VOGONS

Common searches


First post, by Cyberdyne

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

So i have allways played my old DOS games with my 32" and 55" tvs with totaly full screen, played my NES and other console emulators in monitors and Sony PSP in full screen. My eyes just adjust o those "fat" characters. It is more better than those black bars. Sometimes i even look old TV shows with totaly full screen with my modern screens. It just somehow does not bother me....

I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.

Reply 1 of 30, by Joseph_Joestar

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

My incorrect aspect ratio tolerance is limited to playing 320x200 and 640x480 games on a 5:4 LCD monitor with a native 1280x1024 resolution. The image scales correctly on the horizontal axis and there's some minor stretching on the vertical axis which doesn't bother me.

But no, I couldn't play games meant for 4:3 displays if they are stretched to fill a widescreen monitor. That just looks wrong to me. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Using Audigy drivers with a Sound Blaster Live
Installing DOS drivers on an Audigy2 ZS
OPL3 vs. ESFM vs. CQM vs. SBLive
OPTi 82C930 review

Reply 5 of 30, by imi

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2020-11-05, 13:01:

My incorrect aspect ratio tolerance is limited to playing 320x200 and 640x480 games on a 5:4 LCD monitor with a native 1280x1024 resolution.

^this

I played a lot of 4:3 resolutions at 5:4 and later some 16:9 games on a 16:10 monitor, such slight differences aren't that bad, but 4:3 stretched to 16:9/16:10 i.e. square pixels on 320x200/640x400 just looks way off.

Reply 7 of 30, by Big Pink

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I knew humanity was doomed in 2007 when it seemed like every window I passed revealed a new HDTV playing 4:3 programming stretched to 16:9. Retro pain 😜

The UHD -era equivalent must be motion smoothing. My parents didn't seem to think there was anything wrong with films on their gigantic new TV looking like a shot-on-video behind the scenes extra.

I thought IBM was born with the world

Reply 8 of 30, by Cyberdyne

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
mothergoose729 wrote on 2020-11-05, 17:42:

Hey man, play whatever way you want. They are games after all.

On a more serious note, I hate you and everything that you stand for.

Erm.... kinda serious, what gives?

I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.

Reply 9 of 30, by mothergoose729

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Cyberdyne wrote on 2020-11-05, 18:08:
mothergoose729 wrote on 2020-11-05, 17:42:

Hey man, play whatever way you want. They are games after all.

On a more serious note, I hate you and everything that you stand for.

Erm.... kinda serious, what gives?

Sorry, there might be a bit of a culture difference. That was a joke.

Reply 11 of 30, by ZellSF

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

To say something on topic, I can do some aspect ratio deviation when it's too eliminate very small black bars or when it's to do proper integer scale factors on a low resolution display.

Big Pink wrote on 2020-11-05, 17:55:

I knew humanity was doomed in 2007 when it seemed like every window I passed revealed a new HDTV playing 4:3 programming stretched to 16:9. Retro pain 😜

The UHD -era equivalent must be motion smoothing. My parents didn't seem to think there was anything wrong with films on their gigantic new TV looking like a shot-on-video behind the scenes extra.

Looking like a technically superior product (a high framerate video) isn't wrong.

High framerate = bad is just the same dumb nostalgia that people have for listening to music on cassettes, vinyls and 128 CBR MP3s. There's nothing good about the choppy mess that 24 FPS films are. It was originally a measure to save money.

The artifacts that are introduced in trying to convert existing material to a higher technical standard is the (unsolvable) problem.

Reply 12 of 30, by chinny22

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I don't really notice 4:3 vs 5:4. I might if comparing side by side but its been many years since I've had a 4:3 screen.
Now I'm working from home I've sadly replaced those 17" 5:4 for somewhat more modern 20" widescreen's

Some games like Doom I cant handle, others like Warcraft 1 are ok, for 640x480 and above I'm running the correct ratio, black bars don't bother me.

TV my tolerance is much less, especially the early days of the changeover and shows were broadcast at the incorrect ratio, So even my old CRT TV was showing stretched images!
This still happens, Was flicking though the channels last week and watched 10 minutes of the the original Charmed, was kind of funny seeing sexy Hollywood type's with a bit more weight then the industry would ever cast.

Reply 13 of 30, by Malik

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I used to stretch all DOS graphics to max on my 37" LCD TV those days, for want to play everything "FULL"screen. Also was playing stretched full screen on my laptops and desktops.
Until I realized everything's stretched too much and after comparing with 4:3 mode (selectable on TV), which is more familiar with my older CRT monitor experiences.
After that, I started reverting back to 4:3 mode in everything I use - laptops, desktops and LCD/LED TVs. It just looks more "natural" at 4:3 and I don't mind the black borders on either side. The aspect ratio is correct and the images are not distorted and that are all that matters.

5476332566_7480a12517_t.jpgSB Dos Drivers

Reply 14 of 30, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
ZellSF wrote on 2020-11-08, 11:54:
To say something on topic, I can do some aspect ratio deviation when it's too eliminate very small black bars or when it's to do […]
Show full quote

To say something on topic, I can do some aspect ratio deviation when it's too eliminate very small black bars or when it's to do proper integer scale factors on a low resolution display.

Big Pink wrote on 2020-11-05, 17:55:

I knew humanity was doomed in 2007 when it seemed like every window I passed revealed a new HDTV playing 4:3 programming stretched to 16:9. Retro pain 😜

The UHD -era equivalent must be motion smoothing. My parents didn't seem to think there was anything wrong with films on their gigantic new TV looking like a shot-on-video behind the scenes extra.

Looking like a technically superior product (a high framerate video) isn't wrong.

High framerate = bad is just the same dumb nostalgia that people have for listening to music on cassettes, vinyls and 128 CBR MP3s. There's nothing good about the choppy mess that 24 FPS films are. It was originally a measure to save money.

The artifacts that are introduced in trying to convert existing material to a higher technical standard is the (unsolvable) problem.

Even worse, there was a time when historic videos from 18xx-1950s were sped up to get rid of flicker on 50/60Hz TVs.
That's why some old documentary films on CRT TV used to show people hushing through the streets. Thanks to modern technology, these old celluloid film reels can be restored/rescanned and adapted to modern standards. Either AI assisted by using intermediate frames or by using adaptive screens. Or just by filming off a TFT, screen. 😉

Edit: I'm guilty for playing 5:4 SNES games in 4:3.
To my defense, I use the zoom option on modern TVs to play old games or videos (CD-i, VHS) if possible. If not, I choose blackbars.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 15 of 30, by MrFlibble

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Cyberdyne wrote on 2020-11-05, 12:51:

My eyes just adjust o those "fat" characters. It is more better than those black bars.

I know one person in another forum with exactly the same views. Once he showed off some scrreenshots of playing Shadow Warrior that way (IIRC in 320x200 mode stretched to whatever native 16:10 resolution his display was), with the same explanation that it's better than playing in pillarboxed mode (this was before VoidSW came out).

Personally I fail to understand the logic. If you play on a widescreen display in pillarboxed mode, there's empty screen area on the sides where there would be, well, nothing (real world outside the screen borders 😀) if you played on a real 4:3 display. I can't imagine why black parts of a screen would make someone uncomfortable. I think it's better for the eyes than playing in windowed mode (e.g. DOSBox window rendering a 640x480 image) with your desktop in the background, especially if you play for a long time.

Last edited by Stiletto on 2020-11-11, 02:47. Edited 1 time in total.

DOS Games Archive | List of free open source games | List of free closed source games

Reply 16 of 30, by Cyberdyne

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Point is, I appreciate more active screenspace than correct aspect ratio, it just does not bother me, my brain adjusts or something. but my brain just sees those black(dark gray if you do not have a super duper expensive screen) and asks itself why all the time. Maybe it is some sort of OCD.

I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.

Reply 18 of 30, by Con 2 botones

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Cyberdyne wrote on 2020-11-10, 13:55:

Point is, I appreciate more active screenspace than correct aspect ratio, it just does not bother me, my brain adjusts or something. but my brain just sees those black(dark gray if you do not have a super duper expensive screen) and asks itself why all the time. Maybe it is some sort of OCD.

I am also more bothered by black bars than by sprite stretching.
While at retro-PC gaming, I do it on a 5:4 monitor, so neither black bars nor noticeable sprite stretching (at least to my limited brain).

When it comes to emulation, I´ve become an overlay devotee (Retroarch). No sprite stretching, no more black unused areas.

Reply 19 of 30, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
ZellSF wrote on 2020-11-13, 14:03:
Jo22 wrote on 2020-11-10, 02:45:

Edit: I'm guilty for playing 5:4 SNES games in 4:3.

SNES games are 4:3. That's the correct way to play them.

Do you mean you're playing SNES games at 5:4?

Hi! Yes, in practice it is (was).
However, some emulator users insist on a pixel-perfect experience..
- Internally, old consoles often used screen resolutions with another aspect ratio (5:4 or 8:7).
Of course, the picture always was 4:3 on a CRT TV.
To make things worse, mediocre PAL support complicated the matter.

https://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthread.php? … ect-ratio/page2

(Ideally, PAL would be 768x576 pels but in practice, 720x576 or 720x480 were used at best (by newer consoles, not the old ones, of course)).

Edit: Fixed.

14001346425_41b6ae33aa_o.png
Filename
14001346425_41b6ae33aa_o.png
File size
68.02 KiB
Views
224 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

Source: https://videogameperfection.com/forums/topic/ … ction-for-snes/

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//