Parhelia resolution for Flight Simulator?

[kelleym]

Guys (and gals) help me out here. I'm starting to get confused (my normal state of mind) now that I read the "official" instructions on running FS2K2 on the Parhelia. Here's what it says:

"Microsoft Flight Simulator 2002 support Surround Gaming through both widescreen view (1920x480) and multi-window gameplay across 3 monitors. Widescreen view from within the Virtual Cockpit is an experience that has to be seen to be believed."

and then it goes to show screen shots that appear to be about 2000+ by 840+. Is this the resolution for surround gaming?

Right now I'm flying in a single monitor (as my second monitor hangs useless on the side :>) in 1024 x 768. I'd kind of hate to reduce my resolution to 480 in one direction -- that doesn't make sense. Is that only if I go for two monitors (when I get my P board I'll buy a third monitor for sure)?

[Kruzin]

Moved to the Matrox Gaming forum

[az]

Kelleym, Parhelia support up to 4800x1200 in surround gaming (if I'm not mistaken), and I see no reason why the game should limit the res to something below that - whether you'd get decent framerates at those high resolutions is another story (I know you don't need 60fps for flight sims, but it should be above three, right? ).

I guess you'd have to wait till at least tomorrow (when the NDA gets lifted and benchmarks are being posted) to know the answer to that question

AZ

P.S.: Note that surround gaming requires three equal resolutions.

[Kruzin]

The max for surround gaming on Parhelia is 3840*1024, though I don't know about this particular title, as I have not tried it yet.

[Drizzt]

Matrox claims that there are limits in some api's used from FS2002, so the max res indicated from the in-game options is lower than the one really reacheable. So it seems that if you choose 1920x480 the game should be running a higher res than that.

(I must try eating one or two english dictionary, I often find myself out of words...)

[kelleym]

Perhaps a deal breaker?

Well, I'm not quite sure I understand Drizzit's reply -- are you saying that by selecting a lower res it will actually run higher? Or just that the lower res is the only one supported?

This will put a *severe* crimp in P sales from any of us on the flight sim forums (and I have to believe Matrox was counting on this sector to be huge for them, as this was one of the primary games they demoed at E3). That effectively means half the resolution most of us are used to running FS in, which amounts to about "half" of a surround game.

Now that I look at the samples posted on the Matrox site, there are severe jaggies all over the place, as I would suspect from running in such a low resolution (quite frankly, although I run FS in 1024x768, that's lower than many FS enthusiasts).

[Rags]

1920x480 is the triplehead resolution for FS2K2.

Rags

[R0M]

As Rags mentioned FS2K2 and any other game using DX7 as an API will go to 1920x480 max in triplehead. This won't occur with DX8 or OpenGL games,

Regards,

[kelleym]

Yipes. That really sucks.

Oh well, I guess I'll just wait and see what nVidia and ATI have to offer with their new boards coming out in the next few months. Maybe one of them will figure out something new (or I'll just continue to run FS in one monitor. Sigh).

[az]

Just fait for FS2k3

AZ

[kelleym]

Actually, there won't *be* a FS2K3 -- the next release will be FS2K4. And that's a long way off, by which time both ATI and nVidia (and probably Matrox) will have released another round of cards.

Nope, I think the flight sim community will take a big pass on this one, unless I'm really reading something wrong here.

(See my other thread for something else that's interesting about this).

[Rags]

Originally posted by kelleym
Actually, there won't *be* a FS2K3 -- the next release will be FS2K4. And that's a long way off, by which time both ATI and nVidia (and probably Matrox) will have released another round of cards.

Nope, I think the flight sim community will take a big pass on this one, unless I'm really reading something wrong here.

(See my other thread for something else that's interesting about this).

Why?

I can run single monitor with all settings on max and it's smooth sailing. Why on earth would the FS community pass?

Rags

[kelleym]

Because the draw for the P card (at least in the FS world) is multiple monitor support. There are a lot cheaper (and in many people's minds, better) cards out there if you only want single monitor FS.

I'm active on at least three FS boards, and that's the general sentiment. Hot to jump on if multiple monitors are there, cold to pass on this if not.

At the very least a lot of folks will wait for the new ATI and nVidia entries in the next couple of months (and I wouldn't be surprised if they passed the P card in a lot of ways, albeit without multiple monitor support).

Believe me, I *desperately* wanted this card, but now I'm thinking the technology just isn't quite right for multiple monitors and FS. Perhaps, as another poster suggested, the next release. A few years from now I suspect the P board will be selling for less than $50 <bg>.

[Drizzt]

kelleym, sorry to hear that. I hope that the guys over Flight Sim fori are a bit more smart than what you say (and I know that, 'cause I'm a simmer too )


You are saying that 1920x480 is a too low res for playing with FS2k2, and so the P is not a card for flight simmers, right?


1) It's not a P fault. It's a limit from FS2k2. And it's a limit that can be corrected by a patch by M$. Why don't FS try to ask for a patch to address it?


2) We know nothing of Surround Gaming for ATI and NVidia. Why the hell NV30 or R300 should correct the problem, then?


3) The reason why we play FS2k2 at higher res is that the graphics it's full of jaggies. So playing at *480 it's too low? We have FAA, that's just what FS2k2 needed...


4) Why wait to see what other cards can do in singlehead, when you can do the same with better graphics in DH or TH?


5) Have you noticed that FS2K was one of the first game to support natively DH, and that FS2K2 is one of the first to support triple head?


Byez.

[Ant]

Wherever the fault lies you have to admit effectively being restricted to 640X480 is not a nice thought!