Author Topic: Support for wide angle resolutions  (Read 580 times)

zanzibar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 6523
    • View Profile
Support for wide angle resolutions
« on: April 18, 2006, 12:43:01 am »
I tried the \"Jose\" setup with the height half the size.  There were several problems.  First, fullscreen mode was not supported.  The opening picture with the four faces and the Oja towers was warped.  Other artwork and buttons also were warped.  Text and models were ok.

Normal (1024x768):


big: http://s32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/_zanz/shot67.jpg

Wide Angle (1024x384):


big: http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/_zanz/shot65.jpg


\"Wide angle\" seems to have a lot of potential.  For it to be more functional on a single screen though, a couple things need to happen:

- full screen mode needs to be supported, with black bands at the top and bottom as if you were watching widescreen on a TV

-artwork, buttons, and menus need to survive the alternate dimensions without becoming warped



I\'ll post more later as I find more things... it\'s a topic which has been raised before, but I think after seeing Jose\'s screenshots there will be renewed interest in it.



Edit:  I tried it with a bit wider resolution, and with the height at 600 instead of 384.  Text is more readable.

1280x600, 3rd person perspective: http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/_zanz/shot72.jpg


1280x600, 1st person perspective: http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/_zanz/shot73.jpg
« Last Edit: April 18, 2006, 12:53:03 am by zanzibar »
Quote from: Raa
Immaturity is FTW.

Karyuu

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 9341
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2006, 12:56:56 am »
My \"default\" resolution is at 1024x567, and I like it best at that wide angle :] Fullscreen suport would be a very interesting thing to experiment with. The GUI does stretch in unlovely ways in general at the moment.
Judge: Are you trying to show contempt for this court, Mr Smith?
Smith: No, My Lord. I am attempting to conceal it.

zanzibar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 6523
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2006, 01:18:46 am »
If a \"normal\" field of view is 160 degress by 90 degrees (is it?), then the Widescreen dimensions is probably the \"best\".  1024x576 instead of 567, or 1280x720.


800x600  =  1.33:1
1024x768 = 1.33:1
Widescreen TV  = 1.77:1 (16:9, 1024x576, 1280x720)
1024x567 = 1.81:1
1280x600 = 2.13:1




Another big issue with this is mouse sensitivity.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2006, 01:22:09 am by zanzibar »
Quote from: Raa
Immaturity is FTW.

minetus

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 461
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2006, 05:46:34 pm »
i use 1280x768 on a wide screen tv and the only issue i find is name tags when distant become unreadable

ex:. from harnquish forge to the square stairs

zanzibar

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 6523
    • View Profile
another thing
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2006, 07:46:08 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by minetus
i use 1280x768 on a wide screen tv and the only issue i find is name tags when distant become unreadable

ex:. from harnquish forge to the square stairs




Well, name tags are supposed to dissappear if you\'re a certain distance away.  That\'s a new feature though -- before, you couldn\'t read them simply because they were too small.


You should try 1280x720.  It might fit better on your TV.




Edit:  I think super widescreen movies are 64:25, but I'm not certain.  So that would be 1280x500, and 1024x400.  1024x400 isn't as functional (http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/_zanz/shot79.jpg).  The higher resolution version is kinda fun though (http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/_zanz/shot80.jpg).
« Last Edit: April 26, 2006, 03:08:40 am by zanzibar »
Quote from: Raa
Immaturity is FTW.