Author Topic: 16:9 resolution change  (Read 17170 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline soulblade

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 109
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #60 on: August 18, 2011, 10:34:05 pm »
Just my two pennies worth, but usually the "sneak" attacks that are most effective are those coming from above or below e.g. coming from roof on B2b/Equinox/Voland or from low on Viet. There's no increase in view distance vertically so "sneak" attacks should work just as well as before. Not to mention that in ctf there isn't really much behind the spawn point to see, so I don't see it being affected much.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2011, 10:43:02 pm by soulblade »

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #61 on: August 18, 2011, 10:54:01 pm »
Just my 2 cents, but usually the "sneak" attacks that are most effective are those coming from above or below e.g. coming from roof on B2b/Equinox/Voland, or from low on Viet. In ctf there isn't really much behind the spawn point to see, so I don't see it being affected much.
Well in ctf - maybe, on some maps. But keep in mind other gamemodes.
Personally, when ambushing an enemy I like to get closer and then unload a whole clip from close range or just chainsaw him to pieces. You know how in Soldat outcome is often decided by a few split seconds, and this much extra view gives the enemy enough time to notice you sooner and do a roll that might save his life.


L[one]R, INF veteran
maps - remakes: inf_Warehouse ; inf_Fortress ; inf_(Sun)Rise ; inf_Outpost ; inf_Abel ; inf_Moonshine

Offline ginn

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #62 on: August 19, 2011, 05:28:06 am »
My only concern about my/fryer's idea is that it'll help snipers/campers/sprayers notice enemies behind them faster, at least with current increase. In some cases it would save their lives. Personally I'd still prefer if extra view distance was evenly distributed between both sides, so that neither side would have a big enough increase to affect the balance.
this doesn't affect the barrett though.... you shouldn't be concerned about if a few players aren't willing to play in 16:9, the concern is the balance.

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #63 on: August 19, 2011, 04:08:15 pm »
What I mean is that ambushing campers from behind will become harder. It's not about 4:3 vs 16:9, it's about player vs camper/sniper. Campers already have the advantage of being hidden and getting a chance to strike first. Now they get an additional advantage by being able to see what's behind them and have extra time to dodge an attack or notice an enemy trying to sneak by. On some maps it can be critical.

view-behind.jpg:
inf_Fortress. What I've shown on the attached pics is a common area for blues to camp in, but the disadvantage is that you can only see one entrance at once. With all of the extra view distance added behind soldier, you can easily see the tunnel behind while still aiming at the other entrance.

view-even.jpg:
With view distance evenly distributed between both sides of the screen, extra view behind won't be enough to see past walls or notice the enemy quickly enough on most maps, while extra view ahead won't be enough to impact map and weapon balance significantly.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 04:10:18 pm by L[0ne]R »


L[one]R, INF veteran
maps - remakes: inf_Warehouse ; inf_Fortress ; inf_(Sun)Rise ; inf_Outpost ; inf_Abel ; inf_Moonshine

Offline Falcon`

  • Flagrunner
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
  • A wanted lagger
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #64 on: August 19, 2011, 04:32:01 pm »
when you're camping you're most likely focused on what's going on in front of you. I don't think that you'll react quickly enough. Especially when you're sitting with barret on zoom
If you're not paying for something, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold.
- Andrew Lewis

Always code as if the guy who ends up maintaining your code will be a violent psychopath who knows where you live.

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #65 on: August 19, 2011, 04:35:43 pm »
when you're camping you're most likely focused on what's going on in front of you. I don't think that you'll react quickly enough. Especially when you're sitting with barret on zoom
With barret zoom - no, but what about other guns like LAW or M79? There's also such thing as side vision. You may be looking in front of you, but you can still notice a small red spot behind you with a corner of your eye, especially if you play in a small window.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 04:37:41 pm by L[0ne]R »


L[one]R, INF veteran
maps - remakes: inf_Warehouse ; inf_Fortress ; inf_(Sun)Rise ; inf_Outpost ; inf_Abel ; inf_Moonshine

Offline soulblade

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 109
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #66 on: August 19, 2011, 04:57:40 pm »
IMO The difference it will make in Inf or game modes other than ctf is unimportant.

The most common whining in public servers was about m79ers because of the insta-death it brought and the ease of spawning, but using m79 is a lot harder when it comes to competitive ctf.

If the weapon balance was based on public servers or other game modes then m79 might have had some crazy nerf on it by now; as it is, the weapon balance has been modelled on the ctf competitive scene. Since this new view distance will affect the weapon balance, workarounds should be made with ctf the top priority. IMO having the view distance increase behind the player will give minimal advantage to those with 16:9 because rarely are players able to sneak from there even at 4:3. Also, any increase in the view distance in front of the player will mean the weapon balance could have to be completely remade, which has been explained enough already by other guys here.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 05:00:22 pm by soulblade »

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #67 on: August 19, 2011, 04:59:41 pm »
I'm a competitive CTFer who doesn't give a damn about everybody else.
Are you serious?


Also I've seen cases when players snuck up from behind and got a successful kill. I understand why it might not happen competitive CTF, but again - other game modes matter.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 05:01:24 pm by L[0ne]R »


L[one]R, INF veteran
maps - remakes: inf_Warehouse ; inf_Fortress ; inf_(Sun)Rise ; inf_Outpost ; inf_Abel ; inf_Moonshine

Offline soulblade

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 109
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #68 on: August 19, 2011, 05:04:49 pm »
I'm a competitive CTFer who doesn't give a damn about everybody else.
Are you serious?


Also I've seen cases when players snuck up from behind and got a successful kill. I understand why it might nit happen competitive CTF, but again - other game modes matter.
I'd rather base any fixes on the most popular gamemode rather than one that is barely played at all. Not sure how that is ignorant of me.

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #69 on: August 19, 2011, 05:12:42 pm »
I'm a competitive CTFer who doesn't give a damn about everybody else.
Are you serious?


Also I've seen cases when players snuck up from behind and got a successful kill. I understand why it might nit happen competitive CTF, but again - other game modes matter.
I'd rather base any fixes on the most popular gamemode rather than one that is barely played at all. Not sure how that is ignorant of me.
Quite ignorant, I'm honestly surprised. DM and INF are very popular as well, or at least used to be before most of the regular players switched to gathers or quit the game altogether. Even pointmatch and HTF had players back in the days. The fact that CTF is more popular than other gamemodes doesn't mean they should just be left to rot.


L[one]R, INF veteran
maps - remakes: inf_Warehouse ; inf_Fortress ; inf_(Sun)Rise ; inf_Outpost ; inf_Abel ; inf_Moonshine

Offline amb2010

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 264
  • Fear the dot ...
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #70 on: August 19, 2011, 05:28:28 pm »
I'd rather base any fixes on the most popular gamemode rather than one that is barely played at all. Not sure how that is ignorant of me.

I'd rather ignorant people didn't exist but hey, obviously that ain't gonna happen any time soon so :P

Other game-modes do matter. Sure they may not be as popular as other ones for what ever reason, but they are still there and should not be ignored. Soldat is Soldat. It *has* INF and DM in it, they are just as much part of the game as CTF is. Of course this isn't a thread for CTF vs INF, it's about 16:9 resolutions and the added benefits it gives over people not using it.
And as the lyrics go in the United State's national anthem: "America, f**k YEAH!".

Offline ginn

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #71 on: August 19, 2011, 05:34:29 pm »
It would be better to make a new map-pack for the less played modes, rather than taking a bigger risk (the new wm is a 'test') in the 'competitive' modes.
The level on publics is very low, so I doubt even half of them have developed peripheral vision yet. Which kinda makes that advantage useless.

Offline soulblade

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 109
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #72 on: August 19, 2011, 05:46:28 pm »
I'm a competitive CTFer who doesn't give a damn about everybody else.
Are you serious?


Also I've seen cases when players snuck up from behind and got a successful kill. I understand why it might nit happen competitive CTF, but again - other game modes matter.
I'd rather base any fixes on the most popular gamemode rather than one that is barely played at all. Not sure how that is ignorant of me.
Quite ignorant, I'm honestly surprised. DM and INF are very popular as well, or at least used to be before most of the regular players switched to gathers or quit the game altogether. Even pointmatch and HTF had players back in the days. The fact that CTF is more popular than other gamemodes doesn't mean they should just be left to rot.
You should know that in any sport/competitive game that rules are there to keep the game fair and consistent. Even small changes can have drastic repercussions in the competitive scene as the standard is so high that the difference between winning and losing is very small.

Having some extra view distance behind the player isn't going to "rot" other game modes at all. They aren't played at such a high level, so changes to the game will hurt them less and I really don't think it will hurt them at all.

If your view distance was used, it would actually have a worse affect on soldat as EVERYbody in EVERY game mode would have to relearn how to play and relearn how to aim. Whereas, having the extra view distance only behind the player will not affect aim OR the weapon balance OR the most popular game mode. Your the one who is ignorant.

Offline amb2010

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 264
  • Fear the dot ...
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #73 on: August 19, 2011, 05:50:01 pm »
Cause you know things like aim-lag and what not didn't affect gameplay at all right? That's what happens when a game isn't complete and new features are to be added. They *affect* gameplay eventually and people will adjust to them eventually. If the feature added creates unfairness for people, it should be removed/changed to ensure fair play. If the only way to ensure fair play is changing how gameplay functions and that's the only solution then it should be added. Since while it requires learning how to play, *everyone* is on equal terms.

In American Football spearing is not allowed, it used to be and people were used to being able to tackle that way (driving your head/helmet into their gut, very painful and dangerous) but they added the rule in. So because it would require people needing to relearn how to play it shouldn't be changed? I find that ridiculous. That's the nature of games, especially highly competitive games, as you said. Even small changes affect gameplay greatly so why does it matter if a big one comes along and affects gameplay as well?

Also, loner said just because they aren't as popular they shouldn't be left to rot, as in not ignored as you suggest. Ergo the "ignorance" since you think nothing but CTF matters.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 06:04:50 pm by amb2010 »
And as the lyrics go in the United State's national anthem: "America, f**k YEAH!".

Offline soulblade

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 109
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #74 on: August 19, 2011, 06:10:19 pm »
Cause you know things like aim-lag and what not didn't affect gameplay at all right? That's what happens when a game isn't complete and new features are to be added. They *affect* gameplay eventually and people will adjust to them eventually. If the feature is to ensure fairness for everyone, then regardless of the change to the game it should be added. Football (american that is) used to allow tackles to the back of the knee, now it doesn't. It was added in for safety and people had to adjust to learn to the new rules. So just because it changes gameplay it shouldn't be added? I find that kind of ridiculous.
Since when was aim-lag a part of Soldat? Yea people eventually got used to a part of Soldat that doesn't exist. Nice point thanks.
(FYI it was an idea that was never implemented because it was rubbish.)

With Loner's idea all 4:3 users will see less in front of them and be at a disadvantage in every fire fight. Hmm, hardly something players can just adjust to you know since there aren't any new skills to learn. Unless buying a new widescreen monitor counts as a skill?

Offline amb2010

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 264
  • Fear the dot ...
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #75 on: August 19, 2011, 06:17:32 pm »
It *was* implemented in a beta but removed due to rubbish, the point still stands. Not adding features because it requires people relearning how to play is a poor decision. Perhaps aim-lag was a poor example since it wasn't being implemented to fix things but was a "I think this is cool" addition.

I was in no way supporting Loner's idea or anyone's idea, I was merely stating that this isn't a CTF vs INF discussion, adding features based solely on CTF is a stupid thing to do and not changing features to ensure fair play, even if they will cause people to need to relearn how to play, is also a stupid idea. That was it. As for my stance on 16:9, I think it should be removed entirely. I see no fair way to ensure 16:9 uses don't have an advantage and 4:3 users don't get a disadvantage. I think nothing is wrong with 4:3 picture boxed on widescreen monitors.
And as the lyrics go in the United State's national anthem: "America, f**k YEAH!".

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #76 on: August 19, 2011, 06:18:06 pm »
You should know that in any sport/competitive game that rules are there to keep the game fair and consistent. Even small changes can have drastic repercussions in the competitive scene as the standard is so high that the difference between winning and losing is very small.
Soldat is first of all a game. It was not made to be a sport, it was made so that players of all kinds could just play and have fun. If you look at it as a sport - even in real-life sports there are occasional changes to rules. Give me an example where a small change could have "drastic repercussions", because I really fail to see how a very skilled player can suddenly become a pathetic noob because of that.

Having some extra view distance behind the player isn't going to "rot" other game modes at all. They aren't played at such a high level, so changes to the game will hurt them less and I really don't think it will hurt them at all.
That's true, but I wasn't referring to just that. I was referring to the whole competitive scene's attitude where they bash every thing that gets changed and make it sound like they and their opinion are more important than everybody and everything else. Over the time this kind of attitude have had a very negative impact on Soldat and its more casual gamer base.

If your view distance was used, it would actually have a worse affect on soldat as EVERYbody in EVERY game mode would have to relearn how to play and relearn how to aim.
What? Because of increased screen width? Are competitive players really THAT sensitive?

Whereas, having the extra view distance only behind the player will not affect aim OR the weapon balance OR the most popular game mode. Your the one who is ignorant.
But it will affect ambush tactics which are a great source of fun and aren't that rare. It really is fun to suddenly drop down and shove a chainsaw up a camper's ass, or spas him point-blank. Though it doesn't sound like you've ever experienced something like that.


I'm not ignorant, I respect opinions of both the pubbers and competitive players. But there are limits, and like I've mentioned before - competitive players tend to cross that limit and demand way too much.


L[one]R, INF veteran
maps - remakes: inf_Warehouse ; inf_Fortress ; inf_(Sun)Rise ; inf_Outpost ; inf_Abel ; inf_Moonshine

Offline soulblade

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 109
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #77 on: August 19, 2011, 06:19:32 pm »
Also, loner said just because they aren't as popular they shouldn't be left to rot, as in not ignored as you suggest. Ergo the "ignorance" since you think nothing but CTF matters.

Where did I say other game modes don't matter exactly? Or did you even read my post properly? All I have said is that ctf and the competitive scene should have higher priority when taking any changes into account as most players are in them. What you are saying is popularity of game modes should be completely disregarded. If a change or new feature positively affected INF TDM and RAMBO, but completely screwed up CTF it would be fine right as long as it was fair?....Yea it would except...oh wait you'd have a DEAD GAME.

P.s. This is my last post on the matter. I cba arguing with all this spew.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 06:21:28 pm by soulblade »

Offline amb2010

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 264
  • Fear the dot ...
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #78 on: August 19, 2011, 06:22:52 pm »
Quote
IMO The difference it will make in Inf or game modes other than ctf is unimportant.

Right there? Sure it isn't exactly "Ignore all other gamemodes" but you say any impact on them is unimportant because it makes CTF better.

I said all the game modes should be treated equally, if it screws up CTF it shouldn't be added. If it screws up Rambo, it shouldn't be added. Just because people rarely play them, doesn't mean they should be ignored just because CTF has some elitist competitive people. Seeing how you are one of those and don't care about anyone elses' opinions I'm done here.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 06:25:41 pm by amb2010 »
And as the lyrics go in the United State's national anthem: "America, f**k YEAH!".

Offline Serial K!ller

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 408
    • Soldat Mods Archive
Re: 16:9 resolution change
« Reply #79 on: August 20, 2011, 04:57:24 am »
the increased view distance in the back would also have an advantage in CTF in certain situations

-it can be a harder to pass by enemies that are attacking your base when you are returning with their flag because they can spot you sooner.
-also when you are holding the flag and you are defending your teams base it will be easier to spot enemies that are sneaking from behind.

so you would be disadvantaged if you aren't using widescreen f.e. when your not registered (or will wide-screen not be an option for registered only?)