I don't agree with Blizzard.
I don't agree with Blizzard.
Overwatch restricts the screen ratio to 21:9. This means using three 1080p monitors (5760x1080 in NVIDIA surround) creates large black bars on the sides due to the 48:9 format. Blizzard’s reasoning, as I understand it from the forum thread (https://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatc...0744984391), is that the interface wasn’t built for this and it gives players an edge. I believe Blizzard is mistaken about providing a benefit. While it might seem true in theory, other factors like high refresh rates matter too. Yes, I can adjust to 21:9 across all my monitors and gain more screen real estate, but the UI becomes distorted because of the bezels. My concern is why not allow a very wide format while still limiting the viewing angle so I don’t lose competitive balance.
As someone who prefers 21:9 ultrawides, I never considered sticking with the outdated 16:9 format. It seems many assume 21:9 offers an edge, but in reality, 4:3 still holds a strong advantage today. The concern about "unfair advantages" is overblown—many developers cap at 60fps, which can actually hurt performance on lower refresh rates like 240Hz. It’s a frustrating situation when the right tools aren’t supported, making it feel like a lazy choice to skip updates.
It's true that larger screens can offer an edge, particularly in fast-paced games like Overwatch where opponents often appear above you. Many top players still favor 4:3 or even 5:4 setups. The issue with surround sound systems is that they require a huge FOV increase to function well, which would result in a nearly 270-degree view of the field. Limiting the FOV can lead to a very narrow vertical perspective and a poor overall experience.
You've experienced what Blizzard aims for—great visuals and a consistent field of view. As long as the perspective stays the same, the benefits remain solid.
This was the peak era for three-monitor configurations and SLI or Crossfire setups.