Widescreen support in PC games?

[Ozymandis]

I'm kicking around the idea of getting a widescreen monitor (maybe CRT, maybe LCD) next month, and I'm just wondering how many PC games have support for 16:9/16:10 ratios?

Anyone else here have a widescreen monitor?

[vogel]

All Unreal Engine games I'm aware of support widescreen either by modifying your .ini file or by entering "setres XxY". I only wish there was a way to play BF1942 at 1600x1024.

-- Daniel, Epic Games Inc.

I'm kicking around the idea of getting a widescreen monitor (maybe CRT, maybe LCD) next month, and I'm just wondering how many PC games have support for 16:9/16:10 ratios?

[Ozymandis]

All Unreal Engine games I'm aware of support widescreen either by modifying your .ini file or by entering "setres XxY". I only wish there was a way to play BF1942 at 1600x1024.

-- Daniel, Epic Games Inc.

Sweet. That's great to hear, as I play a lot of UT2k3 :D

And I checked, and Quake3 engine games support custom resolutions as well. I've basically got my bases covered :twisted:

[V3]

Don't you need to be able to do custom aspect ratio as well to get the most of it ?, instead of just stretch image ?

[pcchen]

I believes many 3D games assume 1:1 SAR (source aspect ratio). So as long as your display has 1:1 SAR, you'll be ok.

[Crusher]

1:1 source aspect ratio? I thought the aspect ratio of the viewport was supposed to match the display resolution ratio...

[pcchen]

But games do not know the aspect ratio of your display, so the best they can do is to assume 1:1 SAR (square pixels). Normally a 4:3 display has 4:3 resolutions (such as 800x600, 1024x768, etc.), a 16:9 display has 16:9 resolutions (such as 1600x900). However, there are some exceptions, such as 1280x1024. If you try to use 1600x900 on a normal 4:3 display, you'll see distorted results in most 3D games.

There are other options for 3D games, such as fixed DAR regardless the resolutions. For example, a game may provide an option for the user to set the DAR (display aspect ratio), such as 4:3, 16:9, etc. Then they can display correctly with any resolution. This is also used by MPEG-2, which provides only four different aspect ratios: 1:1 SAR, 4:3 DAR, 16:9 DAR, and 2.21:1 DAR. So although DVD resolution is fixed at 720x480 (or 720x576 for PAL), 352x480/576, or 352x240, it DAR is fixed at 4:3 or 16:9 (DVD does not support 2.21:1 DAR).

[Sxotty]

Quake3 does widescreen.

[Crusher]

But games do not know the aspect ratio of your display, so the best they can do is to assume 1:1 SAR (square pixels). Normally a 4:3 display has 4:3 resolutions (such as 800x600, 1024x768, etc.), a 16:9 display has 16:9 resolutions (such as 1600x900). However, there are some exceptions, such as 1280x1024. If you try to use 1600x900 on a normal 4:3 display, you'll see distorted results in most 3D games.

There are other options for 3D games, such as fixed DAR regardless the resolutions. For example, a game may provide an option for the user to set the DAR (display aspect ratio), such as 4:3, 16:9, etc. Then they can display correctly with any resolution. This is also used by MPEG-2, which provides only four different aspect ratios: 1:1 SAR, 4:3 DAR, 16:9 DAR, and 2.21:1 DAR. So although DVD resolution is fixed at 720x480 (or 720x576 for PAL), 352x480/576, or 352x240, it DAR is fixed at 4:3 or 16:9 (DVD does not support 2.21:1 DAR).

Now you're confusing me... is the aspect ratio the ratio of the width to height of the image being displayed, or the ratio of width to height of the actual screen? Are you saying that a 1280x1024 image on a normal monitor should be using a 4:3 aspect ratio instead of a 5:4 aspect ratio?

I assumed the aspect ratio was strictly tied to the resolution of the image being displayed, which is easily calculated by the application and can easily be used in the formation of the projection transformation matrix.

[pcchen]

Now you're confusing me... is the aspect ratio the ratio of the width to height of the image being displayed, or the ratio of width to height of the actual screen? Are you saying that a 1280x1024 image on a normal monitor should be using a 4:3 aspect ratio instead of a 5:4 aspect ratio?

That depends on the aspect ratio of your display. If your monitor is 4:3 and the picture covers the full display, you should use 4:3 DAR regardless the resolution. In this case, 1280x1024 has non-square pixels.

However, some monitors, especially LCD monitors, always have square pixel on its native resolution. For example, an LCD with native resolution of 1280x1024 is likely to be 5:4, not 4:3.

So to keep a square displays like a square, you'll need to know the real aspect ratio of your monitor. Some CAD users calibrate it using rulers.

I assumed the aspect ratio was strictly tied to the resolution of the image being displayed, which is easily calculated by the application and can easily be used in the formation of the projection transformation matrix.

This is only true when you have square pixels (1:1 SAR). Many resolutions have square pixels, including all 4:3 resolutions on 4:3 monitors. However, some resolutions are not 1:1 SAR, such as 320x200. For 16:9 wide screens, you need 16:9 resolutions for square pixels such as 1600x900 or 1280x720. There are some special monitors which have strange aspect ratio. For example, my sub-notebook has a native resolution of 1280x600, that's 2.13:1.

[Crusher]

Hrmm... I'm going to have to disagree. The aspect ratio used for the perspective transform matrix should be the same as the aspect ratio of the window the image is displayed in, regardless of the physical dimensions of the monitor. It will be using non-square pixels if the resolution isn't the same aspect ratio as the display, but that can't be helped. If you use an aspect ratio of 1, however, the image will be distorted. I offer some screenshots of examples demonstrating this:

aspect_ratio_of_1.jpg (http://216.170.140.83/aspect_ratio_of_1.jpg)
aspect_ratio_of_4_to_3.jpg (http://216.170.140.83/aspect_ratio_of_4_to_3.jpg)
aspect_ratio_of_5_to_4.jpg (http://216.170.140.83/aspect_ratio_of_5_to_4.jpg)

(too large to show here... please be patient with my 768k SDSL :) )

The sphere and pyramid look as they should in the 4:3 and 5:4 screenshots. In the screenshot with the aspect ratio of 1, they appear to be squished vertically. This observation is made on a dislpay with a 4:3 ratio, where both the 4:3 and 5:4 look similar, apart from the size in pixels.

I know that in the DX8 help document, Microsoft demonstrates creating the perspective transformation matrix with what they refer to as a "typical" value of 1. I think this is incorrect, and should only be when your display resolution is a 1:1 aspect ratio. If any games are using an aspect ratio of 1, I believe they are doing it incorrectly.

[pcchen]

Did you change the resolution to 1280x1024 to view the picture in 1280x1024? If not, you'll see correct aspect ratio because both of your 4:3 and 5:4 images assumes square pixel.

On the contrary, your 1:1 image assumes 1:1 DAR, since most monitors are not 1:1 DAR, it will looks squashed. If you use a 1:1 DAR monitor and use 1024x960 resolution to display the image, the image will display correctly.

The projection matrix in DX8 document (and many other 3D text books) assumes 1:1 SAR, so the DAR can be directly computed from the size of the window.

[Crusher]

I took out a ruler and measured the sphere in fullscreen in both resolutions, and apparnetly using a 5:4 aspect ratio isn't quite right at 1280x1024. However it's still a hell of a lot better than using an aspect ratio of 1.

So what you're saying is, it's impossible to display things correctly all the time automatically... and every single tutorial/reference document on the subject is wrong (I've found numerous OpenGL examples using the window width / window height as the aspect ratio). That's nice.

[pcchen]

So what you're saying is, it's impossible to display things correctly all the time automatically... and every single tutorial/reference document on the subject is wrong (I've found numerous OpenGL examples using the window width / window height as the aspect ratio). That's nice.

Actually they are right, as long as you have 1:1 SAR (square pixels).
It's incorrect only when you use monitors/resolutions with non-square pixels, such as using 1280x1024 on a 4:3 monitor.

[Crusher]

Actually they are right, as long as you have 1:1 SAR (square pixels).
It's incorrect only when you use monitors/resolutions with non-square pixels, such as using 1280x1024 on a 4:3 monitor.

Yeah, but as you said earlier, you can never know when that is, since you don't know what the physical dimensions of the display are, only the resolutions it supports. I suppose you could count the number of resolutions that were detected for each aspect ratio, and then use the aspect ratio that has the most number of supported resolutions, but even that's not guaranteed to be correct.

[Gnep]

To reply to the original post, I don't see why the games listed here:

http://www.matrox.com/mga/3d_gaming/surrgame.cfm

wouldn't work in widescreen - they are pretty much all doing single-viewport rendering (just across 3 screens in Parhelia's case), and support custom resolutions and field-of-view. Usually just a bit of tweaking in the .ini file needed :)

[pcchen]

Yeah, but as you said earlier, you can never know when that is, since you don't know what the physical dimensions of the display are, only the resolutions it supports. I suppose you could count the number of resolutions that were detected for each aspect ratio, and then use the aspect ratio that has the most number of supported resolutions, but even that's not guaranteed to be correct.

Yes. A solution is to let the user to select the display aspect ratio. Common aspect ratio includes 4:3 DAR, 5:4 DAR, 16:9 DAR, and perhaps 2.21:1 DAR, and an additional 1:1 SAR. The default can be set as 1:1 SAR since it's most common. If the result is distorted, the user can select the correct aspect ratio.

In thoery, you can get the dimension of the display from the Windows DC. However, I don't know how many monitors support it, nor how accurate they are.

[Nappe1]

well, mý example might be bad, but I'll try it anyways...

in Super Video CD PAL standard, frame size is defined as follows:
- 480 pixels width, 576 pixels height.
- aspect ratio 4:3

if you calculate image's resolution based aspect ratio, it is nowhere near to 4:3. still, players always display it as 4:3 (using streching)

this is the as in Grand Theft Auto 3 PC version... you can force the engine to render images on widescreen (16:9) even if you would be using 4:3 resolution. this is because on regular TV outs cannot use 16:9 proposed resolution modes with standard non-HDTV. With using overscan and 16:9 style FoV settings, you are still able to display game right with only 800x600 resolution on 16:9 tv.

while using anlogical CRTs, streching to wider resolution on CRT than in original image, isn't any problem because quality and sharpness of final image isn't good enough to human notice errors especially when image is changing fast enough. (of course FoV must be set correctly for 16:9 visible field.) BUT when we are talking about TFTs that have native 16:9 resolution, things change a little bit. (image no longer consist lines like the image which CRT draws.) and streching errors become visible very easily.

[T2k]

All Unreal Engine games I'm aware of support widescreen either by modifying your .ini file or by entering "setres XxY". I only wish there was a way to play BF1942 at 1600x1024.

-- Daniel, Epic Games Inc.

I'm kicking around the idea of getting a widescreen monitor (maybe CRT, maybe LCD) next month, and I'm just wondering how many PC games have support for 16:9/16:10 ratios?


?

Daniel, I didn't change ANYTHING but Unreal II IS working fine here at 1920x1200... :)

[T2k]

And I checked, and Quake3 engine games support custom resolutions as well. I've basically got my bases covered :twisted:

Yes, the two most important FPS-engine does support widescreen. IIRC, Serious Sam also sports this feature.

So far we covered 80% of the FPS' now... :D

[Carlmc79]

I think the resolution is what Matters, im using a R8500 and using Rage3d ive added custom resolutions of a wide aspect. for example 1920x1200 or 1600x1024. A number ofgames accept this but if u dont have a wide screen monitor, it all looks strange and vertically stretched. But it works okay.

By the way where can one buy a Wide screen CRT of like 19" or even 17" that supports a resolution like 1920x1200 comfortably?

Thanks

[MuFu]

Have a look at the Song GDM-FW900. Very nice monitor!!!

BTW, how would one get MOHAA to run @1280x768? All the info I've been able to find has involved getting nVidia cards to run at 856x480 (using "+set r_mode 11" and an INF hack) but I have a 9700 Pro and the native res of my monitor is 1280x768.

MuFu.

[Ozymandis]

Max Payne also has widescreen support, even for 720p resolution :D

[MuFu]

BTW, Unreal II is working fine for me at 1280x768. No mods needed at all and it looks damn nice :cool:

NFS: PU supports 1280x768 by default, but with non-square pixels (looks like 1024x768, stretched). It's a crap game anyway so that's ok.

I just wish I could get MOHAA working now. =\

MuFu.

[Carlmc79]

Do games actually look that Nice on Widescreen. I know movies look more natural. I understand if u already have a Wide screen monitor u need a widescreen resolution.

[MistaPi]

Does not most 3D games use 4:3 transformation aspect ratio so it looks correct on a 4:3 screen regardless of the resolution?

[pcchen]

I don't think most 3D games use fixed 4:3 for transformation. They use fixed 1:1 pixel aspect ratio instead. For example, if you try to use 1600x900 on a 4:3 screen, you'll see distorted image (at least that's what NFS:PU does).

[T2k]

By the way where can one buy a Wide screen CRT of like 19" or even 17" that supports a resolution like 1920x1200 comfortably?

Thanks

Nowhere. They're too small for that. Mine can do that - it's 24".

[Ozymandis]

I finally got my widescreen monitor, a Sony P.E.D on sale and after rebate only 600 bucks! Anyways, I'm playing UT2k3 in widescreen and I can't figure out whether changing the FOV to 120 makes the image look correct or whether leaving it at 90 is better :?

[epicstruggle]

interesting, how good is does it look though?

l;ate,r

[Ozymandis]

Well I got that particular display because it does everything. Doesn't have a DVI input, sadly, but it does have S-video, RCA, and component inputs along with a VGA one.

Overall I'm pretty happy with its PC performance. Of course that comes with the standard caveat of only running at its native resolution, but there's not much ghosting in UT2k3 (that's the only game I've tried so far on PC). With 480p stuff from my consoles the onboard scaler doesn't quite seem to be up to the task. I'm tempted to take it back and get one of the Samsung widescreens instead, because console gaming was a large part of why I was getting a new display.

Widescreen PC gaming is cool. It's like playing in a movie! I'm definitely hooked, and I wish more developers would support this :D

[malcolm]

i dont see why widescreen would be better than 4:3, it just cuts away two slices, so how does that make it look better?

[pcchen]

Because human eyes are horizontally placed? :)

[malcolm]

Im not talking about using a wider screen to see more horizontaly, ofcource horizontal stuff in a scene is usualy more interesting than vertical.
but if you have the same amount horizontaly, why is it considered to look better to have less verticaly?

[malcolm]

btw pcchen does that mean that if you close one eye this is no longer true? :lol:

[pcchen]

Im not talking about using a wider screen to see more horizontaly, ofcource horizontal stuff in a scene is usualy more interesting than vertical.
but if you have the same amount horizontaly, why is it considered to look better to have less verticaly?

This may be true for many movies, since many movies are shot with non-wide cameras, and the director cut them into "wide format." However, for 3D games, wide screen can have wider horizontal FOV, which makes you see more horizontally, instead of less vertically.

btw pcchen does that mean that if you close one eye this is no longer true?

Of course, you may notice that you lose some part of your vision when you close one eye. ;)