2K addresses BioShock widescreen issue
It states that the optimal mode for playing the game is in widescreen, the mode that 90% of 2K's development stations employed. Team members chose a widescreen field of view "that best reflected their intentions with respect to the way the world is perceived" and instead of cropping it for 4:3 displays, they "slightly extended the vertical FOV for standard def mode: we never wanted to have black bars on people's displays." In other words, the original widescreen mode lost nothing while the 4:3 mode was extended.
While that sounds like a "same difference" situation, 2K feels they made the right decision. If, however, you're still not pleased, the developer is looking into ways of allowing users to manually adjust the field of view. Alternatively, you can have your memory erased and play the game blissfully unaware of issues you wouldn't have noticed had someone not pointed them out to you.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Paul @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:29PM
I can honestly say that this "issue" hasn't bothered my ability to enjoy the game.
Monthenor @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:32PM
While widescreen "cropping" probably won't affect anybody's enjoyment, this seems like the worst possible response 2K could have made. Did they hire PR flacks from Sony?
Anonim @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:13PM
"It's not broken (stupid), it's advanced!"
Or how people eat PR bullshit , then thanks and ask for glass of piss.
PRs clearly LIE - the FOV would be different if widescreen/4:3 would be implemented properly.
In widescreen game is 'zoomed in' - and it shouldn't be.
Anonim @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:19PM
How it shoul look like:
http://wsgfmedia.com/uploads/paddywak/screenshots/bioshock/Bio-1-T.jpg
from fix for PC version
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=108586#108586
dsub @ Aug 22nd 2007 6:34PM
I agree. This seems more like something for people who don't own the game to complain about. The reviewers that gave the game perfect scores didn't know about the issue, and they still thought the game was amazing.
Face it. If people hadn't put 2 and 2 together, you all never would have known and you'd be going on and on about how amazing Bioshock is. This does not effect gameplay, therefore it does not effect the game. End of story.
Meloche @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:31PM
Sincerly, people are bitching for nothing.
mcatrage @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:21PM
The people bitching the most probably don't even own the game. Happens everytime a highly rated game comes out. Most obvious being with Twilight Princess.
SymetriX @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:44PM
It amazes me that people still think this is some made-up problem that people are just complaining about for the sake of complaining.
So let's get the facts straight: Irrational games says "no no, guys, we didn't crop widescreen, we made fullscreen taller!"
Now, just stop and think about that statement for a second. Is widescreen cropped? Yes. Half-full, half-empty, no matter which way you slice it, they admit that in relation to fullscreen, widescreen is cropped.
What they also admit is that the WIDEscreen ratio does not have a WIDER field of view than full screen.
That means that either full screen users or wide screen users are not recieving a horizontal field of view that is correct for their aspect ratio.
Based on that fact that the character's arms and tattoo (which is relevant to the story) are not shown in widescreen mode, and based on the fact that widescreen feels "zoomed-in", it's pretty clear who is not getting the correct FOV.
None of us widescreen gamers are claiming the game is bad, but you have to remember, for a widescreen owner we are in the minority, and we constantly have to educate people as to what the issues are, and what the correct way to implement widescreen is, since a lot of companies (*cough EA*) feel it is acceptable to implement widescreen in such a manner that we get a worse experience than fullscreen users.
And with forums like this, you practically have to have a PHD in mathematics in order to explain what should be a simple situation without somebody claiming that you're a chronic complainer.
I guarantee if fullscreen users were getting short-sided they'd be just as upset as widescreen users are now. Ignorance may be bliss, but a little bit of education on the issue might help before you go making statements about situations you have no understanding about.
DWells55 @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:33PM
Although I did notice that the FoV was a bit low when I started playing the game, it's really nothing worth complaining about. This is mroe a case of people being pissed off that their expensive HDTVs show less of the game than an SDTV. While I do understand their point that widescreen should be about adding to the view, not restricting it, it's nothing really worth making a huge fuss over.
The Boo @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:39PM
I agree but this method is still retarded. I won't bitch but I will moan.
caramelzappa @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:33PM
To me it's just the fact that 2K was quoted saying you would see more in widescreen, when it's in face the opposite. I'm going out to buy the game today, and though I'm sure I'll enjoy it as much as anyone, I hope they patch this issue up correctly soon.
Surreal @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:33PM
What Irrational did is perfectly fine. It is exactly the same thing that is called "Open Frame" for movies. Much ado about nothing.
Phour ZwanZig @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:56PM
I was worried so I rented it, but now that I see its just like the Demo, I dont care.. Its not stretched to fit the screen which I hate, so Im gunna buy the game now..
Im Loving It..
*and no its not McD's*
JLynx @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:36PM
So this is only effects people with 4:3 screens. Great. I'll move this into my who cares bin.
caramelzappa @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:38PM
No, it means people with 16:9 and 16:10 screens see less than people with 4:3 screens.
Sceren @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:37PM
Who cares?
Still a 10/10 for me.
Hirsbrunner @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:40PM
To quote Grandpa Simpson:
"Bitch..bitch..bitch!"
hvnlysoldr @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:41PM
I still think it was lazy or over sighted of them. 'lost planet text size'
JL @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:57PM
I agree. This is a shitty excuse.
BUT, this game is so awesome. 9.9/10
-.1 for lazy widescreen
Phour ZwanZig @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:59PM
Funny you mention text.. Thats the only beef Ive had with the game, and its not really the text itself, but the Subtitles for the VoiceOvers just doesnt match up.. Many times you read the text b4 its even spoken..
Thats my ONLY beef..
Almack64 @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:42PM
Man I need to take a class in the skill of spitting flaming BS, I mean Public Relations.
aC @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:43PM
what you people don't seem to get is that using this method, even if they "patched" it to be farther out in WS, they would still just update 4:3 to be the same width AGAIN, and add on the top and bottom AGAIN, and start this all over again.
You got what they intended for WS, and just because 4:3 gets more vertically you're all whining like little children, not even realize that there is NO WAY to fix this using their current methodology.
People can be so damn idiotic.
Brent @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:45PM
The question is, which is correct...to show more at 4:3 or to show more at widescreen? There's really no way to give both the exact same amount of screen real estate. Meh, it really doesn't matter to me. It might matter a little if there was multiplayer, I guess.
David @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:56PM
That's exactly the case! and when you show more at once, you will always trade off with the details being shrunk.
The preconception that one way is "right" is really annoying to me!
J-Guy @ Aug 22nd 2007 6:47PM
The only difference between 4:3 and widescreen should just be that widescreen fits the whole image across the entire screen. The two sizes should show exactly the same thing.
False @ Sep 19th 2007 2:23PM
People seem to think widescreen views should equate in the game-world to extra perhipheral vision. 2k didn't want that, period. In an exploratory shooter like this it would be game breaking to give some players extra peripheral vision, whereas extra height just allows you to see more of the floor and ceiling as you walk around. 2k didn't mind showing you the floor in front of your feet, they wanted to avoid revealing the mob of splicers trying to flank you in the shadows...
J.Goodwin @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:47PM
You either "crop" the widescreen image to get to the fullscreen or you "crop" the fullscreen to get to the widescreen.
It's not a "cropped" vs "uncropped" issue, it's an artistic decision on the part of the design team to do one or the other or to provide a letterboxed or pillarboxed experience so that everyone has the exact same view.
Frankly, IMHO, players don't have the right to second guess that decision by the directors of the game.
halobreaker @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:48PM
Either see wider or higher... you pick.
Frowelishnu @ Aug 23rd 2007 3:42AM
You're exactly wrong.
It's see taller or not. There is no wider.
That's the issue, wide screen should be wider.
It's not called short screen, idiots.
ScreamingSkull @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:48PM
Uh, I thought this was why they let you look up and down now-a-days? I mean if this were doom...
NATO_Duke @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:48PM
"...play the game blissfully unaware of issues you wouldn't have noticed had someone not pointed them out to you."
That should sum it up. People need to cry less and just play the game.
hvnlysoldr @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:55PM
They're not playing the game if they're on here.
T-bone and Razor @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:54PM
It would SEEM like they intended to give something to the majority of people who are still using SDTV's, or it would seem so if they hadn't made that statement saying that you would be able to see more in 16:9, not less
This probably would not have been worth more than a passing mention had it not been for that wierd, contradictory statement
Jmoney @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:56PM
Joystiq, i love u guys...but anyone who play the game to that point know what u meant. And Im not gonna point out where u said it to those who haven't played the game yet.
vanwagnen @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:57PM
16:9 and 16:10 users get their full display filled with what the developer thought was the optimal view of the virtual world. 4:3 users get a shrunken version this optimal view, plus some extra sh*t on the top and bottom that the developer never thought was necessary.
Psycho ranting fanboys are hilarious. In fact they probably actually believe that the scene was rendered in full and then the pieces were literally 'chopped off' to make the wide screen version. I recommend that these fanboys start with some books on real time rendering (Watt for example) so they can understand projections and viewports. Otherwise they will continue to look like morons.
Nintendo Power @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:58PM
Dear Everyone who thinks this is actually an issue,
STFU.
AlanRickman @ Aug 22nd 2007 4:58PM
The guys at the forums that pointed this out already have a hack that enables editing of the FOV on the PC version. Kinda odd they did it so quick...anyway, 360 owners will have to wait for a title update.
The reason they need this option is two-fold:
1.) Some gamers get physically ill with such a close-in FOV (it looks like its about 75-85). I myself dont get sick at it, but I found myself scootching back from the TV while playing the demo, I felt three feet too close to everything.
2.) As you can tell from the screenies above, in widescreen, you are farther away from objects than you realize you are, because the FOV is zoomed in. For short-rance weapons/abilities/ or usable items, you can see why thats bad.
Anyway, Im glad the community caught on to it, Im glad the press listened to the community, and Im glad the devs are working on a fix.
All in all, good work everybody.
chenry @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:00PM
I'm willing to bet most of the people who claimed they wouldn't buy the game because it's not TROO WIDESCRN probably bought the game anyway.
In summary: cry cry cry
Ibrin @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:03PM
Racer_S and the Widescreen Gaming Forum have provided a solution to increase the 16:10 & Surround FOV, versus 4:3
http://www.digg.com/pc_games/Racer_S_and_the_Widescreen_Gaming_Forum_provide_WS_hack_for_Bioshock
kftgr @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:03PM
What 2K should do is to "appease" the widescreen moaners by placing the camera 20 feet behind the player. Obviously, since wider is better, such a large FOV should satisfy any gamer. What it does to the game's immersion and atmosphere is of no importance. FOV is king, right?
At least then the WS people can't complain that they're seeing less than the 4:3 people.
Ibrin @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:04PM
Pulling the camera back (a dolly movement) doesn't increase the FOV. The simple fact is that 2K said that "widescreen users would see more" and they don't - they see less. It is a feature that was not delivered on.
kftgr @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:13PM
@Ibrin
Yes it does.
@hvnlysoldr & JL.
How exactly is it "lazy" to have widescreen this way? I don't find it lazy at all -- perhaps understanding this would help to resolve the differing stances.
hvnlysoldr @ Aug 22nd 2007 6:08PM
It's not so much laziness as it is an oversight. Dead Rising and Lost Planet had near illegible text in standard definition screens. They underestimated the demand from people with standard def TVs. 2K chose to make the widescreen the default position and chose to add vertical height to standard def. That's been misinterpreted to mean wide is being chopped off unfairly for being the better model usually. 2K's response confounds us. We misinterpreted them to say standard is getting a small bonus not that wide got shafted. That's why I said they were lazy or it was an oversight.
Ibrin @ Aug 22nd 2007 8:04PM
No, it doesn't...
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/Comparison_of_dolly_and_zoom
Dolly, zoom, and FOV are all three distinct things...
Kabapu @ Aug 23rd 2007 3:17AM
@Ibrin
That's a really informative article. Thanks. And it completely explains the issue that people are getting justifiably upset over. Anyone who doesn't understand this issue doesn't understand the concept of cropping. It's (essentially) similar to watching a film originally produced in widescreen format after being reformatted (or cropped) for 4:3 screens (you end up missing out on the bigger picture, the complete experience).
But if you don't understand it by now, you won't any time soon.
horngreen @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:15PM
So take the game back if seeing that knuckle is so damn important!
Murry @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:18PM
My problem is that of inconsistancy. Ive got bioshock on the 360, and the PC demo right? Both are playing on the same monitor. Both are playing at 1280x1024. The PC version? Fullscreen. Hawt wrist action if you will. The 360 version? Black bar letterboxing of developers do not wanting. I dont really /care/ about the wrist issue so much as I care that I have big black bars on one version but not the other and how playing any game in letterbox mode is.. kinda lame. Especialy when you can see that its no fault of your own.
Hectigo @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:20PM
Yep, just like some people pointed out already in the earlier discussion, widescreen users were whining about nothing. If anyone should be whining it would be the 4:3 users, who don't get a letterboxed image or a reduced FOV like they sort of should. Of course it's still an interesting decision to have such a relatively small FOV, but it's the one the developer wanted to have. I guess a possibility for adjusting FOV will still be a welcomed addition, especially for people who might suffer from motion sickness.
Starsmore @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:20PM
You mean I can play an XBOX360 game on my SD and I'm getting the better deal than HDTV?
Fucking awesome. Wish Capcom would do the same for some of their games. I hate having to squint and cock my head funny to read the text in Dead Rising.
Dud @ Aug 22nd 2007 5:25PM
Various forums have already disproved their response already.
People have already released a 3rd party patch that fixes the PC version.
Now its up to them to patch the 360 version and make everything right again. Why they let people go on vacation so soon is beyond me. The week after release is typically damage control week, where patches will need to be made for stuff (Like this) that wasn't caught in the usual Q&A.