It's an aesthetic choice.
The Order: 1886
- Thread starter Bagel seed
- Start date
-
- Tags
- tig:theorder1886
Possibly a combination of aesthetic and performance. They may have chosen cinematic aspect for the look, but that also affords 14% more rendering for niceness on screen. Or it could be that they did some tests, found they couldn't get the IQ they wanted at 1080p so letterboxed for that little extra performance. Given the first showings were cinematic, I'm inclined to go with the first case. I think they chose cinematic aspect for the style (they should go 24 fps too!
). Whatever the case, the letter-boxing does have an upside as well as a reduced FOV.So it's 40min for the press but 0min for us gamers, beautiful. Not to mention we still don't know when we'll see it
Are you that ignorant of the preview process to think the press are being sworn to secrecy? They're showing the game live and in person to the press so they can write up preview coverage that will be accompanied by a bunch of official media.
@Tanzen: Arrivato, domani vedo il primo gameplay serio per The Order 1886
[Come, tomorrow I see the first serious gameplay for The Order 1886]
Not to be pedantic but "Arrivato" should be translated as "arrived".
That stone wall is clearly tessellated
Must be something wrong on my end though.
Sigfried1977
Legend
I think it does. At least in Beyond's case. Image composition was fantastic in that game. That said, I think it's indeed a little pointless in a behind-the-back, user controlled camera scenario.
I understand that, but what's wrong with just giving us an embargo date? Or does the general public get the footage one day after?
Bagel seed
Veteran
He was only jok........or was he not?
Of course not, I have 20/10 vision.
Back to the black bars thing. I think it's going to catch on with other games, especially later in the gen. Who needs to see what's going on in the sky or on the ground that much anyways :smile:
D
Deleted member 86764
Guest
It's good to see a game set in London for a change. And I love the 'what if' scenarios.
It actually increases the FOV considerably, the aspect ration of the order will provide you with a much wider FOV than 16:9. This decision was made even before the developers knew about the PS4 hardware. I wish people would just stop claiming that they did so because they wanted to get extra power out of it (14%? but what of the hit in performance from a wider FOV than the usual 65 degrees you get in games?).
Unless the RAD wanted to get that little bit of extra power regardless of PS4's final specs ie. even if it had turned out to be twice as powerful as the current specs (which doesn't really makes sense), the decision to go with the current aspect ratio was clearly and artistic choice.
There is no other way to provide an aspect ratio like this on a 16:9 screen without doing black bars. This reminds me of the time when people used to claim GOW games have "fixed" camera for performance reasons, so as to cull the objects. That myth was debunked later by one of the developers from the game here on B3D.
Sigfried1977
Legend
Afaik you can use a PS3 with a custom firmware to get rid of Beyond's black borders. Does anyone know whether this has any impact on performance?
I don't think you are getting a wider FOV. For that, they'd need a wider angle lens which would probably start to add perspective warping and look a little odd. If the perspective remains the same, you get exactly the same horizontal FOV but with the top and bottom cut off.
The 14% saving won't apply to geometry if there's no geometry being culled (extra geom from wider FOV as you suggest, if it is wider, which I doubt it is) but will apply to pixel workloads.
Again, mistaken. You can take exactly the same horizontal FOV from these images and just draw in the space above and below. You don't need a particular aspect to provide a particular FOV - that's decided by the camera properties in your renderer. You can render fish-eye into a square aspect, or super zoomed (300mm telephoto) and letterbox it for a narrow FOV with no top or bottom.
No-one's made the assertion that RAD are doing this for performance reasons. It's only noted that there is a performance gain that comes with the choice. There's no consensus, but most are just questioning it, and those expressing an opinion seem to be siding with the view it was aesthetic.
Yes, it impacts the performance. In some rare scenes it goes below 20.
I had zero problems with Beyond's aspect ration. I barely even noticed them.
The screenshots we've seen so far suggests a wider FOV. At least that's what it looks like to me.
Why do my movies have black bars then? I was under the impression movies do this because they need the wide angle, and the need for more vertical area was the reason why Avengers has an aspect ratio 1.85:1 instead of 2.39:1 like in most movies.
Similar threads
