Ultra wide support

General Discussion
161

Yes but the distinction matters. The original request isn’t some sacrosanct thing.

Yup, a patch for checks notes SC: Remastered.

It matters to Blizzard, since they’re the ones that were stickler about it to begin with.

Which is what the ENTIRE GAME is balanced around. The top percent are the only players that matter when it comes to changes that can affect the meta.

Ah so now we have to support things for theoretical people that might not even exist. If someone is interested in buying UW they’ll buy it. Anyone whose purchasing decisions are driven by what SC2 does and does not support needs to get a life.

It’s also the only source we have.

Then why did you use the word demand? It wasn’t mentioned before but you chose to word it that way. If it isn’t a demand you never would have used the word.

Yeah probably; if they can find a way to do it without exposing hooks more power to them. If not, then they can’t risk it.

Then you shouldn’t have used the word demand. There’s another word you’ve used several times: Request. I don’t know why you decided to change to demand; but you did.

162

No…it doesn’t matter. I was literally the one that brought up the possibility of it happening in a remaster…It should be pretty obvious that it doesn’t matter if the support comes that way or not.

Not even going to bother, because you’re not actually looking…

Missed the point. Completely. Like, you found another continent you were so far off course.

Again, missed the point, the complaint about changes that only matter to a few % of players as a reason to not make the changes…while defending an overall process that constantly does just that.

It’s not theoretical people that might not exist…it’s called…wait for it…market research. Also someone who is hanging in a thread, by self admission, to literally just be unhelpful and try to get in the way saying someone needs a life…hmm…interesting.
Spoilers a lot of gamers change system parts based on their favorite games. It doesn’t mean they don’t have a life, it means they really like the game and want to get the best experience for it.

Only source does not mean it’s a good one.

You may notice the words before the word “demanding” it said “No one is” meaning, that is not happening. You see, there is a thing around other words in a sentence that is called “context” and it helps form the meaning of the statement as a whole. I know it is a really rough concept…but trust me it makes sense.

You missed the point of the 16:9 support comment…again…I am talking about running the game in 16:9, like the actual resolution set to that (1920x1080 or 2560x1440), in the game, on a monitor with a native 21:9…most games will automatically center the image instead of stretch it. SC2 does not. Even other games with no support for 21:9 at all, still manage to center the image instead of stretch…or at least get along with the drivers GPU scaling well enough to not crash.
*Just to be clear this is just a sidenote just that it’s annoying that even the supported 16:9 resolutions don’t work right on these monitors.

Because you’ve been acting like it’s some crazy demand. I was highlighting the fact that it’s just people, with a great monitor profile, requesting a feature be included again eventually in the game because it would be awesome. Again, you may have noticed that the context around the word…

163

No, we’ve been acting like youre refusing to take no for an answer and are gaslighting people trying to justify it.

1 Like
164

How is attempting to arrive at solutions gaslighting? Also you literally contribute nothing ideas wise. At least Whovian makes an effort to point out real flaws, you just come in to essentially say “nope” repeatedly and add nothing else. At least Whovian seems open to finding a solution if one could be found, even if he does seem resistant to the search.

Actually nevermind, I honestly don’t care about any of the side arguments, what matters is the topic…which is simply making it known that a portion of the audience very much wants UW added to some form of SC2.

All the other junk just distracts from that aside from discussions about how best to implement it.

165

Both nVidia and AMD drivers have a setting to maintain aspect ratio, letter and pillarboxing as needed. Something I’m quite familiar with, having a 16:10 monitor for some time and also enjoying old school 4:3 games from time to time.

1 Like
166

No, Kelthar’s right. The main issue here isn’t UW support, it’s you not listening to the word “no” coming from multiple sources. This does include Blizzard; and I don’t mean the MVP, I mean them patching it out to begin with.

167

@RickRumble Yes, it is an option in drivers, but the issue is that with that on SC2 likes to crash…a lot. Which was what I was talking about in my comment, it handles it badly, then when you try to correct it with drivers it gets moody.

@OldWhovian That’s the issue for people who don’t care about UW…for everyone else, the issue is wanting to make sure it is known to be a feature people want. Only one of those types of people really needs to be in the thread tbh. Because if you don’t care about it…then you can just leave it alone.

168

I’ve stated plenty of reasons I’m opposed to it and evidence to Blizzard being both actively opposed to it and not interested in developing the feature out. It’s simply not happening and you should accept that reality.

169

Won’t happen if people stop asking for it for sure. But if people keep asking it will happen in some form or another.

170

Typically when somebody explicitly responds to a suggestion with “no, we dont want that.” it indicates that continuing to ask for it will in fact not coerce them to do it.

1 Like
171

This isn’t a personal relationship, it’s a business one, paying customers want specific support for a product.

Not only that, support for a use case that was there when purchased and was later removed.

172

This isnt complicated. You asked. They said no. Continuing to ask will not change their answer.

1 Like
173

Untrue, making sure to keep the idea afloat and more people asking over time can definitely change it, if not for SC2 proper, then for the inevitable remaster. Blizzard likes money. Fans give money easier when features they want are included.

174

hmm yes I see, you’re one of those…

Let us check your statement to that unfamiliar thing called reality what ‘something in some form or another will happen’ means when you incessantly keep ignoring a no…

  • If you had enough at the pub and the bartender refuses to give you another one, and you keep asking over and over again, you probably are going to be kicked out by the bouncer.
  • If you return at that club a bit later and the bouncer doesn’t let you in anymore, after which you keep asking many times more, he’ll eventually give you a lisp :stuck_out_tongue: .
  • If you keep asking the woman you want to date and she said no, there just might be that tiny chance she means no… If you keep asking a million times you’ll probably end up with a court restriction order.
  • Last but not least: keep asking for a taxcut and see what happens when they refuse it and you’re not paying them but keep asking: you’ll gonna make it very far :stuck_out_tongue: .

Or like Dr.Evil once spoke in one of meetings: How about no, Scott? Zip it!

175

Funny thing, there aren’t any paying SC2 customers anymore. The game is free.

Yup they removed a bug from their implementation of resolution options.

176

What was that about reality? Blizzard isn’t a girl I’m trying to date. I bought a product, it was able to be used in 21:9, that feature was retroactively taken away with no way to get it back.

I paid for a product with a feature. That feature is now gone.

Example 1 would only be accurate if they gave me the booze, then somehow retroactively removed the alchohol from it, in which case the customer would be in the right for the product being falsely advertised.

Examples 2 through 4 are completely apples to oranges.
For example 2: Not letting me in would be more akin to not allowing me to buy the game. I didn’t pay for anything, I didn’t get anything.
For example 3: Again, that’s a personal relationship, not a business one, wholly different dynamic. Not applicable.
For example 4: That is not a business relationship either, that is a governmental requirement as a citizen of a country, again, wholly different dynamic. Not applicable.

Whovian, it doesn’t matter if someone makes a product free later, you are still a paying customer if you paid for it. Also, you say it’s a bug, but it’s still not accurate no matter how many times you say it.

177

Did you know that a single horse skin in WoW made more money than SC2? You’re right, they do like money; which is why they cut SC2’s rope. It’s simply not a money maker. They’re definitely not going back to it now to add an official UW feature.

178

Can you find any official documentation guaranteeing this feature? If not then you don’t really have any claim that they owe it to you or anyone else. Without that, the rest of your argument there just falls flat.

179

It does matter that its free. You paid for it, your receipt is in the til and the ToS/EULA you agreed to in order to play says they can remove whatever they like whenever they like without notice. So they removed a bug. It’s not my fault you don’t know what a feature is.

180

Doesn’t really matter if it guarantees a feature or not. Changing a product after release to remove a feature is altering the product that was purchased. Games do not tend to explicitly state all included features one way or the other. It comes down to what exists at time of purchase.