Aspect Ratios with SF4


#1

Well for some stupid reason I can’t post a new thread in the SF4 forum because of my 35 post count, even though I’ve been coming here since 06. Whatever. I’ll address it here.

I got a hold of the PC version of SF4 recently in some way shape or form, and tested it out. I was pretty happy with it. After I got my GFX drivers updated and the frame rate steady, I actually started to prefer it. Most of all however, I liked the screen size. It showed quite a bit more than my console version did. At this point, I still assumed I was on 16:9.

Then I switch the aspect correction settings and toy with them a bit and realize I’m on 4:3. I switch to 16:9, and then I realize my problem.

For two and half weeks I’ve been having problem after problem with gauging distance and playing my game correctly, and yet I switch it to 4:3 and all of a sudden, things get so much easier. I don’t know why it is but then I look at some videos. 4:3 resembled the Arcade ratio a lot more than 16:9.

I switch to my xbox which is 16:9, and get my ass handed to me. And then switch back to 4:3 and everything just fits much much better.

Yeah I know, it’s nit picky, and really for many of you it won’t make a difference, but I was wondering why we aren’t using the 4:3 aspect ratio which resembled the arcade version much more than 16:9 does. I mean we stuck to 4:3 for HDR, but for some reason we didn’t for SF4. The game looks great either way, so chalking it up to “It looks dirty” doesn’t cut it.

I don’t know. I mean of course if we’re sticking with 16:9, I gotta up my game and get with the program. I’d just like to know if this was ever brought up in the past, because it seems like it could have some implications, even minor, towards the way the games are presented at Evo.

Sorry for troubling you. Thoughts?


#2

The arcade version of SFIV is desinged to be 16:9, sorry. The official cabinets are widescreen.


#3

well fuck, Guess that answers my question.


#4

You should post more.


#5

If I’m not mistaken, all of the new arcade cabinets that use widescreen high-def monitors actually sport a… 16:10 aspect ratio? Or rather, 8:5 I guess. That’s why the console port of SF4 needed to adjust the vertical positioning of various HUD elements (ya lifebar son).

Somebody who actually knows what they’re talking about please confirm/deny this.


#6

All I know is that the arcade machines can be adjusted to either 4:3 or 16:9 but the game plays exactly the same way either way. The characters just appear a bit smaller in the 4:3 ratio.


#7

No, the reason for the adjustment of the lifebars and such is to compensate for the over-scan most normal televisions, HD or otherwise, inherently have. Monitors on the other hand, either computer or arcade, show you every pixel of the screen. The flyer for the Vewlix mentions it supports a resolution of 1360x768, that would be a 16:9 aspect ratio.

The one thing redrapper forgot to mention is the aspect ratio of his monitor. It’s probably safe to assume nowadays that might be a 16:10 since those are the most common. But maybe he has an old CRT. Maybe he has one of them Evo monitors that was 16:9? What’s the native resolution on your screen dude? Perhaps the problems you were having with spacing might be because you were stretching picture out, trying to fit a square in a rectangle or vice-versa?


#8

moved to tech talk


#9

im pretty sure this is a correct statement… but i wont confirm just in case im wrong… i dont wanna look stupid :rolleyes:


#10

^ ^ ^
So did you just burn me like really hard? Because it felt like it, but I wasn’t positive. Please confirm/deny so I don’t look completely silly.


#11

nah i was just agreeing with the logic but not saying that arcade actually runs 16:10(i think it does)

lol this is confusing right?


#12

My thoughts are you clearly do not understand aspect ratio’s… Perhaps you have your xbox incorrectly set? I really do not know…

Your XBOX and PC aspect ratio’s need to be set to what type of screen you have.

If you have a widescreen 16:9 TV screen, then set your aspect ratio to that.

Your PC screen is either 4:3 CRT, 16:9 or 16:10 LCD All of which are available on the PC.

The arcade is 16:9… If you do not have a 16:9 screen and play at 16:10 the difference is only just very slight… NONE of which should affect performance. Maybe just some psychological, but other than that no change in gameplay, just set your aspect ratio to what ever screen you have your pc and tv has.


#13

It’s a good thing you can’t post in the SF4 forum.


#14

I use an xbox with a samsung 22 inch high def tv. I want to have to 4:3 aspect ratio in order to see a bigger playing field and have smaller characters. When i set my tv to this instead of doing that it puts two black bars on either side and squishes the image. help?


#15

That’s exactly what’s supposed to happen at 4:3.

SF4 is meant to be played in a widescreen format.


#16

umm… that’s what is supposed to happen when you want to play 4:3 on a 16:9 display. If you want to fill the whole screen, play in 16:9.

If you want to “stretch” the 4:3 image to 16:9 DON’T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT! It will throw off your spacing perception like crazy. Sure you may get used to it on your tv, but play on a cabinet or a friend’s house… you’ll be royally thrown off.

SF4 was designed for 16:9, and can accommodate a 4:3 picture.

Make your choice.


#17

I have to go with this one, I have encountered several people with misfitting settings.

The meters and lettering get deformed.
Characters and backgrounds are in proportion.
I have made screen shots for comparison.
I chose E. Honda because he is wide.

1280*1024 (5:4)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2619/4029391278_0ebdfd2dc9_o.png

1280*720 (16:9)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2759/4028641491_a52c691210_o.png

1024*768 (4:3)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2428/4029401078_1817a8d669_o.png

1280*1024 (5:4)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2694/4029393134_593cc8e01e_o.png

1280*720 (16:9)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3490/4028642855_8c5c0ca197_o.png

1024*768 (4:3)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2495/4028647517_58ce98311b_o.png

1280*1024 (5:4)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2659/4029394904_fd99746a99_o.png

1280*720 (16:9)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2707/4029399406_df36349e0c_o.png

1024*768 (4:3)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2749/4029403890_7eed71b885_o.png


#18

I think the best think to do is stop fussing around with specs and settings and just play the game. Accept the “ratio” and adapt. Skillz on SF or any game for that matter should not be determined on specs. I remember back in the day. I use to play Quake 1 and 2 on “heat.net”. (Yeah I’m old) Anyway, I had mad lag and most people back then did too. But that didn’t stop us from pwn’n. So yeah. Sure in a perfect world, you can set a game any way you want. 1 hit kills, 40 supers into an ultra etc. But when you break it down, it all boils down to the player. :slight_smile:


#19

Who are you again?


#20

There are video-games that do not have dynamic proportioning.
In Real Time Strategy video-games this can give an unfair advantage.
And back in the day I played Asteroids.

I made two screen shots of Command & Conquer 3 Tiberium Wars.
Both are taken at maximum zoom out. (It does not look like that in the screen shots but it is.)
1280720 (16:9) Where you see a lot of the playing field.
1280
1024 (5:4) Where you see less playing field.

Command & Conquer 3 Tiberium Wars does not lock each others screen resolution to
have it set to the person with the lowest one,
I faintly remember there was a Command & Conquer that did that.

1280*720 (16:9)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2777/4029698795_6e180178c6_o.png

1280*1024 (5:4)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2593/4029701097_bedfd596f7_o.png