Thanks, I see a lot of good points (also some deviations from the subject, but that's fine too)
I guess the thing is that is not easy (or even possible) to do a general list the way I imagined it initially.

Probably would be more realistic trying to determine the maximum possible/usable resolution with consumer hardware for each year, but I think I'll simply decide case-by-case, based on the resolutions allowed by the game itself and the technical capabilities of the release period.

That would be hard due to early exotic modes made for high resolutions,and the early years of VESA modes. 1994's had at least one 3d game that supported 1024x768x256 (Janes US Navy Fighters) despite how impossible the CPU hardware requirements were to play that with all graphic features enabled at anything resembling a playable framerate. (it wasn't until 7th gen CPUs)

Iiyama A201HT used 2048x1536 80hz in 2002.

So, in 1996 I guess it's quite easy, I remember
- low/mainstream: 320x240 (or 320x200) - maybe we could consider 512x384 as a "mainstream" alternative for some games
- high: 640x480 (with 3D acceleration for some very luck ones)

640x480 was used with sotware rendering for 2D games and some 3d games even before 1996 (need for speed 1 for example on pentium 90).

Cuttoon wrote on 2022-04-21, 22:32:

Mainstream SVGA pioneers in gaming were Syndicate in 1993 and Warcraft II in 1995.

You have forgotten sim city 2000 svga game in 1993.

Sunoo wrote on 2022-04-22, 11:38:

Unless I’m misremembering things, people had a much higher tolerance for lower frame rates back then. I’m not sure the average gamer of the era would have called below 40 fps “unplayable”.

Yes. Lots of game was limited at 30 fps and even sub 30 fps. 15-20 fps was playable for some games at the time (90's even the last).

willow wrote on 2022-04-27, 22:03:

Iiyama A201HT used 2048x1536 80hz in 2002.

For gaming in 2002 that resolution wasn't feasible and if any gamer got it into their hands they had to use lower resolutions or sacrifice visual features and details for playable framerates if supported.

640x480 was used with sotware rendering for 2D games and some 3d games even before 1996 (need for speed 1 for example on pentium 90).

Most games that used SVGA early on were mostly static animation-wise and a Pentium computer before the late 90s was considered a high-end solution.

willow wrote on 2022-04-27, 22:03:

640x480 was used with sotware rendering for 2D games and some 3d games even before 1996 (need for speed 1 for example on pentium 90).

They had to either be really affine or draw some double-width pixels to compensate though. Some were also really slow (Cybermage, USNF) and/or buggy (Screamer). The most mainstream 640x480 SVGA 3D game was 1994's Wing Commander III. Dawn Patrol was another early one

320x240 aka modeX was _never_ a common resolution in DOS. In fact it was almost not a thing at all. I dont know of any games pre 1996 Quake that would support it at all, and only 1997 Lost Wikings 2 used it by default. Quake of course ran 320x200 out of the box.
320x240 became somewhat popular with advent of snail 3d Decelerators in early directX games.

640x480x256 indeed started being popular in 1994, another example Transport Tycoon.

60fps was very much a golden standard you experienced in the Arcades since the eighties, and something everyone wanted even though most people didnt know the name for it yet 😀. Not fluid, slower, choppy, acceptable was how people talked about framerate without mentioning the word "framerate" or actual numbers back then. "Good" Arcade conversions did 30 fps, 3dfx Voodoo1 aimed at delivering 30fps, some games even shipped with 30 fps vsync (1996 Tomb Raider), 30 fps was good enough for home gamers. Console gamers could taste very limited 240p@60 selection up to 1997 https://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthread.php? … ration-Consoles with most 60 fps games showing up in 1998. On PC front in 1998 Pentium 2 became popular (still >=$600), Celerons 300A came out ($150) and Voodoo 2 dropped ($350), this is where people finally started playing at 60fps either in software (Quake 1 320x200 P2/Celeron 300MHz) of accelerated (Quake 1/2 800x600 Voodoo2, 1024x768 SLI V2). AMD fans had to wait another year for a CPU capable of reaching 60fps 😀.

rasz_pl wrote on 2022-04-28, 04:55:

320x240 aka modeX was _never_ a common resolution in DOS. In fact it was almost not a thing at all. I dont know of any games pre 1996 Quake that would support it at all

a few...

AstroFire
Blackthorne
Comanche Maximum Overkill
Cybermage
God of Thunder
Ken's Labyrinth
KORT
NBA Jam Tournament Edition
Silverball/Epic Pinball
The Lost Vikings 1
WWF Wrestlemania Arcade

leileilol wrote on 2022-04-28, 05:34:

a few... […]
Show full quote

rasz_pl wrote on 2022-04-28, 04:55:

320x240 aka modeX was _never_ a common resolution in DOS. In fact it was almost not a thing at all. I dont know of any games pre 1996 Quake that would support it at all

a few...

AstroFire
Blackthorne
Comanche Maximum Overkill
Cybermage
God of Thunder
Ken's Labyrinth
KORT
NBA Jam Tournament Edition
Silverball/Epic Pinball
The Lost Vikings 1

NBA, Comanche, Epic Pinball and The Lost Vikings (should of checked 1 since I knew about 2) seem to be the only four mainstream games out of this bunch. Maybe also Blackthorne, but I remember it being a flop on PC? Glancing at REMOVED and REMOVED there were >7000 DOS games ever created, with probably good 80% from 1989-1996 period. I would still argue <20 out of ~5000 is 'almost not a thing at all' 😀

leileilol wrote on 2022-04-28, 05:34:

WWF Wrestlemania Arcade

https://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/4388 … bam-bigelow.gif

60fps was very much a golden standard you experienced in the Arcades since the eighties, and something everyone wanted even though most people didnt know the name for it yet 😀. Not fluid, slower, choppy, acceptable was how people talked about framerate without mentioning the word "framerate" or actual numbers back then. "Good" Arcade conversions did 30 fps, 3dfx Voodoo1 aimed at delivering 30fps, some games even shipped with 30 fps vsync (1996 Tomb Raider), 30 fps was good enough for home gamers. Console gamers could taste very limited 240p@60 selection up to 1997 https://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthread.php? … ration-Consoles with most 60 fps games showing up in 1998. On PC front in 1998 Pentium 2 became popular (still >=$600), Celerons 300A came out ($150) and Voodoo 2 dropped ($350), this is where people finally started playing at 60fps either in software (Quake 1 320x200 P2/Celeron 300MHz) of accelerated (Quake 1/2 800x600 Voodoo2, 1024x768 SLI V2). AMD fans had to wait another year for a CPU capable of reaching 60fps 😀.

Not everyone got 3Dfx Voodoo accelerator cards even when prices dropped. 😀

Not everyone got to experience 60 fps 😀
In the middle of 1998 TNT released at afaik $250, Voodoo2 was $200 at that point. TNT still required either >$600 P2, or heavily overclocked celeron to get to magical 60 https://www.anandtech.com/show/197/9 https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-chips,83-7.html
as for other choices, according to Anand:
"Matrox is happily coming in a close 4th place as their above average performance and rock-solid feature set make the G200 the choice for non-obsessed gamers with desires outside of playing Quake 2 at 60 fps"
ah yes, the mythical gamer with desires outside of playing games (no opengl driver) 😉 and above performance at 4th place out of 5 :----]

rasz_pl wrote on 2022-04-28, 13:28:

Not everyone got to experience 60 fps :) In the middle of 1998 TNT released at afaik $250, Voodoo2 was $200 at that point. TNT […]
Show full quote

Not everyone got to experience 60 fps 😀
In the middle of 1998 TNT released at afaik $250, Voodoo2 was $200 at that point. TNT still required either >$600 P2, or heavily overclocked celeron to get to magical 60 https://www.anandtech.com/show/197/9 https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-chips,83-7.html
as for other choices, according to Anand:
"Matrox is happily coming in a close 4th place as their above average performance and rock-solid feature set make the G200 the choice for non-obsessed gamers with desires outside of playing Quake 2 at 60 fps"
ah yes, the mythical gamer with desires outside of playing games (no opengl driver) 😉 and above performance at 4th place out of 5 :----]

Yeah, not everyone got to experience that.

Apart from that, TNT2 which was released in 1999 was much better than the first TNT and even got 3DNow! optimizations in later drivers (although not to the extent that 3Dfx did).

Gmlb256 wrote on 2022-04-27, 22:27:

willow wrote on 2022-04-27, 22:03:

Iiyama A201HT used 2048x1536 80hz in 2002.

For gaming in 2002 that resolution wasn't feasible and if any gamer got it into their hands they had to use lower resolutions or sacrifice visual features and details for playable framerates if supported.

Some games was playable in this resolution even withtout sacrifice visual features.

Yes, by 1999 60fps was reachable even on low'ish end systems with overclocked/fast celerons/durons (~$100) and tnt2 m64 or voodoo3 2000 (both <$100) in low res. Of course this lasted barely a couple years until games started using shaders.

Alone in the Dark was in Vga on PC but it had a better resolution on a Mac. Characters and objects were in 3d rendered on 2d levels. I can't find what resolution it was but I doubt it was svga. The Mac version came out in 1993.

In 1994 Little Big Adventure 1 had 3d characters in Svga on isometric levels. It supported many graphics cards and it could do 72 Hz if your card supported it, maybe 75 Hz. In 1995 Fade to Black was in full 3d in 640x400 (also in 320x240 and 320x200). Theme park in 1994 could do svga but Bullfrog made it after Syndicate. For me the game that started the trend of 3d in Svga was Rally Championship in 1996.

About low refresh rates, Final Fantasy 7 ran at fixed 15 fps during fights in 1997 (also 15 fps for the videos and when the gameplay has videos in the background, 30 fps in the rest of the game and 60 fps in menus). The updated Steam version still runs at 15 fps nowadays.