Menu
What's new

4x3 Stretch

Col. Gaspar

Col. Gaspar

The 47 Ronin
I've done about 4.5 hours of reading and pro tips and settings and I have stumbled onto something that might make you more competitive...

4x3 Stretch resolution

You see less in game but it makes your models look seriously larger and in turn much larger models to shoot

If I'm a nub for just reading about this then so be it

Get-right plays at 1024x768 4x3 stretch and I think we can agree on his god status in the game.

I'm going to give this a try when I get on next time along with some new key binds...

I want to encourage people to try this out for a map or two and write back here with your opinion. I'm going to put mine down so if anything people will read my post because I'm going to give it a try.

Pro setting? Let's take some time to find out!

Sent from my Nexus 5
 
Why you need to play CSGO on a 16:9 monitor
16:9 ratio monitors cop a fair bit of criticism from visualphiles, some of it has to do with the panel type, other times it has to do with the manufacturers who produce them. Whatever the reason, of which there are many of varying validity, it’s apparent that a shift in perception is upon us.

120Hz monitors are now embedding themselves into the homes of consumers, pro-sumers and of course pro-gamers. It’s not because we want to play 3D content, it’s because the 2D content we view is viewed twice as fast. For those who are unaware: 120Hz means your display has the potential to push out up to 120 perceivable frames every second. The difference between this and a typical LCD monitor of just a few years ago is quite simply double. 60Hz vs 120Hz translates to 60fps vs 120fps – if your hardware can pump out 120fps in your favourite game, of course.

The thing about 120Hz monitors is that almost all of them are being delivered in 16:9 panels. What real difference does 16:9 vs 16:10 have when computing? If you’re comparising resolutions, 1920×1080 (16:9 “Full HD”) means you’re losing some vertical visibility when compared to a 1920×1200 (16:10) desktop. However, in a game like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive where the vertical FOV (field of vision) is fixed and only the horizontal FOV changes, the result with a 16:10 panel is actually a loss in horizontal visibility.

At 16:9 your horizontal FOV in CSGO is 90 degrees – a FOV many gamers will be familiar with. On a 16:10 monitor your horizontal FOV becomes 84 degrees, seeing less to the left and right than your 16:9 bretheren. Running 4:3, God forbid, your FOV is cut to merely 74 degrees. That’s barely wider than Battlefield 3′s “super zoomed” default FOV of 70.

Numbers, numbers, numbers. What do the differences in these figures actually look like? I think you’ll be surprised. Below is a look at the advantage a 16:9 player gets.




Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 4:3 Resolution


Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 16:10 Resolution


Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 16:9 Resolution
 
Last edited:
CL4P-TP Ninja Assassin said:
Why you need to play CSGO on a 16:9 monitor
16:9 ratio monitors cop a fair bit of criticism from visualphiles, some of it has to do with the panel type, other times it has to do with the manufacturers who produce them. Whatever the reason, of which there are many of varying validity, it’s apparent that a shift in perception is upon us.

120Hz monitors are now embedding themselves into the homes of consumers, pro-sumers and of course pro-gamers. It’s not because we want to play 3D content, it’s because the 2D content we view is viewed twice as fast. For those who are unaware: 120Hz means your display has the potential to push out up to 120 perceivable frames every second. The difference between this and a typical LCD monitor of just a few years ago is quite simply double. 60Hz vs 120Hz translates to 60fps vs 120fps – if your hardware can pump out 120fps in your favourite game, of course.

The thing about 120Hz monitors is that almost all of them are being delivered in 16:9 panels. What real difference does 16:9 vs 16:10 have when computing? If you’re comparising resolutions, 1920×1080 (16:9 “Full HD”) means you’re losing some vertical visibility when compared to a 1920×1200 (16:10) desktop. However, in a game like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive where the vertical FOV (field of vision) is fixed and only the horizontal FOV changes, the result with a 16:10 panel is actually a loss in horizontal visibility.

At 16:9 your horizontal FOV in CSGO is 90 degrees – a FOV many gamers will be familiar with. On a 16:10 monitor your horizontal FOV becomes 84 degrees, seeing less to the left and right than your 16:9 bretheren. Running 4:3, God forbid, your FOV is cut to merely 74 degrees. That’s barely wider than Battlefield 3′s “super zoomed” default FOV of 70.

Numbers, numbers, numbers. What do the differences in these figures actually look like? I think you’ll be surprised. Below is a look at the advantage a 16:9 player gets.




Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 4:3 Resolution


Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 16:10 Resolution


Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 16:9 Resolution
Click to expand...

LOL SOMEONE DIDN'T LEARN MLA IN SCHOOL!!!! :fap:
 
CL4P-TP Ninja Assassin said:
Why you need to play CSGO on a 16:9 monitor
16:9 ratio monitors cop a fair bit of criticism from visualphiles, some of it has to do with the panel type, other times it has to do with the manufacturers who produce them. Whatever the reason, of which there are many of varying validity, it’s apparent that a shift in perception is upon us.

120Hz monitors are now embedding themselves into the homes of consumers, pro-sumers and of course pro-gamers. It’s not because we want to play 3D content, it’s because the 2D content we view is viewed twice as fast. For those who are unaware: 120Hz means your display has the potential to push out up to 120 perceivable frames every second. The difference between this and a typical LCD monitor of just a few years ago is quite simply double. 60Hz vs 120Hz translates to 60fps vs 120fps – if your hardware can pump out 120fps in your favourite game, of course.

The thing about 120Hz monitors is that almost all of them are being delivered in 16:9 panels. What real difference does 16:9 vs 16:10 have when computing? If you’re comparising resolutions, 1920×1080 (16:9 “Full HD”) means you’re losing some vertical visibility when compared to a 1920×1200 (16:10) desktop. However, in a game like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive where the vertical FOV (field of vision) is fixed and only the horizontal FOV changes, the result with a 16:10 panel is actually a loss in horizontal visibility.

At 16:9 your horizontal FOV in CSGO is 90 degrees – a FOV many gamers will be familiar with. On a 16:10 monitor your horizontal FOV becomes 84 degrees, seeing less to the left and right than your 16:9 bretheren. Running 4:3, God forbid, your FOV is cut to merely 74 degrees. That’s barely wider than Battlefield 3′s “super zoomed” default FOV of 70.

Numbers, numbers, numbers. What do the differences in these figures actually look like? I think you’ll be surprised. Below is a look at the advantage a 16:9 player gets.




Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 4:3 Resolution


Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 16:10 Resolution


Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CSGO) in a 16:9 Resolution
Click to expand...

Wow!!! I never thought it would matter. I like playing on 4:3. Seeems smoother on my old PC.
 
Well now that fov has been explained I see why the models appear larger... Still going to try it... An edge is an edge

Sent from my Nexus 5
 
I don't think any pro plays on 1920x1080. They also use insanely low DPIs, low sensitivities on top of that, static oldschool crosshairs, left handed gun models, and very low graphics settings.

It's all about the individual though. Most of these players have been around the block and they're trying to make the game feel and look similar to 1.6. These settings don't work for most people.
 
I played with 1280x1024 as a test and never went back to 1920x1080, it's awesome, I like it.
 
Besides losing the sides of my screen the models were not any bigger. I must be missing something

Sent from my Nexus 5
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top