Screen resolution

Solver · July 11, 2001, 07:41

This is of paramount importance to me - will it be possible to play Civ 3 with 800x600 resolution? If not, I am not buying it. Firaxis, if you read this, then please take in account. I have a 6 years old small monitor (yes!), which I just love too much, and it only can show 800x600, not higher. Plus, if I view 1024x760 on anything less than 17" monitor, my eyes hurt. If they haven't included 800x600, please do! This will surely add some thousand copies sold to your stockpile, and buying a new monitor is not a priority for me now, and I'm not going to do that because of Civ 3 (probably).

LaRusso · July 11, 2001, 08:00

now be a good boy and understand that computers are not for playing games but for raising productivity

Solver · July 11, 2001, 08:32

And this is why I can live with an 6 years old monitor, because that's enough for browsing apolyton.

LaRusso · July 11, 2001, 09:40

exactly. instead of browsing excell sheets

Provost Harrison · July 11, 2001, 10:20

Get a new monitor, they are cheap, even big ones.

One I find is that if it isn't text and things and you are looking at pictures, you can cope with a higher resolution. If you can fiddle with the text size, you may not have a problem...

Solver · July 11, 2001, 10:51

It's all right, but I have nostalgic reasons for keeping this monitor. It's very good, and I was offered some good money for it - they said noone would now pay you more than 70$ for monitor that's so small and with these resoultions, but I was offered 150$ (a year ago). I refused, even though for some 170$ I could probably get a new one. Damnit, there are lots of people with 800x600, and what's the official response to this?

Inverse Icarus · July 11, 2001, 16:27

nothing less than 1280 x 1024 please firaxis.

i hate games where things are so fawking bulky.

Executor · July 11, 2001, 16:47

Quote:

Originally posted by UberKruX
nothing less than 1280 x 1024 please firaxis.

What kind of crappy monitor do you have?

Firaxis, I demand a minimum resolution of 2048x1600.

Inverse Icarus · July 11, 2001, 17:30

its a 4 or 5 year old gateway monitor, the ev700.

Darkknight · July 11, 2001, 19:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Executor

What kind of crappy monitor do you have?

Firaxis, I demand a minimum resolution of 2048x1600.

* Drools noisily *

Holy mother of holy saint Joseph!
What size is the monitor *** TV screen??

I find 1024 x 768 plenty. Considering it's for my old P166 if I tried to run anything over that on it it'd probably die. It's been threatening to die for months now. I'll try to turn it on some day and bamm I'm back to only having a laptop. No Flight sims for me

Mahdimael · July 12, 2001, 13:48

Hmm...you can get a new 17" monitor around here for about $130. It's the best investment you can make, especially if you have an old monitor. My old 14" monitor was so bad that the screen was fuzzy and I didn't even realize it until I got my 17" monitor. I probably ruined my eyes looking at that thing.

It's one of the most noticable and best changes you can make.

Solver · July 12, 2001, 13:52

Won't be noticable for me. The old monitor gives excellent quality, despite the little resolution it has.

Mahdimael · July 12, 2001, 18:44

That's good. I just remember playing C&C:tiberian sun and wondering why all the units looked so crappy. I tried it again and I was able to experience why they looked okay, but the game sucked

JellyDonut · July 13, 2001, 03:32

800x600! The **** Tracy watch can display more than that

If anything's cheap right now it's monitors, printers, RAM and CD-Rs (all of which I have purchased in the last 6 months). I suggest anyone who doesn't have the sys. requirements update whatever cash register piece of sh** you have!

JellyDonut · July 13, 2001, 03:35

Hee hee they censored D!ck Tracy

Rasputin · July 13, 2001, 04:08

what about us guys who play at work , we cant get our comapnies to buy new monitors yet

oops boss is coming... hmmm how do i explain apolyton is reaaly a Greek Oil Company that I am negotiaiting with to get better prices !!!!!

Jarouik · July 13, 2001, 04:11

I can understand your concern... however, considering the overall system requirements of Civ 3, I believe that virtually all computers the game is going to run on will have a monitor capable of displaying 1024x768 graphics - yours is a rare exception.

Since 1024x768 is the standard minimum resolution in use nowadays, I believe Firaxis will be better off using that resolution only, since making the game playable on a lower resolution would require considerable changes to the user interface we have already seen designed for 1024x768 resolution. In addition, for a game with such high-resolution graphics, 800x600 screen would be probably too small to fit everything in. All in all, I think Firaxis has made the right decision by implementing the game in 1024x768, considering the advantages, and redesigning the interface separately for 800x600 would cost more than the tiny increase in income would be worth, I believe...

And yes, 17" monitors are quite inexpensive, being the minimum monitor size nowadays, and having one instead of 14" or 15" increases your computer's usability tremendously, even if you had been used to a tiny monitor before.

campmajor! · July 13, 2001, 04:25

It looks like this is an American site!

campmajor! · July 13, 2001, 04:27

Quote:

Originally posted by JellyDonut
Hee hee they censored D!ck Tracy

To bad if your name is Richard...

Trdi · July 13, 2001, 05:10

I have 8 years old philips monitor. 800*600 is max. But I'm getting a samsung 900 nf soon, so ... I think all possible resolutions should be included, includind very high. Games look SO better on 19 inches and high resolution.

Robert Plomp · July 13, 2001, 06:13

The more info Firaxis can put in one screen, the better.
That's really important to civ games !

OneFootInTheGrave · July 13, 2001, 09:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Mahdimael
That's good. I just remember playing C&C:tiberian sun and wondering why all the units looked so crappy. I tried it again and I was able to experience why they looked okay, but the game sucked

Civ III should be scalable, and support anything frm 640 x 480 to 1600 x 1200, which might be really great on big monitors.

I myself have two, a 15 in and a flatscreen 14 in.

I would like the geam to be playsable on two monitors as well (I guess windowed mode would cover for that). But most likely this is just a wish that will not come true.

Robert Plomp · July 13, 2001, 10:08

Quote:

640 x 480

yeah, sure

and they'll support CGA and hercules monitors !
Commandore 64 and pherhaps they'll even write a gwbasic simulator !

I'm sure it'll be cool to be able to play civ on my hand calculator !
or my watch !

Jarouik · July 13, 2001, 10:33

Quote:

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave

Civ III should be scalable, and support anything frm 640 x 480 to 1600 x 1200, which might be really great on big monitors.

I myself have two, a 15 in and a flatscreen 14 in.

I would like the geam to be playsable on two monitors as well (I guess windowed mode would cover for that). But most likely this is just a wish that will not come true.

The problem seems to be that Civ 3 interface indeed is not windowed to any extent (not even city screens/advisors etc.), and everything in the game is apparently designed with 1024x768 in mind...

It is a shame, since a freely resizeable and windowed mode would remove another problem for those of us with multiple monitors: when in a full-screen game, you usually can't properly use windowed programs on your secondary display when the game is occupying the main display, whereas with Civ 2 you can very well have ICQ, Winamp etc. visible and usable on one display while having the Civ 2 window on another.

campmajor! · July 13, 2001, 10:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Jarouik

whereas with Civ 2 you can very well have ICQ, Winamp etc. visible and usable on one display while having the Civ 2 window on another.

If the game is good, then you will need no other programs!

Jarouik · July 13, 2001, 16:08

Quote:

Originally posted by campmajor!
If the game is good, then you will need no other programs!

No game is good enough to stop multitasking for

At least for a game that is in use as much as Civs are bound to be, the ability to live (preferably windowed) alongside other programs running at the same time is rather important. It certainly has made me play Civ 2 more...

Inverse Icarus · July 13, 2001, 17:15

i have a dual head video card, so i can place 2 monitors die by side and have it act as one wide one.

wish firaxis would let me mess with that.

that "track enemy moves" thing in civ 2 works very well with it.

July 13, 2001, 23:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Get a new monitor, they are cheap, even big ones.

In the U.S. a View Sonic 15 go for around $100.00. A 17 inch maybe $150.00 or less. I'm going the next show and find out.

Sabre2th · July 14, 2001, 00:45

Monitors (and computer equipment in general) are/is very cheap. Even those of you who say that your old, small monitor is fine may be surprised by what a larger monitor offers. I never used to care either, but once I used my 17 inch monitor for a while, I realized I could never go back. This doesn't apply if you can't afford a monitor.

tniem · July 14, 2001, 01:41

I don't know, Firaxis always says they try to make the game for the lowest system requirements in mind. I would have to think that they would look to make the game work on a 800 x 600 monitor. It is still a very popular monitor setting.

I however, hope the game is scalable, I don't want to have to change my system back to 1024 x 768 in order to play.