Field Of View



  • Hello, I want to talk about FOV.

    As some of you may know Chivalry has an adjustable FOV which can be adjusted in the video menu from 60 to 120 degrees. However, you can increase your FOV further than this with the use of console commands or .ini file edits.

    Personally it has always been of my opinion that tweaking your FOV higher than the game allows in menu for competitive advantage is basically cheating. It allows you to see a lot more of any fight and spot any flankers much easier at a higher FOV and this generally comes with no disadvantage.

    Having said that I don’t want to be hypocritical an fall into the trap of making my own personal set of rules, so instead I would like to hear opinions from the competitive community so we can decide upon a rule for this, and I (and anyone else) can adjust settings accordingly.

    First, here are some screenshot at different FOVs so you can get an idea of how this all works:

    60 FOV. Lowest you can set it in the video menu.

    90 FOV. Default. This is pretty low for someone who’s used to playing 100+

    120 FOV. Highest you can set FOV in the video menu.

    150 FOV. The maximum FOV I found playable, although I prefer 140. And I mean viably playable. I was just as accurate if not more so with my attacks and it only took a few minutes to adjust to the range changes. Notice the massive difference between this and 120 FOV.

    Here are my thoughts. There is no reason why someone would want to use an FOV as large as 150 (which is ugly, but so is low settings for max FPS) for anything other than perhaps a multi-monitor setup, if Chivalry even supports that. (And even so, this would still give an advantage.) With an FOV this high you can see your entire weapon swing and every enemy movement, even in face hug range making it very easy to manipulate and land every hit. It also makes it nigh on impossible for people to flank unseen without being directly behind you, and this way it’s much easier to make decisions as who to hit next and where. There’s no need to predict or estimate what’s going on when an MaA side dodges or you have to fight multiple opponents on either side of you. You also get a much clearer view of every enemy attack that would otherwise be partially off screen. There is no doubt that this is an advantage.

    I think we can rule out the argument of “If the game lets you do it, then why not?” because there are plenty of things in Chivalry’s console commands and .ini files that definitely would be considered outright cheating.

    In competitive games, third person perspective was banned because it allowed you to see significantly more than in first person. Now, high FOV doesn’t let you see around walls, but it does give you increased precision and battle awareness practically for free. Battle awareness, enemy prediction and experience in these things is a huge part of competitive scrims that is rendered (quite literally “rendered” hoho) unnecessary with this FOV.

    I would like to hear the opinions of players on where the line should be drawn, if at all, with FOV. Should FOV be limited to the menu restrictions, or should you be allowed to go further and how much?

    I’m really curious to see a general opinion on this, as I would switch up to 140 FOV in a heartbeat if people had no problem with it as it has a clear advantage, although I do think it somewhat ruins a lot of what makes team fights in Chivalry interesting.

    TLDR; should there be a limit on FOV?

    Edit for clarity:
    I am not proposing a locked FOV, or even a low capped FOV.
    I am simply proposing that we decide on what the FOV limit should be for competitive games.



  • @NabsterHax:

    150 FOV.

    But yeah. I can see how setting your FoV to 150 can give you some advantages. It’s one of those things that no one who wants to play for fun would use because of how horrible it looks, but the kind of people who only care about winning would probably use it because of the advantages it gives.

    120 Should really be the max. Everything after that starts to look really distorted and you get the floating arm syndrome.

    Speaking of which I hope TBS fix the slight case of floaty arms at 120 FoV. It’s only really noticeable when I’m playing knight, but sometimes crops up a bit as vanguard or MaA.



  • @David:

    120 Should really be the max. Everything after that starts to look really distorted and you get the floating arm syndrome.

    Well really 120 looks pretty bad, especially for two-handed swords. I’d use 120 but I can’t stand looking at it for some weapons. Wouldn’t that mean you ought to be saying “110 should really be the max”?

    110 is the highest the first person arm models seem to be able to cope with.



  • Game looks too weird above 110 for me so I don’t bother.



  • Except that superhigh fov makes your range aiming (throwables) really bad and fucks up your range judging completely. GL seeing stabs properly at Fov 150, haha :P. Theres definetly drawbacks for going high fov.

    There definetly should be no limit to FOV. FOV adjustment isnt been seen as cheating since competitive gaming exist and it would just screw over the people who have problems with 120 fov.



  • @CRUSHED:

    Except that superhigh fov makes your range aiming (throwables) really bad and fucks up your range judging completely. GL seeing stabs properly at Fov 150, haha :P. Theres definetly drawbacks for going high fov.

    There definetly should be no limit to FOV. FOV adjustment isnt been seen as cheating since competitive gaming exist and it would just screw over the people who have problems with 120 fov.

    Says the guy who has been abusing 130 FOV since release.



  • im not abusing anything, high fov is not a “cheat” or exploit by any means



  • I’ve bound my Q key to toggle my FOV between 60 and 110. Basically lets me have binoculars for when I want to check for archers, or for when I’m an archer myself trying to snipe.

    If I played at 130 FOV I’d probably make Q toggle from 130 for melee, to 90 for medium range combat and 60 for long range combat/scouting, then back to 90 then back to 130 then starting again.

    Thus removing any disadvantage high FOV has to ranged combat.



  • So you want to change fov everytime you switch to your throwables? oh yeah… that sounds awful! lol

    nobody cares what you do, high fov has disadvantage in range combat thats a fact if u change it to lower fov then ofcourse the disadvantage is gone. rocket science



  • 130fov 120fps master race
    [image:x7pqpmvj]http://i.imgur.com/upsvWJX.jpg[/image:x7pqpmvj]





  • Fov (130) an exploit?



  • @rumpelstiltskin:

    130fov 120fps master race
    [image:20pvzlm8]http://i.imgur.com/upsvWJX.jpg[/image:20pvzlm8]

    Haha yet you got shittiest graphics on.

    Makes sense



  • Never liked the fact FOV could be changed since it was implemented. I’m afraid I have to side with developers who lock FOVs in first person games on fairness grounds.



  • I played a few hours on 140 FOV in public and had no issue using throwables. I can see why an archer who needs to shoot at medium to long range wouldn’t want to use 140, but throwables are short range enough to aim easily with practice. I was comfortably hitting people (better than usual, in fact) when playing with javelins.

    Same thing with ranges and stabs. At first I was running into people before even attacking them, but it took me one game to get used to the ranges, and then I was able to hit people at my weapon’s max range and still have the advantage of seeing everything when I was face-hugging or being face-hugged.

    If most people in the comp scene really think that the game is better with uncapped FOV that’s fine. I just want to make sure we’re all playing by the same rules.

    EDIT: Also, if high FOV is allowed, can I also use ini and console tweaks to enter 3rd person and see through thin walls and shields? Hopefully you can understand why I want to clarify what is and is not allowed for competitive games. Higher FOV does give you an advantage. Why should it be allowed if seeing through walls and 3rd person is not?



  • @NabsterHax:

    I played a few hours on 140 FOV in public and had no issue using throwables. I can see why an archer who needs to shoot at medium to long range wouldn’t want to use 140, but throwables are short range enough to aim easily with practice. I was comfortably hitting people (better than usual, in fact) when playing with javelins.

    Same thing with ranges and stabs. At first I was running into people before even attacking them, but it took me one game to get used to the ranges, and then I was able to hit people at my weapon’s max range and still have the advantage of seeing everything when I was face-hugging or being face-hugged.

    If most people in the comp scene really think that the game is better with uncapped FOV that’s fine. I just want to make sure we’re all playing by the same rules.

    EDIT: Also, if high FOV is allowed, can I also use ini and console tweaks to enter 3rd person and see through thin walls and shields? Hopefully you can understand why I want to clarify what is and is not allowed for competitive games. Higher FOV does give you an advantage. Why should it be allowed if seeing through walls and 3rd person is not?

    I would like you to make an video, and show that you can watch through thin walls or shields with higher fov (130 perhaps).



  • you can even look trough walls with a 80 fov so that argument is invalid



  • Games like Quake (3) always had a fov-cap so w/e. But as Nabster said, as long as we all play with the same rules I don’t mind if people use whatever fov they want.



  • @CRUSHED:

    you can even look trough walls with a 80 fov so that argument is invalid

    Indeed, you can look through walls and objectives, since the beginning of the game. Doesn’t matter what fov you have.



  • lol quake 3s fov cap was 170 or so

    almost none of the twitch shooters had fov cap


Log in to reply