I hate auto-changing FOV in modern first person games

[Blastfrog]

Why is it acceptable to have first person games constantly change the FOV these days? A few examples:

1. Many games raising the FOV when sprinting. I get it, it looks "faster" when looking forward, but automatically changing the FOV distorts your sense of space if it's not a constant value. Another problem is that it looks slower if you're looking up or down as the ground moves slower on-screen, even if the walls move faster when looking forward. Lowering the FOV makes it look faster when looking up and down, so if there's a deliberate distortion, it should adjust based on view pitch.

Not that I think it's reasonable at all to change FOV during gameplay. I firmly believe it should remain constant. The user should have the freedom to adjust it, but I think for "normal" circumstances it should remain what the user set it to and not modify it.

2. Event based -- Looking at footage of Duke Forever, it seems the FOV increases when engaging in minigames such as pinball tables. This kinda pisses me off. It almost seems like an acknowledgement of "yeah, the default FOV isn't appropriate for some situations so let's adjust it".


I imagine VR game design will largely eliminate these concerns, but as the general populace is stuck on 2D for at least 5 years, I'd rather keep a constant FOV to ensure that it feels as "real" and spacially consistent as possible.

[Doomkid]

Honestly, I really agree with this. I also hate when games add in a fake "blur" when you turn left to right. It gives me motion sickness badly and makes the games artifically hard. I dunno why so many titles do that shit.

[geo]

That has to be disorienting when it changes. I know a few games with in game first person cut scenes only have it at one FOV and not your desired FOV. I can't imagine why it would auto change.

[Phml]

I don't mind it, but it sucks when it's not optional. I have friends who can't play first-person shooters because the FOV changes make them motion sick.

It's weird to see this push for color-blind friendly games lately, while FOV is largely ignored even though it affects more people. I suppose this might be because color-blindness is something easy to relate to even for people who don't know video games, while FOV is at least a bit technical. Many aren't even aware a low FOV or a FOV change is what makes them sick.

[scifista42]

Sodaholic said:

automatically changing the FOV distorts your sense of space if it's not a constant value.

I firmly believe it should remain constant.

I strongly agree in context of action games that test your skill in efficiently controlling your game character. View-changing effects are just making your effort harder, arbitrarily, and that's annoying. For example Wrack's default sword-swinging effect. I've disabled it immediately.

[Clonehunter]

I agree with this, but I can't recall encountering it anywher, except maybe the running thing, though I don't know where.

[40oz]

Doomkid said:

Honestly, I really agree with this. I also hate when games add in a fake "blur" when you turn left to right. It gives me motion sickness badly and makes the games artifically hard. I dunno why so many titles do that shit.

Same here, I don't get sick from it but I certainly don't understand why normal human perception incapabilities are emulated when you have to use your human eyes to play the game anyway. My vision isn't very great and it's somewhat important to me that I can see more in a video game than I could if I were doing the same thing in real life. Soon our FPS characters will be blinking and breathing and looking directly at their guns to reload and tie their shoes and and do everything to compromise the control of the player for a more 'realistic' and cinematic gameplay experience.

[scifista42]

40oz said:

Soon our FPS characters will be blinking and breathing and looking directly at their guns to reload and tie their shoes and and do everything to compromise the control of the player for a more 'realistic' and cinematic gameplay experience.

Yes, that will be bad. And the worst thing is that the prediction is actually inevitably going to become true, as it seems.

[Xaser]

This (along with motion blur) is a case where something that's realistic (and, to some degree, looks good) directly conflicts with what works best for gameplay (IMO). It's a bit of a conundrum to solve, particularly with motion blur (though a bit off-topic): modern engines sorta "need" it in order for the whole "realistic" look to be complete, but I can see it getting in the way of a hypothetical fast-paced Doom-movement-speed shooter to the point where it'd probably need to be disabled. Problem is, would it be "feasible" to do so from a modern-graphical standpoint (i.e. would companies actually disable it)?

[Captain Toenail]

40oz said:

Soon our FPS characters will be blinking and breathing and looking directly at their guns to reload and tie their shoes and and do everything to compromise the control of the player for a more 'realistic' and cinematic gameplay experience.

And shortly afterwards you will be able to see the floaters in your vision, or even see the sides of your own nose.

Maybe an idea for a Doom mod? You must maintain Doomguy's hunger/bladder/bowel/comfort/happiness/sanity/labido/fatigue levels. Doomguy starves? Lose HP. Doomguy's bladder reaches maximum levels & he pisses himself? Reduced comfort and happiness. Fatigue too high? Reduced movement speed. Doomguy's labido levels getting too high? Ahem... umm... yeah. Better find an imp I guess.

How annoying would that be? Trying to reach the exit but Doomguy gets too tired and proceeds to poop himself.

[Gez]

Captain Toenail said:

And shortly afterwards you will be able to see the floaters in your vision, or even see the sides of your own nose.

Maybe an idea for a Doom mod? You must maintain Doomguy's hunger/bladder/bowel/comfort/happiness/sanity/labido/fatigue levels. Doomguy starves? Lose HP. Doomguy's bladder reaches maximum levels & he pisses himself? Reduced comfort and happiness. Fatigue too high? Reduced movement speed. Doomguy's labido levels getting too high? Ahem... umm... yeah. Better find an imp I guess.

How annoying would that be? Trying to reach the exit but Doomguy gets too tired and proceeds to poop himself.

It did not include libido management or bladder control, but you can try Robinson's Requiem. It's the game where you do see the side of your nose (if you lose one eye), and where you might have to amputate one (or both) of your legs (and/or arms) if you get a wound that gets infected and gangrenous.

[FireFish]

Xaser said:

motion blur

Aaahhh! Burn it! Send it to hell! - Homer simpson.

[Avoozl]

Some modern games like Shadow Warrior 2013 have a FOV changer and by default are set to a value much lower than 90 which the game is initially made for, and when changed to 90 it makes somethings like the characters hand and arm very weird looking, so even thoguh the game has it it still hasn't been made properly supported by the engine.

[Blastfrog]

Avoozl said:

Some modern games like Shadow Warrior 2013 have a FOV changer and by default are set to a value much lower than 90 which the game is initially made for, and when changed to 90 it makes somethings like the characters hand and arm very weird looking, so even thoguh the game has it it still hasn't been made properly supported by the engine.

Yeah, that can be annoying.

I'm a dinosaur that still uses a 4:3 CRT (though I intend to change this as soon as I can afford to). I set Rage to have an FOV of 106 (base ratio is 16:9) which is as close as one can get to 90 when in 4:3 mode. The gun looks uncomfortably far from the screen.

Doom 3 BFG edition uses the same FOV as Rage (80, equivalent of 64 in the original engine) and they consciously chose to move the gun forward by 3 units to make it look better in the low FOV. If only I could change that variable in Rage to move it backward by 3 units (or the equivalent if the scale is different), but it doesn't work. I wanna play Rage as if it were a 2004 game, dammit id! :P

[Doomkid]

Xaser said:

modern engines sorta "need" it in order for the whole "realistic" look to be complete

I'm curious what you mean, Xaser - I would get it in years gone by, perhaps to hide stuff that's loading in the distance or whatever due to slower hardware, but why is it necessary to complete that 'realistic' feel?

40oz said:

I certainly don't understand why normal human perception incapabilities are emulated when you have to use your human eyes to play the game anyway.

This is pretty much how I feel about it in a nutshell. On a side note, I think I'm particularly sensitive to motion sickness from video games - Whenever possible, I always force games to run at a 35 FPS cap as anything higher literally puts me at vomit-level after just a few minutes. It kinda sucks.

[Quasar]

The ONLY place where an FOV change is appropriate is during a cinematic, IMO. Your eyes are not a camera, they do not have variable angle lenses with huge zoom capability. So are you seeing through the character's eyes, or a camera? Make up your minds, game designers.

I could MAYBE allow for it for stuff like, say, super heroes that run faster than the speed of sound, or for some character on a psychoactive drug trip. Otherwise, it's out of place.

[Dragonsbrethren]

Quasar said:

I could MAYBE allow for it for stuff like, say, super heroes that run faster than the speed of sound[...]

FOV changes are practically needed for me to get any real sense of speed. Without them, yeah, I'm moving fast, but it doesn't feel fast.