Widescreen Gaming Forum

What FOV are those at? surely not 30. it looks like you need a small bump up so if that was 90 hit 100 I should also at this point note a couple of things. 1. most people use different values for 1st and 3rd person, never liked it myself. 2. I am a lifelong glasses wearer and have become convinced that it makes me more tolerant of the side distortion you are noticing. but it will fade away for you. its just you needing to play on that Munkster screen *(my grandson's name for my setup) for a little while so you get used to it. You will also notice that different games do better at surround than others in this respect and switching from one to another will make you notice till you get involved in the game. Some programmers actually design the game from the engine out with wide screen compatibility in mind and those are a true pleasure to play. For the others we have Guru's like on here to lead us by the nose to a solution.

EDIT: the effect you are seeing is Fisheye. our vision gets the same thing and the brain translates it out otherwise our field of view would be fixed and narrow.

Robert

These screen i think i had the FoV set at around 80, ill jump it up to 90 or so and see if i can get use to it. Thanks for all the help.

Hey guys, regarding the unintended wallhacking you get with surround resolutions (and, at least on my box, the glaring white background that often shows through and blinds me)... I have a fix.

Merge this into Fallout4.ini:



(The existing values, if present, will probably be 1.0 and 15.0, respectively.)

Basically, the problem was that we are effectively making the near clipping plane considerably wider, which allows it to clip through walls that previously couldn't get both close and on-screen at the same time. The solution is to bring the near clip closer so that it covers a smaller area that can't get close enough to walls to clip through them.

The numbers above should work well for 3 x 16:9, even with large bezel corrections. If not, try 0.3333 and 5.0000, respectively, but those are total overkill.

Tech details:

While I'm here...

I use SLI'ed 2GB GTX 680's on my system. I was looking at the diagnostics while in high-stutter areas and realized the game was pegging my vram full-time, sitting at about 2,010MiB allocated almost all the time.

Presumably it was thrashing ram<-->vram, like regular virtual memory can do with the disk when there's more data being actively touched than there is physical ram. This can eat up huuuuuge amounts of bus bandwidth to the GPUs, each and every frame. You don't see it as card activity, though. It's being transferred, not processed. Processing actually stalls while waiting for transfers to complete. I often see the card activity drop very low during bad stutters.

I tried installing a texture downscale/repack mod and vram usage started fluctuating between 1,700MiB and 1900MiB, indicating to me that it was no longer thrashing, but managing to hold contents from the previous frame and re-use them.

Obviously, since the mod involves repacking with more effective, but more lossy, DXTn modes, rather than raw color as many of the textures reportedly are, there is some loss of quality.

This particular mod also eliminates some of the higher-resolution base+mip levels on textures that just don't need it. Sometimes the author was overly zealous and you can see his handiwork a little too well, but I have to say the framerate boost in crappy areas was worth it. I might start tracking down particularly bad/blocky offenders and deleting them. Not sure I care enough. Staying 30-40 around Goodneighbor with only minor hiccups at times... that's nice.

Edit: I'm not referencing the actual mod because I'm still very new to creation engine modding and I don't have a way to gauge mod quality/reliability. I'm sure you can find it, and possibly other attempts, pretty quickly, though.

Its perfectly okay to share the mod name or just a link with the proviso you named. These guys are the best I know at evaluating stuff like that and will share their opinion of the work in question. I too have seen what your talking about. My working solution was to turn to ENB since Boris has a first release out just to handle the video memory usage issues Bethesda games all seem to share. That was a super description of the visual aspect presentation by the way. The diagram shows the apparent change in distance with viewport angle also if one looks for it.

Robert

Hi. exist any solution for 5040x1050 16:10 configurations?? Hayden is still working in a fix??
Thanks

OF COURSE!
hehe your resolution is close enough to the 5670 x 1080 that has been assembled to work. Might need a little tinkering of the INI values but the flash files changes that were made should be great. If you need help with the ini adjustments just put it up to the group and we will figure it out. First just put it all in place like it is and see. Never know it may not even need anything.

Robert

It worked flawless in my Eyefinity 3x1, 5760x1200

Excelent work!

Hey. Has anyone fixed the Transfer UI? Using Haldi's fix and the ini tweaks works great now the only thing that is scaled wrong is the Transfer UI. Thanks!!

Massive props to Haldi - that fix awesome.

if the barter/transfer UI is broken for you then you missed a step or mis-spelled a value in the ini settings because the final portion of the fix is in the ini settings. go back and check them and you will find the issue.

Robert