n00b question...

[k0n]

are you supposed to game at the display's native resolution?


im deciding the viewsonic vx or the risky 2407. it'd be hard to game on both of their native resolutions if thats the rule of thumb

thanks!

 

[MJCfromCT]

I'd say that gaming on a non-native resolution will look a lot better than normal desktop/web browsing at a non-native resolution.

I have played NFS:MW at 1024x768 on my 2007WFP, whose native resolution is 1680x1050, and it didn't look horrible...it was quite playable.

However, I keep the desktop resolution at 1680x1050, because that gives you the clearest, sharpest picture.

 

[HighwayAssassins]

Anytime you do anything on an LCD under native resolution, there will be distortion.

Lets say your monitors Native res is 1280x1024. That is how many physical pixels you have. Now, you put an image that is 1024x768 on that screen, every physical pixel is not displaying its own unique pixel. And since your res is not half, its not like each game pixel takes up 2 pixels on the screen...its unevenly distrobuted to make it work. This will lead to these wierd lines in your screen, thin lines become thick, and thick lines become thin in certain areas.

But, in game you probably wont notice, but look at your crosshair you will see what i mean. In general, native res is the best way to go, on an LCD. CRT's can do whatever.

 

[PYROTAK]

I actually like gaming on non-native res. Its like AA for the AA deficient hehehe.

All the jaggies get smoothed out when my lousey graphics card can't put out the AA that i need.

 

[Desdichado]

if having distortion bothers you, you could turn off scaling altogether on the games that won't work at your native res. I have a 2001fp with a native res of 1600x1200, and have found that its not uncomfortable to play games at 1280x1024. That way you are using the native resolution, just not the entire screen. This does sort of defeat having a big screen, but if it is only on certain games or something, it might still be worth it.