Overwatch Fov

Overwatch Fov
If playback doesn't begin shortly, try restarting your device.
Videos you watch may be added to the TV's watch history and influence TV recommendations. To avoid this, cancel and sign in to YouTube on your computer.
An error occurred while retrieving sharing information. Please try again later.
0:02 / 1:41 • Watch full video Live

World of Warcraft Arena World Championship
World of Warcraft Arena World Championship
Unfortunately, your browser is too old to work on this site . Please upgrade your browser to view rich content, log in and reply.
the cardboard box FOV of Overwatch is pretty low, some of my friends refuse to play with me just because the FOV makes them feel motion sick. Is Overwatch 2 gonna use the same engine that breaks when you try to raise the FOV? (the reason for no mid-to-high FOV in Overwatch 1 afaik)
No details have been shared suggesting they will, but I would suspect it’s rather unlikely. I wouldnt get your hopes up.
This is hard for me to form a solid opinion on.
On one hand, who doesn’t like a higher fov?
On the other hand, I feel the current FoV lends a lot in terms of skill requirement and game/situational sense requirement.
Is it? And why would it make some one mothion sick? So much questions.
For me it always felt like same as other games.
My friends plays cs on low fov he says it gifes ya an advantage.
Wel adleast I think it was he plays om 4:3
Gor bigger hitbox .
I feel the current FoV lends a lot in terms of skill requirement and game/situational sense.
No. Current FoV sucks and I have a hard time believing they tried to lower its limit even more in beta.
My friends plays cs on low fov he says it gifes ya an advantage.
CS is a completely different game where you don’t have enemies jumping over your head.
Every game before I used to play with a FOV of at least 115, FOV being so low in OW is a big problem. Also why is there no minimap? There’s no excuse, it’s just awkward and creates toxicity.
The FOV was even smaller in beta and had no option to change it. When asked why they didn’t include a slider they said it would give people an advantage who know how to change their settings. Funny how they don’t consider higher refresh rates to be an advantage though.
They finally included a slider and increased the FOV, but it’s still super small. They just don’t care.
Changing FoV and aspect ratio doesnt make hitboxes bigger. I’m not really sure who started such a silly rumor. If this were true you could just play on a larger display and they’d be magically bigger.
What it does do, however, is make the mouse movements across varying lengths across your screen more consistent. Lower FoV or a more limited aspect ratio (i.e. as square as possible) reduces the stretching effect from the perspective transform of the camera.
Lower FoV simply makes distant things appear larger, nothing special. In certain games you have to shoot at distant targets most of the time, which is why they have FoV lowering aiming modes and scopes. Makes sense to lower FoV in a game like that.
On the other hand, I feel the current FoV lends a lot in terms of skill requirement and game/situational sense requirement.
What? How so? It heavily limits the information you can see on the screen.
Appearing larger doesn’t make them easier to hit. Camera movement from aiming is completely independent from the concept of rasterization of the objects on your screen. One is a 3 dimensional rotation, the other is a 2D projection onto a surface.
It may help you actually see things if you have trouble doing so, but functionally it provides no benefit to aiming that you couldn’t achieve at a higher FoV by simply lowering your mouse sensitivity and continuing to aim at smaller objects. This is what is accomplished when you zoom in (e.g. on Widow) and it applies a scoped sensitivity modifier to accommodate. You can see this in action by just setting you widow scoped sense to 100%.
Not sure what point you are even trying to make. Lower FoV makes enemies bigger on your screen, that’s a scientific fact. Of course you need to adjust mouse sensitivity either on your own or bake it into “scoping”, otherwise aiming will feel too fast after lowering FoV.
This may sound dumb but… what’s a FoV?
My point is that being bigger on the screen doesn’t make the hitboxes any bigger.
Defining factor of a frustum, part of the world that is projected onto the screen. You can project just a little emulating telescope (tiny Field of View) or do full 360 projection that looks weird but lets you see things directly behind you.
Field of View. Think of it as how much you can see on screen at once. You can probably google some screenshots which will do more justice than me trying to butcher an explanation.
Defining factor of a frustum, part of the world that is projected onto the screen. You can project just a little emulating telescope (tiny Field of View) or do full 360 projection that looks weird but lets you see things directly behind you.
Field of View. Think of it as how much you can see on screen at once. You can probably google some screenshots which will do more justice than me trying to butcher an explanation.
I see, Thanks for explaining brothas
Funny how they don’t consider higher refresh rates to be an advantage though.
Because refresh rate wouldn’t let you see someone on your screen that someone else with a regular monitor couldn’t?
Meanwhile if you had a widescreen monitor FoV you could see more things than people with a normal monitor couldn’t.
Seeing a Genji on left side of your screen because you spent £2,000 on a monitor while everyone else has a regular 144hz/240hz 22inch monitor lol
I’d rather spend £2000 on multiple monitors and upgrades lol like you clearly aren’t playing competitively and you prob are on Epic graphics etc, you care more about how the game looks compared to playing competitively and it shows.
Pretty sure the point is it’s a dumb excuse for them to not give us higher FoV because literally anyone can just go to options and change their settings. Not everyone can afford a better monitor.
Meanwhile if you had a widescreen monitor FoV you could see more things than people with a normal monitor couldn’t.
21:9 isn’t supported in OW anyways and I really doubt anyone is playing the game on a 4:3 monitor.
I really doubt anyone is playing the game on a 4:3 monitor.
You’d be surprised. I bet there are people who do. Gaming PC aren’t easily obtained everwhere, I have friend in Egypt who struggle to get his PC together and he work very very hard to get what he has.
Powered by Discourse , best viewed with JavaScript enabled

A place for in-depth discussions of Competitive Overwatch™ (the team-based shooter from Blizzard Entertainment). Find detailed discussion of meta, esports and events as well as guides, advice, and tips that go beyond the basics.
After playing fps games for most of my life, i still dont understand why FOV in OW is so low. Here i will present few comparisons to other games, why current FOV is too low and how in positivie way it can affect the game.
Before we start, short explanation of FOV types.
horizontal but 4:3 resolution base and
As base one we take horizontal one, that one which OW is using.
1 horizontal FOV = 0.6767 vertical and
1 horizontal FOV = 0.8358 horizontal, 4:3 base
So now when we have this info, lets compare OW FOV to diffrent games.
Lets start for games paced way slower than OW. Good examples are CS and R6.
CS is using H 4:3 base fov, max, and if im not mistaken, capped is 90
R6 is using vertical FOV. Max is 90.
Yes, way slower placed games have already higher FOV
Latest Quake is using the same FOV like ow, max is 140
Reflex, sadly i dont remember max, but default was 105, but 4:3 base, which is 120.16 horizontal FOV
And probably best, comparing both have a lot of similarities in gameplay - Paladins. Paladins is using same FOV like ow, max is 120.
So now when we know how FOV looks on few currently popular shooters, lets talk how it change game.
First - A lot of people in early OW days were afraid that making FOV higher will make some ults insanely strong. Currently i dont see any advantage with higher FOV and ulst except 2 of them - high noon and visor.
Visor currently is easly countered by d.va matrix, shields, or just hp pool tanks in general. Sligthly better vision while ulting will not make it op.
High noon - fun fact, a lot of people doesnt know that. High noon already works at 117.5 FOV. Source: https://imgur.com/a/6yxGu So even if we take one of most common FOV, which is 120, it will add only 2.5 degree, which is almost nothing.
Second - It will indirectly buff flankers.
This is true, but also false. Doomfist as example will find enemies around him easier, without losing track of someone next to him, same thing with tracer and genji especially while blading. But it also works in other way. You can track that stupid T500 tracer with infinite blinks easier on higher FOV. People with higher FOV will see more, so it can make it harder to flank them, etc etc.
And last one - Just simple cosmetic change in settings.
Why its 103? It makes no sense. Its 70.53 vertical and 86.63 4:3 base. If devs wanted keep low FOV, why it wasnt 100 or 105? Why something exactly between them? It literally looks out of place in settings.
A lot of ppl what i known in early days really liked the game, but hated how low FOV is and in the end all of them stopped playing due to claustrophobic feeling. I had exactly same feeling, after weeks of playing i started adapting. Even now when i want play other games, i need to lower FOV by a lot to 103, because i dont want destroy my muscle memory. Overwatch is marketed as "really fast paced first person shooter", sadly, with one of lowest FOVs i ever played in my entire life.
Just for fun, here's what 133° FOV would look like:
I combined the images for easier side-by-side comparison.
Imo it doesnt look nice. If it becomes an option im obv gonna use it cause competitive advantage and stuff but I really hope it doesnt become an option
Is there a way to also affect the first person character model?
the game looks so much better in high FOV, it would be a dream for anybody, literally every role would be higher-skilled because of this. i can't think of one role that this would be OP because this benefits everyone. you'd be able to find targets easier, peel, spot flankers, this would make OW a higher skilled game and feel better competitively. it would also look better on stream with like 120-125 fov for OWL
for ex: this buffs genjis abilities to track targets and dash around, especially with blade, but it also helps anas and mercys keep an eye on the entire battle and be able to call genji out. higher fov is more balanced than people realize
after playing blackops4 on pc it was like holy crap i need that fov in overwatch.
Yeah, my aim is genuinely better in Black ops, and I have no idea how to calculate sens to get it close because the FOV is so wack
It's extremely annoying having to deal with a Tracer or Genji up close with low FOV.
I thought Overwatch's FOV was a bit on the low side until I got into Dead By Daylight, where the killer's FOV is locked at 87. Borderline nauseating.
To be serious though, I agree. Even though I don't feel Overwatch's FOV is outright low , it's still a rather underwhelming cap for such a modern PC FPS game. Higher FOV feels better and faster, and is overall just more enjoyable.
While I agree 87 is nasty to play with, at least in that game it makes sense to have a lower FOV for game play/tensions sake. Still sucks though.
Weird anyone brings up the it will buff flankers argument. Cause like you say it also buffs people fighting flankers.. it buffs everyone cause more visual info is better!
If anything it'd be a huge buff to Widowmaker as it'd turn her into a tiny few pixel target while she herself keeps the scope. Widow vs Hanzo duel would be very lopsided against Hanzo.
Lol it would be funny watching no one be able to aim for a day or two or watching everyone calculate a new sens.
Also projectile lead will feel very different
Changing fov doesnt affect sensitivity in most games, aswell as in overwatch.

(opens in new tab)

(opens in new tab)

(opens in new tab)

(opens in new tab)
(opens in new tab)

(opens in new tab)

Contact me with news and offers from other Future brands

Receive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsors

The first episodes of The Rings of Power have a real 'unskippable cutscene' vibe
The return of the '90s: That game you love is coming back
HARDWARE BUYING GUIDES LATEST GAME REVIEWS
More stories to check out before you go
PC Gamer is supported by its audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here’s why you can trust us .
...and that's unlikely to change, according to game director.
When Blizzard rolled out 21:9 screen support to Overwatch's Public Test Region today, people lucky enough to own a monitor that wide were pretty chuffed. For a while, Blizzard had ruled it out, stating last year that it might lead to a situation of "Haves and Have-nots", where folk with a wider field of view might hold a competitive advantage over people using 16:9 monitors.
That policy still remains intact however, because according to users on Battle.net , the 21:9 setting doesn't actually widen the field of view, but rather narrows it. Basically, if you compare these images taken by user Fin on the forums, you'll notice that the wider, 21:9 version is the same as the 16:9 version, only cropped at the top and bottom.
After a long thread on Battle.net, game director Jeff Kaplan eventually weighed in, confirming the studio's stance on FOV and competitive advantages. "We do not plan to increase the max FOV beyond 103, in any resolution," he wrote.
"As a result, this doesn't leave us with a lot of options for 21:9 support. I know this is not the answer our 21:9 players want to hear. But we feel like it would be unfair to 16:10 and 16:9 players if 21:9 gave a substantial FOV advantage."
So there you have it: 21:9 support is technically there, but you'll want to weather the (perhaps minor) disadvantages if you intend to use it.
Shaun Prescott is the Australian editor of PC Gamer. With over ten years experience covering the games industry, his work has appeared on GamesRadar+, TechRadar, The Guardian, PLAY Magazine, the Sydney Morning Herald, and more. Specific interests include indie games, obscure Metroidvanias, speedrunning, experimental games and FPSs. He thinks Lulu by Metallica and Lou Reed is an all-time classic that will receive its due critical reappraisal one day.
Sign up to get the best content of the week, and great gaming deals, as picked by the editors.
Thank you for signing up to PC Gamer. You will receive a verification email shortly.
There was a problem. Please refresh the page and try again.
PC Gamer is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site (opens in new tab) .
©
Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury,
Bath
BA1 1UA. All rights reserved. England and Wales company registration number 2008885.

Mature Handjob
Lesbian Cumming
Pee Outdoor

Overwatch Fov

Report Page