel wide/thin FOV? The way I look at it 100 degrees has a wider view than 70 degrees - although 100 will look more compressed.

I think we should try and use the same terms here. Lets just call it more zoomed/less zoomed.

The thing that really strikes me about this video is how much faster a player appears to be moving on a 100 degree vs 70 degree. This means that with a 70 degree field of view movement speeds can be set faster and feel just as slow!

Once you understand this is becomes obvious why reach movement is so slow at 78 degrees. Going back to 60 degrees will allow much quicker and more responsive movement.

9

Also, it is mind-blowing that you prefer 100 degrees over 70 degrees. So, yes, a slider would be nice.

Watching at 100 degrees everything looks too fast - even though it isnt any faster. 70 degrees give a player greater precision. Also, watching 100 degrees gives me a really bad headache.

10

I play both 3 and Reach fairly regularly and I think I prefer Reach’s FoV from a game play stand point, also I don’t feel less immersed because of a slightly larger FoV (maybe that’s just me). As long Halo 4’s is between 60 and 78 I’ll be happy!

11

> Higher FOV = More dynamical looking gameplay, which is of course better.

No, we don’t want more dynamic LOOKING gameplay. We wan’t more dynamic GAMEPLAY.

Reading up on the subject it would seem that different FOV’s make different people sick. On account of this I think having an FOV slider would be perfect. Also, the games movement speed should be tuned at 60 degrees for the best gameplay. This way gameplay is still explosive and responsive no matter what FOV is chosen.

12

> I love this video - it really puts things into perspective - however do you mislabel wide/thin FOV? The way I look at it 100 degrees has a wider view than 70 degrees - although 100 will look more compressed.
>
> I think we should try and use the same terms here. Lets just call it more zoomed/less zoomed.
>
> The thing that really strikes me about this video is how much faster a player appears to be moving on a 100 degree vs 70 degree. This means that with a 70 degree field of view movement speeds can be set faster and feel just as slow!
>
> Once you understand this is becomes obvious why reach movement is so slow at 78 degrees. Going back to 60 degrees will allow much quicker and more responsive movement.

Hmm I’m not sure what you mean with the mislabeling. The text in the beginning? “Wide FOV > narrow FOV”? If so, what I actually meant with that is just “Wide FOV ‘is better than (>)’ narrow FOV”…
So yeah, 100 degrees FOV = wide(high, less zoomed), 70 degrees = narrow(low, more zoomed).

13

> Hmm I’m not sure what you mean with the mislabeling. The text in the beginning? “Wide FOV > narrow FOV”? If so, what I actually meant with that is just “Wide FOV ‘is better than (>)’ narrow FOV”…
> So yeah, 100 degrees FOV = wide(high, less zoomed), 70 degrees = narrow(low, more zoomed).

Well you had 70deg on the left and 100deg on the right.

Then under that you labeled Wide > Narrow.

Which is very confusing.

Should have been Narrow < Wide.

And, yeah, we disagree over which FOV we prefer, however I think it is different for everyone and that is why a few FOV options would be nice.

60
70
78
90

Would be perfect.

14

> Well you had 70deg on the left and 100deg on the right.
>
> Then under that you labeled Wide > Narrow.
>
> Which is very confusing.
>
> Should have been Narrow < Wide.
>
> And, yeah, we disagree over which FOV we prefer, however I think it is different for everyone and that is why a few FOV options would be nice.
>
> 60
> 70
> 78
> 90
>
> Would be perfect.

Ok I understand what you mean, and yes, it is actually kinda confusing.

Yup, I’ve come to understand the different opinions too. And btw, I’m the type who gets the headache from a low FOV :). So yes, that’s why we need the slider or something similar, and I know for a fact it’s a very easy thing for the developers to do. And if they decide not to implement it, I’d be seriously interested in knowing why.

Hope 343 are even listening…

15

Please vote and keep my thread alive, I’ll bump this one.
http://halo.xbox.com/Forums/yaf_postsm672321_Team-game-customisation.aspx?g=posts&m=672321&

16

I think that 343 has realized the impact of FOV on movement speed and to keep things reasonable has opted not to include a slider. Also, many casual players could get into trouble with sickness with an FOV slider and not realize that the FOV is causing this.

Of course a warning could be but in. However this is more work.

Keep in mind that H1-Reach do not have master volume controls. Anyone who does not use a xbox live headset for chat but rather sends their chat through their speakers/headphones has had problems with chat since the beginning. I have gone 6 years without being able to hear chat while my gun is firing because the game is too loud relative to chat.

It is very enlightening to realize just how out of touch Bungie was with their own game. Mistakes like not being able to hear chat suggest that no one with any influence over there even played their own game -let alone read the forums.

I have long since come to the conclusion that most of those people played other games - as evident with reach. A wider FOV suggests a PC gamer in charge…etc etc. Having ‘Halo’ people is essential to getting the game right. Look at the damage slip up’s like sprint, FOV, and Bloom have caused.

On account of this I personally invite, beg any 343 employees that have questions - to come here and ask around. If you are a 343 employee who perhaps doesnt know how long a beatdown animation should take, or does not know what grenade trajectory to set, or how bouncy to make grenades.

Please please please do not be afraid to ask.

17

Edited by Moderator - Please do not bump your posts.

*Original post, click at your own discretion.

bump

18

In Halo 2 and 3, objects kept their size and shape as they got to the edge of the screen. In Halo 1 and reach, they distort. I hate that distortion. I think I have a much easier time of holding the image of the geometry in my head when it’s not constantly warping when I turn my head. It feels much more immersive.

19

It would be great if you could set your field of view to what you wanted, lots could be done with that, also if you were able to set your guns to left handed primary on screen or right handed weapon on screen.

20

View model field of view is also important. They should increase that too.