Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

How FOV could improve Infinite's gameplay

OP Rickygforce

I just made a similar post in a recent thread, and I thought maybe it would be appropriate to elaborate on the topic - how a game 'feels.'

An FOV slider would help tremendously in this regard. Because a higher FOV essentially zooms your character's perspective out, your sense of speed increases when moving, your cross-hair aim feels smoother and more controllable because more of your surroundings are squished onto your screen, so your cross-hair appears to be slower and less twitch. Just play 2-player split-screen which increases your FOV, and you'll notice the difference immediately.

But does anyone think that an FOV slider would be appropriate for Halo Infinite on console? I know that this topic has been done to death but there a lot of points people haven't considered about it, like the paragraph above.

Some people on other forums and threads have argued that it gives others an unfair advantage simply through preferring a higher FOV, and I don't know the implications of having an FOV slider upon the balance of the game. As we all know, Halo is a game about equal starts and balance. But others argue that an FOV slider is similar in concept to being able to change your sensitivity, and that it's just a matter of preference.

But a big argument about MCC on PC is that the aim assist is too high for mouse users to compete, and I feel that in order to improve the natural accuracy of controller and rely less on aim assist, increasing your FOV and giving other options like deadzones and acceleration plays a big part. In fact, playing at a higher FOV makes Reach's aim assist almost feel too strong compared to, say, 78 degrees.

Another problem is the impact on performance. But there are other console shooters with FOV sliders, and cranking it up to 120 degrees doesn't seem to drop me below 60 frames very often on my XBOX One S. But, then again, we don't know how demanding Halo Infinite might be due to it being a cross-gen game. If Infinite does end up being cross-play, I feel like an FOV slider would be necessary on console to even the playing field, because I don't think mouse users are too happy about the high level of aim assist in Reach, and so controller users may need some other form of aid to remain viable if aim assist in Infinite is significantly lower.
Some people on other forums and threads have argued that it gives others an unfair advantage simply through preferring a higher FOV, and I don't know the implications of having an FOV slider upon the balance of the game. As we all know, Halo is a game about equal starts and balance. But others argue that an FOV slider is similar in concept to being able to change your sensitivity, and that it's just a matter of preference.
Players choosing not to use a feature that is available to everyone at any moment cannot be a balance issue. You cannot refuse to touch the A button and cry that jumping is unfair. And indeed, you cannot play at a lower sensitivity and cry that higher sensitivities are unfair. If someone gives everybody a gift, and you refuse it, you don't get to say you were treated unfairly. That's not how the world works.
tsassi wrote:
Some people on other forums and threads have argued that it gives others an unfair advantage simply through preferring a higher FOV, and I don't know the implications of having an FOV slider upon the balance of the game. As we all know, Halo is a game about equal starts and balance. But others argue that an FOV slider is similar in concept to being able to change your sensitivity, and that it's just a matter of preference.
Players choosing not to use a feature that is available to everyone at any moment cannot be a balance issue. You cannot refuse to touch the A button and cry that jumping is unfair. And indeed, you cannot play at a lower sensitivity and cry that higher sensitivities are unfair. If someone gives everybody a gift, and you refuse it, you don't get to say you were treated unfairly. That's not how the world works.
Agree 100%. As stated before, all shooters should have a FoV slider imo. Also, some games would benefit greatly from them. I believe Halo Infinite should have it included too.
Even if 343 chooses to not use a FOV-slider, they should a least increase the base FOV to at least 90°...
I would love an FOV slider. Similar to 60fps games on console, slowly we've been getting more shooters with FOV sliders and it has spoiled me. My main MP shooter right now is Apex Legends and I play that at 100 FOV. I would probably play at max which is 110 on that game but it seems the performance takes a bit too much of a hit so I leave it at 100. Anyway, when I go back to H5 or MCC once in a while... not gonna lie, it's jarring and does not feel good. When I play ANY first person game that doesn't have an FOV slider it just feels weird. Doom and Apex have spoiled me and it's hard to go back.

At this point an FOV slider is probably my biggest hope for Infinite. If it doesn't have one, that's going to affect my enjoyment of the game greatly. I'd for sure get used to it because I plan on playing a lot of it, but I know I could have way more fun with it if I could change my FOV.

To the people saying they shouldn't add one because of balance or "it's not Halo"... please, it's 2020. Time to stop living in the past.
I just played a Halo match yesterday, after not playing for a long time, and the first thing that popped into my mind after looking around and trying to aim was; I need to change my FoV, just to find out I can't...so yeah, FoV slider please~
To the people saying they shouldn't add one because of balance or "it's not Halo"... please, it's 2020. Time to stop living in the past.
Ugh I see that used as an argument against so many things now it makes me feel sick every time I see someone say that.

Almost always see this exact cycle:
  1. New feature gets suggested or implemented
  2. Rage about it being "Not Halo"
  3. Demand the games innovate and/or evolve
  4. Repeat from (1)
No FOV.
Alduric wrote:
No FOV.
Would you like to elaborate on why you feel this way?
FOV sliders are viable on PC games because every PC is different and thus you aren't guaranteed a specific level of performance or frame rate.

Increasing/decreasing the FOV changes your game's performance.

Console games specifically target a specific frame rate and resolution. They are all, as far I'm aware, pegged to 30 or 60 fps. Other aspects of the game, like physics and animations, can also be tied to these frame rates. In order to target a specific fps/resolution, you have design around a specific FOV.

This is why FOV sliders are almost never in console games.

You could maybe allow two set FOV options to choose from on a console game but the developers would need to basically optimize the game twice, which would greatly increase development time.
FOV sliders are viable on PC games because every PC is different and thus you aren't guaranteed a specific level of performance or frame rate.

Increasing/decreasing the FOV changes your game's performance.

Console games specifically target a specific frame rate and resolution. They are all, as far I'm aware, pegged to 30 or 60 fps. Other aspects of the game, like physics and animations, can also be tied to these frame rates. In order to target a specific fps/resolution, you have design around a specific FOV.

This is why FOV sliders are almost never in console games.

You could maybe allow two set FOV options to choose from on a console game but the developers would need to basically optimize the game twice, which would greatly increase development time.
This is not true. If you can support one field of view, you can support every other field of view below it. If you don't want to leave performance on the table, you can even scale graphical settings based on field of view. You know, the same thing PC players do to hit a certain target frame rate, but done by the developer beforehand. You don't need to find the most optimal settings for every field of view (not that console developers ever have, even with a single field of view; many console games actually have frame rate drops, some more than others). You can just find settings that work for the lowest, for the highest, and a couple ones in between. You don't even need to be that careful with the higher field of view options, because realistically, anyone who actually wants to play at 120 degrees probably won't cry over not having the absolute prettiest graphics.

The order of importance has always been gameplay > everything else > graphics. If a developer worries over how a rock face being made of 100,000 triangles instead of 200,000 will look like, and prioritizes the latter over providing players a comfortable experience, they don't have their priorities straight.
Seems like the dominant opinion is that FOV sliders are OK for console. Good to know I'm not alone.

I just wonder that if the Series X is as powerful as people say it is, I would hope that there would be an FOV slider (to at least minimum 103-105 degrees, max 120 like MCC PC) for Infinite on the XBONE X and Series X. Maybe if 343 manage to somehow optimise Infinite well enough, maybe the S and OG XBONE might handle one with 60fps locked. If only there was more information about Infinite, I do get sick and tired of speculating.
Correct me if im wrong but I'm pretty sure doom eternal has an fov slider for consoles
Correct me if im wrong but I'm pretty sure doom eternal has an fov slider for consoles
Yup, so has DOOM 2016. No excuse for Halo not to have it too imo.