640x480 against 800x600

[Minimi]

For my new game, I need to know what problems occur in using 800x600 resolution, as it'll feature pre-rendered 3d backgrounds, I need to know weither the game will slow down or not, and if this resolution of 800x600 is fully compatible with AGS. I've used till now only 320x240, but for this game it just need to look alright.

[Galen]

Does having the computer render higher resoultion graphics at a higher resolution increase the workload of the computer?

Think about it logically. Of course there is a slow down, neglectable as it may be.

[GarageGothic]

It will slow down the game slightly since there's more pixels to move around, but unless you're using lots of graphics heavy functions (such as DrawingSurface or generating full-screen DynamicSprites), it won't be noticeable on modern computers. Especially not after the recent Direct3D implementation.

Your best bet would be to make a mock-up of your game using the same size of sprites and number of on-screen characters/objects that you think will be used in the final game. Then ask some of your friends to test it on their computers, providing you with their system specs and the frame rate count they got. This should help you decide the minimum specs for your game, and you can use that as a target throughout development, testing on a similiar machine on regular basis. If you do choose to include advanced effects that aren't necessary to gameplay (shadows, animated background objects and whatnot), you can always put in a toggle for them in an options menu.

[scotch]

The manual's recommendation for 800x600 @ 32 bit is a 900mhz cpu, which is about right, although of course the graphics card makes some difference too, especially for 3D accelerated mode. My mother's laptop is 600mhz but it's fine with D3D mode.

You can decide for yourself if you care about people on slower computers, but obviously nobody that bought one in the last 5 years will have any slowdown.