View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
frag.machine

Joined: 25 Nov 2006 Posts: 728
|
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
leileilol wrote: | frag.machine wrote: |
Actually, the intended standard resolution for DOS Quake was 320 x 240 (keeping the 4:3 aspect ratio). |
Explain why DOSQuake defaults to 320x200 then? 320x200 is intended to be 4:3 also. |
320x240 was obtained via mode X, which wasn't 100% standard among all VGA cards back in 1996 (it worked OK in like 90% of the hardware, but there were a few chipsets that failed), so 320x200 was a safe fallback. And no, 320x200 != exact 4:3 aspect ratio. _________________ frag.machine - Q2K4 Project
http://fragmachine.quakedev.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mh

Joined: 12 Jan 2008 Posts: 909
|
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
320x200x256 is standard VGA mode 13h. In other words if you were releasing a graphics program back in those days, and you wanted it to run on as wide a range of hardware as possible, you bloody better support this as your default. Anyone who remembers the old 80x25 character displays can do some interesting calculations around this.
I'm of the opinion that there is no such thing as a "canonical" video mode that you are "meant" to run software Quake at, or that software Quake is "designed" for. If you go back to the old techinfo.txt that came with DOS Quake you'll see it's pretty clear that 320x200 is just "the mode that works" and nothing more, and that there's plenty of talk about running Quake at higher resolutions. _________________ DirectQ Engine - New release 1.8.666a, 9th August 2010
MHQuake Blog (General)
Direct3D 8 Quake Engines |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2004 phpBB Group
|