The screen resolution problem

[Reiter]

Hi there,

the screen resolution problem is a quite fundamental problem actually. If you develop a game you have to care about the possibility the users/players might use another screen resolution as yourself.

For example you develop a game for 1024*786 but players like to play in 640*480 or 1280*720 or something. If this isn't considered at development phase the result will look awful for the players with different resolutions.

I know of two solutions to this (2d scroller):
1) Resizing any image used in the game. The relative positions of each object in the game will be the same for any resolution.

2) Not to allow lower resolutions and fix the screen area for higher resolutions to the lowest resolution ratio (e.g. 1024*786). There are unused screen areas f?ºr higher resolutions then.

Which method do you prefer and why? For which genre? Is there a further/better method I did not consider?

[Robert Kosek]

3) Resize the screen, but do not resize the interface. Position the interface relatively. Perhaps include several different resolution "packs" for larger and smaller interfaces to make it better for those with larger and smaller resolutions than the standard.

I can take the old Jedi Knight 1 game and play in 1280x1024 for just this reason. Simpler in a FPS, yes, but nothing you can't accomplish.

[czar]

In a 2d side scroller then I wouldn't bother supporting more than one resolution, or maybe two - 4:3 and 16:10 ratio - your graphics will look sharpest in the resolution you created them for - any scaling will degrade their look.

I think widescreen vs 4:3 is probably a more annoying issue to deal with than resolution

[Chebmaster]

I would strongly recommend to always use the desktop resolution: the video mode switching is an anachronism. The modern flat panel monitors interpolate your picture in all resolutions except their native one, and the result of this interpolation often looks ugly.

The worst case are resolutions close to the native one (like 1024x768 on a 1280 x 1024 monitor).


I think widescreen vs 4:3 is probably a more annoying issue to deal with than resolution
I just bought a new monitor (wide screen 1680 x1050) - and guess what? It has a "wide/auto" setting and automatically clips the 4:3 modes like 1024x768 to the center of its screen, leaving black areas at the left and right.

On the other hand, OpenArena (a free clone of Quake3 using its engine) allows to set 1680x1050 by editing the config file (not available from the menu) but uses only the center area, so the picture is effectively 4:3.


Not to allow lower resolutions and fix the screen area for higher resolutions to the lowest resolution ratio (e.g. 1024*786).
An only viable method. My poor videocard has not enough texel power, so I cannot play NWN2 in the native resolution. And guess what? I have to play in the windowed mode, because 1280x1024 or 1024x768 looks ugly when stretched vertically to 1050 pixels.

[czar]

With 3d games it is a different issue - he is talking about a 2d sprite based side-scrolling game. Unless this game is going to be played by hundreds of people I would aim to make a nice looking game in a single resolution. 4:3 ratio - if person is running in widescreen mode move the score panel etc to the wide screen part maximising the game playing area.

Why get spend lots of time dealing with resolutions etc when you should be spending that time on making the game.

[Chebmaster]

The scaling problem is especialy important for a 2d game based on pixel art.
In that case I would recommend to choose 800x600. It is low enough that it gets interpolated nicely on most modern monitors giving a visually pleasing soft image.

[Mirage]

Even for 2D games the solution can be in 3D area. Just do 2D over 3D. Any adequate 3D engine handles aspect ratio so on wide screens players just will see more.
Proper video modes enumeration will guarantee that all video modes will be available for player to choose.

P.S.: I almost always playing games in a non-native for my monitor video mode and didn't see any artefacts.

[Reiter]

Thanks all for your replies.


3) Resize the screen, but do not resize the interface. Position the interface relatively. Perhaps include several different resolution "packs" for larger and smaller interfaces to make it better for those with larger and smaller resolutions than the standard.

I didn't get the difference between 2) and your no. 3)?


In a 2d side scroller then I wouldn't bother supporting more than one resolution, or maybe two - 4:3 and 16:10 ratio - your graphics will look sharpest in the resolution you created them for - any scaling will degrade their look.

I think widescreen vs 4:3 is probably a more annoying issue to deal with than resolution

Why get spend lots of time dealing with resolutions etc when you should be spending that time on making the game.

Since I had to rework much of the game because I didn't think about resolution first, this is a helpful hint. But also if half of the few players trying the game cannot run it because of resolution issues the overall work was also wasted.


I would strongly recommend to always use the desktop resolution: the video mode switching is an anachronism. The modern flat panel monitors interpolate your picture in all resolutions except their native one, and the result of this interpolation often looks ugly.

The worst case are resolutions close to the native one (like 1024x768 on a 1280 x 1024 monitor).

Well. If I get you right your statements are contradictory because first you tell to use the desktop resolution (e.g. 1024*786) because different resolutions will be interpolated automatically to the native desktop resolution with ugly results. But this also means if there is video mode switching anybody could switch to their native desktop resolution and so the interpolation could be avoided and finally the result won't look ugly. I am confused.


The scaling problem is especialy important for a 2d game based on pixel art.
In that case I would recommend to choose 800x600. It is low enough that it gets interpolated nicely on most modern monitors giving a visually pleasing soft image.

I use 640*480. Should be also fitting then :).


Even for 2D games the solution can be in 3D area. Just do 2D over 3D. Any adequate 3D engine handles aspect ratio so on wide screens players just will see more.
Proper video modes enumeration will guarantee that all video modes will be available for player to choose.

P.S.: I almost always playing games in a non-native for my monitor video mode and didn't see any artefacts.

Nice idea indeed. I may consider this for the next project.