The Order: 1886... 3rd person steampunk action on the PS4 - Page 8 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 08:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubasteve2365 View Post

Negative. When the adoption of a "standard" for HDTV was being settled upon by the powers that be. The selection of 16:9 was as a compromise between movie studios that wanted 2.40:1 and TV studios with 4:3 content.
It's arbitrary. It's a compromise no longer needed. 2:40:1 serves a rational and functional purpose even if for large screen cinema. 16:9 serves no purpose in and of itself and exists only a compromise between two ends of spectrum that have a need. That spectrum is 2.40:1 and 4:3. I argue that 2.40:1 is currently still in need whereas 4:3 (which was limited by CRT Technology mid century 1900s) is no longer in need. Meaning the compromise is no longer in need.

It is objectively, superior, especially when considering the idea of no fragmentation.

You're working backwards from your desire to have everything in 2:35 and dismissing every practical reason why 16:9 exists. It's not that what you're saying doesn't have merit, it's just completely insensitive to everyone else's real world considerations. If fragmentation is your primary concern above all else, it should be self evident that fragmenting it again isn't a step in the right direction. Realistically, you can either have stability or you can have progress....but not both. So putting up 2:35 as the cure for fragmentation is completely hollow - you're fine with fragmentation, you just want it to fragment your way.

I'd love a world where everyone agreed with me and moved heaven and earth to defer to my desires too...but come on, you've got to recognize that's what you're saying here.

From my perspective, I'd love it if this next gen failed, and everyone moved over to PC gaming instead. And everyone had to buy a new $500 GPU each year or else they wouldn't be able to run the game. That way graphics are never held back to suit the low end. As much as I genuinely would love everything about that, and could conjure up a ton of semi-persuasive arguments as to why everyone should be on board, I'm pretty sure that proposal would fall flat too. smile.gif

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 09:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
scubasteve2365's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,146
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

You're working backwards from your desire to have everything in 2:35 and dismissing every practical reason why 16:9 exists. It's not that what you're saying doesn't have merit, it's just completely insensitive to everyone else's real world considerations. If fragmentation is your primary concern above all else, it should be self evident that fragmenting it again isn't a step in the right direction. Realistically, you can either have stability or you can have progress....but not both. So putting up 2:35 as the cure for fragmentation is completely hollow - you're fine with fragmentation, you just want it to fragment your way.

I'd love a world where everyone agreed with me and moved heaven and earth to defer to my desires too...but come on, you've got to recognize that's what you're saying here.

From my perspective, I'd love it if this next gen failed, and everyone moved over to PC gaming instead. And everyone had to buy a new $500 GPU each year or else they wouldn't be able to run the game. That way graphics are never held back to suit the low end. As much as I genuinely would love everything about that, and could conjure up a ton of semi-persuasive arguments as to why everyone should be on board, I'm pretty sure that proposal would fall flat too. smile.gif

Well, if we take this back to the scope of the thread regarding "The Order: 1886", then it being in a cinema scope ratio is not in conflict with your post. I'm not suggesting it be an over-night shift. I firmly believe that to transition requires the content first, which is exactly what happened with the last transition. An example of content coming first is exactly this case, The Order:1886 being in a cinemascope ratio.

I see no reason everything can't just be cinemascope, given that there aren't any naturally occurring reasons for content to be 16:9 other than it simply being the ratio displays are commonly made in today. So, I am billing it as the cure to fragmentation because that's what I think it could be. Could being the operative word. If the common display ratio were to transition to a 2.40:1, then the staunch avid 16:9 defender could still get his content with no loss in screen size by choosing a TV of the same height today. The 2.40:1 consumer does not have that choice, so even if fragmentation were to continue past a transition period or last forever, it'd be more palatable.

This isn't about moving heaven and earth, nor is it to specifically cater to my desires, (ironically, this discussion stemmed for your comments about how Ready At Dawn is not catering to your desires by having a fill-the-screen option) it is about technological evolution. Your stance seems to suggest that 16:9 is perfect and will be the defacto standard ratio till the end of time, which to me seems bizzare, especially considering the founding and implementation of the ratio as nothing more than a compromise and as a ratio in-and-of-itself has no merit. To me, it seems that you're the one working backwards. You're saying 16:9 is good because it's there and that's all it takes to make it a good. I'm working forwards, in my opinion, by saying there is a fundamental purpose to 2.40:1 and advocating for a standard shift towards something with purpose and away from something that only exists as a compromise.

Regardless nothing is going to change overnight, and I'm not suggesting such. Baby steps. The Order:1886 is one of those steps.

"The Scuba Tank" thread here
PSN/XBL : ScubaSteve2365
scubasteve2365 is offline  
post #213 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 10:01 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Just out of curiosity, why can't a diehard 2.4:1 buff just buy a screen of greater width and live with the black bars, in the same way you propose everyone buy a taller screen? Or just buy one of the 2.4:1 screens already available?

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #214 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 12:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
scubasteve2365's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,146
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Just out of curiosity, why can't a diehard 2.4:1 buff just buy a screen of greater width and live with the black bars, in the same way you propose everyone buy a taller screen? Or just buy one of the 2.4:1 screens already available?

The problem is the content. Until it's more common it's not going to push marketing of scope screens. Again, same as the transition before. Content will have to come first, that and down the line the long-term objective would be so that no-one has to deal with black bars. You're thinking as if 16:9 content has a purpose and would even exist outside of 16:9 displays being the norm. If 16:9 displays aren't the norm, then said content wouldn't likely exist. That's my whole point. We are dealing with a format that serves no purpose on it's own.

Out of curiosity did you have the same arguments when 16:9 replaced 4:3? Is there a reason you feel 16:9 is the end game or finish line when it comes to ratio standards?

"The Scuba Tank" thread here
PSN/XBL : ScubaSteve2365
scubasteve2365 is offline  
post #215 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 12:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubasteve2365 View Post

The problem is the content. Until it's more common it's not going to push marketing of scope screens. Again, same as the transition before. Content will have to come first, that and down the line the long-term objective would be so that no-one has to deal with black bars. You're thinking as if 16:9 content has a purpose and would even exist outside of 16:9 displays being the norm. If 16:9 displays aren't the norm, then said content wouldn't likely exist. That's my whole point. We are dealing with a format that serves no purpose on it's own.

Out of curiosity did you have the same arguments when 16:9 replaced 4:3? Is there a reason you feel 16:9 is the end game or finish line when it comes to ratio standards?

Nah, 4:3 is too thin.

I dunno how the order became the poster boy for the coming 2.4:1 revolution lol. I thought it was just a cheesy effect to make it look more cinematic.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #216 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 01:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rolltide1017's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Brad View Post

When I was in film school, it was always amusing to see people just slap letterbox bars onto their film. A lot of people didn't account for that when shooting, nor did they even try to fix it in post by shifting the image up or down. What ended up on the screen looked very amateur, which was the opposite of what they intended it to look like. The cut scenes in The Order 1886 remind of that.

Thank you, glad I'm no the only one who sees this. It's why I don't believe the devs when they say they've designed it from the ground up for 2.40, it looks like the black bars were just slapped on. I just don't buy the "cinematic" lines, I think it is all about making it easier for them to hit their graphical targets. It takes more then slapping black bars on something to make it cinematic and, the few videos we've seen are not very cinematic IMO. Just feels like a gimmick to me at this point.

PSN ID: RollTide1017
rolltide1017 is offline  
post #217 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 01:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
scubasteve2365's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,146
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Nah, 4:3 is too thin.

I dunno how the order became the poster boy for the coming 2.4:1 revolution lol. I thought it was just a cheesy effect to make it look more cinematic.

I don't think it's any poster boy. Although it's the first game to my knowledge that's done 2.40:1. Other games in the past have done letterboxing on 4:3 but I don't know of any that has gone full cinemascope. Regardless of what you think, or I think, cropping is an artistic decision. My wife (a photographer) and I (often her assistant, 2nd shooter, videographer) often have deferring opinions on what crops to go with to draw focus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rolltide1017 View Post

Thank you, glad I'm no the only one who sees this. It's why I don't believe the devs when they say they've designed it from the ground up for 2.40, it looks like the black bars were just slapped on. I just don't buy the "cinematic" lines, I think it is all about making it easier for them to hit their graphical targets. It takes more then slapping black bars on something to make it cinematic and, the few videos we've seen are not very cinematic IMO. Just feels like a gimmick to me at this point.

I think the gameplay is going to feel like that to a degree, because it's not a locked frame (free camera). I'd imagine if you looked at a 16:9 free-camera game in the era of 4:3 displays it'd have a similar feeling. Two things, I think, will determine how much of it is just black bars slapped on or not:

1) How are the fixed-camera cutscenes framed
2) Do any in-game set pieces utilize the wide field of view.

There have been games where I've wished there was a winder field of view. One of Uncharted 2's major setpieces (the collapsing building) could have used a wider FOV without a doubt. If you ever find yourself scanning side to side to find enemies or be on the lookout for something, you're effectively just using the old "pan and scan" technique and you would be more responsive if the game just had a wider FOV. I know in online FPS I do this quite a bit.

"The Scuba Tank" thread here
PSN/XBL : ScubaSteve2365
scubasteve2365 is offline  
post #218 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 01:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubasteve2365 View Post

I don't think it's any poster boy. Although it's the first game to my knowledge that's done 2.40:1. Other games in the past have done letterboxing on 4:3 but I don't know of any that has gone full cinemascope. Regardless of what you think, or I think, cropping is an artistic decision. My wife (a photographer) and I (often her assistant, 2nd shooter, videographer) often have deferring opinions on what crops to go with to draw focus.
I think the gameplay is going to feel like that to a degree, because it's not a locked frame (free camera). I'd imagine if you looked at a 16:9 free-camera game in the era of 4:3 displays it'd have a similar feeling. Two things, I think, will determine how much of it is just black bars slapped on or not:

1) How are the fixed-camera cutscenes framed
2) Do any in-game set pieces utilize the wide field of view.

There have been games where I've wished there was a winder field of view. One of Uncharted 2's major setpieces (the collapsing building) could have used a wider FOV without a doubt. If you ever find yourself scanning side to side to find enemies or be on the lookout for something, you're effectively just using the old "pan and scan" technique and you would be more responsive if the game just had a wider FOV. I know in online FPS I do this quite a bit.

I can see you're coming at it from the perspective of a filmmaker....but don't forget it's a game, and they're not bound by the same constraints. They don't even need to change the aspect ratio to change the the FOV. They could put a full 360 degree view in 4:3 with a simple change of a variable.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #219 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 01:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
scubasteve2365's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,146
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I can see you're coming at it from the perspective of a filmmaker....but don't forget it's a game, and they're not bound by the same constraints. They don't even need to change the aspect ratio to change the the FOV. They could put a full 360 degree view in 4:3 with a simple change of a variable.

If you accept that any game could do 360 in 4:3 by a change of a variable, then you accept that artistic crops are chosen for every game on the market. What makes a 2:40 crop any more wrong than a 16:9 crop?

While they likely could do 360 to 4:3, They still have to play within the same bounds of geometry, draw distance, resolution, and whatnot. Just because they could do those things doesn't mean it works for the art. We aren't talking about a technical limitation. We are talking about appropriately drawing focus. They could render more floor and more ceiling but that doesn't necessarily do anything meaningful. It can also distract into making your character feel to small even though when cropped the same feeling isn't there. There are certainly reasons to a wider FOV, beyond performance, that is beneficial to gaming. Otherwise, 4.3 would be superior because they could take the same FOV and fill in the vertical details. At some point you lose the ability to draw focus the way you want to if vertical fill (maintaining width) is permitted ad infinitum. Also, like we established every movie ever made could've taken the same FOV width wise and used a taller AR, there are no constraints. Movies are shot wide on purpose, not to get around some constraint. It don't need to see 10 feet above Gandolf's head in the Hobbit, likewise I don't need to worry about pointing the free-camera in directions that the game designers aren't drawing me to.

I've looked at images of the game and I'm not convinced it was developed 16:9 with bars slapped on. The way the character seems to be biased to the left with a wide view extending right seems to suggest it's by design

"The Scuba Tank" thread here
PSN/XBL : ScubaSteve2365
scubasteve2365 is offline  
post #220 of 229 Old 06-02-2014, 02:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rolltide1017's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubasteve2365 View Post

1) How are the fixed-camera cutscenes framed

The cutscenes are what I'm talking about, the few we've scene have been framed pretty poorly. They way many of the subjects are framed feels like the bars were just slapped over a 16x9 image.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubasteve2365 View Post

What makes a 2:40 crop any more wrong than a 16:9 crop?

Because 99% of gamers have a 16x9 TV and would like a game to fill the whole thing. If all they are doing is cropping, why choose a crop that 99% of us can't utilize to the full extent.

PSN ID: RollTide1017
rolltide1017 is offline  
post #221 of 229 Old 06-05-2014, 12:50 PM
Member
 
Lostonmountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sierra Nevada
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 20

Looking forward to this, as an armature Victorian era historian I find Steampunk very amusing should be fun if done right.  Glad I'm getting a 58" set though--letterboxed it would probably just be to small on my 40" screen (for my aging eyes).

Lostonmountain is offline  
post #222 of 229 Old 07-16-2014, 10:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
TedSeattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 37
A brief hands-on from Kotaku:

Quote:
I played through the Inequalities chapter that's been previously shown, huddling behind cover and blasting away at human enemies across the streets of an alternate-reality London. Shooters live and die by the ingenuity of their weapon design and The Order's thermite rifle was the first thing to make me think that there might be some spark to the thought going into the game. It's a dual-action firearm that fires a long-range burst of combustible thermite particles that can be set aflame by a flare.

So, as two or three enemies scrambled on a roof across the street, I could fire the thermite cloud first and then shoot the flare to instantly explode the air around them. Follow-up clouds keep the fire going, too. Players can also fire the complementary payloads in a different order, going flare first and thermite next for a delayed reaction. I also used a pistol during a sequence where I had to drag a fallen friendly to safety but didn't note anything remarkable about the gun during my brief time with it.

Later on in the demo, I used the game's Blacksight power to slow down time and down enemies with deadly precision. A corollary of drinking a mysterious fluid called Blackwater, the ability was reminiscent of the Deadeye mechanic in Red Dead Redemption.
From
http://kotaku.com/playing-the-order-...n-o-1605980750

Last edited by TedSeattle; 07-16-2014 at 10:34 AM.
TedSeattle is offline  
post #223 of 229 Old 07-19-2014, 01:55 PM
Member
 
Lostonmountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sierra Nevada
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 20
^I think this game may breath new life into my PS4, thanks for the link, sounds like something that will hold my interest. Hmmm does make me think maybe someone should turn the "Purple Rose of Cairo" into a game, maybe when good VR headsets come out .
Lostonmountain is offline  
post #224 of 229 Old 08-13-2014, 12:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
TedSeattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 37
TedSeattle is offline  
post #225 of 229 Old 08-15-2014, 09:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Apache
Posts: 510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
The only reason (for me, for now) to get a PS4. Too bad this a Feb. 2015 game.

Sofa King Bananas

 

"My mother****** is so cool, when he goes to bed, sheep count him." Pinky

thebesthereis is offline  
post #226 of 229 Old 08-15-2014, 11:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
defdog99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebesthereis View Post
The only reason (for me, for now) to get a PS4. Too bad this a Feb. 2015 game.
Thats insane. The game was shown in 2013 at the PS4 relrease party.

When the PS5 comes out I'm waiting 2 years next time.
defdog99 is offline  
post #227 of 229 Old 08-18-2014, 04:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
tampabuc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 633
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by defdog99 View Post
Thats insane. The game was shown in 2013 at the PS4 relrease party.

When the PS5 comes out I'm waiting 2 years next time.

I feel your pain man. So much money wasted chasing next gen so far, and it all fell on us as consumers and early adopters. Its all good though... there is a game coming out this Fall titled:


Revenge - Rise of the Gamer


In this game, you can battle (on both side of the planet) evil past gaming executives, questionable next gen design choices, misinformed consumers, and marketing hype.


I hate to spoil the ending but whoever you select to battle, you will end up disappointed - until the 2015/2016 "patch". No games and gimped features, or worse yet, shady 1080p or lack therefore, on next gen games, after the longest and most painful last gen console cycle imaginable, is not acceptable. Several years from now, we will laugh at all of this - at least I hope so.


(just kidding; sort of)
JoeNc likes this.
tampabuc is offline  
post #228 of 229 Old 08-18-2014, 05:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lordxar5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 396
Gah I have no shortage of stuff to play. Still sitting on Watch Dogs and TLoU, Plus freebies, and some indies. I'm toying with skipping Destiny except its already preordered.
lordxar5 is online now  
post #229 of 229 Old 08-18-2014, 08:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
tampabuc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 633
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 101
I'm not going to skip Destiny. Pre-ordered here also.

It may not be a next gen exclusive which is really sad (we are 7-8 years removed from the PS3 & 360 launch), but the beta overall, especially the final moon mission hooked me. Plus, this game should have premium resale value, even if multiplayer is terrible.
tampabuc is offline  
Reply PlayStation Area

Tags
The Order 1886

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off