BioWare Can't Patch Unreadable Text for Non-HD TVs in Mass Effect 2
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Because I own a mac and not a PC.ItsAPaul said:
It's cheaper to buy an XBOX than a new gaming PC.
Easy enough to understand?
THIS is what I don't get, people are OBSESSED with size. All the TV adverts say "buy Forty Two Inch, buy Forty Two Inch!" and people get stuck with the the idea that they NEED a huge screen to view from 8+ feet away.Becoming Insane said:
It's all a matter of perspective, with the resolution the same it all comes down to size. A 32 inch HDTV at 9 feet, appears just as big as a 17 inch monitor at only 5 feet.
Now how about the Lencher distance, which is a formula for the optimal viewing distance for a given resolution/screen size (http://hdguru.com/lechner-distance-the-number-you-need-to-know-before-buying-an-hdtv/21/). The idea is any closer and you'll see too much detail (pixel boundaries) too far and you lose detail. For a 720p image, you optimally want to sit 2.4x the diagonal diameter away from the screen, that is also close enough to read any small font text perfectly clearly.
Say a 19 inch monitor... have you even TRIED looking for one? I did say these things are common as salt. Anyway, a 720p letter-boxed image would have a 17-inch diagonal diameter on a screen that size.
17 x 2.4 = 40.8 inches = 3.4 feet
Now Three and a Half feet is not "on your lap" it close enough so your stretched out feet are touching the base of the furniture stand that the monitor is on. I have been using this setup and so has my friend for many months now and it has been perfect. You can still lie back on a couch, just scooch it up a bit closer to the screen.
The pretty much solitary advantage of a big 40 inch HDTV is... social. With a bigger screen people can sit further away, so for a given comfortable viewing angle more people can watch the same film or TV show without crowding each other, that is the only way HDTVs can justify their extreme cost, how multiple people can watch it at time so it serves the whole household.
Are you really going to spend TWENTY TIMES as much as you have to, just in case occasionally someone wants to watch you play Mass Effect 2? Just remember, every extra inch of viewing distance the cost goes up EXPONENTIALLY!
"One person not having an HD set is not going to change anything at all."
No, but if half the Xbox 360 owners doggedly stick to SDTV, as apparently around 45% do, then this is a big disincentive to developers against creating amazing looking games.
You are just rationalising by saying you "need" a $1000 HDTV for your gaming and ignoring the incredibly useful budget VGA solution.
If you really can't find a monitor a friend or family member to lend you or sell you at "mate's rate" well that is extraordinary, I doubt you have even properly looked. If you can't afford one on eBay well then you are not in a position to buy ANY games as it is not like this is a recurring cost, this allows you to play ALL your games in HD as they were intended.
But if you answer this AT ALL, please answer this question:
Are you viewing this website/thread from a desktop PC?
This is very important, because if that is the case with all likelihood the solution is quite literally staring you in the face!! Virtually ANY desktop computer monitor will do. I'm trying to help you here but you aren't helping yourself, only making life difficult by being lured by $1000 HDTVs which are so heavily advertised. Don't be a sucker.
Well those are some pretty extreme circumstances you have there... I'm sorry about your financial situation but no way can it apply to half of Xbox 360 owners who are still on SDTV or the thousands of people who have $60 / £45 to blow on a game at launch price like Mass Effect 2.MelasZepheos said:
But I don't know what you are talking about saying it costs £100 to upgrade to HD:
http://www.kikatek.com/product_info.php?products_id=108618&source=froogle
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-COMPONENT-HD-AV-VGA-CABLE-FOR-MICROSOFT-XBOX-360-UK_W0QQitemZ270491282621QQcmdZViewItem?rvr_id=&rvr_id=&cguid=61ec5b9d1260a0aad4009530ffdfe515
in case the link dies in the near future that is a 17-inch 1440x900 monitor, new, for only £38 and then an XB360's VGA Cable for £4, that's little more than 40 quid for HD gaming. And I've seen better deals in the past.
I know you can't afford this now, but you COULD have afforded it and hopefully you will in the future. For the overwhelming majority of Xbox 360 gamers they should- overall - be playing in HD, sooner or later. Face it, this is a HD generation, but as long as there are a significant number of SD gamers, then developers are not going to be able to make the most the the detail they have available to them.
I think Max Payne (Could be wrong), also had this problem (might've been solved eventually). To be honest, I actually moved from my HD TV to a smaller standard def TV, and I really didn't notice a difficulty in reading the text.
1: The text is pretty optional though, anything important has a VO behind it
2: My TV is pretty average . . . it's definitely not a LARGE television, so you'd have to have a pretty small television to really have problems >_>
1: The text is pretty optional though, anything important has a VO behind it
2: My TV is pretty average . . . it's definitely not a LARGE television, so you'd have to have a pretty small television to really have problems >_>
This article also lists many flaws with using a monitor to game on. You apparantly know better than I do, however, so because I am moving soon and was going to buy another television to game on (got a game room in my new house!), maybe I can save some money and just use my computer monitor. I would have to ask, though, because 1440x900 isn't supported by the 360, can I be sure everything will look good on it? It's just a 19" widescreen, but I just want to know if the scaling will work out.Treblaine said:
Stop telling people to spend more money because Bioware is too stupid to let people change the font size.seditary said:
PC games are a greater hassle, and I don't have a computer capable of playing it.ItsAPaul said:
Don't come back saying "nuhuh PCs are teh better!" because I don't want to hear it. You asked, I answered. Your situation doesn't apply to everyone else, just as mine doesn't.
OT: Yes, the small text is incredibly annoying. Luckily, it's usually on stuff that I don't care to read anyway.
Oh I've played all the way though GTA4, Gears of War and a load of other 360 games via a 1440x900 monitor and it works PERFECTLY.chronobreak said:
Don't worry about the aspect ratio, as long as you have it set up right (select the 1440x900 output in the 360 menu) then the aspect ratio will not be distorted nor will it be cropped (chopped off at the sides). All that will happen is thin black bars top-and-bottom to fill up the 16:10 aspect ratio screen with the 16:9 output.
This is what the 360 does so well, PS3 only scales to 16:9, but 360 should support a 16:9 output on a 16:10 screen with just blackness top and bottom.
Hard to explain but basically you have the 1280x720 output on the console right, it is upscaled to 1440x810 (that's a 16:9 ratio), then black pixels are added top+bottom to fill it up to 1440x900 (16:10 ratio) image which is output to the monitor which doesn't do any scaling at all. Absolutely ideal solution, I wish all the consoles did this.
Aww PC gaming isn't that hard to achieve. Especially if you are willing to lower yourself to Console standards - BURN!!!The Bandit said:
Naw, the point I'm making is part of the reason COD4 seems to play so well (high frame-rate) on Xbox 360, yet may stutter if you play it on PC is because - and I'm surprised how many people don't know this - both the PS3 and Xbox 360 versions are rendered in only 1024x600!!
That is barely better than Standard Definition, it is just upscaled to 720p. Yet people who try to play COD4 on their PC at standard resolution of, say, 1280x1024, well the PC has to work TWICE as hard for the same frame-rate. Console also has only a piddling 2xAA and even then has an average framerate from ACTIVE SCENES of only 50 to 45 frames per second, though it aims for 60 frames per second.
With that in mind, and how the console version usually uses Medium-to-high rather than "Extra" settings as on PC, you'd be surprised how many PC owners CAN in fact play PC games as good as the consoles. And with all the benefit of mouse aim and dedicated servers when you can get 'em.
This extends to Mass Effect 2
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,703669/Mass-Effect-2-Galactic-battle-Geforce-versus-Radeon/Practice/
1280x1024 is 40% larger resolution than used on the Xbox 360, yet is playable on an ancient Geforce 7900 GTX graphics card that was released March 9, 2006.
Personally my PS3 and 360 are mainly for their 1st party games. 3rd party will always have more potential on PC, 1st party will always be the best on the console their own parent company has made. Though many Japanese developers just "don't get" the PC, so for MGS4, Ninja Gaiden, Bayonetta, etc, you'll need a console.
But even that is changing, Street Fighter 4 and Resident Evil 5 were great on PC, and the next MGS game from Konami is coming to consoles and PC simultaneously.
People are against spending money on hardware to fix what is a software issue. People should be against spending money on hardware because Bioware could not be bothered to look at their game on the type of display that most Xbox360 owners have. Why is it that videogames seem to be the only software that has difficulty providing people with the option to change the text size when so many of the most commonly used software items, including the one's Bioware used to create the game in all likelyhood have been able to do this for decades now? I write software for a living and I would never approach my boss and tell him that they should buy new hardware because I simply can't be bothered to go inside my own code and make the fonts bigger. First off he would fire my ass, secondly it is generally any easy problem to fix. The only way it would be hard is if I made my program in the most stupid way possible. Why in the hell should Bioware get away with "Oh well it's too hard."seditary said:
The first mass effect was released originally on the 360 and the vast majority of the sales the game enjoyed came on this platform. Since the game rewards players of the previous game it is perfectly sensible that they would play the sequel on the same system that they completed the original game. Were it not for the simple fact that my 360 is being repaired, I would have done precisely this rather than simply downloading a save that came fairly close to what my previous game experience was.ItsAPaul said:
In the case of ME2, my own perspective is the game "feels" like a console port. In the case of Dragon Age Origins, it was quite clear that the PC version of the game was the "correct" version. Additionally, the lack of any real ability for players to produce mods for Mass Effect remove a great portion of the incentives that generally come attached to purchasing the PC version of a Bioware game.