Question for gamers with HD monitors

[Signal]

I only just recently got my first HD wide-screen monitor - on a laptop no less. Took me a moment to figure out the new resolutions that wide screen monitors like to use (one I'm using right now uses 1440x900 as opposed to something like 1024x768 or 1280x1024, for example), but now that everything looks nice and in-proportion now (as opposed to stretched wide) I was wondering to myself if computers, and specifically video games, make use of all this "extra space"?

In other words, whenever I play a game that supports wide-screen resolutions, is what I'm seeing the exact same thing I would see on a Standard Definition monitor, just "stretched" to look like it stays in proportion? Or do games these days take advantage of the extra space on the sides of the screen to actually show you more of what is going on in your peripheral vision?

How about my Xbox 360? I bought my first ever wide-screen flat panel TV to go along with it and hooked it up via HDMI cable - another first for me. Do console games take advantage of the extra space on the side to show off more stuff?

[KeystoneMan]

I have a widescreen 24" monitor and its awesome. I play everything in 1920x1200 (16:10 ratio). You need the right ratio. if you get the right ratio, nothing gets stretched. I dont know if my field of view is actually bigger when I play video games with a wide screen, but it feels like it is! Its really nice.

I know nothing about the 360 sorry. Im sure rabb1t or KO can lay some mad science down for you.

[Crazy_Dragon]

Depends on the game, to be honest, but most of them simply display all that you'd see (or be forced to squint at) on an SD display. All you're really getting is a bigger, sharper picture.

[rabb1t]

Im sure rabb1t or KO can lay some mad science down for you.

Not so much science really. The quick answer is that "yes, the camera should be the correct aspect ratio in order to display more information than the older aspect ratio".

Here is an example shot that I have (http://www.everbecoming.com/temp/pond1680x1050.jpg) which shows a 4:3 (1280x1024) box in a 16:10 (1680x1050) screenshot. I really need to make a comparison one for a MMOG, but what you aren't seeing is that with a wider field of view you would have a higher awareness of baddies on those edges, you'd have UI elements pushed off of your main field of view instead of smack dab right in the middle.

However, I do have to correct something...

Question for gamers with HD monitors

As pointed out by KeystoneMan your question isn't about high-def, but about aspect ratio. Your OP compares a 16:10 aspect ratio to 4:3 and 5:4, which are the older 'square' formats, compared to the new school 'wide screen' format of 16:9 (used in film and TV) or 16:10 (adopted by PCs prior to the 16:9 standard going mainstream.)

"HD" commonly refers to a signal which is 480p, 720p, or 1080p, which refers to the vertical pixel count and framerate. (Being 480, 720, or 1080, at 60 FPS.) So, technically speaking, PC monitors have been "HD" for roughly 10 years, as resolution has been higher than 640x480 for a very very very long time.

It is important to note that the industry is already seeing a shift away from the old 16:10 standard and towards the 16:9 standard to unify both media. Recent word is that LCD manufacturers are stopping production of 16:10 pannels for laptops, so we should see a pretty quick change there to only supporting 16:9 in the near future. We have already seen some 16:9 desktop screens appear. (Those being 1920x1080. For laptop we'll likely see some 1280x720s start to appear in order to claim Blu-ray compliance for 720p resolution. It also wouldn't surprise me to see 1680x1050 changed to 1600x900 to fit 16:9 aspect.)

Depends on the game, to be honest, but most of them simply display all that you'd see (or be forced to squint at) on an SD display. All you're really getting is a bigger, sharper picture.

Untrue. There are extremely few games these days that do not correctly alter the camera angle/position to display a wider field of view. The last one I knew of to display the "same" information regardless of aspect ratio is Hellgate:London.

[KeystoneMan]

MAD science yo!

[rabb1t]

[sings] I blinded you! :eek: :cool:

[Signal]

Here is an example shot that I have (http://www.everbecoming.com/temp/pond1680x1050.jpg) which shows a 4:3 (1280x1024) box in a 16:10 (1680x1050) screenshot. I really need to make a comparison one for a MMOG, but what you aren't seeing is that with a wider field of view you would have a higher awareness of baddies on those edges, you'd have UI elements pushed off of your main field of view instead of smack dab right in the middle

Awesome! Thanks for all the information and correcting my mistake. Consider me an educated individual now. :o

As you can tell, I've mainly stuck with my old SD TVs and computer monitors (I still have an old fashioned CRT monitor back at home) until I was recently deployed. Now I live in a small prison cell with power strips, so ordering space-savers like an LCD TV and laptop (from Amazon.com) have been a godsend - but this is my first introduction into all the different HD types and aspect ratios. So, I really do appreciate you taking the time to explain all of this to me. :D Thanks again!

Since I have your attention, perhaps I could ask for some advice:

The moment I return home, I'm going to have some saved-up money burning a hole in my pocket. I've decided to blow the initial wad on a brand new scratch-built desktop computer gaming system ordered from NewEgg - that way, I have my own copy of the upcoming Windows 7, a DX11 compatible video card, and a beefy rig to take advantage of all that power. Since I'm ordering so much computing horsepower, a display to bring it all together is in the cards. So, should I go ahead and look for a 16:9 aspect monitor in order to further "future proof" my computer, or would a cheaper 16:10 monitor still be supported for years to come?

[rabb1t]

No doubt it will be a few years before the 16:10s fully fade from the market, years more before support stops.

But as to being "cheaper", not so much the case. Similar specs...

Samsung 2333SW (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001314) 23" 1920x1080 $220 post rebate
vs.
Samsung 2433BW (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001309) 24" 1920x1200 $270 post rebate

Remember two things are going to become a factor...
1 - As production slows on the 16:10 pannels they become more expensive to the manufacturer, thus more expensive for us
2 - 1920x1200 is a larger material size than 1920x1080, thus it will have a higher cost even when you are cutting a piece from the same master sheet (think of it like a large piece of paper you cut into smaller pieces, the more pieces you can make the less each will cost), and again, that price difference is passed to us

More words sent via PM ;)

[rabb1t]

PS, no offense with my bla bla. I was just clarifying for the sake of clarification. Didn't mean to sound mean or anything if it did. :)

[Signal]

PS, no offense with my bla bla. I was just clarifying for the sake of clarification. Didn't mean to sound mean or anything if it did. :)

Na, ya didn't. I'm genuinely appreciative of all your comments. :)

[Roflcopter35]

I have a widescreen 24" monitor and its awesome.


I was hit with extreme jealousy when i read that, my monitors only 22!

[KeystoneMan]

I was hit with extreme jealousy when i read that, my monitors only 22!

26' monitors are too bad in price.....

[rabb1t]

I was hit with extreme jealousy when i read that, my monitors only 22!

24" is going out really. These days it's more about 23" in 16:9. Acer X233Hbid (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009163) 23" 1920x1080 $190

26' monitors are too bad in price.....

Haven't seen more than a few 26". Typically it's gone 24" to 30". A few in the 25.5" range are showing up lately though and there are a few that aren't super terribly bad in price. Samsung T260 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001276) 25.5" 1920x1200 $400 post rebate.

Then again, I'll never forget back in late 2005 when I paid $1200 for my 24", so.... :p (It's full retail price was closer to $1600.)

[KeystoneMan]

24" is going out really. These days it's more about 23" in 16:9. Acer X233Hbid (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009163) 23" 1920x1080 $190

Dont listen to him....hes delirious from rabb1t flu, go 28'!!!!!

[rabb1t]

go 28'!!!!!

Not exist. You talkin' crazy. :o