Page 2 of 3
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 00:00
by Caydr
I understand that, but the question is, why? Computer LCDs are the only thing in the universe that uses that aspect ratio.
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 01:52
by esteroth12
I have a 4-6 year old CRT runnign 1280x1024...
and my bro's LCD uses 1024x768

Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 04:50
by Pxtl
Notice: the plurality of players play at 1024x768. Which means that a lot of people are seeing the same GUI I'm seeing with the damned illegible buttons. That sucks.
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 05:05
by Hunter0000
No love for good ole' 16x12?
*crys*
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 07:19
by Quanto042
Hunter0000 wrote:No love for good ole' 16x12?
*crys*
Problem is that a lot of budget monitors don't support that res.
I'm running at 1280x1024 btw
I think i actually have come to prefer the whole 5:4 aspect ratio over the 4:3 these days.
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 10:16
by aGorm
Zenka wrote: On TFT's the higest resolution is also the amount of crystal cells it holds. You *must* use it's native resolution or have some pixels be rendered with 2 cells and some with 1, resolving in an unequliaised view.
Not tota;ly correct.. most modern TFT's upsample the image in much the same way photoshop will scale up an image, and so doom (which will only run at 1600 x 1200 due top being craply writen) will look great on my 1920 x 1200
aGorm
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 11:54
by Zenka
aGorm wrote:Not tota;ly correct.. most modern TFT's upsample the image in much the same way photoshop will scale up an image, and so doom (which will only run at 1600 x 1200 due top being craply writen) will look great on my 1920 x 1200
aGorm
Well, indeed it doesn't look crappy. Fortunatly

It is just an attempt of an explanation why most people run 1280*1024 insetad of 1280*960.
And TFT is indeed the only thing in the galaxy that uses that weird aspect ratio. Therefore it is important.
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 13:12
by IMSabbel
Caydr wrote:Yeah, this is for ingame resolution, not just desktop resolution.
This is unfortunate. It seems the majority is split between 1024x768 and 1280x1024, which use different aspect ratios, messing everything up.
I'm still trying to figure out why 1280x1024 became the standard rather than 1280x960. The 64 extra pixels are nice, but why? :S 1280x1024 is a weird bastardization that just appeared out of nowhere for no apparent reason. It's... I think 5:4, while the standard is 4:3.
Its an artefact from the 80s, when having 2^10 lines made it much easier to deal with.
And of COURSE people with 17" or 19" should use a 5:4 aspect ratio ingame, as thats what their monitors physically have. Using a 4:3 resolution would provide quite a bit of distortion.
IMHO, this shouldnt really be a problem. Spring will (hopefully, if i read the SVN log right) include support for non 4:3 aspect ratio in the next version. I mean, if TA could do it in 1997, there is no reason why a game today should squish the content just because the user runs as 16:10 or 5:4.
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 19:24
by FireCrack
Caydr wrote:I understand that, but the question is, why? Computer LCDs are the only thing in the universe that uses that aspect ratio.
becasue LCD pixels are square, wheras CRT pixels are rectangular...
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 20:04
by Caydr
Oooohh.... I see. That makes more sense.
Posted: 02 Oct 2006, 22:24
by bamb
I play with 1280x1024. My computer sucks but it's a pathfinding and map texture memory problem so resolution doesn't affect it, it's no faster with 1024x768. I've turned all the effects down. (Plus changed the font luxi.ttf to a readable one!)
Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 06:15
by Ishach
1280x960 on a 14 year old monitor

Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 09:15
by Quanto042
Ishach wrote:1280x960 on a 14 year old monitor

Thats damn good, i've had a lot of bad luck with monitors. The one I have now has lasted the longest (3) years.
Other than that, most of my monitors only last for about 9mos - 18mos, then they crap out. I was pissed too, cause i had a really nice 19" CRT from NEC, and i figured it would last me for a lifetime (or at least my computer's lifetime). But the joke was one me as it only lasted 11months. Fuck u NEC, Fuck U.
Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 09:20
by Ishach
I bought it second hand so I dont know if it still counts
Its started to make this horrible buzzing sound, i thiink any day now its going to explode in my face

Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 13:03
by rattle
I don't know why but I got addicted to degauss my CRT every 5 to 30 minutes... my old Samsung SyncMaster 750p (caution: surreptitious advertising!) had some funny flashing effects in one corner because of that.
Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 14:49
by Ishach
what does degaussing do anyways
Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 16:42
by Caydr
Degaussing doesn't do a heck of a lot. It's intended to help eliminate color distortion caused by things like magnets, etc. Yeah, don't get an unshielded magnet near your CRT, btw...
To do a proper degaussing, you need a degaussing coil. It's basically a giant electromagnetic coil that you plug into the wall and move around your monitor for a couple of seconds. I don't think you can buy them.
But the joke was one me as it only lasted 11months.
New or used? If it's new they are guaranteed to work for some period of time, probably at least a year but I'd guess 2-3. NEC is the king of monitors, from what I understand.
Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 17:41
by Quanto042
Caydr wrote:
But the joke was one me as it only lasted 11months.
New or used? If it's new they are guaranteed to work for some period of time, probably at least a year but I'd guess 2-3. NEC is the king of monitors, from what I understand.
I bought it brand New, for $350. Fuck u NEC, FUCK U.
Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 20:54
by Peet
rattle wrote:I don't know why but I got addicted to degauss my CRT every 5 to 30 minutes...
I thought only stoned people (and me) did that

Posted: 03 Oct 2006, 21:57
by esteroth12
lol, its funny because in a computer lab at my school, whenever you turn off a moniter than back on, it automatically degausses. when it does so, every moniter in the room flickers!