View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000380 | FSSCP | DirectX | public | 2005-04-23 09:23 | 2005-07-01 20:48 |
| Reporter | WMCoolmon | Assigned To | taylor | ||
| Priority | normal | Severity | major | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Platform | PC | OS | Windows 2000 | OS Version | Various |
| Summary | 0000380: Distorted images under DirectX nonstandard res | ||||
| Description | Originally I was only experiencing this in the lab, but the splash screen image in the 3.6.6 VPs is also incorrectly scaled in 1280x1024. This does not occur under OGL; I suspect it's either a bug in the lowlevel D3D texturing functions, or some esoteric setting I have somewhere. (Since I have yet to hear anyone else complain about this) The easiest way to tell whether the bug exists is by checking whether or not the nose of the Sobek is cut off. The display code appears to be reading the actual and desired size of the image properly, but past the setting of the desired coordinates to vertex points, I can't verify that things are scaling properly. This is a new problem in all recent builds. | ||||
| Steps To Reproduce | Use the 3.6.6 mv_core. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
when did this start? |
|
|
Sometime around when the rect_lists came up. |
|
|
alright, looking through some of the code, gr_screen.custom_size of something other than -1 means were useing something other than 640 or 1024, and gr_screen.res is an index to wich of the two graphics coordanants to use, would it be a good idea for us to remove the 640 option (internaly force the use of 1024 coords, then resize them to whatever there suposed to actualy be) and use rescaled 1024 coords for all 2d stuff? edited on: 06-01-05 22:43 |
|
|
Umm, I don't think the 1024 coords scale very well to the 640 positions. At least not the way I remember it after playing with it for icculus.org stuff. I can think of a few places that it won't scale worth a crap actually but I don't know to what extent this is throughout the code. If you mean using 1024 coords for all non-standard resolutions then it's likely to have to same display issues in 800x600 as it would in 640x480. The 1024 graphics aren't made to scale below 1024 so there would be real problems getting everything to look/work right. |
|
|
well what if we used 640 coords for everything less than 1024, and 1024 coords for everything >= |
|
|
AFAIK the only difference between that and what we're doing now would be between 640x480 and 1024x768. |
|
|
Fixered. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005-04-23 09:23 | WMCoolmon | New Issue | |
| 2005-05-30 17:55 | administrator | Status | new => assigned |
| 2005-05-30 17:55 | administrator | Assigned To | => Bobboau |
| 2005-05-31 23:17 | Bobboau | Note Added: 0002551 | |
| 2005-06-02 01:48 | WMCoolmon | Note Added: 0002565 | |
| 2005-06-02 02:27 | Bobboau | Note Added: 0002567 | |
| 2005-06-02 02:43 | Bobboau | Note Edited: 0002567 | |
| 2005-06-02 03:06 | taylor | Note Added: 0002568 | |
| 2005-06-03 04:22 | Bobboau | Note Added: 0002579 | |
| 2005-06-03 04:27 | WMCoolmon | Note Added: 0002580 | |
| 2005-07-01 11:22 | taylor | Assigned To | Bobboau => taylor |
| 2005-07-01 20:48 | taylor | Status | assigned => resolved |
| 2005-07-01 20:48 | taylor | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2005-07-01 20:48 | taylor | Note Added: 0002730 |
