110 FOV Incoming!!

@cheyn0

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.

Do you even know how aim bots function? I'm willing to bet that you do, but let's assume you don't.

Higher FOV means more targets are being able to get tracked, in addition to general (higher) awareness of your surrounding. While ESPs do not benefit that much from higher FoV (not really important), aimbot definitely does.

That's why most of the cheat software has FOV sliders for fine-tuning, cuz aimbots are sensitive to FOV (admittedly, they can even be inaccurate if FOV is raised too high). That's where monitor aspect ratio also comes into play, but really no need to go into that many details.

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?

You didn't make sense. And that's because bigger FoV = more stuff rendered on screen = more performance penalty. Xbox 1 is still supported and very very old. And this is just one of the reasons they were denying to raise FoV for so many years.

I still think they should've never caved for this request, but whatever. Hey, at least regular players can now as well enjoy the fish-eye effect while getting dunked on by cheaters. 🤣

Lemme guess - your next argument will be for Rare to remove Xbox 1 from supported platforms. 😂

@r3vanns a dit dans 110 FOV Incoming!! :

@cheyn0

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.

Do you even know how aim bots function? I'm willing to bet that you do, but let's assume you don't.

Higher FOV means more targets are being able to get tracked, in addition to general (higher) awareness of your surrounding. While ESPs do not benefit that much from higher FoV (not really important), aimbot definitely does.

That's why most of the cheat software has FOV sliders for fine-tuning, cuz aimbots are sensitive to FOV (admittedly, they can even be inaccurate if FOV is raised too high). That's where monitor aspect ratio also comes into play, but really no need to go into that many details.

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?

You didn't make sense. And that's because bigger FoV = more stuff rendered on screen = more performance penalty. Xbox 1 is still supported and very very old. And this is just one of the reasons they were denying to raise FoV for so many years.

I still think they should've never caved for this request, but whatever. Hey, at least regular players can now as well enjoy the fish-eye effect while getting dunked on by cheaters. 🤣

Lemme guess - your next argument will be for Rare to remove Xbox 1 from supported platforms. 😂

Officially, the fact that the FOV is blocked at 90 is mainly because the game was designed that way to promote player immersion (closer vision = more immersion) - well, that's the official explanation so often described by the moderators of this forum when this subject was mentioned...
So even if the developers change the nature of their own game to “avoid cheating” (the most modified file) then good....
I wonder if they're doing this to make it easier for cheaters, but if only....

So it's not a big deal, but when I see posts from players asking for the captaincy in Safers Seas, I'll have a good laugh when I read the automatic message from the moderator who will “drop the anchor”...

They've all lost credibility, and that's the worst of it!
So yes, we can welcome this change, but the problem remains the same! Denying the problem in front of us is no good!

Players have been asking for PvE servers for years. For years they were told: NEVER!
Then one day the developers said yes! - I consider Safers Seas to be a PvE server with limitations.
And then they did it right: they explained why Safers Seas were necessary! That was excellent communication! And they thought long and hard about how to integrate it properly into the game.

It wasn't just a response to strong demand, it was more than that!

Here, linking the FOV change to cheaters, but what a long way we've come....

Tells you how much these forums mean to them.

Rare last month:
"Oh we're never doing that even though people ask"

Rare today:
"Turns out a ton of cheaters got a start on FoV packs and a ton of our players were using that. Fine, we'll make it a thing in the game."

Classic Rare.

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@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 😅

But then we would be accussing them of listening to cheaters and not being honest about it 😁, at least now, we know why they made a 180 on this.

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.

I've seen some videos of people using a larger FoV and it looks bad IMHO. One of the attractions of SoT is that it looks nice. If people have to choose between having worse graphics or have a disadvantage in fights with other crews, some might be looking for another game to play. Switching your FoV when you're about to encounter another crew probably will become standard for those that not only PvP.

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

You didn't make sense. And that's because bigger FoV = more stuff rendered on screen = more performance penalty. Xbox 1 is still supported and very very old. And this is just one of the reasons they were denying to raise FoV for so many years.

Oh, so more FoV would probably mean less rendering from a distance ?
I've been noticing more and more stuff rendering in when you approach them (and worse rendering out when you take a step back), including shipwreck positions changing within a map square.

@r3vanns an aimbot doesn’t care about what FoV the game is running at

The aimbot knows where everyone is whether they’re on screen or not. It’s not based on visuals, it’s based on their position in the pc memory

@lem0n-curry said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

You didn't make sense. And that's because bigger FoV = more stuff rendered on screen = more performance penalty. Xbox 1 is still supported and very very old. And this is just one of the reasons they were denying to raise FoV for so many years.

Oh, so more FoV would probably mean less rendering from a distance ?
I've been noticing more and more stuff rendering in when you approach them (and worse rendering out when you take a step back), including shipwreck positions changing within a map square.

Actually, now that you've mentioned it, I've noticed similar as well in other UE4 games (like Icarus, Atlas, Ark Surival Evolved, etc).

In Icarus, one of the fps boost tweaks globally suggested WAS to raise FoV to 100+ (from the initial 75). Until it was fixed.

So this behavior is possibly a bug within the UE4 engine itself. If not a bug, then its about dev decision how models and textures (and zones/levels) are streamed in (and at which distance).

Because in many other games that I've played, raised FOV equaled more rendering (I always see my GPU usage).

@Captain-Knyt

an aimbot doesn’t care about what FoV the game is running at
The aimbot knows where everyone is whether they’re on screen or not. It’s not based on visuals, it’s based on their position in the pc memory

There's a difference between ESP (that I mentioned, which doesn't care) and aimbot specifically. And yea, both FoV and aspect ratio are playing part in aimbot's precision/reaction. I'm not gonna be debating this with you at all.

Feel free to google it, as I won't be posting any sources here explaining this as its against the forum rules. And secondly, because I really don't care to debate it lol.

@mopwieldinghedgehog said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

Before this nonsense goes any further, let me clarify something. Moderators and Deckhands will moderate and respond in line with what is true at the time of the response. Moderation guidlines and standard replies are provided by Rare. Rare later changing their stance on something does not mean anyone was lied to previously nor that there was some misconduct on moderators or deckhands part. It simply means that sometimes plans and directions change.

If I can be perfectly honest, cases like this are the ones where I can actually empathize with moderation team, as someone working in customer support (not Rare's) for years now.

Your job is to spam macros Rare tells you to spam, and after you're the ones taking the hit every single time Rare folds tails between their legs, and dump their "vision".

It's kinda sad and funny at the same time. xD But I do feel for ya. I know it sucks lol.

@lem0n-curry said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

Oh, so more FoV would probably mean less rendering from a distance ?
I've been noticing more and more stuff rendering in when you approach them (and worse rendering out when you take a step back), including shipwreck positions changing within a map square.

We'll see how it impacts the visuals, but more likely it will mainly impact performance (average FPS), as that's what most games will warn you about when you adjust the FoV.

As for the pop-in, yeah, that's been annoying for years. Even on Mythical settings, it's very noticeable. It's intended to save on memory usage in the client by culling the LODs, but it's super aggressive. You can even see LODs on player characters pop when zooming in and out doing an emote. This actually leads to more stress on the CPU as it works to swap in and out LODs from memory a lot more often. My guess is that this is why the game hitches so much, even on a decent PC.

The shipwreck model switching at distance seems more like a bug though, it used to be fine until the LotV was added.

One thing that might become more obvious with a higher FoV is the VRS on the edge of the screen. If you pan the camera slowly, you can see the shading on objects change at the edges - this is very noticeable on stone walls at Port Merrick, for example. A lot of the time though, you're barely able to perceive it as it's not the focus of your vision. That may change at higher FoV.

@realstyli

One thing that might become more obvious with a higher FoV is the VRS on the edge of the screen. If you pan the camera slowly, you can see the shading on objects change at the edges - this is very noticeable on stone walls at Port Merrick, for example. A lot of the time though, you're barely able to perceive it as it's not the focus of your vision. That may change at higher FoV.

YOOO! And for some time I thought I had issues with drivers or shaders. Port Merrick was the first place where I've noticed it, big stones on Forts are the second place I've noticed it as well, depending on the sun placement. Usually more pronounced at sunrise/sunset.

Happy to hear it's not just something specific with my rig.

I wonder now, are you touching resolution scaling? Cuz I'm playing 1080p with 200% render scale. And everything on Mythical.

You can even see LODs on player characters pop when zooming in and out doing an emote. This actually leads to more stress on the CPU as it works to swap in and out LODs from memory a lot more often. My guess is that this is why the game hitches so much, even on a decent PC.

That's actually a very good guess. Constant swapping of textures/models in addition to how a game handles culling and shaders is usually what's leading to stutters. Especially traversal ones.

Luckily, SoT doesn't recompile shaders every now and then (like some games do), so that's not the problem here, once these are fully compiled. But everything else most likely is.

I can understand it though. The game is probably very conservative on streaming pools due to being an old console port, that kept getting cranked with more content (stuff to render in this specific case) over time.

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@realstyli
I wonder now, are you touching resolution scaling? Cuz I'm playing 1080p with 200% render scale. And everything on Mythical.

VRS is Variable Rate Shading, VSR is Virtual Super Resolution.

That's actually a very good guess. Constant swapping of textures/models in addition how a game handles culling and shaders is usually what's leading to stutters. Especially traversal ones.

Yeah, the traversal stutter is a known issue with Unreal Engine games, but it was generally in control up until Heart of Fire. That's the first time I noticed a big stutter when approaching The Devil's Thirst.

Luckily, SoT doesn't recompile shaders, so that's not the problem here. But everything else most likely is.

I can understand it though. The game is probably very conservative on streaming pools due to being an old console port.

SoT does compile shaders but only when you update your drivers. It would actually be better to have a more extensive PSO pass every update (even an optional one), as that would make it so shaders aren't compiled on the fly. Which is another cause of big hitches.

@realstyli

VRS is Variable Rate Shading, VSR is Virtual Super Resolution.

Yea I know that, not why I asked. Also, VSR is AMD feature you enable outside of the game in the adrenaline software. :D I was just wondering if you noticed any change in VRS (not AMD VSR) behavior after changing in-game resolution scale.

I would've gladly tested native 4k instead of 200% resolution scale (1080p to 4K upscaling), but sadly I don't have a 4k monitor yet.

EDIT: actually, I can test it. But I need to change my desktop resolution to 4k after applying VSR. Otherwise, just with VSR enabled, SoT itself doesn't allow me to pick 4k in the dropdown (it's not in the resolution options drop down)

SoT does compile shaders but only when you update your drivers. It would actually be better to have a more extensive PSO pass every update (even an optional one), as that would make it so shaders aren't compiled on the fly. Which is another cause of big hitches.

That's why I said recompile, not just compile :D A lot of UE games have issues constantly compiling shaders, even when you haven't updated/touched your GPU drivers. Straight up bugged. Luckily, SoT does it only after new GPU drivers installation.

Regarding the second part - yea, I really don't get it why this isn't generally an industry standard thing nowadays. I'd always pick precompiled shaders and wait a bit longer just for the first time, over compiling shaders on the fly and having shader microstutter. It's driving me nuts sometimes, as I'm super sensitive to it.

But yea, if you wish, I'd rather continue this convo in dms, so we do not stray away from the topic of the OP. 😅 I got carried away, so I apologize to OP and mods here.

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@realstyli
Yea I know that, not why I asked. Also, VSR is AMD feature you enable outside of the game. :D I was just wondering if you noticed any change in VRS (not VSR) behavior after changing in-game resolution scale.

Oh, okay. I've recently switched to a 9070 XT (from a 3070ti) but I've not enabled VSR in Adrenalin. The in-game resolution scale is currently broken for me (doesn't save), not that I ever used it before. I play at Native 1440p with FreeSync on, and generally it's a locked 120fps anyway. It might be nice to clean up the image a bit, though.

My guess is the VRS is configured for the default FoV, which I think is 70? But I haven't really tested it. It's not something that I focus on too much at 90 in general play, as it only seems to be aggressive in areas with a lot of shadows.

Again, we'll see how it looks with 110 FoV.

That's why I said recompile, not just compile :D A lot of UE games have issues constantly compiling shaders, even when you haven't updated/touched your GPU drivers. Straight up bugged.

Regarding the second part - yea, I really don't get it why this isn't generally an industry standard thing nowadays. I'd always pick precompiled shaders and wait a bit longer just for the first time, over compiling shaders on the fly and having shader microstutter. It's driving me nuts sometimes, as I'm super sensitive to it.

100%... Thankfully, it is becoming more and more common to see shader compilation on PC ports, not just with Unreal - I'd say in no small part thanks to how much Digital Foundry's Alex Battaglia and others have complained about the issues around shader compilation.

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@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 😂

Things change.

@fysics3037 The only post that rivals fov is outfit saving, which seems like it would have been a pretty easy thing. I cannot for the life of me understand why outfit saving still isn't a thing.

@sairdontis4317

Things change.

Thanks god for that, otherwise I'd get bored really fast really soon.

Also, I get what you're implying, and no - I'm not opposing the change itself. I'm opposing the reason for it. There's a big difference.

If they went with what people asked for before it got mainstream with cheaters, and were just transparent about feedback from the forum - I would've said fine.

Didn't care about the change itself then, do not care about it now. Only care about them acting spineless, yet again. That's the fun(ny) part 😂

@r3vanns Reasons have been all over the place with this game and team.

@sairdontis4317 said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@r3vanns Reasons have been all over the place with this game and team.

When people got rude and acted entitled, I was shutting them down and sided with Rare (and moderators, to an extent).

When people were not rude and politely asked for features/changes, even when I did not fully agree, I was at least empathic. But yea, very often supportive.

I didn't care if it was about FOV, Safer Seas restrictions, or a feedback about the game itself. I'm saying this, because I know you're one of those people advocating for SS that were never rude, and actually engaged in civil debates.

Now, honestly, I'm the one that'll be taking 180 on my stance: by all means, whether people will gonna politely or impolitely ask for SS restriction removals, I don't care - GO FOR IT. Captaincy? Go for it. Reapers? Go for it. FotD? Go for it. Emissaries? Go for it.

It looks like that you just need to push enough, spam enough to get what you want. Just make sure that whatever you do, you do it in SS, because they obviously use their data in addition to forum spam. The more of you actually spend more time in SS, the higher the chance you'll get what you want.

I definitely won't be debating people on this topic anymore. And probably many other divisive topics. When they have no empathy for their own moderation team, to not make them look like fools over and over for ordering them to shut people down and then switch, I see no point in engaging with stuff like that.

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@sairdontis4317 said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@r3vanns Reasons have been all over the place with this game and team.

When people got rude and acted entitled, I was shutting them down and sided with Rare (and moderators, to an extent).

When people were not rude and politely asked for features/changes, even when I did not fully agree, I was at least empathic. But yea, very often supportive.

I didn't care if it was about FOV, Safer Seas restrictions, or a feedback about the game itself. I'm saying this, because I know you're one of those people advocating for SS that were never rude, and actually engaged in civil debates.

---

Now, honestly, I'm the one that'll be taking 180 on my stance: by all means, whether people will gonna politely or impolitely ask for SS restriction removals, I don't care - GO FOR IT. Captaincy? Go for it. Reapers? Go for it. FotD? Go for it. Emissaries? Go for it.

It looks like that you just need to push enough, spam enough to get what you want. Just make sure that whatever you do, you do it in SS, because they obviously use their data in addition to forum spam. The more of you actually spend more time in SS, the higher the chance you'll get what you want.

I definitely won't be debating people on this topic anymore. And probably many other divisive topics. When they have no empathy for their own moderation team, to not make them look like fools over and over for ordering them to shut people down and then switch, I see no point in engaging with stuff like that.

Game has to change and unfortunately, Number must go up.

@look-behind-you said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

Just for reference, "Spamming Forum topics" is not the way. It will just end up with removal/further action....so....please don't do that.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for spam as actually advocating for it.

I'm saying that I already see some people thinking this way. Here, on Steam, in YT comments.

That's how enough people perceived this latest FoV change (SS before that) - as spam enough, and you get what you want.

Also, by spam I didn't mean 1 person spamming duplicate topics. But many people spamming the same topic. For a fact I know that you personally locked god knows how many FoV topics just in the last 2 weeks, which in this case I actually supported.

But none of these were by the same person. Or at least by the same account, right. I cannot claim if some of those were alts, simply because I do not have real data to back it up.

@look-behind-you said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

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

Yes, your point is? I didn't say anything different there than I did in my previous comment.

Just read through comments on other high-reply-count topics regarding FoV, Profiles, etc.

@look-behind-you said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

Regardless, myself and the rest of the Moderation Team will continue to Moderate to the rules as we always have.

As is your job. Ain't got no problem with that.

As I previously mentioned, I did support Rare, and mods as an extended hand of Rare for locking topics like that.

I still do. I only told Sairdontis4317 that I personally just won't be debating with people anymore on those topics, because I see no point in it.

@r3vanns If people feel strongly enough about a topic they will revisit off and on over time and maybe tweak their stance even as they play more or talk to other crew and guild mates. Working a topic for details or ideas to feel out group sentiment are one the things that makes forums interesting in my opinion. Unpopular ideas have just as much value as popular ones do.

@sairdontis4317 said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@r3vanns I people feel strongly enough about a topic they will revisit off and on over time and maybe tweak their stance even as they play more or talk to other crew and guild mates. Working a topic for details or ideas to feel out group sentiment are one the things that makes forums interesting in my opinion. Unpopular ideas have just as much value as popular ones do.

You know, I'm actually kinda feeling guilt for really going harsh even on those entitled people. 😂 Few days ago OP got so mad that they deleted all of their comments on their post.

What was the topic? You guessed it - FoV. Day or two after that Rare announces the change. I mean... damn lol.

It really got me thinking why I'm even doing this.

Confused here, why is playing on Safer Seas bad ? If people enjoy playing that mode what is the harm and if data shows they enjoy it how is also wrong ??

@look-behind-you said in 110 FOV Incoming!!:

@r3vanns said in 110 FOV Incoming!!

Now, honestly, I'm the one that'll be taking 180 on my stance: by all means, whether people will gonna politely or impolitely ask for SS restriction removals, I don't care - GO FOR IT. Captaincy? Go for it. Reapers? Go for it. FotD? Go for it. Emissaries? Go for it.

It looks like that you just need to push enough, spam enough to get what you want. Just make sure that whatever you do, you do it in SS, because they obviously use their data in addition to forum spam. The more of you actually spend more time in SS, the higher the chance you'll get what you want.

Look... again, I don't care. I'm starting to sound like a broken record, and I'm getting bored of it. Feel free to keep misinterpreting, or actually trying to understand what I'm saying. Cause again, I don't care about that either.

People are gonna do it anyways, and that's what was my point. And your job is to rightfully lock them up. Let's not keep going circles.