Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
[deleted comment]
[deleted comment]
i think this is what's supposed to be
borders just "hide" what is being rendered behind them, but the renderer still
calculates everything as if there were no borders
wouldn't it be better to have borders as real screen limiters?
Original comment by neckil...@gmail.com
on 15 Oct 2010 at 4:41
No, this only happens on fully 2d images, such as loading screens. They get
stretched to the wrong ratio instead of being 4:3.
Original comment by matbur...@gmail.com
on 15 Oct 2010 at 1:18
yes, 2d images are relative to the screen size, borders just mask the extra
screen rendered
Original comment by neckil...@gmail.com
on 15 Oct 2010 at 10:49
I'd say the other way around - 2d images are relative to the ratio they're
originally drawn in, if they're stretched then that's incorrect behaviour.
Here's two pics as an example of this issue. The first is Dinosaur's title
screen, a 2d image which is correctly displayed as 4:3 with borders (as
'Borders' is the option I've chosen). The second is the loading screen for the
demo, a 2d image which is stretched to the 16:9 ratio of my screen, even though
I requested 'Borders' mode.
The image looks stretched also - it should be in 4:3.
Original comment by matbur...@gmail.com
on 16 Oct 2010 at 2:40
Attachments:
Frame buffer rendering currently doesn't take into account the rendering mode,
thats the problem. Known problem (well, more like a limitation of my code)
Original comment by drkIIRaziel
on 16 Oct 2010 at 10:55
This issue was closed by revision r82.
Original comment by drkIIRaziel
on 21 Oct 2010 at 11:00
verify fix pls
Original comment by drkIIRaziel
on 21 Oct 2010 at 11:01
Verified, thanks for fixing this issue.
Original comment by matbur...@gmail.com
on 27 Oct 2010 at 5:21
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
matbur...@gmail.com
on 14 Oct 2010 at 1:50