Poll regarding FOV cap.
The current cap is at 120, which I myself is not to keen on, so I decided to create a quick strawpoll.
I was wondering this as well. 120 is playable, but letting me bump it up to 140 would be ideal. Anything over that is kind of awful.
I think 140 is a resonable cap, the game starts looking pretty wonky at this fov but I think its necessary for player confort .
You should consider multi-monitor setups in your argumentations.
@Kissaki Forgot that people like having black gaps in their LOS when they play ¯\ _(ツ) _/¯
I’m fine with the 120 fov cap. However I do feel badly about multi-monitor users. I wonder if there is a way to enable past 120 fov if the game detects a multi-monitor set up? I know players could just bluff this and get 140+ fov with a single monitor, but it at least will curb the average player from doing so. I did not like seeing 90% of competitive chivalry montages being with fish vision.
As it’s a new test session going on right now, I think this should be bumped.
There shouldn’t be an FOV cap. In real life you have nearly 180 vision, not 90. Also, higher fov makes it easier to deal with those third person muppets. Torn banner really don’t seem to be in Touch with their own community. Not having a good time in the alpha to be honest.
I think 140, or even 130 is a reasonable cap. 120 is a little too close in my opinion. with 130 or 140 you can’t really see behind your back to parry or anything, it just makes the game feel more comfortable and not so zoomed in.
I played C:MW on 140 through 160. 140 is fine, but it’s a little goofy compared to nearly every other game on the market, it’s also worse for projectiles. Projectiles, ranged attacks and long range abilitites play a much larger role in M:AW.
Just forget about 130+.
Make something higher than 105 the default.
As another user mentioned above, let’s steer clear of fish vision. 130 or 140 seems ideal. It doesn’t warp your center of view as much as you start to get at 150 but it still lets you get a better grasp of your surroundings.
Also, consider the average potential customer. They probably aren’t familiar with hardcore competitive chivalry so if they happen to see a mirage montage on youtube with 160 fish vision it might turn them off from the game as a whole.
Complexity isn’t a bad thing in bite-sized doses but in an ideal world the gameplay will have plenty of depth with as little complexity as possible. Major turn offs for new players in chiv include the obvious - reverse overheads and unrealistic spins - but these are just extra layers of complexity that felt unfair because they weren’t taught in the tutorial and thus raised the learning curve beyond the patience of your average new player.
FOV is in a similar boat. If you see all the high level competitive players at 160 and you think that looks awful, you might not feel like you have the potential to be as competitive as the players that make that cosmetic sacrifice. And that might be the difference to make some players quit.
I agree with an increase in the FOV cap for first person cameras, but I propose we put forward a 120 cap (or thereabouts) for the third person view. Playing on anything higher than 120 FOV in third person could lead to an issue we saw in Chivalry, where people could see you running up behind them from a mile away. This is gameplay I think we can all agree on that shouldn’t be encouraged, or made available, which is why I think the 120 cap was put in place to start with.
Well ideally you wouldn’t allow third person if this game is to become competitive. TB should just remove the cap and lock to first person.