KoHaN69 on 10/4/2006 at 04:25
Alright, well most probably didn't think of this:
changing the FOV, then cutting the game resolution DOWN, to make it narrower, hence when it stretches, it fills the screen perpotionally
now, honestly, who thunk of that?! :eek:
Luthien on 10/4/2006 at 05:55
(a) You can't set the FOV in T1 and T2.
(b) It wouldn't look any better than stretching 1600x1200 to 1920x1200.
KoHaN69 on 10/4/2006 at 06:43
Quote Posted by Luthien
(a) You can't set the FOV in T1 and T2.
(b) It wouldn't look any better than stretching 1600x1200 to 1920x1200.
I'm sorry, you misunderstood; i meant modifying it yo be "narrow" stretched by default, so 1:1 picture would look like its vertically stretched, so when the screen automatically stretches it, it would stretch to the appropriate perspective
The FOV has to be mofifiable because there is zoom, so it DOES modify
Luthien on 10/4/2006 at 06:50
I'm sorry, you misunderstood:
(a) You can't set the FOV in T1 and T2.
(b) It wouldn't look any better than stretching 1600x1200 to 1920x1200.
Before you reply again, think about it.
Vigil on 10/4/2006 at 20:48
To avoid a needless reply: the eye-zoom affects both the horizontal and vertical FOV angle at the same time. In order to get widescreen-style stretching, you must affect only the horizontal or the vertical FOV. There are no apparent commands for affecting only one FOV axis.
jermi on 10/4/2006 at 21:48
And in that light, it seems likely that non-square pixel aspect ratios were not considered at all when writing the graphics engine code. If this is the case, then hacking a pixel aspect ratio variable into the engine would mean patching many many many places in the code. Clearly, going directly for widescreen, square pixel resolutions is the easier alternative - even if that seems practically impossible as well.
Vigil on 11/4/2006 at 07:31
Not that it makes any difference, but 1280x1024 isn't a square pixel resolution on standard 4:3 monitors (1280x960 is).
Yametha on 11/4/2006 at 14:06
I know you can make the picture stretch horizontally because it happens to me when I'm playing. I need to ajust the monitor to make the aspect ratio correct again.
I use 3D Stereo, and then ajust the frustum. This porbably isn't any use to you, but it lets you know that it can be done.
Expanding on what Vigil said: While Thief might render what should be a 1.25 aspect ratio, it's really a 1.33 aspect ratio, which means anyone playing 1280x1024 without ajusting their screen is getting a slightly stretched (vertically) picture.
jermi on 11/4/2006 at 20:15
Quote Posted by Vigil
Not that it makes any difference, but 1280x1024 isn't a square pixel resolution on standard 4:3 monitors (1280x960 is).
Well, it doesn't make any difference to
some people. ;)
But yes, in this case it doesn't make any difference, since Dark assumes square pixel aspect ratio even with 1280x1024 resolution. Obviously, the support for any other pixel aspect ratio just isn't there in the engine.
One can, of course, play widescreen Thief simply by stretching the picture vertically so that the pixel aspect ratio gets corrected back to square. The top and the bottom of the picture will be cut off, and you end up with a smaller than normal vertical (and diagonal) FOV.
That might be possible to correct, since the engine (TMA) has variable FOV.
Yametha on 12/4/2006 at 00:28
Quote Posted by jermi
But yes, in this case it doesn't make any difference, since Dark assumes square pixel aspect ratio even with 1280x1024 resolution.
Um, no it doesn't. I checked in dromed by making two shapes, one with an aspect ratio of 1.33:1 and the other with 1.25:1, then lining them up with the edges of the screen. Thief thinks that 1280x1024 is a 4:3 (1.33:1) aspect ratio. This does not involve square pixels.
