Template talk:Problems/GC Widescreen Auto

Other Titles?
I'm unsure of how accurate the Wikipedia list we used to flag titles is. There were at least 2 titles on their list that didn't include widescreen options, so I have a feeling they may be missing a few titles as well. Kolano (talk) 12:34, 2 December 2015 (CET)

Template split
Hadn't time to look into detail before but *why* this template got splitted into two? From the recent discussions it seems that for some games (like King Arthur) the built-in AR switch doesn't work, I got it, but why not edit template logic to conditionally change the text from "Auto" to "Force" if an additional parameter is given? That's waay cleaner than creating an almost identical duplicate to handle this (it's what config and testing does to handle channels, for example). I'm completely against having this template split when an super simple addition would achieve the same, I almost reverted it without asking but I think you may have a good reason to do so? - Jhonn (talk) 05:08, 24 November 2015 (CET)


 * It was split for the reason you indicated, the problem text was wrong for a series of titles that instead of "Auto" need to be set to "Force 16:9". Having two templates seemed simpler to me than adding parameters and logic. There are likely to be a few more of these sorts of Problems templates, it seemed like it could get confusing for each to have various sets of parameters. Kolano (talk) 08:05, 24 November 2015 (CET)


 * The only two options that can affect native widescreen are "Auto" and "Force 16:9" so we won't need to deal with lots of parameters and right now only two possible games needing "Force 16:9" surfaced, which makes the second template even more redundant. Also, if Dolphin changes something in its settings we would have to modify more templates to account that (not a big deal, but it's more things to keep track). If that's the only reason I'm gonna to merge them back and do something similar to config and testing, the logic is veeery simple (a simple  does the trick) and it defaults to the most used one, so in this case it would be   for the majority of the titles and   for the two exceptions currently known. - Jhonn (talk) 17:37, 24 November 2015 (CET)


 * The one other benefit is being able to get separate lists of the relevant titles. We only generate a single Native Widescreen Support category, so if we don't use different templates there seems to be no easy way to get separate lists.
 * There are only those two cases for WidescreenGCN, but there will be other non-widescreen related Problems templates. It seems like the eventual list of them would be clearer if each didn't have various custom parameters.
 * Someone still needs to review all the other titles we list under Problems/WidescreenGCNAuto‎, I have a feeling there will be other titles that are also not compatible with Auto AR.
 * Kolano (talk) 19:45, 24 November 2015 (CET)


 * Meh, I'm still not a fan of duplicated templates but you have a good point, keeping the duplicates for now but if I find a way to still get the separate listings without needing a duplicate (or more categories) expect me merging them back into a single one... - Jhonn (talk) 03:26, 25 November 2015 (CET)


 * Completed my testing and didn't find a need for anything but the two options. So it seem like using params is extraneous. Kolano (talk) 11:50, 2 December 2015 (CET)

Auto vs Forced Review
OK, I reviewed all the remaining titles. More titles required Force 16:9 that I had hoped. Please provide commentary below if there is anything further to say here. I don't think there is though, so I plan to purge this discussion out in a few days if there is no further feedback Kolano (talk) 14:42, 2 December 2015 (CET)

Force 4:3
These titles have a native widescreen option but, instead of changing FoV/Viewport, add black bars to the screen to "unstretch" it; requiring Force 4:3.


 * Battalion Wars
 * TMNT: Mutant Melee

This seemed fishy to me, as I'm not clear how you'd get widescreen rendering with "Force 4:3". More or less you don't. To state what's going on here more clearly. Enabling the in game widescreen option of these titles doesn't make them widescreen. Instead it shrinks the image to be 4:3 if displayed on a 16:9 display. For that to work correctly, you actually need to set things to be "Force 16:9". So though these titles have "widescreen" options, they are forced to be 4:3. I'm guessing we should just purge these from our widescreen list, but please provide feedback. Kolano (talk) 09:32, 2 December 2015 (CET)


 * Widescreen notes have been purged from these titles. Kolano (talk) 11:52, 2 December 2015 (CET)

Auto + Force 16:9
These titles provide two widescreen options, "Widescreen" and "Anamorphic 16:9". "Widescreen" works fine with "Auto" AR, but "Anamorphic 16:9" works only with "Force 16:9".
 * SSX 3
 * SSX Tricky


 * I think this should mean that we use the "Force 16:9" recommendation for them, since it presumably works with both modes but auto only works with the one. Kolano (talk) 04:53, 2 December 2015 (CET)

I've updated these titles to indicate "Force 16:9". Kolano (talk) 11:46, 2 December 2015 (CET)
 * We should investigate those games further before setting force. For example, the menus of those games may still be rendered in 4:3 even with widescreen enabled (like Zelda Wind Waker with AR code). Using Auto in that case would seamlessly switch between 4:3 and 16:9 when needed, while in Force mode the menus would be stretched... - Jhonn (talk) 16:50, 2 December 2015 (CET)

Inconsistent Widescreen
Just a heads up, I asked JMC47 and he tested various of those games. Something he said that I think it's important to note somewhere is that "a lot of these games won't change into widescreen until something using a widescreen viewport shows up (3D graphics, usually. Such as the character models in Soul Calibur II's menus.)". Jhonn (talk) 05:30, 29 November 2015 (CET)

Yes, many of these titles provide widescreen output inconsistently. This usually seems related to the underlying assets not being suited for 16:9 display. I'm not clear we should worry about this. Kolano (talk) 10:16, 2 December 2015 (CET)

FOV
There might be two more possibilities in the widescreen setting we want a parameter for it. It's whether the widescreen setting impacts the field of view. But first I'd like to find a game with Problems/WidescreenGCNAuto that does that them we'll implement a such thing. Assuming there is, what's a good parameter name? Something with "|NoFoV" for example... Lucario (talk) 04:34, 28 November 2015 (CET)


 * OK, let's work through reviewing for Auto support first and see if so we can identify relevant titles. There may need to be more complex handling, as some titles might provide multiple options for this (i.e. both a FOV effecting and non-effecting setting). Kolano (talk) 08:34, 28 November 2015 (CET)


 * Do we really need to tag whether a game may change its FOV when using its native widescreen option? I mean, by enabling 16:9 in the internal game options we'll get a wider FOV anyway, so, unless I missed something, what's the problem here? - Jhonn (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2015 (CET)


 * Whether does it simply increase FoV or in cost of FoV unlike Dolphin's widescreen hack. Then revise the text where saying the widescreen hack is not recommended into something else if the latter one is the case. Lucario (talk) 02:46, 29 November 2015 (CET)


 * F-Zero GX apparently cuts off top and bottom and at the same time increases the field of view in left and right sides. See animated screenshot I made here. Do we need an additional parameter for this special kind? Lucario (talk) 02:46, 29 November 2015 (CET)
 * Meh, I wouldn't bother keeping track about what FOV you'll get, by taking this route we would be making this very specific and thus we would have a lot of specific aspects to take into account. I (personally) think that maintaining only if it needs "Auto" or "Force 16:9" to use the native widescreen option provided by the game is more than enough... - Jhonn (talk) 03:25, 29 November 2015 (CET)
 * I kind of agree. I'm not up for doing lot of work and I don't have any more games listed above after we've removed some. Lucario (talk) 03:41, 29 November 2015 (CET)

So if there is to be no follow-up here I presume this topic is closed, and can be purged out in future. Kolano (talk) 11:48, 2 December 2015 (CET)