EPTDifferent aspect ratio same Screen - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
semantics
10040 Posts
| ||
|
Chuiu
3470 Posts
| ||
|
teapot
United Kingdom266 Posts
Now faced with the bizarre situation that if on my native 1900x1200 monitor I lower to 1900x1050 suddenly more of the map appears, but I have to look at ugly horizontal black bars. So, ugly black bars BW? yes ugly black bars WC3? yes ugly black bars SC2? yes Another PC game that suffers from consolitis. | ||
|
otmar
Australia11 Posts
| ||
|
wishbones
Canada2600 Posts
edit: if so omg, i hope i get beta, ill fucking play! | ||
|
wishbones
Canada2600 Posts
On February 20 2010 05:03 caution.slip wrote: ah i see, yeah 16  has more width.isn't 16:19 1920x1080 (not 1980x1050) i wish there were smaller resolutions that were 16 sorry didnt see this -_- fix op dude. | ||
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
On February 20 2010 19:32 teapot wrote: =[ Now faced with the bizarre situation that if on my native 1900x1200 monitor I lower to 1900x1050 suddenly more of the map appears, but I have to look at ugly horizontal black bars. So, ugly black bars BW? yes ugly black bars WC3? yes ugly black bars SC2? yes Another PC game that suffers from consolitis. lol I didn't even think about this... I have a 1920x1200 screen, too. Seriously, Blizzard should fix this. It's probably like 5 lines of code. | ||
|
tlwilim
Hong Kong24 Posts
every screenshot and battle report is 16 : 9. so blz won't fix this, it is intented imo | ||
|
Wuselmops
Germany346 Posts
| ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
| ||
|
teapot
United Kingdom266 Posts
On February 20 2010 19:40 otmar wrote: Alot of the top war3 players use CRT monitors.. do you guys think this will be a disadvantage in sc2? The game is optimised for 16 : 9. All other resolutions are cropped from the 16 : 9 and will be disadvantaged in the amount of map on display. IMO this is what should be on display: ![[image loading]](http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t117/OrangeQuackers/Screen6.png) this is what it is on display at the moment: ![[image loading]](http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t117/OrangeQuackers/Screen5.png) Though I might be slightly biased having 16 : 10 :p | ||
|
otmar
Australia11 Posts
| ||
|
InterWill
Sweden117 Posts
| ||
|
Wuselmops
Germany346 Posts
| ||
|
Polis
Poland1292 Posts
| ||
|
otmar
Australia11 Posts
| ||
|
Wuselmops
Germany346 Posts
| ||
|
Chuiu
3470 Posts
On February 20 2010 21:04 teapot wrote: The game is optimised for 16 : 9. All other resolutions are cropped from the 16 : 9 and will be disadvantaged in the amount of map on display. IMO this is what should be on display: Why should 16:10 get the advantage over both both other aspects? It should be like this: ![[image loading]](http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n99/chuiu/aspects.png) | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
On February 20 2010 04:13 MasterOfChaos wrote: they should have made it so tan(FovX/2)*tan(FovY/2)=const which basically makes what you see equal for all aspect ratios. So the widescreens show more on the side, and 4:3 shows more vertically. Probably the reason for it becoming wider, but not narrower on widescreen is that the default function for creating a Perspective Projection matrix takes the angle for the Y opening and an aspect ratio. So they did something like "Perspective( 50deg , Width/Height , near , far)" m yes i agree aswell shallow and pedantic | ||
|
teapot
United Kingdom266 Posts
On February 20 2010 23:19 Chuiu wrote: Why should 16:10 get the advantage over both both other aspects? It should be like this: OK, that is best. I prefer your version. btw look at Bioshock 2's supposed "fixed" widescreen support... http://www.2kgames.com/cultofrapture/article/widescreenannouncement They couldn't get it right for BS1 and now they fail again for BS2... :r | ||
| ||
