Ludeon Forums

Hey all. Knowing what res people play at will help me make certain design and tech decisions. If y'all could hit the poll it'd be great.

I see a trend developing.   :-X

1280x1024 :)

I'm at 1366x768. I'm guessing that puts me closer to option 2, correct?

Not too close to anything, 1920x1080, so I chose option 4.

1920x1080 cos brand new screen ^-^

Same boat as SSS currently.

Really depends if you have a laptop or desktop. Most desktops will play at 1920, while most laptops will play around 1366.

Who voted 1024x768?

What resolution do you play at exactly?

Would it be a problem if I upped the minimum resolution a bit?

Do this is for ui resolution or entire game ?

1680x1050 here in general use

Windowed on my old SXGA monitor, 1278x973, 5:4 aspect ratio. On my bigger system with the new monitors, windowed at something approaching 1920x1080, 16:9 aspect ratio.

Now, 1024x768 is a 4:3 aspect ratio... wouldn't someone have to be running a CRT monitor for that to be native? Are there still working CRTs somewhere? I have trouble finding working 5:4 LCDs, nevermind 4:3 CRTs...

Quote from: loc978 on March 21, 2015, 02:18:32 AM
Now, 1024x768 is a 4:3 aspect ratio... wouldn't someone have to be running a CRT monitor for that to be native? Are there still working CRTs somewhere? I have trouble finding working 5:4 LCDs, nevermind 4:3 CRTs...

I've got 2 working CRTs at my place. I've got a bunch more but they aren't hooked up to anything so I don't know if they're working or not.

Quote from: SSS on March 20, 2015, 09:21:22 PM
I'm at 1366x768. I'm guessing that puts me closer to option 2, correct?

I am at 1360 x 768. Is that what you meant?

Quote from: nottma on March 21, 2015, 04:07:44 AM

Quote from: SSS on March 20, 2015, 09:21:22 PM
I'm at 1366x768. I'm guessing that puts me closer to option 2, correct?

I am at 1360 x 768. Is that what you meant?

1366 X 768 and 1360 x 768 are both viable Resolutions, the laptop which I'm currently running supports both with a maximum of 1366, no idea why, but it does.

Should hopefully be updating to something a bit bigger soon. Got a tower in the works.

Using 1366x768 (laptop's max)... Voted for 1 option, and won't be able to play if Ty will increase min res to 1080... It's a pitty, but I understand why it is needed - low-res screens can be easily cramped with UI elements, that can be implemented in future (like EdB Interface-like icons for pawns).

I voted for option 3 because I have a 1920x1080 screen at home. But when I'm over at mum's (like today) I'm playing at 1366x768.

1440 X 900 here. Not sure where that fits into the poll.

Sorry, if this is off-topic, but as we can see - positions in poll is really wierd, cause of most people uses 16:9/10 ratio, and all of them not sure what res to vote for...
So, maybe Tynan should re-do the poll? Only IMHO, not even a suggestion though...
And one more thing... I'm a paranoic one, so I think, there is always a person who plays on granpa's cga monitor, but who will vote for a greatest res, just to say: "Im as cool as Chuk's steel balls. Cause it is internet and you can't check it". Again, just thoughts, maybe not worth to worry)

As long as things continue to work well at non-standard ratios, I don't mind. Currently playing on a 21:9 (2560x1080) screen and it works very well, no UI issues other than a slightly cropped background picture on the main menu. 

A UI scaling slider however, would be nice.

I use 1440x900. I do not know what option i should select :/

Quote from: Tynan on March 21, 2015, 12:46:05 AM
Would it be a problem if I upped the minimum resolution a bit?

I think you should stay with min 1024x768 (like now).

Quote from: Enjoyment on March 21, 2015, 08:22:37 AM
I'm a paranoic one, so I think, there is always a person who plays on granpa's cga monitor

Yea.. I think about this too... But anyways you can always select 640x480 resolution.

I play RimWorld at the native resolutions on both my MacBook Pro (1680x1050), where it is very nice, and my iMac (2560x1440), where it is spectacular.

I have a 1920x1080 screen and normally run the game at 1042x987 which is what I keep my left-hand side browser on.  I have a second browser on the right taking up the rest of the screen which is usually where my background video is.

1366x768, voted option two because it's mathematicly closer :P

1920x1080, like most a' the people here :P

2560x1440 is what I play at. I was considering getting a 3440x1440 monitor, but I'm having a difficult time swallowing the price.

1920x1080 as well and no complaints as yet.

Quote from: geredis on March 22, 2015, 08:27:41 PM
1920x1080 as well and no complaints as yet.

1920x1080 reporting in too

Looking back, there isn't a proper answer for "1080p 16:9" as the 1920x1200 is right for width and the 1680x1050 option is just about as close in the height.

Why these strange resolutions? Isn't everyone 16:9 these days AND 1080p (1920x1080)?

I understand the 1366x768 or even 1360x768 for laptops or possibly even smaller 720p* monitors, but it's got to be ancient/terrible to be 4:3/16:10 and/or less than that. Why even make the poll in 4:3? Certainly a 4:3 CRT has to be blurry/dim as #%*( by now and not worth using.

Anything in the last 5 years is going to be 1080p or higher unless it's a laptop. 23" 1080p 16:9 monitor is dirt cheap. Got to be really cheap if you can't afford that. That's basically bare minimum for me and that's only $100-$120.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10#Computer_displays

Quote from: tommytom on March 22, 2015, 10:53:26 PM
Looking back, there isn't a proper answer for "1080p 16:9" as the 1920x1200 is right for width and the 1680x1050 option is just about as close in the height.

Why these strange resolutions? Isn't everyone 16:9 these days AND 1080p (1920x1080)?

I understand the 1366x768 or even 1360x768 for laptops or possibly even smaller 720p* monitors, but it's got to be ancient/terrible to be 4:3/16:10 and/or less than that. Why even make the poll in 4:3? Certainly a 4:3 CRT has to be blurry/dim as #%*( by now and not worth using.

Anything in the last 5 years is going to be 1080p or higher unless it's a laptop. 23" 1080p 16:9 monitor is dirt cheap. Got to be really cheap if you can't afford that. That's basically bare minimum for me and that's only $100-$120.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10#Computer_displays

Following statistic probabilities, there was always going to be 'those' bunch of people.
There's also people running older screens that aren't CRT's that are at 4:3 aspect ratios, that do not feel the need to upgrade simply because there's no reason to as it still works.

Edit;
[OFFTOPIC] Because I don't want to bump the thread unnessessarily...
That Free-Sync stuff looks nice, Wouldn't mind having some of that next time I upgrade my systems, definitely better than V-Sync's dodginess.
[/OFFTOPIC]

Yes, I suppose there are still some 4:3 LCDs running around. I have seen a few, and they are absolutely terrible. LCDs back then were VERY primitive. I used to be a CRT advocate and still am to some extent, but they are dead and gone and my 19" CRT (R.I.P.) was dim as a candle and blurry as all get out before I retired it, and that was a looooong time ago and it's been about that long they stopped making them (mainstream anyways. I'm sure you can pay a ton to get one new still).

Old 4:3 LCDs will have terrible ghosting due to the terrible response times. It's like the 1990s where everyone used mouse trails in Windows 9x because it was cool. Everything should have excellent response times, size, resolution, LED backlit (brighter, last longer, energy efficient). I have a CCFL myself and need to replace this one at some point. Only because the polarization sheets separated and dust got in there (there are specs under the screen "skin") and the light bleeds through the edges on dark scenes (since I bought it, actually).

I suppose I am one of those "won't buy a new monitor because this one still works" guys. The irony. But, It's got all the latest tech besides being LED and... well... being new.

I want a G-Sync monitor, but it's old TN panel technology (terrible view angles and color) and it's ridiculously overpriced just to remove tearing with v-sync off or removing the input lag/framerate drop with v-sync on. I'll upgrade when it's viable.

/sort of off-topicness

Edit: Nope. Sorry. More off-topicness: http://www.techpowerup.com/210846/amd-announces-freesync-promises-fluid-displays-more-affordable-than-g-sync.html

1366x768

I'm still using my 24" 1920x1200 monitor, and the only reason why I even consider buying a new one, is that a lot of indie titles have lazy devs and they dont support my resolution properly(even after a full release). Other then that, I just can't justify to buy a new one, since I'm prefectly happy with this. Most likely I will use this till it dies or starts causing any issues.

1680x1050 in Fullscreen, bescause of my 22" Display,
or less in Windowed Mode, because Netflix :D

1280x720 on 70" TV. Text in interfaces get too small to read at higher resolutions, unless the interface scales.

You're the man Tynan.

There could be problems with upping the minimum resolution because of TV's tynan.  A huge amount of HD tv's bought within 2-6 years ago have a maximum native resolution of 1024x768.  And that was right about the time people started replacing monitors with tv's.

So while technically, you are in the clear because it's outdated tech, could cause some outrage like some of the other big launch's did when they required dx11 compatible video cards.

1920x1080
Unless I am watching a stream, then 1024x57

New computer, New monitor. 1920 x 1080. 1080p is beautiful...

1920x1080 here, and won't be going higher until it becomes the standard.

1920x1080 - No vote from me.

Quote from: Tynan on March 20, 2015, 06:36:15 PM
Hey all. Knowing what res people play at will help me make certain design and tech decisions. If y'all could hit the poll it'd be great.

i gotta ask, why the 16:10 aspect ratios? 16:9 is a lot more common.
Its nice that alternate aspect ratios are supported.

Personally, i've got 1080p and 1366x768 (desktop and laptop)

Quote from: Mussels on April 03, 2015, 04:39:02 AM

Quote from: Tynan on March 20, 2015, 06:36:15 PM
Hey all. Knowing what res people play at will help me make certain design and tech decisions. If y'all could hit the poll it'd be great.

i gotta ask, why the 16:10 aspect ratios? 16:9 is a lot more common.
Its nice that alternate aspect ratios are supported.

Personally, i've got 1080p and 1366x768 (desktop and laptop)

Probably because 16:9 and 16:10 are pretty close, and the poll's aimed to get a rough idea mostly.

1920x1080 is probably the most common size of monitor these days.

My old laptop was 1366x768 which is a common laptop monitor size now. My current PC is 1920x1200 which makes me the odd one out compared to the norm of 1080p.

1600x900

Trie on a ~900x600 but it was too small since I couldn't shift the screen up or down. If I could do that somehow, it'd work for me.

Windows: 2560 x 1600 -- 16:10 ratio.
iMac:       2560 x 1440 -- 16:9 ratio.
Future monitor: 4k or 5k -- 16:9 or greater ratio.