In today's Dev Update, Drew announced the long-asked for increase to SoT's FoV. Going up from 90 to 110, this will help a lot of folks - especially those with motion sickness.
Glad to see this change, and I think 110 is a solid compromise.
110 FOV Incoming!!
@theblackbellamy said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
tHeRe aRe nO iNtEnTiOnS tO cHaNgE tHiS iN tHe fUtUrEAnd yet this will continue to be the tagline about any request to make Safer Seas less of an insult to people who dislike PvP.
@hiradc said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@guildar9194 that always was the tagline pre safer seas being announced...
So, the Return of Arena in 2026 ?
I dislike that they've effectively capitulated to cheaters and vindicated their actions but, if it does help those who genuinely need it, fair enough. As long as testing shows it doesn't destroy the "artistic vision", then can't really complain. I just wish they had explored other solutions for motion sickness first (adding an in-game reticle, being the main one).
@guildar9194 said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@theblackbellamy said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
tHeRe aRe nO iNtEnTiOnS tO cHaNgE tHiS iN tHe fUtUrEAnd yet this will continue to be the tagline about any request to make Safer Seas less of an insult to people who dislike PvP.
An insult? Really? People willingly bought a pirate game clearly designed with constant player conflict in mind, and they’re “insulted” when a tutorial type mode is offered? Pretty entitled mindset.
In any case, as someone already pointed out, entitled gamers have already been saying this. “Rare said there would never be PvE servers but then released safer seas, I’ll be able to left click skeletons and watch Netflix at the same time with full rewards and no risk soon!”.
I dislike that they've effectively capitulated to cheaters and vindicated their actions but, if it does help those who genuinely need it, fair enough.
Was it only cheaters requesting higher fov? Even I used to upvote those threads until Rare made their very stubborn stance clear.
And why is it only "fair enough" to those who have a genuine need, but not to those who just prefer it? CoD allows a higher FoV than 110, but funny enough, that's what I set mine to lol. I don't think I need it, but the game feels better at 110; no higher and no lower.
It's likely that Rare just got enough feedback from the community, and changed their perspective.
Now if they add insta-ladder-grab, speed hacking, and infinite supplies...
Don't take this as me complaining over this change as I was one that really wanted it.
But my god, RARE just loses credibility over time. The amount of gaslighting and double downing they have done over this topic, the past years stating their reasons why it will not be increased in the game. To then doing a 180 really brings into question their seriousness.
Are you going to believe and trust folks that say one thing to your face than do a 180 later down the line? Not really.Either way, it's pretty darn obvious why they did this change, take the other change as a hint too with the Hourglass matchmaking update and put 2 and 2 together:
Game is on a decline, S17 looks like to be salt to injury and complete failed season. They are simply trying to get as much players as they can back to the game, [mod edit].
The change isn't going to lose players, on the contrary it gives more accessibility.
This is WHAT A QoL Change is...@veronik5682 Your post has been edited as it goes against the Forum Rules and Pirate Code.
ALWAYS:
Be courteous. Don’t insult players you don’t know. If humour is the intent, remember that this can be lost or misinterpreted online, and words can very easily offend. Be mindful of what you’re saying and if someone asks a question, see if you can help them out as you’d appreciate being helped out yourself if the roles were reversed.
Name calling, personal attacks and using derogatory language against Community Members, Rare Employees, Global Moderators or Deckhands is not acceptable. Using such language will result in a warning, then temporary ban from the Forums and a final warning. If the action is persistent or increasingly aggressive, a permanent ban from the Forums will be issued.
Please read and abide by the Forum Rules and Pirate Code in future.
Thank you.
@veronik5682 said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
Don't take this as me complaining over this change as I was one that really wanted it.
But my god, RARE just loses credibility over time. The amount of gaslighting and double downing they have done over this topic, the past years stating their reasons why it will not be increased in the game. To then doing a 180 really brings into question their seriousness.
Are you going to believe and trust folks that say one thing to your face than do a 180 later down the line? Not really.Either way, it's pretty darn obvious why they did this change, take the other change as a hint too with the Hourglass matchmaking update and put 2 and 2 together:
Game is on a decline, S17 looks like to be salt to injury and complete failed season. They are simply trying to get as much players as they can back to the game, [mod edit].
The change isn't going to lose players, on the contrary it gives more accessibility.
This is WHAT A QoL Change is...Well.... they basically just gave a silent nod for all the SS people to spam forum for removing SS restrictions, if they wanna see it happen xD
I predict fun times on forums, and very soon hahaha
On the topic - I'm happy only for genuine people (non cheaters).
But for all the entitled posters that spammed for years and were throwing tantrums on Forums, and especially for cheaters, I see this as a massive L from Rare.
Just in the last 2 weeks mods locked at least 20 topics for FOV sliders, and then Rare drops this now 😂
The "fair enough" was more a resignment to that fact. It has been long requested, but I'll wait to see it in action before I decide to use it or not. I'm not someone who struggles with the game at 90, but if everyone else is setting it to 110, I would be a fool not to do that - as I'd be at a big awareness disadvantage otherwise.
Capitulating to cheaters is more about how they presented the news today, it wasn't about the feedback so much as they saw what cheats were being widely used. And the FOV modification was one they noticed was used a lot. If they hadn't mentioned this in the Dev Update and lumped it in with cracking down on cheats, then maybe I would agree that it was completely down to overwhelming feedback.
Capitulating to cheaters is more about how they presented the news today, it wasn't about the feedback so much as they saw what cheats were being widely used. And the FOV modification was one they noticed was used a lot. If they hadn't mentioned this in the Dev Update and lumped it in with cracking down on cheats, then maybe I would agree that it was completely down to overwhelming feedback.
Exactly this! So by using that logic - let's imagine, if PvE players massively turned to cheats to be able to complete a FotD, BB, etc, does that mean they'd think about unlocking them in SS?
They really shouldn't've mentioned FOV raise in the same basket with pak cheaters. It just leaves a bad taste.
But now that they've added it, will I be using it? If I feel at disadvantage, I'll have to. Unless chilling in SS.
So what is expected to happen?
Everyone shifts the Fov to max (110) and stay at the helm, barely turn their heads and see people being sneaky all the time. Or see incoming ships from sides of there heads without turning?
As well, it seems Rare is tired of banning FoV players at this point and decided just to increase it. But Players in time will complain 110 isn’t enough. It never is….
It all good and fun. But it’s never about the “sea/motion sickness. It about not seeing your ladders on a solo sloop :p
Capitulating to cheaters is more about how they presented the news today, it wasn't about the feedback so much as they saw what cheats were being widely used...
Ah okay. I didn't even see the dev update. I just saw something on discord, came to the forum & saw this thread.
If they admitted that this is aimed at deterring 3rd party app usage, then they admitted it lol. I mean the transparency is welcome; I'm actually surprised there was no "this is just QoL!" spin.
Because even though cheat-deterrent was a motivator, it will be a QoL improvement to a much wider chunk of the playerbase. You too might enjoy 110 more, and not just because everyone else is doing it.
Again, CoD allows for a higher FOV but I keep mine at 110. For some other FPS games, I used 105. At some point, the benefit of seeing more of the periphery doesn't outweigh the cost of how warped everything looks. It ultimately comes down to personal preference.
@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@realstyli
They really shouldn't've mentioned FOV raise in the same basket with pak cheaters. It just leaves a bad taste.Same basket ?
They looked at what cheats were used and came up with FoV.
That's more than same basket - you're right about the bad taste though.
this as an opportunity to review the types of modifications players were using for us to learn and better understand why players were turning to mods. Putting the exploits aside, there was a clear modification that a lot of players had been using, and we weren't really surprised as it's one we've seen commonly requested in player feedback and as an accessibility improvement. So we're going to be increasing the maximum field of view that we support from the current cap of 90. and extend that up to 110.
@lem0n-curry said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@realstyli
They really shouldn't've mentioned FOV raise in the same basket with pak cheaters. It just leaves a bad taste.Same basket ?
They looked at what cheats were used and came up with FoV.
That's more than same basket - you're right about the bad taste though.
Yea, I prolly picked a wrong phrase there, my bad. In that case, instead I'll just say- shouldn't've mentioned it in the same video 😅
Game-wise, is this some sort of an epochal change? Lol no. This game def saw bigger controversial additions/changes and it's still here, alive.
Anyways, we'll see how it will actually affects the gameplay. I'll admit that it's still too early to raise eyebrows before seeing it in action.
@realstyli I don't agree with this line of thinking, tbh. Cheaters don't cheat to specifically have better FoV, they cheat because they're jaded, terrible players. If FoV was fixed long ago, there would still be cheaters regardless, so I don't think this really "vindicates" anyone other than folks who've legitimately asked for FoV increase.
@burnbacon I've watched some of the videos of people using 120 FoV and it looks WONKY. The way the arms and guns/sword moves looks so jarring, despite the increase in visibility.
I'd wager 110 was the sweet spot that increased vision, without sacrificing overall looks.
As for the third point, I dunno.. I feel like it's nice to have devs that listen (even if it took a while) to their players, especially for a harmless FoV accessibility option.
@valor-omega said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@realstyli I don't agree with this line of thinking, tbh. Cheaters don't cheat to specifically have better FoV, they cheat because they're jaded, terrible players. If FoV was fixed long ago, there would still be cheaters regardless, so I don't think this really "vindicates" anyone other than folks who've legitimately asked for FoV increase.
If the change had nothing to do with cheaters using FoV mods, then they shouldn't have mentioned them in the same breath. The fact that they used the PAK modification topic to segue into the FoV discussion makes it seem like the two are linked. That is what I am talking about. It makes it appear like their hand was forced on it. They could have just said it was a long requested QoL change and left it at that.
@burnbacon [mod edit] Complain enough. We will do as you command.". My dearest, that, my friend, is called feedback. Rare is acting upon a large heap of it, provided to them through medias and platforms of many kinds throughout the years by their community.
"Everyone shifts the Fov to max (110)" GEE i wonder why that could be?? Surely not because the community has been asking for this for years because playing on 90 is actually pretty uncomfortable for most of us, [mod edit] some of us get motion sickness from it as well? Absolutely cant be the case!!
[mod edit]
@captain-knyt said
@veronik5682 damned if you do, damned if you don’t?
They put themselves in that position in the first place, plain and simple.
@BurnBacon People who defended 90 FoV I never understood.
Remember just yesterday where RARE's Official reasoning was that the game 'looked bad' if it were to increase beyond 90 FoV?
Once again hard at work trying to fool the general player base. Meanwhile if you played the game for more than a year you would of come across 100/110/120 footage showcasing the game looks perfectly fine at those higher FoV's.
NOT TO MENTION: At higher fov you can ACTUALLY see the full reload animation on a flintlock/eye of reach that you simply cannot on 90 (Cocking back the flint on the weapon fully).Btw I think 110 is more than enough for players to give up their FoV cheats. The 120 isn't a big enough different to merit a chance of a ban. Unless of course they have been reduced to playing on alts due to their multiple bans than why not at that point. Cheaters gonna cheat, both irl and in game lol.
But for the general playerbase like me who always wanted 120 FoV? 110 is more then enough to stop spamming posts and demanding it for SEVEN years straight.Once again, funny how RARE gives the players what they want/need and the outcome is explosive positivity on their socials, from supposedly the ''toxic'' side of the playerbase.
Always funny when the truth pans out don't it?It really isn't hard if RARE weren't acting like in their own world the whole time...
@captain-kirn Your post has been edited as it goes against the Forum Rules and Pirate Code.
ALWAYS:
Be courteous. Don’t insult players you don’t know. If humour is the intent, remember that this can be lost or misinterpreted online, and words can very easily offend. Be mindful of what you’re saying and if someone asks a question, see if you can help them out as you’d appreciate being helped out yourself if the roles were reversed.
Name calling, personal attacks and using derogatory language against Community Members, Rare Employees, Global Moderators or Deckhands is not acceptable. Using such language will result in a warning, then temporary ban from the Forums and a final warning. If the action is persistent or increasingly aggressive, a permanent ban from the Forums will be issued.
Please read and abide by the Forum Rules and Pirate Code in future.
Thank you.
@look-behind-you said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
Please avoid engaging in personal arguments and derailing the topic of the thread. It is fine to debate the content of the post, and the viewpoints therein, but disrespecting any of your fellow pirates personally is against the pirate code, and our forum rules.
Define what is personal then by all means, because you seem to be very inconsistent about it.
Cuz some comments only get modded, some get completely deleted, and some comments just somehow slip by without anyone touching them even though they could be perceived as "personal" or offensive :)
You know, it's kinda harder to debate anything when moderation is inconsistent. Or should I say biased (dare I say personal).
@r3vanns Off-topic, irrelevant bickering like a child in the playground, directed towards an individual.
If you have any issues with any Moderation action, feel free to submit a support ticket via Rare Player Support.
@look-behind-you said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@r3vanns Off-topic, irrelevant bickering like a child in the playground, directed towards an individual.
If you have any issues with any Moderation action, feel free to submit a support ticket via Rare Player Support.
So basically, every comment can be deemed as personal and up to your personal preference to mod or not, because every comment is by default directed to an individual. Got it.
PS. funny you mentioned kids in a playground. 😂
It really isn't hard if RARE weren't acting like in their own world the whole time...
Like with everything ever. The whole "vision" narrative falls apart the moment they think something will earn em few dollars more, or help retaining/bringing back some of the playerbase.
@r3vanns If they are off-topic and irrelevant to the Thread whilst still targeting individuals, sure!
Again, submit a support ticket via Rare Player Support.
Any further off-topic posts will be removed.
@realstyli I'm sure that played into it, but I can't believe that cheaters using FoV editors were the sole reason. If nothing else, it could have been worded better. It seems like they're slowly starting to trickle in asked-for features - FoV/Outfit presets being the big ones.
Here's the thing; yeah, there's been a long-standing viewpoint on certain things, and things that they've said they wouldn't change, yet here we are. I think we just need to put down the pitchforks and this "but they said" argument and see it for what it is; Rare are trying to give the players what they've asked for, even if it goes against their vision, in spirit of making people happy and to keep their game going for as long as they can - something everyone should want.
If people really want to give up on a legitimately unique game over a change of design philosophies/principles, that's their prerogative, but I think meaningful changes are good, even if they're a bit late. Should they have come sooner? Perhaps, but it is what it is.
@valor-omega said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:
@realstyli I don't agree with this line of thinking, tbh. Cheaters don't cheat to specifically have better FoV, they cheat because they're jaded, terrible players. If FoV was fixed long ago, there would still be cheaters regardless, so I don't think this really "vindicates" anyone other than folks who've legitimately asked for FoV increase.
Spot on. What cheater on earth would ever need to increase his/her FOV? Quite laughable when you think about it. Almost as laughable as the 90 fov limit in the first place. Only console games have such a trash fov and this was ported to pc, so why not adjust the FOV to a pc FOV?
Oh hold on, I just made sense there didn't I?
9 out of 92
