Re: [Adonthell-artwork] Fwd: Screen resolution(s)

[James Nash]

I'll put together a mock screenshot over the weekend and crop and scale it to 
the various sizes I've proposed to see how it looks. Will upload the results to 
the wiki somewhere.

        - James


On 3 Aug 2010, at 23:44, Kai Sterker wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 12:34 AM, James Nash <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> Sending the original failed (probably because I had attached an image). Here 
>> it is again with a link to an uploaded copy of the image...
> 
> Strange. Should have held it for moderator approval ...
> Anyway, I think up to a certain size, attachments are fine. Over 100
> or 150k, that's the result.
> 
> 
>>> I've been thinking about screen resolutions. If I'm not supporting we have 
>>> currently fixed the game at 640 x 480 (aka "VGA").
> 
> Yeah, although I definitely wanted to add support for 16:10 and 16:9
> aspect ratios for the Waste's Edge remake. I got the MacBook Pro
> that's 1440x900 and the TV that's 1920x1080, and I'd like to run WE on
> those without ugly borders or image distortions. (I've also got an old
> 17" flatscreen with 1280x1024 and the iBook with 1024x768).
> 
> 
>>> The main reason is that this allows us to delivery a consistent game 
>>> experience to the player. The amount of map that is visible and the size of 
>>> characters and objects relative to that remains fixed. (Imagine if we used 
>>> the same graphics but scaled the viewport up to a big resolution - you'd 
>>> probably see the entire Waste's Edge village on one screen but you'd need a 
>>> magnifying glass to find your character!)
> 
> Exactly. Adjusting for different aspect ratios should be fine, but
> opening up the resolution completely might ruin the level design.
> 
> 
>>> So, if we designed our graphics to fit comfortably within these sizes and 
>>> layout maps (and design the gameplay) such that things a player must be 
>>> able to see on screen fit within the minimal view area, then we can scale 
>>> and stretch to pretty much any common screen resolution using integer 
>>> multiples.
> 
> Yeah, that does sound appealing. Even though Ingo specifically noted
> that he had scaled the remade graphics for 1024x768, they are
> currently still being used at 640x480. I'm not sure if they are too
> large if it gets much smaller than that, though. OTOH, if you want to
> move to more pixel-artish gfx, perhaps sizing them down a bit will be
> good for the quality.
> 
> Chosing a bigger, native resolution, means that other common
> resolutions can not be had with Integer scaling. (OTOH, try walking
> into a store and buy a display that's not 1920x1080 these days). It's
> late again, so I won't do any numbers, but perhaps we could work
> something out in the range of 960x540, 720x450 and 640x512, if you
> don't mind the 320px difference in the horizontal direction.
> 
> Kai
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Adonthell-artwork mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/adonthell-artwork