PC games developer resolution standard 16x10 or 16x9?

[ginbong]

Hi everyone, I have been deciding on a new monitor for quite some time now. I originally wanted the Samsung T260 25.5" 16:10 monitor but it is currently unavailable in Australia now so I am looking for something else.

I notice that the market is flooded with 16:9 monitors now which brings me to my question:

Is 16:10 still the main aspect ratio that PC game developers design their games at? I play mostly FPS and racing games and I remember there was an issue with Far Cry 2 when being cropped to 16x9. Anyone have any information on this? Sources or links from developers and designers would be good if you do decide to throw any information my way.

Also I believe 16:10 is still better for browsing and viewing images too.

I am having a hard time choosing a 16x10 monitor now, I am looking for something in the 24.5"~30" range as I am currently using a Samsung 2232BW 16:10 1680x1050 monitor, I love it but I've sadly outgrown it as I watch lots of anime and some TV shows on my PC and don't game as much as I used to. Believe it or not I got twelve unfinished games at the moment!

Cheers!

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Many new games support both, but 16x10 seems to remain more widely used. I've got no numbers for this, just my own experience. I personally prefer 16x10 for the extra vertical space, and don't mind the letterboxing for 16x9 content.

 

[Piotrsama]

Also I believe 16x10 is still better for browsing and viewing images too.

I am having a hard time choosing a 16x10 monitor now, I am looking for something in the 24.5"~28" range as I am currently using a Samsung 2232BW 16x10 1680x1050 monitor, I love it but I've sadly outgrown it as I watch lots of anime and some TV shows on my PC and don't game as much as I used to.

I also prefer 16:10.
One thing that you have to consider, is that your 8800 might not cut it at your new monitor's native resolution.

 

[TheVrolok]

I also prefer 16:10.
One thing that you have to consider, is that your 8800 might not cut it at your new monitor's native resolution.

Another for 16:10. I love it. However, like Piostrama said, I'm not sure that your 8800 is going to cut it on any newer game at your panel's native resolution.

 

[ginbong]

I also prefer 16:10.
One thing that you have to consider, is that your 8800 might not cut it at your new monitor's native resolution.

Another for 16:10. I love it. However, like Piostrama said, I'm not sure that your 8800 is going to cut it on any newer game at your panel's native resolution.

Don't worry about my 8800 guys. By the time I decide on a new monitor I will have a 5850/70 or the 5890? refresh under the hood or maybe even an Nvidia GPU if they're any good when they do get released.

So which monitors would you recommend with 16:10 aspect ratio? I want something bigger than a 24" as an upgrade I'm upgrading from a 22". I was looking at the Viewsonic 28" but apparently it isn't good. Samsung don't have any new 16:10 monitors except the T260 25.5" which isn't available in Australia anymore. Dell has a 2709 I believe but isn't on the Dell AU website.

 

[Maximilian]

16:9 all the way Its all i could find anyways i think 16:10 LCD's are being phased out in favour of 16:9 so they can add the "1080p FULL HD waow" logo to them all.

 

[smackababy]

I have a 16:10 that has the "1080p FULL HD" logo, despite having a native resolution of 1920x1200.

 

[simonizor]

16:10 is pretty much the standard widescreen format. Some games (fps in particular) force you to use the fov (field of view) that a 16:10 resolution would have if you use widescreen in an attempt to level the playing field. A monitor with an aspect ratio of 16:10 would be more desirable than 16:9.

That being said, if you find a sweet deal on an awesome 16:9 monitor, don't let that stop you from buying it. Most games let you play at whatever resolution your monitor supports; very few force the fov to be 16:10.

 

[Imp]

I love 16:10 on my monitor, but console games at 16:9 are fine on a huge screen. Since so much stuff is now ported or multi-platform though, you may as well go 16:9 unless you spend most of your time on your Desktop. On the otherhand, it's 230,400 fewer pixels your video card has to render...

 

[zerocool84]

Everyone knows that everything is moving over to 16:9. It's getting harder and harder to find 16:10 displays. They are getting pushed to the wayside cus everything is pretty much 16:9 cus of tv's at home and tons of more people are using their home tv's for a computer monitor.

 

[ginbong]

zerocool84, 16:9 are also cheaper for the manufacturers.

Manufacturers are still making 16:10 like the new Dell U2410 as they know there is still a slight demand. I am still sold on 16:10. Who knows I might wait it out with my trusty 22" and see what new panel tech pops out.

 

[digitaldurandal]

16:10, however if you 1:1 map you will have the horizontal lines when playing blueray on it.

So if you plan to play a lot of movies, 16:9 may be better.

It is also true that it will run somewhat faster, due to having less pixels to push.

That being said I own two 16:10s.

 

[crisium]

Most FPS are optimized for 16:9, so you lose a little bit of horizontal viewing when you play in 16:10. But if you really want the maximum viewing angles you can always letterbox your 1920x1200 to 1920x1080. If you stick with 16:10 the horizontal hit isn't bad - it's nothing compared to FPS in 4:3. But it is there - people may prefer 16:10 but it is rarely - if ever - the optimal viewing angle.

 

[simonizor]

Most FPS are optimized for 16:9, so you lose a little bit of horizontal viewing when you play in 16:10. But if you really want the maximum viewing angles you can always letterbox your 1920x1200 to 1920x1080. If you stick with 16:10 the horizontal hit isn't bad - it's nothing compared to FPS in 4:3. But it is there - people may prefer 16:10 but it is rarely - if ever - the optimal viewing angle.

Most games aren't "optimized for 16:9." The vast majority of FPS games adjust the FOV according to the aspect ratio that you are using. Only the hardcore games force you to use a set FOV.

 

[disappoint]

I'm happy with my 28" 1920x1200, 16:10 LCD. There was a 27.5" 1920x1080 16:9 LCD for exactly the same price as this one in the same store with a glossy screen instead of the matte screen. I'm glad I went with this one. I game on it all the time and never had a problem. Remember, you can do 1920x1080 on both screens, but you cannot do 1920x1200 on the 16:9 screen. I don't even notice the bars at the top and bottom when displaying 1080p material (movies, tv...)

 

[duragezic]

I probably wouldn't worry about the aspect ratio in regards to gaming. Many games support 4:3, 5:4 (1280x1024), 16:9 and 16:10. And while I know little of game development, it seems most devs would easily have all these options in, especially with trends like the Steam Hardware Survey showing widespread adoption of 16:10 and now 16:9 monitors.

Personally I like 16:10 for basic desktop usage, but for games, I don't care as long as its proper widescreen. Unfortunately so many manufacturers are moving to 16:9 you might not have much of a choice.

 

[ginbong]

But what about the issues like in Far Cry 2 where when you use 16:9 the bottom and top were actually being cut off and looked strange and silly so they needed to patch it.

For Far Cry 2 at least the developers designed it mainly for 16:10.

You guys are kinda missing the point. I know if you watch Blu-ray there will be black lines. I don't care about that and I'm already used to it as I use a 16:10 1680x1050 monitor already.

What I want to know is are games meant to be played 16:10 and how do they crop them to fit on 16:9 screens.

Do we lose some visuals or do they just compress the 1200 pixels into 1080 using some fancy magic trick?

Sorry if I wasn't clear in my opening post.

Basically no one knows what aspect ratio developers primarily design at?

 

[Ichigo]

But what about the issues like in Far Cry 2 where when you use 16:9 the bottom and top were actually being cut off and looked strange and silly so they needed to patch it.

For Far Cry 2 at least the developers designed it mainly for 16:10.

You guys are kinda missing the point. I know if you watch Blu-ray there will be black lines. I don't care about that and I'm already used to it as I use a 16:10 1680x1050 monitor already.

What I want to know is are games meant to be played 16:10 and how do they crop them to fit on 16:9 screens.

Do we lose some visuals or do they just compress the 1200 pixels into 1080 using some fancy magic trick?

Sorry if I wasn't clear in my opening post.

Basically no one knows what resolution developers primarily design at?

More like you just misunderstand.

Field of view has nothing to do with resolution and just aspect ratio. What you're looking for is what aspect ratio by default is given the widest FOV, 16:10 or 16:9. Many times, you can manually set fov. Sometimes, it's set for you. There's no "standard" as of now.

Just buy the best monitor you can. If the fov is too low, try to turn it up. If you can't, it's unlikely that going from 16:10 to 16:9 or vice-versa will make a significant difference.

 

[ginbong]

That's what I meant, aspect ratio. sorry. Wrote that last reply after just finishing work at 10:30 pm..

What is this 'Field of View' that you and previous posters speak of? I don't think I've ever run into or noticed that setting in the previous games I played.

I'm also considering the 27" new Samsung 16:9 monitor if I can't find any available 24.5"~28" 16:10 monitors in Australia that appeal to me.

 

[Markbnj]

A quick glance at Newegg for an unscientific survey shows the 24" monitors evenly split between 1920x1200 and 1920x1080. I was surprised. Guess I missed this shift in the market since I bought my Dell 4 years ago. Can't say I like it. My monitor is a monitor first, and then after work it becomes a TV screen. I don't want to give up 120 lines, and don't mind the letterboxing of 16:9 content.

 

[simonizor]

The field of view (also field of vision) is the (angular or linear or areal) extent of the observable world that is seen at any given moment.

Basically, each aspect ratio has it's own FOV that keeps the game in the same general perspective. Wider resolutions have a wider FOV, taller resolutions have a taller FOV. The majority of the games out there adjust the FOV along with your aspect ratio. If a game forces you to use the same FOV no matter what aspect ratio you're using, you'll either have black bars on the sides/bottom+top (if your aspect ratio is larger than the forced one) or you'll have some of the image cut off on the sides/bottom+top (if your aspect ratio is smaller than the forced one). Again, not many games force you to use a set FOV. Mainly only hardcore FPS games that want to keep a level playing field force the same FOV, but you might also find some games that have been ported from consoles that have a forced FOV because the developers were too lazy to add adjustable FOV into the game.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

That's what I meant, aspect ratio. sorry. Wrote that last reply after just finishing work at 10:30 pm..

What is this 'Field of View' that you and previous posters speak of? I don't think I've ever run into or noticed that setting in the previous games I played.

I'm also considering the 27" new Samsung 16:9 monitor if I can't find any available 24.5"~28" 16:10 monitors in Australia that appeal to me.

Field of view determines the area of the game world you can see; in an FPS, it would typically be interpreted as the cone of vision of your character. Depending on the aspect ratio, the field of view (usually expressed as an angle) needs to change so the image doesn't stretch and/or you don't have to deal with black bars. Thus, if you have a wider monitor, you want a wider field of view.

Some games claim native support for widescreen resolutions, but really just do some zooming and stretching voodoo to make it seem like it, which can muck up the FOV and actually leave widescreen players at a disadvantage in terms of visible game world. The Widescreen Gaming Forum, is a good resource for finding out how many games behave, and you can even find some FOV hacks there that can fix games with crappy widescreen support.

Long story short, there is no real "developer-preferred" resolution. Most new games will support both aspect ratios. Just buy the monitor that suits you and the games you like.

 

[ginbong]

A quick glance at Newegg for an unscientific survey shows the 24" monitors evenly split between 1920x1200 and 1920x1080. I was surprised. Guess I missed this shift in the market since I bought my Dell 4 years ago. Can't say I like it. My monitor is a monitor first, and then after work it becomes a TV screen. I don't want to give up 120 lines, and don't mind the letterboxing of 16:9 content.

Yeah I know, slack manufacturers and their money savings xD

Basically, each aspect ratio has it's own FOV that keeps the game in the same general perspective. Wider resolutions have a wider FOV, taller resolutions have a taller FOV. The majority of the games out there adjust the FOV along with your aspect ratio. If a game forces you to use the same FOV no matter what aspect ratio you're using, you'll either have black bars on the sides/bottom+top (if your aspect ratio is larger than the forced one) or you'll have some of the image cut off on the sides/bottom+top (if your aspect ratio is smaller than the forced one). Again, not many games force you to use a set FOV. Mainly only hardcore FPS games that want to keep a level playing field force the same FOV, but you might also find some games that have been ported from consoles that have a forced FOV because the developers were too lazy to add adjustable FOV into the game.

True, kinda like Assassin's Creed on 16:10 had black bars..

Field of view determines the area of the game world you can see; in an FPS, it would typically be interpreted as the cone of vision of your character. Depending on the aspect ratio, the field of view (usually expressed as an angle) needs to change so the image doesn't stretch and/or you don't have to deal with black bars. Thus, if you have a wider monitor, you want a wider field of view.

Some games claim native support for widescreen resolutions, but really just do some zooming and stretching voodoo to make it seem like it, which can muck up the FOV and actually leave widescreen players at a disadvantage in terms of visible game world. The Widescreen Gaming Forum, is a good resource for finding out how many games behave, and you can even find some FOV hacks there that can fix games with crappy widescreen support.

Long story short, there is no real "developer-preferred" resolution. Most new games will support both aspect ratios. Just buy the monitor that suits you and the games you like.

This is what I was worried about, if the game developer is slack and lazy then we could have some cropping going on for 16:9 aspect ratio screens.

What do you like better for FPS gaming 16:10 or 16:9? What are your opinions? The 16:10 has more vertical angle for a more 3D environment I believe.

Thanks for all the input guys, much appreciated.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

This is what I was worried about, if the game developer is slack and lazy then we could have some cropping going on for 16:9 aspect ratio screens.

What do you like better for FPS gaming 16:10 or 16:9? What are your opinions? The 16:10 has more vertical angle for a more 3D environment I believe.

I've never played PC games on a 16:9 screen, just consoles. I notice no significant difference. Maybe 16:9 would be a little more cinematic. I just prefer 16:10 for other activities like web browsing, which makes that aspect ratio better for daily use in my opinion.

It's really not necessary to analyze so deeply, though. Just find the widescreen monitor with the best picture quality that fits your budget.

 

[Mem]

I actually prefer 16:9 to 16:10,I upgraded my main LCD from 16:10 to 16:9 and actually prefer 16:9 for gaming etc....only one of my laptops has 16:10 screen.
I do think 16:10 will be phased out completely ,its only matter of time,16:9 will take over until they go even wider down the road at some point IMHO.