I feel justified yet disgusted with myself at the same time
Fallout 3 and new vegas
dead space if you count them
Fallout 3 is first person, but isn't a shooter, it's an RPG. Dead Space doesn't count, it's a shooter, but it's over-the-shoulder third person.
The lower viewheight also has to be taken into account. I suppose as long as switches are lowered that it doesn't matter that much, but being the nitpicker that I am it still irks me that the spacial aesthetic is being distorted.
Da Werecat said:
Messing with sector heights just because of the different pixel aspect ratio would be impractical.
Then again, it and PSX Doom were developed in the United States where it was intended for NTSC displays, so ignoring the unintended PAL pixel ratio, PSX Doom (and SNES, though I don't consider it "proper" Doom) displayed the PC maps at 8:7 ratio, and even Doom 64 wasn't perfectly square, but was rather 32:35 (same with Jaguar, 32X, and 3DO). So then maybe it doesn't matter too much, especially since the step height is still 24.
Also, as far as I can tell, PSX Doom displays sprites at roughly 65% by 90% relative to the world, allowing it to not look too tall when shifting it out of the ground (because the renderer didn't support sprites bleeding into the floor) and also roughly retain the 5:6 ratio.
Given developer comments and internal documentation, I also suspect that id themselves assumed square pixels, 8 pixels per foot as far as the 3D world was concerned, photographed sprites aside which are undoubtedly meant to be seen in 5:6 because they were captured at 640x480 and scaled to 320x200 before they started to refine and palletize them. I'm certain that Quake was meant to be seen with square pixels, yet the player bounding box is still 32x56.
Again, I'm a nitpicker. :P