Following 4:3, Full, 16:9

    First Previous
  • Lutz 31 Jan 2005 14:39:29 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    So as mentioned in the "Destroy the core" thread, I've got a PS2.

    I was setting it up, and the TV aspect ratio was in 4:3. I changed it to 16:9, but oddly, "Full" looked better (On a widescreen)

    Is this right? Should I be on "Full" ?
  • mal 31 Jan 2005 14:44:41 29,326 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    I haven't got a clue. The PS2 screen settings make absolutely no sense to me. Can't remember what mine is set to. I can remember though that the system screen displays differently to games, annoyingly - in one of the settings at least the system screen is letterboxed, but games aren't.
  • sephy 31 Jan 2005 14:51:54 4,036 posts
    Registered 16 years ago
    Set the console to Full, and set widescreen mode in games.

    That should sort you out
  • Blerk Moderator 31 Jan 2005 14:56:24 48,222 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    The settings on the PS2 setup-screen have absolutely no connection to the display 'in-game'. They're purely for when you're browsing the menus. So.... set them to whatever you like! It doesn't matter one jot.
  • Deleted user 31 January 2005 15:02:33
    It may have to do with the way it plays DVDs, or maybe that's a separate setting when in player mode. If you have a 16:9 TV or a 4:3 with 16:9 squeeze, you'll want your PS2 to deliver the full 16:9 picture.
  • Lutz 31 Jan 2005 15:05:16 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    valli wrote:
    you'll want your PS2 to deliver the full 16:9 picture.
    Which it does on "full" mode, but on widescreen (16:9) there's boarders at the top and bottom.
  • Mike_Hunt 31 Jan 2005 15:17:05 23,524 posts
    Seen 5 months ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    It's a shame you can't find 30 to go to the meet!

    Someone's priorities are screwed if you ask me! ;)

    [MH]
  • Blerk Moderator 31 Jan 2005 15:20:05 48,222 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    It may have to do with the way it plays DVDs, or maybe that's a separate setting when in player mode.

    That's a separate setting within the DVD software.

    Really, honestly - it affects absolutely nothing aside from the 'browser' menus. Don't lose sleep over it - it's the most pointless setting in the whole universe! :-)
  • Lutz 31 Jan 2005 15:22:20 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Mike_Hunt wrote:
    It's a shame you can't find 30 to go to the meet!

    Someone's priorities are screwed if you ask me! ;)

    [MH]
    Meh, the mrs actually bought it for me. I used 55 credit at GS to get the games. :p
  • AnotherMartin 31 Jan 2005 16:21:04 6,229 posts
    Seen 9 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    afaik there was one game that did use that setting. Might have been the getaway or burnout 3.
  • Blerk Moderator 31 Jan 2005 16:29:09 48,222 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Tch. Typical!

    /rolls eyes
  • Wobbler 1 Feb 2005 19:19:51 181 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    It is possible for PS2 developers to read this setting and automatically have their games set-up for widescreen tellys (or otherwise) - Burnout 3 certainly does this, and I'm sure a few others do too. The difference between 4:3 and Full I'm guessing was so that developers could do a 4:3 'letterboxed' game mode like Resi 4 (for some reason). I think because a) this another thing for the developer to implement, which takes ups time better used elsewhere and b) gamers already moan about borders, all developers just say that 'Full' and '4:3' settings are the same.

    And also, since some developers can't be arsed doing proper anamorphic widescreen support, '16:9' won't have any effect in those games either.

    Edited by Wobbler at 19:21:41 01-02-2005
  • Nemesis 1 Feb 2005 19:43:50 19,560 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Lutz wrote:
    Mike_Hunt wrote:
    It's a shame you can't find 30 to go to the meet!

    Someone's priorities are screwed if you ask me! ;)

    [MH]
    Meh, the mrs actually bought it for me. I used 55 credit at GS to get the games. :p

    /rewind

    Hold on. If you dragged those Myst books along Sir I would gladly pay you the 30 pounds agreed fee.

    /problem solved

    Saves posting em!
  • Lutz 22 Feb 2005 09:14:34 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    *bumpage*

    Righto, this is PISSING ME OFF.

    Set up is a 28" widescreen. Xbox is RGB'ed into an RGB slot, the PS2 is scarted into the AV2 slot.

    Fable, Halo 2 etc are FULL 16:9.

    The PS2 is a mess.

    Not only are there MASSIVE boarders at the top and the bottom of the screen (BG&E here) but the screen isn't even fucking centre... there's a big (OK, about 1.5cm) black strip on the right hand side, both on GB&E and Gradius.

    What can I do to get round this?
  • ssuellid 22 Feb 2005 09:20:35 19,141 posts
    Seen 23 hours ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Lutz wrote:
    What can I do to get round this?

    Get a projector with a built in scaler and image processor and a 6 foot screen. Then you don't care about the borders - if there are any. ;)

    A lot of PS2 games allow you to move the image to get rid of the off centre picture. Check the options - its a game by game thing tho. As for the borders its something you have to live with on the PS2.
  • Lutz 22 Feb 2005 09:22:39 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Hyoushi wrote:
    You have tried having the PS2 in the RGB slot, right?
    No, but surely it should give a better picture than this on a standard scart socket?

    I'm guessing here, but I'd say about 55% to 60% of the screen is being used, the rest is just blank.

    I really don't want to be forced to use the RGB, as that means swapping and changing every time I want to use the xbox or the PS2.

    Ssue: Checked the games, no options.
  • Decoded 22 Feb 2005 09:22:54 4,426 posts
    Registered 16 years ago
    Lutz wrote:
    Not only are there MASSIVE boarders at the top and the bottom of the screen (BG&E here)

    Isn't Beyond Good and Evil letterboxed? You'd be better setting your TV to "zoom".
  • Lutz 22 Feb 2005 09:24:00 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Decoded wrote:
    Lutz wrote:
    Not only are there MASSIVE boarders at the top and the bottom of the screen (BG&E here)

    Isn't Beyond Good and Evil letterboxed? You'd be better setting your TV to "zoom".
    Zoom? I'd lose even more of the edges!
  • Lutz 22 Feb 2005 09:26:01 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Hyoushi wrote:
    Oh come on, get civilised and buy one of these! ^_^
    ...
  • ssuellid 22 Feb 2005 09:27:21 19,141 posts
    Seen 23 hours ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Buy one of those. Its rather good - gameplay were doing it cheap or if its still too much then buy the cheap Argos one which is also good but has no remote control.
  • ssuellid 22 Feb 2005 09:30:17 19,141 posts
    Seen 23 hours ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Its gone up to 44.99 on Gameplay.
  • Decoded 22 Feb 2005 09:30:21 4,426 posts
    Registered 16 years ago
    Lutz wrote:
    Zoom? I'd lose even more of the edges!

    You'll have to live with the borders then. For some reason the game was designed to be displayed in widescreen on 4:3 televisions :-(
  • Lutz 22 Feb 2005 09:57:07 48,870 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Decoded wrote:
    Lutz wrote:
    Zoom? I'd lose even more of the edges!

    You'll have to live with the borders then. For some reason the game was designed to be displayed in widescreen on 4:3 televisions :-(
    ...

    What sort of MUPPET does this? Is the xbox version the same?
  • Shinzou 22 Feb 2005 10:36:29 887 posts
    Seen 10 years ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    Lutz wrote:
    Decoded wrote:
    Lutz wrote:
    Zoom? I'd lose even more of the edges!

    You'll have to live with the borders then. For some reason the game was designed to be displayed in widescreen on 4:3 televisions :-(
    ...

    What sort of MUPPET does this? Is the xbox version the same?

    afraid so. i had to zoom it. great game though.
  • Deleted user 22 February 2005 10:57:11
    Come to think of it, they should mention "anamorphic widescreen" on the back of the games just like they do with the DVDs.
  • Stevas-mkII 22 Feb 2005 10:58:58 3,848 posts
    Seen 5 years ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    Mmmm, Gradius.

    Eyes... glazing...

    /twitches
  • Retroid Moderator 22 Feb 2005 11:34:10 45,463 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    Stevas mkII wrote:
    Mmmm, Gradius.

    Eyes... glazing...

    /twitches
    /Whispers "Destroy the core!"
  • mal 22 Feb 2005 11:46:35 29,326 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Lutz wrote:
    Zoom? I'd lose even more of the edges!
    BG&E doesn't output an anamorphic image - if you're allowing the PS2 to force the TV to anamorphic mode, like it insists on doing, then you're stretching the image. Gah, pey'j is fat enough as it is!

    Zoom modes never cut off sides, only the top and bottom. If you go from anamorphic mode to zoom the width will stay the same and the image will be stretched vertically.

    I'm not explaining this well.

    By the way, consoles are crap at getting the image centred. It doesn't matter so much on 4:3 games, as I expect to have borders round the image. With anamorphic games though, the cube is about a centimeter out left and top, and the PS2 is absolutely all over the place. The xbox oddly enough, it pretty much spot on - like every other piece of consumer electronics I've hooked up. It's just bloody consoles.
  • First Previous
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.