it does not switch from 4:3 to 3:4 when rotating a 4:3 game by 90 degrees. It also gives the wrong aspect ratio when using the advanced "screen rotation" option, e.g. The "core provided" setting also fails with many vertically oriented games and many multi-screen games. How can such a popular game already cause this to fail? To fix this, I had to change the setting in the "emulator config" menu to force 4:3 for the Genesis emulator. I think these are just longstanding bugs.įor example, in Sonic the Hedgehog, using the default Retro Pie settings, the screen is stretched to some kind of non-4:3 ratio. And it should give the correct non-4:3 aspect ratios for games such as Ninja Warriors arcade.īut quite often it just doesn't work. Yes, in principle "core provided" should work and give 4:3/3:4 for almost all games.
#Zsnes on hyperspin screen shrink how to#
On modern displays, we need to accommodate some stretch in one dimension in order to get a game to display at the intended AR, but everyone has their own opinions for how to accomplish this, and it often depends on your own display hardware.
If you focus on the fact that 4:3 (or 3:4 for vertical) was almost always the intended display AR, you will understand why games at "perfect" resolution don't look right-because they're not! What I would suggest is that you take this info and consider that there is a big difference between the calculated AR from the game's actual resolution and the intended AR used in original arcade cabinets. This idea does not translate perfectly to rigid modern LCD displays. You just needed enough of them to make the dot on the screen glow the right color, stretched or not. On a CRT this was not much of an issue since the RGB triads were never lining up with game pixels anyway. What this means is that pixels in these games were not always square. But in the end, the final AR was almost always 4:3 by way of CRT adjustments. There was probably a good reason why programmers built games at the resolution that they did, whether memory constrained, or for performance or hardware reasons. That is because the game was built and the graphics designed to fill the monitor, stretching them back into shape. But in this view, the characters look stretched wide.
#Zsnes on hyperspin screen shrink tv#
Street Fighter II for instance almost looks like a widescreen TV if rendered in its native or integer scaled resolution. There are many more severe examples of this. They would have tuned the display to stretch the image to fill the monitor. If you do perfect integer scaling on a modern display, even if that display is a 4:3 LCD, this game will not fill the screen area.
If you do the math, that divides out to an AR of about 1.43, not the 1.33 of a 4:3 monitor, and even if you scaled it to 640 horizontally, it is still only 448 vertically (not 480). Now, take your example, Outrun, which you say is running at 320x224. Game programmers built their games using a variety of standard resolutions, but they all knew that in the final cabinet, the video would be stretched to fill the 4:3 arcade monitor (with probably a handful of exceptions). First of all, the title of your post "Original Resolution / Aspect for each game" contains a common contradiction, and would only work consistently if you were going to display each game on a CRT and you were willing to tune the horizontal and vertical adjustment knobs to fill that screen.Īssuming we are talking arcade games here, almost all of them were built to be displayed on a 4:3 aspect ratio CRT, regardless of resolution. This is why you have had a hard time getting a definitive answer. While gives you some suggestions to explore, your question is actually a little more complicated than it might seem.