Supporting resolutions

LackOfKnack · 2000-01-01T14:27:55

Just wondering what you guys thought: Is supporting only one resolution a good idea? If it is, is 1024x768 reasonable? Thanks.------------------Lack

Graphics and GPU Programming Programming

Started by LackOfKnack December 31, 1999 10:50 AM

13 comments, last by LackOfKnack 24 years, 3 months ago

Zenroth

127

December 26, 1999 08:13 PM

I would say that depends on the game and your min specs for the comp to play the game. Like earlier today i was looking at a few games and found one saying you needed atleast a 8mb video card(for a 2d game 800x600x16). Common ppl not everyone has thoose cards. I myself am trying to still target 2mb cards(for 2d only).

Melo

122

December 27, 1999 07:52 AM

Multi-resolution games are better for the guys, that don't have a fast computer (like me

).
If a game supports only one resolution, i'd prefer 800x600, too.

(I do still have my 2MB card )

_Andreas

GunnarSteinn

122

December 27, 1999 12:52 PM

If you are going to support only one res then you should go for something less, like 800*600 since most computers can´t handle a game with so high res.

ZomeonE

122

December 27, 1999 01:08 PM

Ofcourse most computers can handle 1024x768.
I've had mine for 2 years now and i can run more than that. (same 4 meg card)

I don't see why you'd need 8 megs for 800x600x16?

GunnarSteinn

122

December 27, 1999 01:28 PM

It depends on the game.
If it's a 3D game then you wont be able to run the game in res of 1200*700 (or something like that)

I can run Windows in 1600*1200 but a can't dream of playing Q3A in more than 640*480 and still I'm having a 400mhz computer

[This message has been edited by GunnarSteinn (edited December 27, 1999).]

LackOfKnack

122

Author

December 27, 1999 02:08 PM

It's a 2D game like SMAC/CTP (I know SMAC was kinda 3D but the principal is 2D.) I'm targeting everyone, but I expect the end result to run reasonably on a 300 MHz computer, at least graphics wise. I'm only blitting a few layers of stuff, so the speed would not be too dependent on the graphics system, but more on AI and calculations. I'd like to use 1024 because you can show a lot of information and still have a good map view, while being supported (I think) by a lot of people. My old P90 runs 1024 I think, even. Do you agree?

------------------

Lack

Lack
Christianity, Creation, metric, Dvorak, and BeOS for all!

frizb

122

December 29, 1999 04:17 AM

I don't think you understand. It isn't all a matter of what speed your CPU is. It also matters how much Vid mem you have. You have to take both into account.

Still Learning...

kressilac

110

December 29, 1999 09:26 AM

AI is going to be directly dependant upon the memory and CPU in the machine. Your graphics will be limited by the graphics card in the machine. Figure out who you target audience is and then design for that audience's typical configuration.

Older Computers(>2yrs old)
233P1, 16 - 32Mb RAM, 2Mb Video
Mainstream Computers(2 - >1yr old)
400PII Celeron, 32 - 64Mb RAM, 4Mb - 8Mb Video
Newer Computers(1yr - Sold yesterday)
500PIII 64 - 96 Mb RAM, 8Mb - 16Mb AGP Video
High End Computers($2600+ machines today)
700Athlon 128+ RAM, 32Mb AGP Video

Take the four categories mentioned above and plot them on points of a normal bell curve where the height of the curve is the number of users owning the systems. As time continues update the points on the curve to reflect the current industry. Using Moore's Law you can pretty reliably predict what the power of a computer will be at the completion of your game development cycle. Use your conclusions as a guideline and program for them.

This all has a correlation to the amount of AI you can build into your game(CPU and RAM size) and the graphical detail you can put into the game(Video card). With the AI side of the house, the more RAM and CPU you have, the more variables you can add to your decision making logic. With Video you can adjust the resolution minimum, color depth and variety of sprites or textures. A good balance of all three graphics components will make your game more interesting. I hope this helps you determine what resolution you need to use. Sory for the lengthy post.

Kressilac

Derek Licciardi (Kressilac)Elysian Productions Inc.

Anonymous

December 29, 1999 11:13 AM

You should support 800x600x16 as a minimum even if you plan for your game to be accelerated. I am using Voodoo2 which is maxed out at this resolution and it appears that many others still have older video cards that 1024x768 is not available or too slow.

Anonymous

December 29, 1999 12:56 PM

If your target audience has mostly 300mhz computers, you can pretty certainly have 1024x768 as the only resolution supported. Even my old _386_ with 1mb vram could do 1024x768x8bpp, a computer with 2mb could do 1024x768x16bpp or 1024x768x8bpp with page flipping, and with 4mb (which is probably the very bare minimum even with MMX's) you could do 1024x768x16bpp with page flipping, which is probably enough for your needs. Also, a correction for an earlier post: a Voodoo2 can do 1024x768x16bpp WITHOUT A Z-BUFFER, and since this is a 2D game, no z-buffer is going to be needed.

Supporting resolutions

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Supporting resolutions

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines