widescreen resolution for daggerfall

Post » Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:24 pm

Taemos, after reading your post I decided I wanted to try it. I also have a 7900 GS video card with a widescreen monitor of 1680 x 1050.

A quick rundown of what I did:
1.) Set proper fullscreen resolution
2.) Set renderer to OpenGL
3.) Set scaler to "normal3x"
4.) Set "aspect=true"

What should #1 be?
User avatar
Mashystar
 
Posts: 3460
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:35 am

Post » Sat Jan 16, 2010 7:23 am

fullresolution=1680x1050 will do the job.
User avatar
Laura-Lee Gerwing
 
Posts: 3363
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:46 am

Post » Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:25 am

is there a way to do this with an LCD monitor (DOSBox settings?) that doesn't have a 1.6 aspect ratio? My native width is 1400, but when I try "fullresolution=1400x875" it appears smaller and nested in a large swath of black space, and still looks like a 4:3 shape.
User avatar
danni Marchant
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:32 am

Post » Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:04 pm

figure it out, in case anyone wants to know, you have to set

aspect=false
User avatar
james tait
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:26 pm

Post » Sat Jan 16, 2010 2:56 am

so i concluded that the widescreen doesn't look as good, the doors & people seem to be of odd proportion, too wide, seems more cartoon like. with the 16:9 ratio, my character in the inventory screen is less than 6 heads in height. with 4:3 it is better, about 6.25, but realistic human proportions are between 7 and 8 heads height (although my character is a high elf, i'm sure all the other races will be the same so that clothes and armor fit). so, went back to 4:3.

edit: oh yeah, so my question was, why is daggerfall 320x200? i didn't think widescreen screen format was common for computers back then, if at all...
User avatar
koumba
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:39 pm

Post » Sat Jan 16, 2010 7:58 am

edit: oh yeah, so my question was, why is daggerfall 320x200? i didn't think widescreen format was common for computers back then, if at all...


A lot of DOS games were in 320x200 it was a common res back then, some could run in 640x480 like Sytem Shock and a few others. The most popular monitors back then were 14 and 15 inch crt's, DOS games always look their best on small monitors because of the low resolutions they run in.
User avatar
Sophh
 
Posts: 3381
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:58 pm

Post » Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:13 am

Yes.

The most common resolutions one would find in 90's DOS games:
-320x200
-320x240
-640x400
-640x480

Naturally the first two are often 2x scaled so that we don't go blind trying to read text. Getting widescreen ratios is tricky - especially on LCDs which cannot run low resolutions in fullscreen nicely. What, on my old CRTs, would make a game look "nice and old and pixellated" now ends up getting blurry and really awkward looking.
User avatar
Dona BlackHeart
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:05 pm

Post » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:24 pm

edit: oh yeah, so my question was, why is daggerfall 320x200? i didn't think widescreen screen format was common for computers back then, if at all...

Daggerfall isn't widescreen. 320x200 was the common resolution for DOS games. It was never meant to be showed on a widescreen monitor, but instead on a normal 4:3 monitor. DOS also got some other tricky resolutions that were meant for 4:3 monitors, like 320x400 and 640x400.

So the pixels for most DOS games aren't square. But rectangular and very "tall". The aspect ratio setting in DOSBox sorta fixes this, and make the pixels "tall".
User avatar
Dagan Wilkin
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:20 am


Return to The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion