Professional Fortnite Players Resurrect the 4:3 Resolution for a Competitive Edge

I can see how this would give someone an advantage, the wider the screen the more information your eyes and brain have to process, possibly making situation's in the game more distracting. Having a 4:3 aspect would tighten up your field of view and allow you to be more focused on what's in front of you. Same goes for animal and human evolution for hunting purposes.
 
I can see how this would give someone an advantage, the wider the screen the more information your eyes and brain have to process, possibly making situation's in the game more distracting. Having a 4:3 aspect would tighten up your field of view and allow you to be more focused on what's in front of you. Same goes for animal and human evolution for hunting purposes.

This is true but it's like a double-edged sword, at times the narrower fov will make you miss an enemy you might have spotted in CSGO for example, it happens every once in a while when you see the spectators in 1080p streaming and it looks like the players must have been blind as they don't notice someone starting to fire at them despite you see the guy on your right or left-hand side but then you remember they are using 4:3 only...

So it's a balance between being easier/faster to focus / process what is happening on the screen and how big enemies appears like (gives mental advantage if nothing else) vs how much you can physically see at a time, difficult to then to estimate whether how often the former or latter is more useful statistics wise as it's very difficult to gather accurate statistics on the former. To slightly lesser extent it's also about what settings they are used to and it would make them have to adapt to the other format so it's just easier to stay whit what you're used to.

Last but not least, competitive minded players get their sidekick ("feel-good" dopamine) from playing great and winning meanwhile casuals are more into a funny or silly moment or simply using gaming as a form of relaxation from real life so they aren't necessarily even prepared to give much time or care about that last bit of competitive edge hurting the overall experience where graphics also contribute. I don't really see anything wrong with either but I often feel games should focus on both a "Casual" mode and "Hardcore" ruleset where there's focus around catering to both type of players, usually developers aim for a compromise between the two, ending up not serving either type of players well.
 
Yes, competitive players will do anything they think gives them an advantage. That's part of being competitive.

This includes running the best hardware they can while using wonky and/or reduced settings to maximize their edge. Just like any kind of racing, teams will use any loophole or loose interpretation they can get away with if it gives them an edge.

It's not how I'll be using my hardware, but to each their own. It takes all kinds.

Just get off my damn lawn.


Understood. And while I like the competitive nature of many games, that's not why I play games. (At least not anymore. I was more into the competitive thing in Counter-Strike back in the day)

I don't play many multiplayer games at all anymore, as it simply isn't convenient with my life, but I did get really into Red Orchestra 2 when it was launched in 2011, and put many hours into it over the years. The game has mostly faded at this point, but I loved the semi-realistic infantry warfare aspect of it, on large scale many player maps. I played it almost more for the simulation experience than anything else. Sure, there was some competitiveness to it, and it was great to win a hard fought map, but people who'd be tweaking their systems reducing graphical fidelity, etc. just to get an edge. That would irk me.

When I played a lot of this game, we had a really good community server in which most people seemed to share that idea of what the game was about.

To me, you install the game, set the quality settings to the max your system can handle, and then play it like that. If you are going to intentionally sabotage settings to get an unfair advantage, you might as well be hacking. I mean, whats the difference?
 
Last edited:
Wow, 4:3 resolution! Four whole pixels, doesn't sound like much.

Oh wait -- you meant aspect ratio, didn't you.

I can forgive grossly inaccurate terminology in casual posting ... I'm sure I do it myself. It's mildly depressing to see it in an article headline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Youn
like this
Take it back to 2002 with that 1152x864!!

On a serious note though, this is retarded and should be banned from competition if it can be proven to hold an advantage.
 
If the game allows for such a glitch then it's the developers fault and needs to be addressed.
That said, I've been around for quite awhile and remember when 4:3 was the dominant aspect ratio. To hear the whining of this guy just reeks of 1st world entitlement.

Of course it's on Forbes so what can you expect..

Skill....lol
 
Good luck trying to convince me that the difference between curved surfaces and their collision boxes is the real reason they tried to make the game look like pong.

Think this is a clean shot?
upload_2018-8-3_21-46-32.png


Nope you just hit the fucking floor. This is what the collision actually is. Some angles you win, some you lose, but it doesn't matter if you gave your position away and chunked yourself for 40 armor because you rocketed the invisible floor like an idiot.
upload_2018-8-3_21-46-41.png
 
Last edited:
Is there an example of this in a more recent title, like Rainbow 6 Siege?

Nah now you just get to turn off shit like lens flares.

Understood. And while I think the competitive nature of many games, that's not why I play games. (At least not anymore. I was more into the competitive thing in Counter-Strike back in the day)

I don't play many multiplayer games at all anymore, as it simply isn't convenient with my life, but I did get really into Red Orchestra 2 when it was launched in 2011, and put many hours into it over the years. The game has mostly faded at this point, but I loved the semi-realistic infantry warfare aspect of it, on large scale many player maps. I played it almost more for the simulation experience than anything else. Sure, there was some competitiveness to it, and it was great to win a hard fought map, but people who'd be tweaking their systems reducing graphical fidelity, etc. just to get an edge. That would irk me.

When I played a lot of this game, we had a really good community server in which most people seemed to share that idea of what the game was about.

To me, you install the game, set the quality settings to the max your system can handle, and then play it like that. If you are going to intentionally sabotage settings to get an unfair advantage, you might as well be hacking. I mean, whats the difference?

Yeah because lower settings is the same as shit like this
 
That guys voice makes me rage. It was funny to see other people cheating though.
 
That guys voice makes me rage. It was funny to see other people cheating though.

You mean desperately trying to justify being a gigantic cunt.


The people he says are cheating are just running from his footsteps as he elephant stomps around the map or because he literally just butchered someone in a given area 2 seconds earlier.

CT player watches him massacre 2 people as he tears down into CT spawn, subsequently watches the 1 singular direction he can possibly come from at that point. Gets instantaneously killed.

"This guy is cheating"
 
Last edited:
Oh he deserves to have a pineapple shoved up his butt daily. I just think he cheats bc of his voice. Self hatred leads to the desire to inflict the same upon others.
 
And here I thought everyone said wide screen monitors gave the advantage because you had a wider field of view...
Depends on the type of game and mechanics of it. In a game with skill aim targeting for example vertical or horizontal height could become negatively impacted usually it is vertical height as we tend to have tons of horizontal space, but much less height to work with. Also when being swarmed with a ton of mobs quickly seeing more of that in advance helps with your reaction response time to it. In a FPS the hit box size is a very real issue and problem that is skewed by resolution size. The wider field of view is a advantage just not in every game in a MMO for example it helps by giving you more chat screen and UI real estate that otherwise can consume most of a screen.
 
This reminds me of the Quake 3 days, the guys that turned off everything making it almost black and white, except for model textures. Even more extreme than this video. It's basically cheating, you're turning the rez down to minimum to make everything huge, then turning off all graphics except for what you want to kill. Your targets stick out like sore thumbs and are easy targets, no distractions.

I got into a huge fight with a coworker who did this when he played. I was like, what is the enjoyment of playing a game if you're going to cheat? He was like "winning?" right before I threw a keyboard at his head.

Everyone should use the same settings and resolutions, or it's cheating. At best, an un-even playing field.

 
I think some form of setting tweaking is fair as not everyone has equally fast PCs so those who have a better PC who have stable FPS gets an advantage. IMO it starts going too far when you start tweaking it go beyond what the developer intended from INGAME settings, so ini tweaks and external graphic driver tweaking etc is the point I think it starts going too far, it's the developer's responsibility to set the limits ingame as to how far the tweaking should be allowed. I also think regarding the resolution it's hard to classify it as a "cheat" as we have different monitors and different games behaves a bit differently and if you go too small on the resolution again, you won't spot the enemies that's just right next to your FOV so it can potentially become a disadvantage too.

The right way would be to have competitive and casual rulesets in games that are intended to be more competitive minded where there's more specific rulesets as to what is okay and what isn't and then players will have a lot better experience when they are around similar mindset of players too. At least I enjoy it more when I played UT when I had more experienced players around in team based gamemodes who tried their best to make sure the team wins rather than going doing something solo with some important vehicle that contributes nothing. Could also turn it around and say if I'm new to a game I'd rather jump into some casual style play than a hardcore one where teammates will keep insulting me and mother for being such a bad player.

Mulitple different rank is a decent way in CSGO to ensure similarly experienced players play with each other but it's also something which only works for games that make a breakthrough and has big enough playerbase but I think 2 ranks, ie casual and competitive would go along way already and should work as far as playerbase goes with most games.
 
Last edited:
Think this is a clean shot?
View attachment 93873

Nope you just hit the fucking floor. This is what the collision actually is. Some angles you win, some you lose, but it doesn't matter if you gave your position away and chunked yourself for 40 armor because you rocketed the invisible floor like an idiot.
View attachment 93874

I did not know that. I used to play alot of quake 3 and did notice some odd clipping or strange behavior on the curved surfaces but I didn't realize it was that significant.
 
Wow, 4:3 resolution!
First time I've heard someone refer to 4:3 as a "resolution"...

what's next, "I only game @ 8k fps"? eh.....

oh, shit I think got an idea... (goes to patent office)...
 
Back
Top