Hopefully I'm not bothering you. If I do, please simply ignore this post.
While tinkering with nGlide 0.97 I just remembered something that I found missing from nGlide for some time now: forced 16:10 like it's possible to force 4:3 at any resolution.
Why does that make sense, there are plenty of 16:10 resolutions available? That's right, but unfortunately the two that would allow 16:10 with 1:1 pixel mapping on most 16:9 HDTVs aren't. These would be ~1232x768 for 1366x768 panels and 1728x1080 for FullHD panels. Despite nGlide not offering these resolutions, they aren't available in any driver by default too, so easiest thing from a users perspective would be to set nGlides resolution to the displays native resolution and nGlide would do the aspect ratio correction. Should be pretty easy to implement, I would think, since nGlide can handle 4:3 this way already.
Another question one might ask is: why 16:10 on a 16:9 monitor? Quite simple: There are actually games that look quite wrong when using (their proposedly original) 4:3 aspect. One perfect example for this is Screamer 2 (most likely all Screamer games). In 4:3 one can clearly see that some supposedly circular HUD elements and the wheels of the cars aren't circular at all. In 16:10 on the other hand everything looks perfect. The same, btw., is true for quite some DOS games that where made for a 320x200 (16:10!) resolution. Making 320x200 pixel games look correct at 4:3 requires an uneven pixel aspect ratio. Something that, I guess, many artists and programmers didn't care about (or didn't think of) back then.
Bottom line: 16:10 is needed to make some games look right and implementing it as an additional aspect setting would be the easiest way to handle this from a users perspective.
Aspect Ratio 16:10
-
- Posts: 1067
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:29 am
- Location: RU
Re: Aspect Ratio 16:10
Err... 320x200 and 640x400 are always 4:3. All glide games are 4:3. There were no others monitors in the glide times.16:10 is needed to make some games look right
So why do you need stretched and inproper visuals so badly?
ASUS P4P800 SE, Pentium4 3.2E/2 GiB DDR400 (3-3-3-8), Sapphire Radeon HD3850 AGP, 2 Voodoo2 12 MB (SLI), Audigy 2 ZS.
Windows XP SP3 Pro Rus (w/o the POSReady hack), Catalyst 14.4, Voodoo2 W2k 1.02.00 drivers.
Windows XP SP3 Pro Rus (w/o the POSReady hack), Catalyst 14.4, Voodoo2 W2k 1.02.00 drivers.
Re: Aspect Ratio 16:10
Simply try, as I said, for example Screamer 2 and you'll see what I mean. Take a good look at the HUD and the cars wheels (ideally while watching a car from the side) at both 4:3 and 16:10. After you did this, tell me again that the game looks stretched in 16:10.Gamecollector wrote: Err... 320x200 and 640x400 are always 4:3. All glide games are 4:3. There were no others monitors in the glide times.
So why do you need stretched and inproper visuals so badly?
The opposite is the case. The image is compressed horizontically when displayed in 4:3.
Of course, the game was played on 4:3 monitors back then, but (in this case quite obviously) the devs didn't take some essential considerations into account regarding displaying 320x200 (=32:20=16:10) pixels fullscreen with the correct AR on a 4:3 display. Many devs did this correctly back then, the Screamer devs and many others didn't.
On a sidenote: I'm working in the field of computer graphics for about 15 years now. Believe me, I know a bit or two about aspect ratios.
Re: Aspect Ratio 16:10
I checked what this guys says and he is right. Game is compressed horizontal when 4:3 and looks fine when 16:10. So it would be good to have 16:10 option.
Here is a pic of 1650x1050 (16:10)
Here is a pic of 1650x1050 (16:10)
- Attachments
-
- dosbox 2013-02-19 18-03-41-60.jpg (150.64 KiB) Viewed 7558 times
Re: Aspect Ratio 16:10
Why does that make sense, there are plenty of 16:10 resolutions available? That's right, but unfortunately the two that would allow 16:10 with 1:1 pixel mapping on most 16:9 HDTVs aren't