Why doesn't Bethesda support Ultrawide monitors?

[[TFB] † Deuce †]

Im so pissed off the Bethesda doesn't support ultra wide monitors and i contacted tech support. No reply.

[Dreadlow]

A couple of months ago they said they'd get around to it, but who knows. Just have to tweak the ini file for the time being.

[Bunker]

same reason it doesn't support Imax format

[Gravity 🌌]

low priority?

[Jᴧgᴧ]

Because ultra-wide users aren't the "lowest common denominator". Spending development money making a feature that 0.2% of the population (or less) will use isn't profitable.

Since they're owned by MS now, they make games that cater to the Xbox and PC crowds, that's it. Whatever combination can reach the most people possible is what they produce. That's also why the game was watered down, boring, and "safe".

Bethesda isn't interested in making great games anymore. They are interested in making large profits, and have been since the consolization of Skyrim's UI and the Creation Club inception.

[FeilDOW]

I used flawless ultrawide for my playthrough.

Originally posted by Jᴧgᴧ:

Because ultra-wide users aren't the "lowest common denominator". Spending development money making a feature that 0.2% of the population (or less) will use isn't profitable.

Ultrawide monitors are over 4% now and thats not including multi-monitor setups. I'd say 4% of over 100million monthly subscribers isn't nothing.

[tkwoods]

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

I used flawless ultrawide for my playthrough.

Originally posted by Jᴧgᴧ:

Because ultra-wide users aren't the "lowest common denominator". Spending development money making a feature that 0.2% of the population (or less) will use isn't profitable.

Ultrawide monitors are over 4% now and thats not including multi-monitor setups. I'd say 4% of over 100million monthly subscribers isn't nothing.

Which Ultrawide because they do support up to a point.

[Silverlight]

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

I used flawless ultrawide for my playthrough.

Originally posted by Jᴧgᴧ:

Because ultra-wide users aren't the "lowest common denominator". Spending development money making a feature that 0.2% of the population (or less) will use isn't profitable.

Ultrawide monitors are over 4% now and thats not including multi-monitor setups. I'd say 4% of over 100million monthly subscribers isn't nothing.

Is this what I sound like as a Linux user?

[Jᴧgᴧ]

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

I used flawless ultrawide for my playthrough.

Originally posted by Jᴧgᴧ:

Because ultra-wide users aren't the "lowest common denominator". Spending development money making a feature that 0.2% of the population (or less) will use isn't profitable.

Ultrawide monitors are over 4% now and thats not including multi-monitor setups. I'd say 4% of over 100million monthly subscribers isn't nothing.

~5 years ago 3440x1440 stood at exactly 0.36% of all Steam users (per Steam Hardware Survey). Looking it up today it stands thusly:

• 3440x1440: 2.18%
  
• 5120x1440: 0.27%
  
• Total: 2.45%

While it appears to have marginally increased in that five years, the point stands: it's a minority, and a small one to throw money at. The game needed FAR more things elsewhere in it's development even just for the average player.

No, that doesn't include multi-monitor desktop resolutions that end up as ultra-wide. I can say I personally (as a gamer) haven't run multiple monitors in a very long time, even with three sitting around going unused. Too many games had trouble rendering across different display devices if they weren't already merged.

To shift gears: AAA game developers keep porting games over to the PC, but only after they develop for the consoles. Reason: PC sales are the minority, but not a vast minority. More along the lines of ~30%. That's why we get the scraps now. Any demographic in the same boat is going to get the same treatment - priority goes to the "lowest common denominator" now, because that's profitable.

I'm sure if the ultra-wide crowd "squeaks" enough they may get what they want, at the expense of other areas of the game not getting what they need. That's typically how getting what you want when you're a vast minority works.

I used to run multi-monitor as well, until good TVs became available that made PC Monitors an obsolete commodity. Now I usually run at 4k with a ~60" monitor, and don't need ultra-wide or multiple monitors to fill peripheral vision.

Point #2: We aren't subscribing to anything out on Steam. Even on the XBox you don't need to subscribe, you can just go buy a copy. If you mean Gamepass, yes.. those are subscribers. But if you somehow manage to find Gamepass players that have ultrawide setups, I think you'll find they're the rarest of the bunch. No one's "feeding perpetual subscription fees for work like this to continue".

To sum up: someone's going to have to raise holy hell for Bethesda to perk up and decide to add ultrawide, when we already can do it with edits. They have bigger fish to fry: new DLC to sell for profits.

Is it sad? Yes - gaming has continually been dumbed down to suit the consoles. I'm replaying MGSV right now, and it has a horrible ported control scheme. Even the official manual is written for controllers only. It's just what you get when you aren't one of the masses anymore.

[FeilDOW]

Originally posted by tkwoods:

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

I used flawless ultrawide for my playthrough.


Ultrawide monitors are over 4% now and thats not including multi-monitor setups. I'd say 4% of over 100million monthly subscribers isn't nothing.

Which Ultrawide because they do support up to a point.

5120x1440.

Originally posted by Jᴧgᴧ:

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

I used flawless ultrawide for my playthrough.


Ultrawide monitors are over 4% now and thats not including multi-monitor setups. I'd say 4% of over 100million monthly subscribers isn't nothing.

~5 years ago 3440x1440 stood at exactly 0.36% of all Steam users (per Steam Hardware Survey). Looking it up today it stands thusly:

• 3440x1440: 2.18%
  
• 5120x1440: 0.27%
  
• Total: 2.45%

While it appears to have marginally increased in that five years, the point stands: it's a minority, and a small one to throw money at. The game needed FAR more things elsewhere in it's development even just for the average player.

No, that doesn't include multi-monitor desktop resolutions that end up as ultra-wide. I can say I personally (as a gamer) haven't run multiple monitors in a very long time, even with three sitting around going unused. Too many games had trouble rendering across different display devices if they weren't already merged.

To shift gears: AAA game developers keep porting games over to the PC, but only after they develop for the consoles. Reason: PC sales are the minority, but not a vast minority. More along the lines of ~30%. That's why we get the scraps now. Any demographic in the same boat is going to get the same treatment - priority goes to the "lowest common denominator" now, because that's profitable.

I'm sure if the ultra-wide crowd "squeaks" enough they may get what they want, at the expense of other areas of the game not getting what they need. That's typically how getting what you want when you're a vast minority works.

I used to run multi-monitor as well, until good TVs became available that made PC Monitors an obsolete commodity. Now I usually run at 4k with a ~60" monitor, and don't need ultra-wide or multiple monitors to fill peripheral vision.

Point #2: We aren't subscribing to anything out on Steam. Even on the XBox you don't need to subscribe, you can just go buy a copy. If you mean Gamepass, yes.. those are subscribers. But if you somehow manage to find Gamepass players that have ultrawide setups, I think you'll find they're the rarest of the bunch. No one's "feeding perpetual subscription fees for work like this to continue".

To sum up: someone's going to have to raise holy hell for Bethesda to perk up and decide to add ultrawide, when we already can do it with edits. They have bigger fish to fry: new DLC to sell for profits.

Is it sad? Yes - gaming has continually been dumbed down to suit the consoles. I'm replaying MGSV right now, and it has a horrible ported control scheme. Even the official manual is written for controllers only. It's just what you get when you aren't one of the masses anymore.

2560x1080 is also ultrawide and I'd suspect some are in the other category like 3840x1600.

This is a long write up when they already said they are adding it in a future update. You also act like adding support is a big development sink, it’s not.

[Jᴧgᴧ]

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

This is a long write up when they already said they are adding it in a future update. You also act like adding support is a big development sink, it’s not.

No, it's not a big development sink, but they typically won't add stuff like this out of goodwill - you have to squeak to get them to do that kind of work without getting paid for it.

The detail was to make a point, which I think I did. Apparently someone squeaked enough if they said it was being added. It's basically just a few profiles in the resolution selection area, probably 5-6 hours worth of a group's time to add/test and then validate on different platforms that support it. But I guarantee you they wouldn't have added it had someone not made a little noise about wanting it. /shrug

[FeilDOW]

Originally posted by Jᴧgᴧ:

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

This is a long write up when they already said they are adding it in a future update. You also act like adding support is a big development sink, it’s not.

No, it's not a big development sink, but they typically won't add stuff like this out of goodwill - you have to squeak to get them to do that kind of work without getting paid for it.

The detail was to make a point, which I think I did. Apparently someone squeaked enough if they said it was being added. It's basically just a few profiles in the resolution selection area, probably 5-6 hours worth of a group's time to add/test and then validate on different platforms that support it. But I guarantee you they wouldn't have added it had someone not made a little noise about wanting it. /shrug

Of course, making noise is how you get things done.

Do you have an ultrawide or did you just come in here to help us make noise?

[Jᴧgᴧ]

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

Of course, making noise is how you get things done.

Do you have an ultrawide or did you just come in here to help us make noise?

Both I think.

I understand the pull of ultra-wide as I had 3 side-by-side at one point, just not anymore.
And Bethesda needs to have more fires lit under them so they realize they didn't do justice to "the largest crowd they can".

But also to try and temper expectations.. Bethesda isn't known for getting around to things that they don't feel important. You have to push them where the engine is concerned, and they don't read Steam forums. Someone down the line will probably write a launcher for Starfield that will have ini edits, resolutions, etc (sorta like BethINI did). But until then, push push push.

[Dagtag]

The game does support ultrawide tho?

They don’t support the niche resolutions of the already niche ultrawide category tho…

When you buy niche hardware you should always be aware of the fact that its niche

[Lemiarty]

Originally posted by FeilDOW:

This is a long write up when they already said they are adding it in a future update. You also act like adding support is a big development sink, it’s not.

That really depends, doesn't it? If you want native imagery at that resolution with the amount of graphics in the game, that would be a huge investment. No, it's not as simple as resizing a given image because even the best software doesn't scale up as pretty as the consume (you) is going to expect. The bigger the image, the more noticeable the flaws. Remember when they released the upscaled 4k for Fallout 4 and, while better, wasn't nearly as good as the native 4k released with FO76 or SF.

Continue on that train of thought, they have to have access to monitors of that size or larger to work on the graphics then their testers have to have access to them, and so forth. It's a huge money sink for 0.27% or even 4%. Were it 40% then it would be supported.

Never assume that just because you want something it only takes a few minutes of effort to deliver it.