In other words, this is where the ‘larger monitor argument’ wins. removing black bars on the sides) does indeed increase the size of the player models on your monitor, but the part that is ignored in making this statement is that you are also increasing the physical area you need to look at in comparison to using 4:3 with black bars. “Stretching 4:3 creates larger models that are easier to see” This is not necessarily a huge thing, though we do see examples of players missing kills due to using 4:3 every now and then, most recently in the IEM Katowice grand final where flusha was able to win a 2v5 for fnatic over FaZe, helped by olofmeister’s resolution of choice. Staying in that position, the player using a 4:3 resolution will not see an opponent coming out of jungle or palace, as their vision will be limited at both horizontal extremes of the monitor, unlike in the 16:9 example where both are clearly visible.Īs such, you can think about the comparison between 16:9 and 4:3 as the latter cropping away some of the screen. However, if you compare the horizontal edges, you will notice a large difference - the field of vision (FOV) of 16:9 aspect ratio is far greater. the top and bottom remain the same, but more is drawn at the horizontal edges of the monitor), so what you see at the top and the bottom in each will be identical (barring movements of the palm trees due to time). 16:9 in general only extends the visibility of 4:3 (i.e. The two screenshots are taken from the same exact position without moving, after merely changing resolutions in-game. The previous images overlaid with one color channel removed - identical parts will show up in normal color
0 kommentar(er)
