Upscaled res? (Massive Screenshot)

[Boris]

I just got SH4 today an am starting to play around with it, looking for all the things people were complaining about.

Now, I'm not sure I'm experiencing the upscaled res thing people have been talking about in 3d views.
Sure, no AA, but 1680x1024 seems to be working fine.

[DragonRR1]

Basically.. If you see major jaggies at 1680x1024 the problem is resolution AND FSAA. Your screenshot has these jaggies!

At TRUE 1680x1024 on, for example, a 22" screen the pixels would be tiny and whilst without AA you would see jaggies they would be barely discernable.

[Boris]

Yes, but there was talk that the res in 3d views was just an upscaled 1024x768, which would make the jaggies massive on a 22 incher.

[alexoscar]

Originally Posted by Boris

Yes, but there was talk that the res in 3d views was just an upscaled 1024x768, which would make the jaggies massive on a 22 incher.

I see massive jaggies in that picture. Horrible I would say. Moreover, UBI has recognized this question and the Dev. Team have stated they are working to solve this question together other questions/bugs.

Its only a upscaled image.

Regards

[DragonRR1]

Originally Posted by Boris

Yes, but there was talk that the res in 3d views was just an upscaled 1024x768, which would make the jaggies massive on a 22 incher.

Effectively each pixel on an image upscaled from 1024x768 to 1680x1024 would be:

Horizontally 1680/1024= 1.64 times larger
Vertically 1024/768 = 1.33 times larger

Very roughly each actual pixel on your 22" is around 0.3mm square so each game pixel is about 0.4mm to 0.5mm of screen area or 1 and a bit pixels.

This is basically as your screenshot shows. To me the jaggies are pretty massive! But everything is of course relative!

[flintlock]

Originally Posted by DragonRR1

Effectively each pixel on an image upscaled from 1024x768 to 1680x1024 would be:
Horizontally 1680/1024= 1.64 times larger
Vertically 1024/768 = 1.33 times larger
This is basically as your screenshot shows.

Yes, the game engine is unfortunately still very much shackled to a dated 1024x768 fixed resolution.

If you run the game on a 4:3 15" LCD at a resolution of 1024x768, then run it on a 16:10 22" LCD with a native resolution of 1680x1050, you'll notice immediately that you don't have a wider field of view that a widescreen compliant res would offer. What you will notice is that you actually see less on your 22" widescreen than the 15" 4:3 LCD user sees, because the fixed 1024x768 resolution is upscaled, then cropped accordingly.

I'm sure the design decision behind this was one of necessity. Getting SH4 to natively support 16:10 aspect ratios with a wider field of view would have been a major technical undertaking.

[RocketDog]

Originally Posted by flintlock

I'm sure the design decision behind this was one of necessity. Getting SH4 to natively support 16:10 aspect ratios with a wider field of view would have been a major technical undertaking.

I would be interested to know a bit more about why the devs did lock it into 1024x768, 4:3 and no FSAA. Out-of-the-box SH3 is locked in 1024x768, but the community hack makes it perfectly playable in other resolutions. I use 1600x1200 with 4xFSAA and 4xAF and it storms along without any problems at all. If a hack could make it work, it can't be that much of a problem so why on Earth did the devs not do the same thing in both SH3 and SH4? Perplexing.

Cheers,

RD.