Would It Be Best To Buy An Ultrawide or Just Game 21:9 on a Native 16:9 screen?

[Cassius101]

The major benefit to 21:9 is the highly increased field of view. Right now, the main games I play are Star Trek Online, Planetside 2 and Halo Masterchief Collection on Xbox one. I might also be playing world of warcraft and Archeage in the future.

Games that I would prefer playing in 21:9 would be a multiplayer FPS/3rd person shooter, I am also looking forward to the Warhammer 40k:Eternal Crusade MMO and would wanna play that in 21:9. Star Trek Online I prefer in 16:9, there are no real benefits to an increased field of view in that game since the only benefit would be mostly pvp but you can usually see all your enemies on screen within the 16:9 field of view in that game anyway. As for Archeage and WoW, I am undecided, I guess the increased fov can come in handy in mass world pvp encounters but I don't think it would be as important since super quick reflexes/reaction times are far less important in a fantasy MMORPG than it is a in a FPS/MMOFPS. Anyway, my main point is, would it even be worth buying a 21:9 monitor if you can already play 21:9 on a 16:9 screen? I have a 50 inch Sony W800B, I created a custom resolution so I can play at 21:9 with the resolution 2560x1050.I enjoy gaming on big screens and will be buying the 65 inch Vizio Reference series when it comes out, it has a low input lag and 120hz refresh rate. A Benq or Asus Ultra wide gaming monitor comes with Freesync or Gsync and they are 144hz but on a 35 inch screen. It would also cost me about 1000-1150$ to buy including tax assuming the Christmas sales.

So would it really be worth buying? The only major benefit is Freesync/Gsync since 120hz vs 144hz difference is hardly noticeable. At this point, I am thinking that I should not buy a 21:9 35 inch Benq or Asus screen when I can already play at 21:9 in the games I have. The only game I have that suffers from screen tearing is WoW and vertical sync in WoW caps the FPS at 30 so I need to turn it off, it isn't really serious though. I don't use vertical sync in any of my other games and there really is no point in using Freesync/Gysnc if you don't need the features of vertical sync in a specific game.

So if you have no screen tearing in a game or minor screen tearing that doesn't bother you then is there really a need for Gsync/Freesync? I have V-Sync off for most of my games since I only notice minor/no screen tearing in most of the main games I play.

Here are my comparisons with 16:9 vs 21:9 on my native 1080p 16:9 TV (it has 22ms input lag).


I am on a character that I only use for VR training in these screenshots.
1980x1050

2560x1050

You can see the rest of the pictures here.

http://imgur.com/a/4wcBT

If FOV is really important to you and you play FPS games (A high FOV by far is the most important in a multiplayer FPS/3rdperosn shooter) then would you really wanna buy a 35 inch ULTRA wide monitor like this? From my perspective, I don' think it is worth it since I prefer gaming on huge screens in the range of 50-65 inches.

http://www.amazon.ca/Acer-XR341CK-bmijpphz-34-inch-UltraWide/dp/B0111MRT90/ref=sr_1_15?tag=amazon0064-20&s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1436945804&sr=1-15&keywords=3440x1440


http://www.amazon.ca/BenQ-XR3501-35-Inch-Led-Lit-Monitor/dp/B01047I0X2/ref=sr_1_1?tag=amazon0064-20&s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1436090403&sr=1-1&keywords=BenQ+XR3501

 

[imaheadcase]

I would not like the 2560 one in fast games. The image seems to look exploded out than normal size. You see slightly a bit more, but nothing drastic.

Seems like that would be a disadvantage to me in FPS.

You answered the screen tearing one, its not a big deal to you don't worry about it. It does not bother me at as well.

I could never game on a TV, it just looks to weird to me.

 

[Cassius101]

I would not like the 2560 one in fast games. The image seems to look exploded out than normal size. You see slightly a bit more, but nothing drastic.

Seems like that would be a disadvantage to me in FPS.

You answered the screen tearing one, its not a big deal to you don't worry about it. It does not bother me at as well.

I could never game on a TV, it just looks to weird to me.

Yea I thought the image seemed a bit too exploded at first but I think I can get used to it, nothing is stretched to the point of being distorted though.

I think there is a significant difference with how much you see, you would be able to see more of what goes on around you and could see more enemies in the distance. It would also be good for being in a tank.

I used to play on a 24 inch gaming monitor, then I played on a 32 inch LED TV and liked it a lot more, I like it even more on a 50 inch TV. I just sit on a futon couvh with the TV pretty close to my face and I use a piece of wood and put it beside me and it has my mouse and mouse mat on it.

Does anyone here prefer gaming in 21:9?

 

[Elfear]

After gaming on a 30" 16:10 monitor for years and briefly trying a 28" 4k monitor, I decided to try a 34" Ultrawide. I loved it for gaming. The extra FOV was very nice and combined with the size of the monitor really increased immersion. I had to fiddle with a couple games to make it look right but most games worked fine natively. I ended up selling it because I wanted to wait for Gsync/Freesync but I missed the experience for 6+ months.

Fast forward to a couple months ago. I picked up a 40" 4k Phillips monitor to do exactly what you're asking about, create a custom resolution and have an Ultrawide. The Phillips excels at this because it has a VA panel so the black bars at the bottom are less distracting. So far I think it's the best of both worlds, 16:9 for some games and 21:9 for others.

 

[Cassius101]

My Sony W800B does not have any black bars on 21:9 and the screenshots I showed are not so accurate, it was on 2560x1050 instead of 2560x1080.

 

[Chocu1a]

I game on a 29" ultra wide. I love the extra screen real estate. Comes in handy in BF4. Gives you a better view of the battlefield. Also looks great in GTA5.

 

[Headfoot]

I love gaming triple monitor 3x1080p. Its awesome. Ultrawide would be not as good but still pretty legit

 

[crisium]

I tried this myself. But on my 1080 monitor 1920x800 is just too low a resolution. Even in BF4 where I used resolution scaling it doesn't change the fact of 800 vertical pixels. It's basically very wide 1024x768. For 1440 monitors sure, you can do 2560x1080. And especially if I had a large 4K monitor I'd play many shooters at 3840x1600.

 

[Cassius101]

What is wrong with using this resolution on a native 16:9 screen? I have no black bars using this ratio on mine so I don't see the issue, why would a native 21:9 screen that is built for this resolution be so much better when I can successfully get it on the screen I have now?

 

[omeds]

I must be missing something. I don't understand why you don't have black bars when running 21:9. There should be a black bar along the top and bottom of screen to fit the 21:9 aspect ratio onto a 16:9 display.
Just like running, for example, 16:9 1280x720 on a 4:3 1280x1024 display. There will be black bars along the top and bottom.

Anyway, I've owned a number of displays ranging from 24" & 27" 1080p 144hz to 27" 1440p, 30" 1600p, and 29" 21:9.
By far my favourite is this 29" 21:9 Dell oc'd to 76hz, despite lower vert res than some of my previous displays (2560x1080). The only thing I miss is 144hz, so have a 24" 144hz panel next to it for online FPS (BF4, CSGO).

For some reason I don't care for the curved 34" panels, I'd much rather have a flat 29" with 144hz. Would be easier to maintain 144fps at 2560x1080 too.

I was toying with the idea of a 40" 4k panel, that could then be run at 21:9 3840x1600 (? or so) and I think give great results.

 

[xthetenth]

Personally I love my curved 34", so to me the advantages of the monitor in everything but gaming more than cover any difficulties caused by the lack of gaming features. I would however also consider a 40" 4K really strongly because at that point you're basically getting the vertical real estate without dealing with shrinking the horizontal and at that point, why not (There are possible answers to this but without one, why not indeed)?

 

[Cassius101]

I must be missing something. I don't understand why you don't have black bars when running 21:9. There should be a black bar along the top and bottom of screen to fit the 21:9 aspect ratio onto a 16:9 display.
Just like running, for example, 16:9 1280x720 on a 4:3 1280x1024 display. There will be black bars along the top and bottom.

Anyway, I've owned a number of displays ranging from 24" & 27" 1080p 144hz to 27" 1440p, 30" 1600p, and 29" 21:9.
By far my favourite is this 29" 21:9 Dell oc'd to 76hz, despite lower vert res than some of my previous displays (2560x1080). The only thing I miss is 144hz, so have a 24" 144hz panel next to it for online FPS (BF4, CSGO).

For some reason I don't care for the curved 34" panels, I'd much rather have a flat 29" with 144hz. Would be easier to maintain 144fps at 2560x1080 too.

I was toying with the idea of a 40" 4k panel, that could then be run at 21:9 3840x1600 (? or so) and I think give great results.

Well there is now, yesterday I updated my Nvidia driver, now the damn black bars are there.

Before when I set this Custom resolution, I had no black bars at all on this 16:9 screen while in 2560x1080, I am very frustrated and mad right now. I might have to rollback my driver or something, this is really bad.

 

[MongGrel]

Have a Dell 2560 X 1080 29" for years now I use for gaming in 21:9.

I just haven't been gaming in general in awhile I guess, but I still like the monitor even though things have been changing obviously.

It still works well with a R9 280X OC'd.

No black bars showing on other monitors would just be scaling I would think, this one does 2560 x 1080 native.

Does make a nice wider field of view.

But those are getting a bit long in the tooth.

 

[Cassius101]

I fixed it, you just have to put "Full Screen" under adjust desktop size and position when the Custom resolution is in enabled in the Nvidia Control panel.

 

[Cassius101]

Have a Dell 2560 X 1080 29" for years now I use for gaming in 21:9.

I just haven't been gaming in general in awhile I guess, but I still like the monitor even though things have been changing obviously.

It still works well with a R9 280X OC'd.

No black bars showing on other monitors would just be scaling I would think, this one does 2560 x 1080 native.

Does make a nice wider field of view.

But those are getting a bit long in the tooth.

For people who like gaming on bigger screens 50-65 inches and like the wider field of view which mostly comes in handy for a FPS since it would matter the most in a FPS, maybe some MMO's it would help also. It would be best for me to keep using this screen or buy the 65 inch Vizio R Series which will come out at the end of this year I hope. The largest Ultra wide gaming monitors now are 34 and 35 inches, that isn't big enough for me, I used to play on a 32 inch screen that I now use as a secondary monitor, I like using my 50 inch Sony W800B a lot more.

There doesn't seem to be any distortion with the image playing 2560x1080 on a 16:9 screen but I would like to see comparisons with some who has a native 21:9 screen.

 

[KingFatty]

Don't forget, some games treat the different resolutions differently.

One game, to get "wider," might simply chop off more of the top and bottom, without showing any additional subject matter on the left and right. So you don't see any new material compared to the "narrower" aspect ratio, and instead lose out because you are cropping material from the top and bottom to widen the aspect ratio.

Another game, to get "wider," might instead add additional material that wouldn't otherwise be viewable, and so you gain information by going wider, and nothing is cropped by using the wider aspect ratio.

Here is a GIF example showing how one game (Starcraft II) would actually add more material to the sides, so you benefit by going with a wider aspect ratio:

But another game shows an example drawback of how you can lose out by going "wider" when the top and bottom are simply cropped off - you can no longer see subject matter above and below, even though you are wider, so it would have been better to stay with the taller aspect ratio, not wider:

So be thoughtful and don't just assume that wider is always better. For games like SCII, 16:9 is better than 16:10 or 4:3, and I don't know what it would do with aspect ratios wider than 16:9 (it might actually crop).

 

[railven]

I got the GF a 21:9 screen and she loves it. And I actually love it too (I use it once in a while).

She plays WoW and Archeage and both show extra on the sides versus my 16:9 monitor.

I'm pretty sure my next monitor will be 21:9.

EDIT:

Also, this image I believe is from The Order 1886 (PS4 game):

The devs they intentionally went with that aspect ratio and black bars for cinematic reasons.

EDIT #2:
And StarCraft 2 doesn't support 21:9 at all. At least her monitor gives you two options 1:1 with black bars or stretch/fill which looks horrendous.

 

[Cassius101]

I got the GF a 21:9 screen and she loves it. And I actually love it too (I use it once in a while).

She plays WoW and Archeage and both show extra on the sides versus my 16:9 monitor.

I'm pretty sure my next monitor will be 21:9.

EDIT:

Also, this image I believe is from The Order 1886 (PS4 game):

The devs they intentionally went with that aspect ratio and black bars for cinematic reasons.

EDIT #2:
And StarCraft 2 doesn't support 21:9 at all. At least her monitor gives you two options 1:1 with black bars or stretch/fill which looks horrendous.

Those are 2 games I wanna dedicate my time to. Right now the main games I play are Star Trek Online, Planetside 2, Halo Master Chief Collection, Halo 5 and Forza Motorsports 6. I don't think I have any time to add anymore games so that has really been bothering me. I might have to neglect some games if I end up liking World of Warcraft and Archeage after experiencing the game at max level since leveling can be very boring, I find leveling more boring in Archeage than in WoW.

 

[Cassius101]

What bothers me is Nvidias Custom Resolution setting does not support DSR or DSR smoothness, I guess it isn't a big deal but DSR Smoothness often improves the color/texture quality.