pls i don't want to throw up

I'd like to try it in Quake Live :)

I'd like to try Quake Live :)

I think this makes projective prediction much, much, harder, but I'd be curious to try it.

As much as I like the idea of having no blind spot, I don't like the idea of my enemies having none. Sure, nobody will have any and we'll live in a perfect equality world! But I'll be missing the situations where blind spots are important.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9USaw9l9YxQ

Ok, that doesn't mean everyone would use 360°. But still, any increase in FOV will reduce the likelihood of yummy situations like that. I might also add that, right now, knowing your opponent's FOV isn't that important and I don't think it should be.

What about making this projection available without changing the FOV cap of 130? That sounds more reasonable. But then, what's the purpose? I guess all it would do is allow players to bump their FOV a bit (if possible) without damaging their LG accuracy or non-clutch rails. But is it overpowered? Will it become an obligatory setting for players who wish to stay competitive? That would be bad.

Can anyone who tried it tell us how it affects the user's capacity to hit clutch shots (fast movements outside the centre of the screen) and to move around (I guess we can adapt to this one fast?) ?

If it's a new feature that's so helpful everyone needs to use it to stay competitive, then it's good and should be allowed, not bad. That's the whole history of Quake... 120hz monitors, high fps, smooth mice, picmip, strafe jumping, rocket jumping, etc.

This criterion is not sufficient. If it was, you would also agree with cg_wallhack being added. I think an increase on possible FOV (helped by the new projection) would disfigure Quake just as much.

False choice, disagree.

I used to do this on my CRT with the OSD. It helped my aim since there were so many more pixels around the crosshair.

I stopped doing it because it was inconvenient on the desktop, and I thought it was a little bit.. I don't know, perverse? Not sure. Something about it bothered me.

If it was an in-game option though I'd love to try that.

There are a lot of 3D games. If this is better why are no games using this?

..because it's tricky to code and it looks unnatural, and such things aren't a priority anyways. A lot of games just stick it at some value like 90 degrees and forget about it.

Plus most game developers aren't going to code something so fundamental. They'd prefer to rely on sdks and such where the heavy lifting has already been done, and they can spend their resources on other things like art/maps/story or w/e.

I remember this being discussed a couple years ago. Basically if someone wants to take initiative and make a working version for Q3, and then donate it to QL, there's a possibility. Similar deal to the new mouse code, although I don't know if that was contracted.

Is it a mod for Q1? i would like to try it.

Interesting, I wish I could try.

this should have become the standard long time ago in all quakes and similar games

I use 120 fov on my CRT and love it with drawgun 3

I get seasick watching this

Same here with the first vid, where valies are over the top, but the second one is pretty ok for me.

I think there is a limit with both kinds of FOV, even if the second one allows a higher value, there is a point where you can't take it anymore , and that is normal, unless you are trained I guess...

Edit: ofc there is a limit with both (sry just woke up...)

I'm sure original AvP had this playing as the alien?

Based on a random google image search screenshot, seems like uniform projection

Iirc, It was just standard projection with a high fov.

nice1 ... would bang.

I always disliked how high fov is compressed in the middle. "Fish eye" would be great, but it requires limit for max fov. It should also be configurable - mix between standard and fish perspective for personal preference.

for me fov is not something that has to be set after how much you can take, see and whatever, it's variable to change to get it to look normal depending on how(screensize, position from screen)you look at your game. 19" monitor or 24" monitor, same distance from me, takes up different space of my vision, that's why i have to use different fov, to get the same feeling and not get sick from too zoomed in view.

If you want your computer screen to take up the solid angle that corresponds to actually being immersed in the game (and the screen being your only window for seeing it), you'd have to use about 30 fov.

that's right, but that would feel wrong in fps games. The fact that we focus on middle of screen(only in focus) we still have peripheral vision, at i guess that's why higher fov works. I'm actually not sure why, but you know when you are too high.

Could it be possible to have fisheyefov without vertical distortion? Also ingame FOV should not exceed human fov : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_of_view

Sure, it's all about the mapping. Actually, I first thought of this thinking of many players who play with the black bars on the side to keep the 4/3, and then someone pointed me to this Q1 mod.

that would be insanely awesome. :p

Your link took me to this awesome picture. Thanks!

You welcome : http://www.bittbox.com/resources/35-stunning-...omy-images

interesting. according to that artical the human horizontal fov is 180, while the vertical is 135.
now guess what aspect ratio 180:135 is.. its 4:3 :o

*mind blown*

çool little fact

ahah that is why i always felt 4:3 was more natural than 16:9 to my brain, until i had a big 16:9 LCD of 1920x1080p, but now i want 1920x1440p :p

Problem of monitors is the view angles now, no need to get bigger screens if its only to put them further away from our eyes :(

I'd love it.

I actually implemented this on the GPU using modern OpenGL a few years ago. Crappy video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYwLhJjFbV4

First I render 6 perspectives into a cube map (front, back, left, right, up, down), each is 90 degrees square. I did this in a single pass using the geometry shader and layered rendering. Although it may be better to do 6 separate passes so you can take advantage of frustum culling.

In the second pass, I used the cube map as a texture and rendered a full screen quad with a fragment shader implementing a nonlinear map projection (Hammer-Aitoff in this example).

There are some artifacts from this. As with any texture, you need to compute mipmaps for the cube map before using it to avoid sampling noise. There are also some artifacts around the edges where some texels have been stretched across many pixels.

Hi there, I am hoping you are the person who wrote about the maths behind the movement in idtech3 games. I'd like to write a plugin for the Radiant which should autogenerate non-complex Defrag/QLrace maps. Therefor I need to have an algorithm that takes the gamemodes (cpm/vq3) maybe as well as the gravity and the impact of turning (changing the Movementdirection etc.) and maybe also the game (Q3/QL) into account. I am not quite sure if this is enough?
So actually I need to create a method to calculate the potential Vmax one person has if he did the circlejump and every consecutive strafejump and turn perfectly between two Points A and B. And later on I also require to be able to add the effect of vertical acceleration (falling down) and ramps+ramp angles to that formula.

Since you provided the most sophisticated information I could find on the web (on funender.com) I'd really like to talk to you in IRC or using any other instant-communication protocol of your choice. My email is [email protected] - I'd appreciate it very much if you replied me there. (As I have only registered here to be able to contact you - also I have seen your last login was in mid of May 2018 - so I don't expect you to answer at all - ESR won't let me send iMSGs).

Kind Regards, Phil

This is the number 1 new feature I'd like to see in Quake Live.

It's beautiful!

Photoshop #101

Filter > Distort > Spherize your quake experience.
No thanks.

damn quake 1 was so good