1920x1080...insane?

Knox · Sun 22/09/2013 20:34:38

I was thinking of going from 1024x768 to a higher-res widescreen format but really dont know which one to choose...(I guess since I'll only be done around the year 2043 anyways, it prob doesn't really matter much...heh).

So how much is too much? As in, would creating a game at 1920x1080 be considered insane with AGS? Could it be "too much res" for AGS to handle (like with larger sprite animations, really huge rooms, etc). Already as it is at 1024x768, if I have a large scrolling room is gets really sluggish in the room editor, and some large animations take forever to load in the view editor.

How do you guys choose your resolutions? Do I go 1280x720, 1280x800, 1920x1080? Arggg!

I keep reading that the out-dated 4:3 aspect ratio should die (what I have now, yay)...thats the main reason why I'm thinking of switching to widescreen.

Not sure what to choose.

Anian · Sun 22/09/2013 21:27:22

With widescreen there's a problem of 16:9 vs 16:10 as it is not standardised.
I'd go with lower resolution rather than 1920x1080 since some laptops for example don't have such high resolutions for example.

Armageddon · Sun 22/09/2013 21:44:11

You'd be better to do it like The Journey Down did (I think they did) and put your art on 3D planes and have some decent texture filtering for upscaling it.

Knox · Mon 23/09/2013 05:33:23

@Anian: By lower resolution you mean something like 1280x720? I'm also guessing AGS doesnt permit us to "scale down" resolution, right?

@Armageddon: Wow, never heard of that before...that is something most people don't do in AGS, right? I guess I can look around on how to set that up see if there are tutorials on the subject.

I mean, does it really matter 16:9 or 16:10? It already sucks having to rescale everything up to widescreen from 1024x768 (moving gui's, re-scripting crap), I really dont want to have to do this again later if I choose the wrong one now.

Armageddon · Mon 23/09/2013 06:33:30

Yeah you wouldn't want to use AGS for a game of that resolution.

Unity would be your best bet, it has some great texture filtering and is very cheap and easy to learn.

16:9 vs 19:10 doesn't matter too much when making a game, I'd dev on 16:10 though because you can always stretch it down a bit without much harm.

Mehrdad · Mon 23/09/2013 07:11:45

@KNOX
You can add 1280x720 on new beta version of AGS .It's on WIP now.

Crimson Wizard · Mon 23/09/2013 08:41:28

Quote from: KNOX on Mon 23/09/2013 05:33:23
@Anian: By lower resolution you mean something like 1280x720? I'm also guessing AGS doesnt permit us to "scale down" resolution, right?

It does - in the experimental custom resolution build (Mehrdad posted the link).
Proof: http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=47344.msg636461738#msg636461738

Calin Leafshade · Mon 23/09/2013 16:56:35

@KNOX

Considering all the stuff your game project seems to do are you sure it can even *run* on a non-nuclear powered PC?

Remember that all the raw drawing and stuff that AGS does is on the CPU and not on the GPU. 1920x1080 is simply not viable for that. Especially not in AGS.

To be honest, I'm stunned that it runs at even the resolution you currently have it at.

Knox · Mon 23/09/2013 17:59:58

@Armageddon: That means switching everything to Unity, which is something I dont think Id want to do, really.

@Mehrdad/Crimson: Wow, I knew you guys were testing otehr resolutions, didnt know it could scale down as well...nice!

@Calin: Hah, yeah it runs...just I cut out lots of full-screen effects and stuff that was too much anyways...I'm hoping that by the time I'm done (when light travel is possible), computers by then will be able to run the game no problem.

Im inching towards 1280x800 (16:10) I guess.

By the way, is there a reason why loading many sprites in the editor makes it slow in the view editor, and why large rooms are really laggy in the room editor? Other than making smaller rooms/less sprites per view (or having a nuclear-powered pc), is there another way to make it "faster" in the editor?

Crimson Wizard · Mon 23/09/2013 18:09:41

Quote from: KNOX on Mon 23/09/2013 17:59:58
By the way, is there a reason why loading many sprites in the editor makes it slow in the view editor, and why large rooms are really laggy in the room editor? Other than making smaller rooms/less sprites per view (or having a nuclear-powered pc), is there another way to make it "faster" in the editor?

Because the drawing in Editor is very non-optimized. I guess that is because it was rarely an issue at the time being, so CJ did not bother.
This may and should be improved at some point.

Knox · Tue 24/09/2013 02:20:09

QuoteBecause the drawing in Editor is very non-optimized. I guess that is because it was rarely an issue at the time being, so CJ did not bother.
This may and should be improved at some point.

Good to know!

Knox · Tue 24/09/2013 18:18:06

@Crimson: If ever you need someone to test that out eventually, I can help.

Armageddon · Wed 25/09/2013 05:24:27

Quote from: KNOX on Mon 23/09/2013 17:59:58
@Armageddon: That means switching everything to Unity, which is something I dont think Id want to do, really.

Well if you're still contemplating resolution I doubt you have much done yet.

qptain Nemo · Wed 25/09/2013 19:11:31

Quote from: Armageddon on Wed 25/09/2013 05:24:27
Well if you're still contemplating resolution I doubt you have much done yet.

Gemini Rue was first implemented entirely using placeholder graphics, so... no, this point doesn't hold any water, sorry.

Armageddon · Thu 26/09/2013 00:43:26

I'm fairly sure he chose his resolution before hand though.

RickJ · Thu 26/09/2013 02:18:29

In addition to KNOX's specific needs and the comments so far, I would like to mention how inexpensive all-in-one-touch-screen 1920x1080 PCs are these days (<$900). People may find creative and interesting (not necessarily classic adventure game) ways of using AGS on such systems. In such situations issues such as performance may not be problematic. Just sayin ...

Knox · Thu 26/09/2013 03:11:31

@Armegeddon: Yeah I've got place-holder graphics right now almost everywhere (except UI which is pretty close to final). The main reason why Im not too keen on switching is my whole "gameplay system" is already coded (other then the driving module). I chose 1024x768 since that was the biggest at the time, hehe!

Knox · Mon 30/09/2013 01:33:49

Just curious, is 1600x900 a "rare" resolution to make a game with (point and click)? $:-\$

(For those who are currently making games higher-res than 1024x768 with AGS): What resolution are you using? 1280x720?

Armageddon · Mon 30/09/2013 01:38:43

There's 4k screens now, you need to worry about how to upscale your graphics and stretch/letterbox your game. You can't just make it at the highest possible res, because there will be a bigger screen tomorrow. What style are you going for? For an adventure game msot people play in window anyways, if it's pixely then there's no reason to make it on such a high res.

Knox · Mon 30/09/2013 02:20:33

Quote from: Armageddon on Mon 30/09/2013 01:38:43
There's 4k screens now, you need to worry about how to upscale your graphics and stretch/letterbox your game.

AGS can do this pretty well already, right?

Quote from: Armageddon on Mon 30/09/2013 01:38:43
You can't just make it at the highest possible res, because there will be a bigger screen tomorrow.

You're right, I'm not approaching this the right way...arg.

Quote from: Armageddon on Mon 30/09/2013 01:38:43
What style are you going for?

Pretty much the style I've got for my main character (avatar), a sort of semi-cartoon "painted realism". Something like this:

Spoiler

[close]