Started by jamespetts, April 09, 2016, 05:54:37 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: jamespetts on April 09, 2016, 05:54:37 PMWindows does not cope well with having different dpi scaling on different monitors.
Quote from: Ters on April 09, 2016, 07:16:50 PMWindows is supposed to since 8.1. I don't remember if applications must be written to support it as well.
Quote from: prissi on April 09, 2016, 08:10:46 PMWe had disabled scaling for Simutrans recently (I think be changing the manifest).
Quote from: jamespetts on April 10, 2016, 11:02:04 AMCould optional 200% scaling be implemented easily in the manifest (and, if so, how would one activate it; my apologies for being ignorant of the ways of the manifest)?
Quote from: jamespetts on April 10, 2016, 11:02:04 AMHas anyone tried this with a reasonably powerful computer (e.g. Core i5, Core i7) to see whether this is indeed a problem?
Quote from: Ters on April 10, 2016, 11:44:05 AMNope. Windows either "transparently" fakes all the scaling for you, or you handle them all yourself.
QuoteThose names have been around for years. My impression is also that most of the performance enhancing developments in the last five years have been in GPU/VRAM, and in the switch from disks to solid state drives, neither of which benefit Simutrans.
Quote from: jamespetts on April 10, 2016, 01:51:49 PMAhh - could Simutrans handle internal 200% scaling, in that case without a major rewrite?
Quote from: jamespetts on April 10, 2016, 01:51:49 PMHowever, does anyone have any idea how Simutrans performs in 4k on any machine?
Quote from: Ters on May 02, 2016, 05:06:22 AMOthers say buying a 32" desktop monitor is crazy, because you need to start turning your head to see the edges, which is bad ergonomics. Unless you put the monitor farther away, which mostly cancels the effect of having a bigger screen, which has an to me unknown effect on the well-being of the eyes.
Quote from: sdog on May 02, 2016, 07:32:03 AMI am also not certain that turning the head is ergonomically bad. This could tempt the user to also change their posture. However, I doubt that tilting the head is even necessary, since our eyes are not fixed in our heads, and cover more than 180 degree. Even with a much smaller screen only a small area is actually in the area of sharpest vision and an even smaller part in our perception. All this is just speculation, however.
Quote from: gmc on September 23, 2016, 08:50:50 PMIf anyone knows how to make the game playable again, i'd be very happy to hear about it.
Quote from: Ters on September 23, 2016, 09:56:35 PMChanging your display settings so that you only have a quarter of the number of pixels is the only thing I know that should work.
Quote from: prissi on October 08, 2016, 01:22:56 PMHaving said that, on my computer both SDL and GDI only used simple pixel doubling routinges, which were ugly.
Quote from: Ters on October 08, 2016, 05:46:33 PMOn a 4K screen or a "regular"/HD screen?I'm not sure other scaling methods, such as bilinear filtering, will look any better. In fact it might just become a blur. Simply scaling up the pixels by an integer factor is what I prefer for old games, and it is what is used by retro games. ScummVM has several options for taking this supplement called phenq and it can scaling, but I find the only one worth using other than simply scaling the pixels, is one that does some rather fancy edge detection and enhancement.
Quote from: RandallRay on October 01, 2018, 03:45:59 PMSo, will it look good on a 4K monitor or not? I'm planning to buy one but only if I'm able to enjoy the graphics.
Quote from: jamespetts on October 01, 2018, 06:56:06 PMWith my large (31") 4k monitor with a 128 sized pakset, I find that it looks good. If you have a smaller 4k monitor (e.g. 27"), it may not look so good - but I do not recommend a 27" 4k monitor in any event, as the dot pitch is too small for good phenq review much of the resolution to be use-able. 4k is only sensible for a large monitor.