Matrix Games Forums

Am i being dumb or are higher screen resoultions not supported ? i.e. anything above 1024x768 gets a bit small

ORIGINAL: Pandemic

Am i being dumb or are higher screen resoultions not supported ? i.e. anything above 1024x768 gets a bit small

Look in the manual, or perhaps designer notes.

nothing obvious as yet just seems odd it started so small a minaturised window on my 24 " or whatever it is

1024x768 is about all these old eyes of mine can handle

ok the manual says it runs in a res of 1024 x 768 please select compatible res when game starts - i have not been given any alternative res options? manaul indicates there should be a way to do this but isnt ?

defect i think ?

there was no way to do it in the BETA's - it only had 1 res.

ORIGINAL: Pandemic

defect i think ?

Maybe. I ran it on a Dell 2001FP (1600x1200) first. It wouldn't go full screen. I changed the res to 1024x768 on the monitor but it doesn't fit the screen right. I'll have to tinker.

Man, I sure hope this is something I have just missed how to change.

Playing in a tiny window is not really an option, and LCDs don't really like to change resolution.

From what I've been reading, you can't.  There is only the one res for the game.  Pity also as it's likely going to dissuade some folks with widescreen monitors from wanting to buy the game...or being unhappy if they do.

Unfortunately, according to previous postings by Matrix, the resolution is apparently fixed at 1024 x 768:

GoA Screenshots

ORIGINAL: Ichirou989

From what I've been reading, you can't.  There is only the one res for the game.  Pity also as it's likely going to dissuade some folks with widescreen monitors from wanting to buy the game...or being unhappy if they do.

I have a 32" widescreen and have no trouble seeing it.

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Ichirou989

From what I've been reading, you can't. There is only the one res for the game. Pity also as it's likely going to dissuade some folks with widescreen monitors from wanting to buy the game...or being unhappy if they do.

I have a 32" widescreen and have no trouble seeing it.

I don't think anyone has trouble seeing it.

I can see it just fine.

I really think that Windows has been the desktop standard for long enough now that game developers should design their games in such a way that they conform to Windows standards. It's not really hard. Look at TOAW, it's been around for ages and can be played at any resolution.

But Norm Koger is a great developer partly because he is always willing to learn new things and keep up with the times. In contrast, a game like Guns of August feels like the developer is still working with the same tools he used a decade ago when he programmed for dos.

I won't even consider buying any game that only runs at one or two fixed resolutions.

ORIGINAL: Owen

I really think that Windows has been the desktop standard for long enough now that game developers should design their games in such a way that they conform to Windows standards. It's not really hard. Look at TOAW, it's been around for ages and can be played at any resolution.

But Norm Koger is a great developer partly because he is always willing to learn new things and keep up with the times. In contrast, a game like Guns of August feels like the developer is still working with the same tools he used a decade ago when he programmed for dos.

I won't even consider buying any game that only runs at one or two fixed resolutions.

Well, IMO, that is taking it too far.

You are going to miss out on some potentially very good games.

But I certainly understand your position, and I know there are plenty of people out there who feel the same way.

Which is what bothers me about this kind of stuff. I think there are more people than we think that could be part of this kind of market, but the stigma of wargames is one of impenetrable interfaces and poor design. Often this is even embraced by the grognards who think that crap interface is the same thing as design complexity. It isn't.

I personally agree that games should be perfectly scalable, flexible, etc. but that's coming at it purely from a personal/customer standpoint. On the development side, there are multiple other considerations. First, for a game like GOA the resolutions being requested didn't even exist when this game entered development.

For a single developer especially and even for a small team, that's a decision that has to be made when game development starts. Back-fitting is rarely ever an option for stuff like this. As a result, this is really not an "issue" that can be fixed, but rather something that would have prevented GOA from ever seeing the light of day without a rewrite, however long that might have taken. As another example, Forge of Freedom runs at 1024x768 fullscreen because at the time development began on the engine (starting with COG) the non-fullscreen scalable windowed mode could not provide acceptable performance. Therefore the choice there was again either develop the game at a fixed fullscreen resolution or don't develop it at all.

As new development starts, developers generally use the tools available to them and look to support the standards of that time. With smaller independent developers, it's rarely possible or feasible to update an engine multiple times during development just to add more resolution support or a different view mode. Ultimately, 2D map-based wargames are not purely for eye candy, but we're encouraging all new development to focus on supporting flexible resolutions, etc. (which several of our games released in the last year and some even earlier, do quite well).

Regards,

- Erik

It's odd that the intro screen fits the screen, but the game itself starts in a window.

Presumably because the intro screen is using different controls than the programming language used for the game.

As Erik said, when this game came into development, 1024x768 was the max general resolution. Changing the interface is not a simple task..especially if the used language cannot "scale". Therefore a new language would have to be used, and with that, the learning curve required to get all the functionality under your belt AND recode the many thousands (millions?) of lines of code!

I don't think you understand the task as it would stand. You're comment is fair, but you really need to see it from the programmers side before you go shouting about crap resolutions.

I am a software engineer by trade.

Resolution is not a function of the language used. You do not need to learn a new language in order to use differing resolutions.

That doesn't mean it is easy to change of course, but it isn't a issue of learning a new programming language.

I think (and not being a graphics designer I don't really know) that the issue is that you need to create new images for each resolution. I think....

In any case, my comments are related to my impressions of the usability and consumer experience - the issues of the developer/publisher does not impact that - the game isn't any more enjoyable because I know that the developer didn't have the option of making it scale.

Well, since I already made an observation here, and was even quoted (!), I guess I better wade fully in and give my 200 cents worth.  Let me start by saying I am a wargamer from long ago, back when SPI was in business, TSR made wargames...and was also in business for that matter, and Avalon Hill was king.  I am most certainly one of those referred to by the term 'grognard'.  From this perspective, I could care less if the interface is cludgy, or the screen won't scale...I want content!  And knowing Frank Hunter's previous Civil War endeavor, I know I won't be let down.  The meat of the game is the thing, and considering some of the crude components to both board and computer wargames that I've put up with in the past, a rough edged interface is the last thing I'll be worrying about.
 
Now that I've been clear on that point, let me move on and put on my other gamer personna...the one associated with such strange acronyms as FPS, RTS, and MMRPG.  With that crowd, presentation is very important, and in some cases crucial.  And the main thing is that these folks are really difficult to get to try out a new game unless it looks slick and is easy to use, otherwise they can't be bothered.  'Man...that thing your playing looks old, you say that's a new game?  Looks boring...'  And so it goes...trying to get non-wargamers to even look at a wargame, board or computer, has always been on the difficult side of things.  Unless of course it looks slick, and doesn't require a bunch of reading to learn how to play.  Pretty and intuitive, that's the ticket.
 
So when and where will the twain meet?  That's the thrust of what Berkut's been saying right from the start, and being a person who has battled long and hard to bring new players into the hobby and also knowing what they seem to want to see, I do agree.  So long as things like interface, screen resolutions and other such issues are dated and difficult to grasp easily, it will be difficult to expand and broaden the genre.  The issue also isn't what wargamers like myself or others here will put up with, but what other folks who might be interested will be put off by.  And while it might sound like a superficial agruement when, after all, 'the game's the thing!', it is still this sort of thing that will get new people to look at these games and give them the attention they deserve, like this game.
 
All that said, there is one last point I'd like to make, and that is it does seem rather unfair to bring all this up on this particular title however...I would have preferred that this came up in a more general discussion forum without naming names.  Not that it should somehow be exempt from these arguments, but more because it really was a one man labor of love on the part of Mr. Hunter to make this game.  I can forgive him an interface that will take some getting used to, or an issue with a single res screen, because he concentrated on what he felt was the most important thing and that was the game itself.  In short, he sang to my wargamer's heart, not that other guy, and being a wargamer first I'm smiling.  [8D]  And for that, I give you many thanks.  But I do think, very strongly, that future designs and designers should take note of these arguments and concerns.  You may want to consider it just fluff, but it's fluff that not just helps sell the games, but helps sell them to newcomers.  And it's clearly not just me who thinks so...look at how the majority of the review sites always have rating catagories for graphics, presentation, etc.  And so coming from a long time champion of expanding our hobby, I think these are valid points and honestly should be considered as important as the game itself if we as a whole wish to continue in that Holy Grail quest of expanding the wargaming community.