question about 4:3 vs 16:10 lcd's in regards to gaming

[-Slacker-]

So this is what I don't understand: is there a difference in image quality between a wide screen lcd and a "sqare" lcd with the same vertical resolution? For example, does a 1920x1200 monitor render a better in-game image quality than a 1600x1200 tft lcd, or does the difference consist of just a wider view field? (When I say Quality", I'm referring to things like extra details, texture quality, jaggies etc)

To be clearer, I'm asking if, image quality-wise, a 1680x1050 is just a wider 1280x1024, or, is it a vertically narrower 1600x1200?

 

[Throckmorton]

Why would one monitor show more details than another? That's up to the game.

 

[Murloc]

So this is what I don't understand: is there a difference in image quality between a wide screen lcd and a "sqare" lcd with the same vertical resolution? For example, does a 1920x1200 monitor render a better in-game image quality than a 1600x1200 tft lcd, or does the difference consist of just a wider view field? (When I say Quality", I'm referring to things like extra details, texture quality, jaggies etc)

To be clearer, I'm asking if, image quality-wise, a 1680x1050 is just a wider 1280x1024, or, is it a vertically narrower 1600x1200?

1. more in-game field of view
2. if resolution increases but not proportionally to screen size then quality increases because pixels are more concentrated (dot pitch) and it looks more real.
A high resolution also makes anti-aliasing more heavy on your computer and you'll have to reduce it, but it's also less needed because jagged stuff is less noticeable.

screen has no effect on internal game effects quality like details and textures, the game just looks overall better.

to answer your question: a 1680x1050 is a 1680x1050, there's no such thing as wider *insert res* or narrower *insert res*. I can't understand what you're talking about.

You could read some articles (on wikipedia or somewhere else) to get a deeper understanding of this.

 

[zagood]

There are some games where a widescreen resolution will display more of the scene by adding to your view on the extra side pixels. In other games, a non-widescreen monitor will display more of the scene because the widescreen version is just cut-off on the top and bottom to match the ratio.

Much more information here:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/

edit: I misunderstood your question, this is still relevant information though.

 

[-Slacker-]

to answer your question: a 1680x1050 is a 1680x1050, there's no such thing as wider *insert res* or narrower *insert res*. I can't understand what you're talking about.

You could read some articles (on wikipedia or somewhere else) to get a deeper understanding of this.

Well, the site you linked has an article that mentions a couple of types of games after the way they adjust to different resolutions ... two of which are

"Hor+ (Horizontal Plus): A hor + game is a game that when played on a widescreen monitor with a widescreen resolution, expands the horizontal component of the FOV while keeping the vertical component roughly or exactly the same. This is often considered the ideal solution for widescreen games, as it grants widescreen users a wider picture. "

"Vert- (Vertical Minus): A vert - game is a game that when played on a widescreen monitor with a widescreen resolution, decreases the vertical component of the FOV. The aspect ratio is generally correct, there is little or no stretching or distortion. This is often unappealing to widescreen users, as it reduces the are of the picture available to them. "

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/FAQ

...So, the way I see it, there are cases where there is such a thing as "wider *insert res*" or "narrower *insert res*" ...

edit: oh, wait, the site was actually posted by zagood ... sorry, my bad

 

[0roo0roo]

24 16:10 is as tall as a 21" 4:3..but wider. 24" are 1920x1200... 4:3 are 1600x1200. 4:3 are rare, and probably more expensive for older tech as they can't be bothered with a niche market. There are probably no bigger and if there are, its not worth it. wide fov is more natural for gaming. anyone thats played a fast paced fps knows during quick fights half the time its a battle to track where the enemies gone because he's straffed off your screen, and you are battling tunnel vision. this is esp bad when you are very close to the enemy.

 

[Murloc]

Well, the site you linked has an article that mentions a couple of types of games after the way they adjust to different resolutions ... two of which are

"Hor+ (Horizontal Plus): A hor + game is a game that when played on a widescreen monitor with a widescreen resolution, expands the horizontal component of the FOV while keeping the vertical component roughly or exactly the same. This is often considered the ideal solution for widescreen games, as it grants widescreen users a wider picture. "

"Vert- (Vertical Minus): A vert - game is a game that when played on a widescreen monitor with a widescreen resolution, decreases the vertical component of the FOV. The aspect ratio is generally correct, there is little or no stretching or distortion. This is often unappealing to widescreen users, as it reduces the are of the picture available to them. "

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/FAQ

...So, the way I see it, there are cases where there is such a thing as "wider *insert res*" or "narrower *insert res*" ...

edit: oh, wait, the site was actually posted by zagood ... sorry, my bad

that doesn't depend on the monitor or the resolution, but on the game.
Most games expand the FOV anyway, old games that don't support widescreen and get patched unofficially may do that though.