Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: 1440x900 resolution
  • Subject: 1440x900 resolution
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: 1440x900 resolution
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Lol i can't play it on the xbox either... nothing like not being able to see a guy in front of you.
Really, between that and the energy sword, Halo 2 just lost all enjoyment for me. And the autoaim..... and the SMG starts..... and the scorpion tank....

  • 07.31.2007 6:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Make it 1280 x 720 and window it. You'll get a 90 degree FOV like me.

  • 07.31.2007 7:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Ryanman7
Lol i can't play it on the xbox either... nothing like not being able to see a guy in front of you.
Really, between that and the energy sword, Halo 2 just lost all enjoyment for me. And the autoaim..... and the SMG starts..... and the scorpion tank....

Fifth Floor, Reality.

Ah, you work here? I thought this place was used for storage just like the Logic and Truth floor!

  • 07.31.2007 8:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Comparision

I took both pictures standing in the same exact position. The one on the left was taken in a 1280 x 720 16:9 aspect ratio. The one on the right was taken in a 1280 x 1024 5:4 aspect ratio.

As you can see if you use widescreen on Halo 2, it vastly increases your field of view, giving you a huge edge in combat online.

[Edited on 07.31.2007 9:09 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2007 8:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Holy crap.

  • 07.31.2007 8:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Master Kim
Holy crap.


You have a pretty nice system.... Those SS's actually look pretty good and you're right that's a "holy crap" difference.

  • 07.31.2007 8:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Nice find NoRefunds. Which pisses me off even more though, as I have a native 1440x900 res, and 1280x720 is DAMN ugly.
Oh, and regardless of "10 Widescreen games", Halo 1 had this resolution, so there is NO excuse for it not to be supported now. Yes, It cut off a little bit in HCE, but it was from the bottom of the screen, only difference was a little less visible gun. And for 10 Widescreen games? Every Steam FPS. So far, every new/next gen Tom Clancy game has had support for it (RSV, GRAW 2). There are a lot.

  • 07.31.2007 11:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I hope the developers release a patch for 1440x900 or someone clever finds a way to hack the resolutions.

  • 08.01.2007 4:43 AM PDT

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
Posted by: RhythmKiller
Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
When they made wide screen monitors, the only thing they had in mind was making your computer more like a movie theater, and that's about the only place where a wide screen monitor thrives; when playing wide screen movies.

I disagree. Games are becoming more and more cinematic as their production values get bigger and bigger, games are now more influenced by movies than ever before. The widescreen presentation looks great on any game that makes good use of it. In particular it's nice with 1st-person viewpoints, as it better emulates the field of vision the human eye has, which is a lot wider than it is tall.

You mean in FPS games, as that is where it would only be appealing.

As I said, in 1st-person viewpoints it is particularly nice.

Tell you what. You show me ten games in production that take advantage of wide screen monitors. Considering no one does CG cinematics any more (all in-game cut scenes nowadays so it feels like you're experiencing it), I'd like to at least then see 10 FPS games that are encouraging wide screen monitors.
Every single current-gen console game, for starters. That's a lot more than ten.

But I don't see how a cutscene being pre-rendered or in-engine makes any difference to the benefit of widescreen.

  • 08.01.2007 4:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: RhythmKiller
Every single current-gen console game, for starters. That's a lot more than ten.

Well, since we're into just putting out things without supporting them at all, allow me to make the statement that 100% of the people who argue with me are wrong.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
But I don't see how a cutscene being pre-rendered or in-engine makes any difference to the benefit of widescreen.

The concept of wide screen has always been something that comes from movie theaters. The feel of being in a movie theater and being surrounded by sound with a gigantic screen watching your favorite movie boggles many people's minds, which is where I can only see why people would enjoy wide screen monitors. In an FPS perspective, there is nothing real about wide screen monitors vs. monitors that don't support wide screen. None of them can capture the peripheral view of a human being and the same goes for video games as well. And again, the only thing appealing with wide screen would be an FPS, so the whole "it's dominating the market" was not only a retarded statement, but false as well.

  • 08.01.2007 10:19 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
Posted by: RhythmKiller
Every single current-gen console game, for starters. That's a lot more than ten.

Well, since we're into just putting out things without supporting them at all, allow me to make the statement that 100% of the people who argue with me are wrong.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
But I don't see how a cutscene being pre-rendered or in-engine makes any difference to the benefit of widescreen.

The concept of wide screen has always been something that comes from movie theaters. The feel of being in a movie theater and being surrounded by sound with a gigantic screen watching your favorite movie boggles many people's minds, which is where I can only see why people would enjoy wide screen monitors. In an FPS perspective, there is nothing real about wide screen monitors vs. monitors that don't support wide screen. None of them can capture the peripheral view of a human being and the same goes for video games as well. And again, the only thing appealing with wide screen would be an FPS, so the whole "it's dominating the market" was not only a retarded statement, but false as well.


But this is not what it is about. It is the fact that the resolution should be supported, simply because it is the native resolution for a considerable number of people.

  • 08.01.2007 9:07 PM PDT

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
Posted by: RhythmKiller
Every single current-gen console game, for starters. That's a lot more than ten.

Well, since we're into just putting out things without supporting them at all, allow me to make the statement that 100% of the people who argue with me are wrong.

Haha, I don't think you really follow. It's not something that needed supporting with a list of games. The current generation of consoles are natively 16:9. That means every single game is developed for widescreen.


But I don't see how a cutscene being pre-rendered or in-engine makes any difference to the benefit of widescreen.

The concept of wide screen has always been something that comes from movie theaters. The feel of being in a movie theater and being surrounded by sound with a gigantic screen watching your favorite movie boggles many people's minds, which is where I can only see why people would enjoy wide screen monitors. In an FPS perspective, there is nothing real about wide screen monitors vs. monitors that don't support wide screen. None of them can capture the peripheral view of a human being and the same goes for video games as well. And again, the only thing appealing with wide screen would be an FPS, so the whole "it's dominating the market" was not only a retarded statement, but false as well.

No, it's not 'dominating the market' just yet, not on PC games anyway. But it will before long - sales of widescreen vs 4:3 monitors are only going upward, and quickly too.

Either way, I don't see anything there which answers why pre-rendered or in-engine cutscenes make any difference to the benefit of widescreen.

And there IS a tangible benefit for FPS. It allows for a greater horizontal FOV - without the need for tampering with the aspect or the width of the vertical FOV, which makes it look unnatural. Examples - COD2 andQuake 4.

  • 08.02.2007 3:03 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: RhythmKiller
Haha, I don't think you really follow. It's not something that needed supporting with a list of games. The current generation of consoles are natively 16:9. That means every single game is developed for widescreen.

Cite your source.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
No, it's not 'dominating the market' just yet, not on PC games anyway. But it will before long - sales of widescreen vs 4:3 monitors are only going upward, and quickly too.

Cite your source.

[quote]Posted by: RhythmKiller
And there IS a tangible benefit for FPS. It allows for a greater horizontal FOV - without the need for tampering with the aspect or the width of the vertical FOV, which makes it look unnatural. Examples - COD2 andQuake 4.

We've already agreed the benefit for FPS games. Such examples can be harnessed easily with tampering with the field of view as well. You're still not addressing how the FPS genre does not dominate the gaming market (though it is a considerable chunk) and, therefore, would not be logical as to how and why other non-FPS games would support wide screen.

  • 08.02.2007 9:29 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

You know, you tell others to cite their sources, but why don't you do the same?

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
A lot of gamers? You speak for the populace then? I would think that the majority of actual gamers own 17' monitors. I've polled at least on three different popular forums with the same results; the resolution people use the most comes with these three in the top: 1280x1024, 1024x768, and 800x600. 1440x900 is wide screen, and any sensible gamer would know a lot of games do not support wide screen. Hell, not only games, but websites as well. When they made wide screen monitors, the only thing they had in mind was making your computer more like a movie theater, and that's about the only place where a wide screen monitor thrives; when playing wide screen movies.

Though as for wondering who to contact about the issue; there isn't anyone to contact. Bungie certainly doesn't care. You can try h2vista.net as some of the Hired Gun employees browse the forums answering questions every now and then.


I don't think you speak for the majority either. Which three "popular forums?" Links to the threads and results? How do you know what went through "their mind" when "they" made wide screen monitors? And how can you read minds? Show me your crystal ball as well.

  • 08.02.2007 11:28 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: jackal397
You know, you tell others to cite their sources, but why don't you do the same?

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
A lot of gamers? You speak for the populace then? I would think that the majority of actual gamers own 17' monitors. I've polled at least on three different popular forums with the same results; the resolution people use the most comes with these three in the top: 1280x1024, 1024x768, and 800x600. 1440x900 is wide screen, and any sensible gamer would know a lot of games do not support wide screen. Hell, not only games, but websites as well. When they made wide screen monitors, the only thing they had in mind was making your computer more like a movie theater, and that's about the only place where a wide screen monitor thrives; when playing wide screen movies.

Though as for wondering who to contact about the issue; there isn't anyone to contact. Bungie certainly doesn't care. You can try h2vista.net as some of the Hired Gun employees browse the forums answering questions every now and then.


I don't think you speak for the majority either. Which three "popular forums?" Links to the threads and results? How do you know what went through "their mind" when "they" made wide screen monitors? And how can you read minds? Show me your crystal ball as well.

They were over the course of many years, but I could only find one.

http://gbxforums.gearboxsoftware.com/showthread.php?t=56646

And I don't know what went through a board member's head for the various companies that produce monitors. Maybe it was "money?" Logical assumptions nowadays are discredited though. We need scientists on payrolls to say what's what.

For your real answer though, when I asked other people about why they wanted to get a wide screen monitor, they replied with either, "I don't," and "Because movies will look so much better when I watch them."

While my research limits me to the people I've interacted with, I am still not making outrageous accusations like "Every new game in production offers wide screen support" and "The whole market" this and that crap. If you want further confirmation, I'd be happy to make a thread that polled people on their monitor resolutions.

Actually, you know what, let's do that.

EDIT: Here, chew on this as well. http://www.onestat.com/html/aboutus_pressbox51_screen_resolut ions_internet.html

[Edited on 08.02.2007 4:38 PM PDT]

  • 08.02.2007 4:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
The concept of wide screen has always been something that comes from movie theaters. The feel of being in a movie theater and being surrounded by sound with a gigantic screen watching your favorite movie boggles many people's minds, which is where I can only see why people would enjoy wide screen monitors. In an FPS perspective, there is nothing real about wide screen monitors vs. monitors that don't support wide screen. None of them can capture the peripheral view of a human being and the same goes for video games as well. And again, the only thing appealing with wide screen would be an FPS, so the whole "it's dominating the market" was not only a retarded statement, but false as well.


The Golden Rectangle! 1:~1.618! The Golden Retangle is considered to be aesthetically pleasing. The 16:10 ratio is pretty close.

  • 08.02.2007 11:02 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: Terin7
  • user homepage:

Frog Blast the Vent Core!

Does Yelo Battery work for H2V now?

  • 08.02.2007 11:06 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

http://www.onestat.com/html/aboutus_pressbox51_screen_resolut ions_internet.html

55% 1024x768 - Yes, my 13" laptop uses this resolution, as did my VERY OLD 15" Acer LCD. It was a popular resolution about 2 years ago. Why is it still represented so much? Because the general public do not upgrade their components, monitors especially, all that often - look at all the 15" CRTs and LCDs about. Gamers who shell out money for the latest and greatest games (not that H2 is latest or greatest anymore) also shell out money for higher end hardware, and it is fair that 1440x900 should be supported in H2, as a large number of people own 19" WS LCDs. Widescreen is becoming the norm.

I guess you want sources on this so here it is: http://msy.com.au/Parts/PARTS.pdf they tend to be where most people in Australia get their gear from, because it's cheap. Because their turnover is so high (you might doubt it from the look of their site, but it is) they only bother stocking a few items that are purchased in high volumes. Have a look at all the widescreens there (denoted by WS), like 90%. People want widescreen, whether it's better or not (it is) is immaterial, more and more people are using them and so the native res needs to be supported in all games.

Widescreen won't yet be the majority, it will be eventually though. Square screens are a dying breed.

Like it or not, heaps of people have 19" widescreens, so why on earth would you not provide proper support for their resolution?

  • 08.03.2007 1:51 AM PDT

Posted by: Agamemnon582bc
Posted by: RhythmKiller
Haha, I don't think you really follow. It's not something that needed supporting with a list of games. The current generation of consoles are natively 16:9. That means every single game is developed for widescreen.

Cite your source.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
No, it's not 'dominating the market' just yet, not on PC games anyway. But it will before long - sales of widescreen vs 4:3 monitors are only going upward, and quickly too.

Cite your source.

[quote]Posted by: RhythmKiller
And there IS a tangible benefit for FPS. It allows for a greater horizontal FOV - without the need for tampering with the aspect or the width of the vertical FOV, which makes it look unnatural. Examples - COD2 andQuake 4.

We've already agreed the benefit for FPS games. Such examples can be harnessed easily with tampering with the field of view as well. You're still not addressing how the FPS genre does not dominate the gaming market (though it is a considerable chunk) and, therefore, would not be logical as to how and why other non-FPS games would support wide screen.

*sigh*. I have no interest in trading challenges with a bratty forum user, agamemnon582bc. For some unknown reason this has become a competition to you, rather than a discussion. And I will not compete in such a childish way. The facts are available.

I have no intention of digging for proof of the easily-observed and stone cold fact that the PS3 and 360 are natively widescreen, any more that I would if you challenged the fact the earth revolves around the sun. Your apparently total lack of knowledge about consoles is not my onus for proving glaring facts about them.

I can tell that you refuse to accept the coming dominance of widescreen because of no better reason than you haven’t adopted yourself yet. This kind of thinking is common on forums, I’ve come to expect it. So for that case, here is an article which should get you up to speed on industry expectations.

And I won’t even bother with your implication that a stretched FOV on an older 4:3 monitor is as good as the same horizontal angle properly presented on 16:9 – you know it isn’t.

But ultimately, I don’t care what you choose to think and I don't have to prove or defend what most people know (including a good few in this thread it would seem). Games are going widescreen, whether it offends your sensibilities or otherwise. Desktop PCs have been lagging behind laptops in widescreen saturation but will catch up soon.

  • 08.03.2007 2:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: The__Abhorred
55% 1024x768 - Yes, my 13" laptop uses this resolution, as did my VERY OLD 15" Acer LCD. It was a popular resolution about 2 years ago. Why is it still represented so much? Because the general public do not upgrade their components, monitors especially, all that often - look at all the 15" CRTs and LCDs about. Gamers who shell out money for the latest and greatest games (not that H2 is latest or greatest anymore) also shell out money for higher end hardware, and it is fair that 1440x900 should be supported in H2, as a large number of people own 19" WS LCDs. Widescreen is becoming the norm.

The general public doesn't upgrade to "bigger and better" monitors because the general public doesn't spend their money on getting the greatest and latest things (unless it's some sort of fad). People typically have 17" monitors nowadays; my monitor goes up to 1600x1200, but I can't see a damn thing at that resolution. Everyone keeps insisting bigger = better, but it's actually causing more eye problems then anything else. 1280x1024 is my border line for resolution, mainly because it's formal, unlike wide screen, which is also another reason why the general populace are not buying wide screen monitors.

Posted by: The__Abhorred
I guess you want sources on this so here it is: http://msy.com.au/Parts/PARTS.pdf they tend to be where most people in Australia get their gear from, because it's cheap. Because their turnover is so high (you might doubt it from the look of their site, but it is) they only bother stocking a few items that are purchased in high volumes. Have a look at all the widescreens there (denoted by WS), like 90%. People want widescreen, whether it's better or not (it is) is immaterial, more and more people are using them and so the native res needs to be supported in all games.

You call an obscure Australian company a source? Hold on, let me go get Michael Moore to be my credible source in this argument. I'm sure he's just as a reliable source as well.

Posted by: The__Abhorred
Widescreen won't yet be the majority, it will be eventually though. Square screens are a dying breed.

I'm sure every board of directorates of every company around the world that uses computers is making the life-breaking decision of whether they want their workers to have wide screen monitors versus monitors that have not only been going down in price, but make up the complete norm of formal. Yes, I can see it now. Wide screen is definitely being considered a choice.

Posted by: The__Abhorred
Like it or not, heaps of people have 19" widescreens, so why on earth would you not provide proper support for their resolution?

These "heaps" of people? Where are these "heaps?" I'm currently running that poll on four different major gaming sites--you know, sites where GAMERS harbor at? Guess what leads in the poll? I'll give you a hint.

It's not wide screen.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
*sigh*. I have no interest in trading challenges with a bratty forum user, agamemnon582bc. For some unknown reason this has become a competition to you, rather than a discussion. And I will not compete in such a childish way. The facts are available.

So if you're proven wrong resort to personal attacks? What are you, a politician?

If the facts are available, present them. I would think it to be rather easy for someone who seems to know what they're talking about, especially when they talk about how they "will not participate" in such discussion, yet continue to do so.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
I have no intention of digging for proof of the easily-observed and stone cold fact that the PS3 and 360 are natively widescreen, any more that I would if you challenged the fact the earth revolves around the sun. Your apparently total lack of knowledge about consoles is not my onus for proving glaring facts about them.

You obviously haven't read that other thread on "Should I just buy a 360 to play Halo 2?" Then again, you're on a roll with the personal attacks, which makes you look all the more mature and your arguments stronger, so please, continue.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
I can tell that you refuse to accept the coming dominance of widescreen because of no better reason than you haven’t adopted yourself yet. This kind of thinking is common on forums, I’ve come to expect it. So for that case, here is an article which should get you up to speed on industry expectations.

Whoah whoah, I thought you just said you weren't going to present to me "proof?" I mean, obscure UK online news articles from a writer's opinion is obviously a serious blow into my side in this argument, but really, here I was thinking you were going to ride this whole thing on personal attack and opinion.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
And I won’t even bother with your implication that a stretched FOV on an older 4:3 monitor is as good as the same horizontal angle properly presented on 16:9 – you know it isn’t.

Actually, I know it is. It's all a matter of opinion as well. You prefer asymmetrical; I prefer symmetry.

Posted by: RhythmKiller
But ultimately, I don’t care what you choose to think and I don't have to prove or defend what most people know (including a good few in this thread it would seem). Games are going widescreen, whether it offends your sensibilities or otherwise. Desktop PCs have been lagging behind laptops in widescreen saturation but will catch up soon.

So first you say, after repeating yourself and contradicting yourself for a while, that you're not going to defend it, yet, in the very same sentence, you go on to do just that. Make up your mind, will you? Stick with one argument tactic that involves blind-folding people to the real issue instead of most that you can fabricate out of thin air.

  • 08.03.2007 8:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Agamemnon, the only point here I can honestly vouch for is that the Current-Gen Consoles ARE support widescreen resolutions in all of their titles.

As for the PC, a lot of people do widescreen. I don't know how much work it takes to change the Res support but they should do it anyway.

  • 08.03.2007 9:58 PM PDT

*I sense a disturbance in the forum*
Jaws on Zanzibar?
Sniper 's Ed 101
my myspace
teh explosion
purchase a leaf blower at any Sears store
After kim saying pc gamers are more mature:
Posted by:ImSpartacus
we r?

I think 1440x900 should be an included resolution in all games, I love widescreen

  • 08.04.2007 3:34 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Yer I was kinda pissed about no 1440x900 support!
Got the game today and went to change the resolution and couldnt find it! Kinda pissed me off abit because it does look abit weird!

Im sure this can be added with an update right?

Please add widescreen support :)

  • 08.04.2007 12:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

lolz

[Edited on 08.10.2007 3:40 PM PDT]

  • 08.10.2007 5:31 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2