about resolution

[Solver]

Congrats Faded arse

No, he got a very old monitor that can't do above 800x600, that's it...

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Solver
Except that there's no reason to get a new monitor...

I did not know one needed a reason the get something othr than one wanted it.

Anyway if it only does 800x600 that sounds like a reason to me, but then I felt I had to have HDTV.

[Solver]

LOL... nah well these are people who live fine for 7 or more years with their old monitor, and don't want to spend money on a new one just for Civ 3. Hence, they seek a way to play on 800x600 .

[jordan83]

Solver is right in all his answers !
Why buy a 50'' monitor when youcan play with a 14'' ?

[Solver]

Hehe, I just understand you well enough .

[jordan83]

ok, but not too much.
if someone want to offer me a 15'' or more inches monitor, he is welcome !

[vmxa1]

That is fine, but I will keep my 21". Some games have a problem with what can be seen on the interface when less than 1024. Games like Stars! can not fit all of the windows in when they are extended until you get to 19". I remember when the 19 came out it made Stars much easy as I no longer had to unfold some windows. Also I do not like the look of games at 800.

[jordan83]

i would be happy if i could play on a 21'' or even 19'' but i can't, that's all ! so thanks to the progammer who create program to play event at 800 ! I think that it is unfair that someone could not play a game because he doesn't have the last monitor !

[vmxa1]

Not true and in fact could consider self center. Why would I make a game to at standard that is how many years old? What would this do to my sales? Do you think people will want to buy game with those types of grahpics? Not many. I am glad you have a work around, but please I do not even want 800 stuff. Try DiabloII before LOD allowed just 800. It is bad enough at 800.

[Solver]

Quite wrong. First, 800x600 is NOT backwards. Most people still use the resolution, look at statistics. It's a fact. 640x480 is uncommon, 800x600 is very common.

Next, Civ 3 is a very uncommon game in this aspect. The upcoming Age of Mythology, which has a brand new 3D engine and excellent graphics with smooth movements, yet it supports 800x600. The Alpha even supports 640x480, retail version supports 800x600, defaults to 1024x768. Which is good - the few people not being able to play so, will switch to 800x600.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Solver
Quite wrong. First, 800x600 is NOT backwards. Most people still use the resolution, look at statistics. It's a fact. 640x480 is uncommon, 800x600 is very common.

Next, Civ 3 is a very uncommon game in this aspect. The upcoming Age of Mythology, which has a brand new 3D engine and excellent graphics with smooth movements, yet it supports 800x600. The Alpha even supports 640x480, retail version supports 800x600, defaults to 1024x768. Which is good - the few people not being able to play so, will switch to 800x600.

You are the first one I have heard of asking for 800. I have read many complaints about games only having 800 and not even 1024. I never said it was backward, just unappealing.
It is nice to claim something as fact that no one can prove or refute. Where do you get the "fact" that most people use 800. even it it were true that does not make games appealing to the rest of us. I do not complain if they include 640 or whatever, but I doubt many games are going to sell to gamers if they only offer 800. It will take a great game to make me buy it.

[vondrack]

Originally posted by vmxa1
It is nice to claim something as fact that no one can prove or refute. Where do you get the "fact" that most people use 800.

Solver is quite right. The standard monitor is 15", not 17"... it will take at least two three years for 15-inch monitors to disappear from the stage... And a 15" is not really suitable for anything over 800x600... the details are too small in higher resolutions...

[jordan83]

i think that you are all right, but read this :
it's pretty cool to play or to have the 1024 or more resolution, this is one thing, but to forbidden poor users that only have under 1024 resolution is an other thing, and this last thing is to be fought.
Thats 's why i applause to Solver initiative to make a great game like civ 3 been able to be played by admirators who just have under 1024 resolution.
And i don't know what you think, but i think that it is a horrible thing to forbidden someone for playing a game that is the best i ever known.
Furthermore, i would say that it is an unfairness that Solver (thanks again) have resolved, thanks again to Solver who is not a selfish player of civ 3.
ps : i have not yet tried the Solver's programm for the resolution, so i reserve my conclusions about it in a furter mail, but in all cases the Solver's initiative is to be encouraged !

[Solver]

You are the first one I have heard of asking for 800. I have read many complaints about games only having 800 and not even 1024. I never said it was backward, just unappealing.
It is nice to claim something as fact that no one can prove or refute. Where do you get the "fact" that most people use 800. even it it were true that does not make games appealing to the rest of us. I do not complain if they include 640 or whatever, but I doubt many games are going to sell to gamers if they only offer 800. It will take a great game to make me buy it.

He's not the first. If you went to the thread with my solution and looked at the first post, you'd see that over 200 people have downloaded it. This indicates that quite some use it... BTW I'm very surprised, I never really expected than more than a few will use it.

Vondrack - right you are. When on a 17" monitor, I work from under 1024, but for 15" monitors 800 is best.

Jordan - thank you very much for the good words. However, making the game not support 800x600 was a Firaxis decision, that made the game look like it was. For instance, many windows and diplomacy screens take more place on the screen than it would fir on a 800x600 monitor, and they probably decided to make 1024x768 a minimum, considering that 98% of gamers will be able to run it. And actually, they were right in supposing so, because people with old monitors are really a few. However, the reason I offer this solution is because I was in the same boat. I felt terribly embarassed by reading there's a 1024 requirement for the game I wanted so much, and that I couldn't fulfill. This means that I had to buy, basically, a 17" monitor, because a 15" monitor would make it look bad. I didn't want anyone in such a situation again, and was happy to make it possible for you to run under 800.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Solver
"He's not the first. If you went to the thread with my solution and looked at the first post, you'd see that over 200 people have downloaded it. This indicates that quite some use it... BTW I'm very surprised, I never really expected than more than a few will use it."

Maybe I am not precise enough or people fail to read and understand what was said. I only said it was the first one I had heard. That leaves room for the rest of the world to fall into that group.

"For instance, many windows and diplomacy screens take more place on the screen than it would fir on a 800x600 monitor, and they probably decided to make 1024x768 a minimum, considering that 98% of gamers will be able to run it. And actually, they were right in supposing so, because people with old monitors are really a few."

I am confused, you tell us that more have 15", yet 98% of the players will use 1024? The truth is I do not have a clue about the numbers. I was mearly voicing my surprise.