MAME resolution q' -> Should I expect games to fill arcade monitor?

[quarterback]

I get them to fill my PC monitor, but at their correct/native resolutions they don't fill my arcade monitor.    Below is a picture of 1942.  Beyond the fact it's off center (an issue that I've since remedied) it simply doesn't fill the screen. 



I'm running that game at it's native resolution using Vantage (or dos MAME with ArcadeOS), so I presume that's how it SHOULD look on an arcade monitor.  But clearly it not only doesn't fill the screen, but it's aspect ratio (the ratio of width and height) isn't the same as an arcade monitor.   You know, 800x600 and 640x480 are all 1:1.33   But 256x224 is, inherently, going to be more 'square' than the 'rectangular' monitor.

I don't remember if pacman filled the monitor at the arcade but at my house it's not the same height and width as the arcade monitor either.    Is this the way these are SUPPOSED to look on an arcade monitor?

Thanks

[Hiub1]

Definitely should not look like that. Do you have any sort of streching on, and does it do this both in Vantage and Mame? And also, is this the only game that does this, or can you get any of them to fill the screen properly?

[quarterback]

Definitely should not look like that. Do you have any sort of streching on,

Nope

and does it do this both in Vantage and Mame?

Yep.

And also, is this the only game that does this, or can you get any of them to fill the screen properly?

This isn't the only game to do this, but I (think) that some games do fill the screen.  I believe that 1941 *does* fill the screen.. or, at least, it fills it top to bottom.

The thing is is that this makes logical sense to me that it wouldn't fill it.  And, clearly, this is where I lose control of how all the resolution options work and what they mean.  But it makes sense that a game with a resolution of 256x224 wouldn't be as rectangular as a monitor with a resolution of 640x480.    The ratio of the monitor is 1:1.33 and the ratio of 1942 is 1:1.14.   1:1.33 should be more rectangular than something that's 1:1.14

1941, OTOH, has a resolution of 384x224.  This is a ratio of 1:1.71   This is more rectangular than the 1:1.33 monitor and, therefore, when I play that game, it fills the monitor from top to bottom with some space left on the sides.   (I'll try and confirm that momentarily with a photo)

But, again, this is where I've never understood the MAME resolution stuff.  It makes sense (to me) that these games wouldn't fill the screen from top to bottom and side to side based on their stated resolutions, but yet I feel like they should.

Thanks for the (continued) help

[quarterback]

Okay.  So, here are pics of 1942 (a 256x224 game) in both Vantage and in ArcadeOS using dos mame .36



It's clear that they both are more 'square' than the 19" arcade monitor is as its native resolution would suggest.


OTOH, here is a picture of 1941 (a 384x224 game) being played through ArcadeOS using dos mame .36   It fills the screen from top to bottom (actually fills slightly more than the entire screen) with a slight black border on the right and left.  This, to me, makes sense because its resolution indicates it's more rectangular than the monitor is.   OR, I just don't understand the meaning of the native resolutions.

[Hiub1]

Hm... Ok. We need to determine if this is caused by the hardware (monitor) or the software (mame). When the game doesn't fill the screen like that, and you rotate the h-position pot on the monitor, does just the blue lit up part move, or does the whole thing, including the back border move? Or does it look like the black border is actually the color black being displayed by the monitor?

In my case, some resolutions fill the screen more than others. Say, the Neo Geo games, which are 324x224 I believe, leave a bit of a gap on the top of the screen. Other games, like the Capcom games which are 384x224, fill the screen completely. My borders are nothing unbearable, and with a smoked plexi like I have, you cannot even notice them.

In some cases, like when I try to play Wonderboy which has a very low horizontal resolution of 256x224, I run it at 320x224 and this will cause the screen to have a black border on either side. Ovbiously this happens because the screen has more lines than the game does, but it still looks ok because out of those 320 available lines, it can pick the 256 lines that are in the middle. This will happen for every other game that you run in a resolution that is greater than what the game is originally displayed at.

[Hiub1]

Well, looks like 1942 is the same resolution as Wonderboy is, and it looks like you are getting the same effect as me somewhat. When I get home today, I will try and run 1942 on my arcade monitor and see what the heck it does. I'll take some pics, and tell you what resolution I am really running it at. Also, are you using an ArcadeVGA or just a regular video card?

[quarterback]

Hm... Ok. We need to determine if this is caused by the hardware (monitor) or the software (mame). When the game doesn't fill the screen like that, and you rotate the h-position pot on the monitor, does just the blue lit up part move, or does the whole thing, including the back border move? Or does it look like the black border is actually the color black being displayed by the monitor?

I think there are probably two things at play here, but let's start with the software end.

In my case, some resolutions fill the screen more than others. Say, the Neo Geo games, which are 324x224 I believe, leave a bit of a gap on the top of the screen. Other games, like the Capcom games which are 384x224, fill the screen completely. My borders are nothing unbearable, and with a smoked plexi like I have, you cannot even notice them.

Okay, this answers the overall/most significant confusion in my head.  I couldn't figure out how all these random resolutions were somehow filling arcade monitors fully when the arcade monitor isn't the same aspect ratio (it's a different 'shape').  If you're telling me that (in their native, unstretched, resolutions) they DON'T magically become the same aspect ratio of the monitor, then I feel vinidcated in my understanding of squares and rectangles

In some cases, like when I try to play Wonderboy which has a very low horizontal resolution of 256x224, I run it at 320x224 and this will cause the screen to have a black border on either side.

In Vantage, I don't think I have the '-resolution' option (at least it's not mentioned on the Vantage website).  My understanding is that this is because Vantage is set up to run games at their correct resolution.  But in dmame, I should be able to tweak/reshape the games to more suitably fit the screen.... even if it means they're not 100% identical to their 'native resolutions'.


Okay, as far as hardware, I think I need to tweak the hardware (monitor) as well because I think the ArcadeOS test screens don't fit the monitor to the edges either (as far as I remember).  That being said, I was really more concerned with clearing up my questions about the shape (aspect ratio) of the screens than the hardware end of things because I was starting to think I was crazy

Thanks Hiub1.  I'll probably be back after I start messing with my monitor's settings.

[Hiub1]

You might have to find a happy medium for your monitor settings, since with all the different resolutions that keep changing, its going to be almost impossible to have them all fill the screen and be centered completely. I am guessing this is a cocktail, but you should really look into having some sort of tinting done to the glass. I have a smoked plexi, and it really hides everything very well, while giving you a nice looking picture to boot.

I really don't have any experience with Vantage, but in Mame you should be able to specify the resolution. One thing you need to make sure is that the resolutions that you are specifying actually exist on your display driver. I am using powerstrip, and created about 10 resolutions that cover all of the games that I want to play, and then I used the Mame Resolution tool to best approximate each of the games to the available resolutions. A couple, like Robotron, I had to tweak manually, but they all came out great for the most part. Are you using an ArcadeVGA or a regular card?

[quarterback]

I really don't have any experience with Vantage, but in Mame you should be able to specify the resolution.

Yeah, and this brings up other confusing issues I have with MAME's settings.   For example:  If I run 1942 (on my PC monitor) with the -rol (to run it vertically) and the -auto setting, it'll be 'short' (just like the pictures above)

However, if I run it with the "-resolution 320x240" "-640x480" "-800x600" etc, it will STILL be "short"   Even though I'd think forcing those resolutions would cause it to be the correct aspect ratio to match my PC monitor... they don't seem to do anything.

So, MAME .36 (the one I'm using) by default uses the "-stretch" parameter.   I can change that to  "-nostretch" and then those resolution settings just make the game progressively smaller, but still don't change the 'squareness'. 

Why doesn't setting the resolution to 640x480 make the screen play back in a rectangular aspect ratio that would correspond with 640x480?



I'm using a 'regular' video card and not an ArcadeVGA  but my confusion about this "-resolution" thing is as PC monitor based as anything.  I've had no luck with Powerstrip either.  Even though I finally got the most recent version to load up without errors (most of the time) I still can't get it to output arcade monitor resolutions even though my video card can clearly do as much.

[Hiub1]

Ok. I can give you a hand with Powerstrip. I don't think that you are running the right resolutions. I really need to write a FAQ for this, maybe this will be the beggining of it. Here are a couple of things that you need to understand.

The -Resolution tag in MAME will display at whatever resolution you indicated AS LONG as that resolution is loaded in your display driver for Windows. I haven't touched DOS or AdvMAME in ages so everything that I will tell you has to do with Windows XP.

So for example. Here is what I do to add a resolution in Powerstrip.

First, turn off your PC and reboot it with no monitor plugged in. This will ensure that we are working on the Default Monitor display driver, which will be the one that the Arcade monitor boots up in.

Now, make sure that you have the latest version of powerstrip, and run it. I would suggest starting from scratch, so uninstall Pstrip if you had it before and reinstall it. Now exit powerstrip and go to the folder where you installed it and open the pstrip.ini file.

Under the General Settings (Or something like this) heading, you have to add the line:

minlines=200

And also, add this under the custom resolutions heading if it exists, or just paste it with the header on there at the end if it does not exist.:

[Custom Resolutions]
240x224=240,8,40,16,224,4,3,31,4779,7
240x240=240,8,40,16,240,4,3,15,4779,7
256x224=256,8,40,16,224,4,3,31,5030,7
256x240=256,8,40,16,240,4,3,15,5030,7
256x256=256,8,40,16,256,3,2,1,5030,7
321x224=321,8,48,24,224,4,3,31,6304,7
321x240=321,8,48,24,240,4,3,15,6304,7
321x256=321,8,48,24,256,3,2,1,6304,7
384x224=384,8,56,32,224,4,3,31,7546,7
384x240=384,8,56,32,240,4,3,15,7546,7
384x256=384,8,56,32,256,3,2,1,7546,7
392x240=392,8,56,32,240,4,3,15,7671,7
640x240=640,16,64,48,240,4,3,15,12073,7
640x288=640,16,64,48,288,5,3,19,12338,7
641x480=641,16,64,48,480,8,6,30,12089,15
801x600=801,24,80,56,600,4,3,21,15088,15

Courtesy of [Mad]!

Now that the custom resolutions are in there, turn on Powerstrip, go to configure under display profiles, then to Advanced Timing Options, and then to Custom Resolutions. Now, click  on the button that says "User Defined Resolutions", you should see all the resolutions that we pasted on there before. Add one of the resolutions with 224 vertical lines, just to try. When it prompts you to restart the computer, accept, and reboot the computer again without a monitor plugged in.

Now, close powerstrip, and go to the Ultimarc site and download the utility called QuickRes. Once you run that program, you will get a little Galaxian ship right by the clock. When you left click on that, it will come up with a list of the available resolutions for the display driver. Click the resolution that you just added, and now the card should be outputting the right signal for the arcade monitor.

Plug in the Arcade monitor and see some windows goodness in whatever non-interlaced resolution you picked!


Let me know if this works for you, and also let me know what video card you are using specifically.

[quarterback]

Ok. I can give you a hand with Powerstrip. I don't think that you are running the right resolutions. I really need to write a FAQ for this, maybe this will be the beggining of it. Here are a couple of things that you need to understand.

The -Resolution tag in MAME will display at whatever resolution you indicated AS LONG as that resolution is loaded in your display driver for Windows. I haven't touched DOS or AdvMAME in ages so everything that I will tell you has to do with Windows XP.

Okey doke, I'll give it a shot!

Just a couple things first so we're on the same page:
(1) I'm running Win98 and not XP  It's a much older computer (which also explains one reason I've been working with multiple versions of DOS mame and vantage)
(2) the video card is a built-n Rage2 something something.  I can look that up to get more specific if need be
(3) I clearly have multiple problems, going back to another post I made about getting the "-monitor arcade" switch to work in both dos mame .36 and dos mame .55   It allows my arcade monitor to work fine in dos .36, but not 't work at all in .55, even with the exact same settings.   I don't know why this is, but I'm just putting that info on the table as well.
(4) FWIW, I followed the Powerstrip FAQ in the video forum.  I could never get the custom resolutions to 'take'.  Powerstrip just kept telling me to reboot reboot reboot etc etc etc.   But your process looks a little different, so I'm off to try it.

Thanks again for your help.
qb

[Howard_Casto]

Powerstrip helps guys but here is the real issue. 

Arcade monitors aren't meant to be able to run any game with the screen adjusted correctly without reaching around to the back and adjusting the trim.  You are never going to get them perfect, even with powerstrips help. 

Although it might result in degraded picture quality on some games, the easiest universal solution is to turn off auto-resolution and set mame to the maximum resolution and refresh rate your monitor can handle.  Now you turn on auto-stretch and all is well.  Since the games never change the resolution, you can fine tune this one resolution via your trim pots and never have to do it again.  As I said, for certain games (due to really strange resolutions) this might not give the best picture, but for 90% of the games everything will look great with minimal effort.

[u_rebelscum]

I think there's an incorrect assumption in this thread.

The resolution's pixal ratio is not the same as the physical arcade screen ratio.  The only time the ratios can (& must) be the same is when the pixals are square.

While modern LCD PC monitor pixals are square, it doesn't mean that it was always this way.  For one example, some HD ready TVs use very rectangle pixals; here's a Sony 16:9 plasma TV with 1024x1024 native resolution and 16:9 pixals!  (It wasn't the only one, either.)  "Old school" broadcast (NTSC PAL SECAM) are not 4:3 resolutions, yet they are designed to display on 4:3 TVs.  One of the things about CRT over LCD & plasma (and always will be) is that CRTs can change pixal shape no problem, while the others can't. 

Old school TVs are 4:3.  Old school PC (CRT) monitors are (mostly) 4:3.  AFAIK, all CRT arcade monitors were 4:3.  (Some say there were some 10:7 arcade monitors, and I'm ignoring the 'recent' street fighter 16:10 projection monitors.) 
And yet all can (and were designed to) display non-4:3 resolutions displayed at 4:3. 


So bring things back on topic, 1941 was displayed on a 4:3 monitor, although the resolution ratio was not 4:3, intentionally.  The 4:3 monitor was (hopefully) adjusted to display the image in the screen much like old CRTs are adjusted with a new resolution.

This would be no problem if you only played one game, or only games with that same resolution and refresh rate.  You'd just adjust your monitor to fill the res to the full screen.

But with mame, there are hundreds of different resolution and refresh combinations.  CRT PC monitors usually could remember settings for ~10 different combos; most arcade monitors only store just the one resolution they are expected to run on.

This is where mame's hardware stretch comes in.  Think of it as stretching the image to your monitor size (not shape) while keeping the original aspect ratio of the orignal monitor (if -keepaspect and -screen_aspect correctly set to the ratio of your monitor).  This is great for LCD, plasma and other fixed pixal monitors, and arcade monitors with limited screen resolutions.  Note that while it's best to stretch in integers to prevent fuzzing, if your monitor's resolution ratio is not the same as the game's resolution ratio, at least one axis can't be integer stretched to match the original display ratio.

Again:
resolution ratio != arcade monitor ratio
resolution ratio != screen ratio
resolution ratio != displayed ratio
the ratio set in -resolution option != the ratio it will display
the ratio set in -screen_aspect option != the ratio it will display


IMO, arcade monitors should be treated almost like LCD monitors with one or two exceptions.  (With arcade monitors) find the best resolution to display your games.  Tell mame to use that resolution (for arcade CRT, if could be all games, or just specific game; for LCD should be all games).  Use -hardwardstretch and/or -d3d and let mame stretch to display at the original ratio.

I hope this helps; I know I rambled a bit.  Ask if anything needs to be cleared up.

[quarterback]

Powerstrip helps guys but here is the real issue. 

Arcade monitors aren't meant to be able to run any game with the screen adjusted correctly without reaching around to the back and adjusting the trim.  You are never going to get them perfect, even with powerstrips help. 

Got it.  Again, I wasn't really concerned that each game wasn't perfect as much as I was confused about (a) the aspect ratio and what it meant to MAME and (b) the fact that changing the resolution in Mame doesn't seem to do what I'd think it would (which is to change the aspect ratio that the game appears on my screen)

Powerstrip would just be icing on the cake at this point.  I'm just frustrated that it (still) doesn't work, even though I've followed the faq in mon/vid, the help given here, and that I know my chip *can* output arcade monitor frequencies... just not via powerstrip or some versions of mame.

Although it might result in degraded picture quality on some games, the easiest universal solution is to turn off auto-resolution and set mame to the maximum resolution and refresh rate your monitor can handle.  Now you turn on auto-stretch and all is well. 

Got it.  As far as this goes, I'm going to have to continue fiddling with MAME to figure out why my WG monitor works (somewhat) with .36 and vantage, but not with .55.  But even with .36 I haven't figured out how to alter the image's aspect ratio on the monitor via the resolution and stretch settings since I can't get them change the aspect ratio in .36

I think there's an incorrect assumption in this thread.

The resolution's pixal ratio is not the same as the physical arcade screen ratio.

1941 was displayed on a 4:3 monitor, although the resolution ratio was not 4:3, intentionally.  The 4:3 monitor was (hopefully) adjusted to display the image in the screen much like old CRTs are adjusted with a new resolution.

Gotcha!  So, my original question of "should I expect games" to fill the 4:3 monitor is "No", unless adjusted to do so either via hardware (pots on the back of the monitor) or software (Mame's resolution and stretch functions)

This is where mame's hardware stretch comes in.  Think of it as stretching the image to your monitor size (not shape) while keeping the original aspect ratio of the orignal monitor

And here's where I'm still having problems because I can't get the games to fill the screen (arcade or PC) when I use mame v.36    I *can* get them to fill the screen with windows command line v.55 (and I swear I've gotten them to fill the screen using dos .55 although at this very moment, I can't)  BUT (for some unknown reason) dos v.55 won't work with my arcade monitor.

So:  v.36 -> works with arcade monitor using "-monitor arcade" but I can't get .36 to fill any 4:3 screen on any kind of monitor
v.55 -> can be set up to fill the screen, but won't display image on arcade monitor, even when using "-monitor arcade"

I hope this helps; I know I rambled a bit.  Ask if anything needs to be cleared up.

It does help.  I guess my real problems are:
- I can't get powerstrip running (not a huge problem, but it would be nice, particularly if I can't solve the following problems)
- I can't figure out how to get dos MAME to stretch to a 4:3 aspect ratio
- "-monitor arcade" in dmame .55 outputs a signal that neither my arcade monitor nor PC monitor can handle.

[quarterback]

Ok. I can give you a hand with Powerstrip. I don't think that you are running the right resolutions.

Since I referred to it, but didn't reply specifically, I'll say that I'm still out of luck.

I'm having the same issues I've had before.  None of the user resolutions will 'take'.  They all have me reboot, reboot, reboot, reboot...

All except for the 640x480.  That one and the "640x480i (arcade)" that is listed under the 'custom resolutions' will both 'work', in the sense that powerstrip will let me choose them.  However, they produce a signal that my arcade monitor doesn't like.  It's gets all squiggly crazy, similar to when it's being sent a PC monitor compatible signal.

And, not that I'm sure it would matter, but the ultimarc quickres app won't run on win98.   Oh, and my video "card" is a built in "ATI Rage IIC".   


I guess what I need to figure out is what EXACTLY is the signal that Vantage and MAME v.36 are putting out.  Because those two will work with my monitor, but nothing else seems to.

[Hiub1]

The QuickRes utility not working is what is causing the problem! :/ Powerstrip has some sort of bug that will output 18 kHz instead of the 15.7 kHz when using these low arcade resolutions. If you could run XP, assuming you have an older machine you can use a barebones edition of XP that has all services turned off and is really light. I am running it at the moment on an AMD K6 233 mhz with 128 mb of ram and it works without a problem. I believe that once you do that, you should be good to go, but again it is somewhat of a pain in the butt to upgrade. I ran into all of this about 3 weeks back, when attempting to make my monitor run. Had to upgrade from 2000 to XP, blah blah blah, but finally got it working and it looks sweet! Don't give up!

[quarterback]

The QuickRes utility not working is what is causing the problem! :/ Powerstrip has some sort of bug that will output 18 kHz instead of the 15.7 kHz when using these low arcade resolutions.

Well, holy crap.   I had no idea.  I figured that QuickRes was just going to make it 'easier' to select resolutions.    I can give XP a shot, but I'm running on 64meg of ram which is fine for DOS, but is really bare bones for XP.

Hmmm... I wonder if there are older versions of Powerstrip without this bug.   I think that the instructions in the Powerstrip FAQ (in Mon/Vid forum) are from an earlier version because they don't completely match up with the current one.  Maybe I should prowl around for a 2005 version.

If you could run XP, assuming you have an older machine you can use a barebones edition of XP that has all services turned off and is really light.

I wouldn't be against giving it a shot.  Is there an XPLite download like there used to be for Win98?  I guess I'll prowl around for that as well.

In the end, I'd still like to actually figure out why mame's arcade monitor output won't work correctly for me, but I'm willing to mess with powerstrip if it can actually work on my system.
Thanks again

[Hiub1]

Yes, the QuickRes utility is the key to the whole process! Actually, once you load all the resolutions from powerstrip onto the driver, you can switch resolutions with Mame with the -r command, as long as the resolution is available. Say you loaded 324x224, 384x256, and 384x224, you can run those 3 resolutions natively through mame by typing

mame mslug -r 324x224

And it will run at that resolution. You just cannot switch resolutions from Powerstrip, or have it running while you are at 15 kHz resolutions. Also make sure that you do what I mentioned earlier with the monitors and boot up the computer with no monitor attached so it does not see a plug and play monitor. When you add the resolutions in powerstrip, you are adding them for whatever monitor is plugged in at the moment. If you do it like you should, under the "Windows Default Monitor", the settings will carry over when you boot up with your arcade monitor which is going to be recognized just the same.

About the Light WinXP, there are many out there. I have had great succes with the Windows XP Barebones edition. You really should try and get a 128 mb stick of ram or more, that will help you out a lot!

Good luck and keep us posted!

[quarterback]

Powerstrip has some sort of bug that will output 18 kHz instead of the 15.7 kHz when using these low arcade resolutions.

Yes, the QuickRes utility is the key to the whole process! Actually, once you load all the resolutions from powerstrip onto the driver, you can switch resolutions with Mame with the -r command, as long as the resolution is available.

See, I'm not sure that the problem I'm having is the same as what you're describing.  I don't think the resolutions are ever loading onto the driver.

I get the repeated messages of "You have selected a vertical resolution below 480 which may prove incompatible w/ your display driver.  Are you sure you want to continue?" I click to continue and then I get "Windows will need to be restarted to see if the display driver has accepted the new resolution"

But I get this every single time.  It's not that I'm getting a bad/wrong-frequency with these resolutions.  These resolutions don't ever seem to be "accepted" by my display driver at all.  And I've tried with powerstrip versions 3.63, 3.60 (June 2005) and 3.47 (2003 or 2004) all with the same results.   I don't think I'm dealing with a bug that requires the ultimarc utility or people would have been forced to use that for years


The "640x480i (arcade) is a different story.   That one clearly is loaded and just gives me a garbled, squiggly mess on the monitor whether it's started from powerstrip or from the mame command line with something like "mame 1942 -r 640x480" but as far as the low resolutions go, I don't think they're ever being entered into the registry (or wherever(

[Hiub1]

Well, if you are using those resolutions that I gave you, it should be 641x480i? I believe that 641 instead of the 640 is just there to differentiate between regular 640x480 and the interlaced mode. Maybe you missed that? Also, drivers vary from Win98 to XP, so you might have better luck there. I have been using a Radeon 9200SE, and a regular 9200 with no problems whatsoever, and they are dirt cheap. I picked one up on ebay for $10 a couple of days ago. I would still suggest upgrading to XP and trying out those drivers, maybe it will run through there. I am pretty sure that ATI cards are the most compatible when outputting low frequency modes, so I don't think you should have a problem with that. By the way, I was using the latest Catalyst drivers, but I don't know if those apply to your card.

[Howard_Casto]

Quarterback, I think you are confused.... all the vertical games you mentioned SHOULD fill the screen the same as they all have the same aspect... at least to the best of my recollection they do.  

What me and rebel were saying is that just because you are running the right resolution doesn't mean you still don't have to adjust your monitor to make them look right.  You do... or do like we said and use hw-stretch.  


Concerning your powerstrip issues.  When powerstrip asks you to restart, in my experience that means your video card doesn't support that resolution/frequency and it'll try (and fail) anyway.  

the garbled picture when getting it in 640x480i is probably normal believe it or not.  Go in the back, adjust your horizontal and vertical hold and you shoudl be able to fix it.  

Of course ps is very buggy, so you never know... could still be an improper timing thing.

[quarterback]

Well, if you are using those resolutions that I gave you, it should be 641x480i? I believe that 641 instead of the 640 is just there to differentiate between regular 640x480 and the interlaced mode. Maybe you missed that?

No, I'm down with that.  The 640x480i that I tried is the "arcade mode" already pre-set in Powerstrip.  The 641x480i (that I added to the .ini file) won't 'take' for me (just like the low res additions) 

Also, drivers vary from Win98 to XP, so you might have better luck there.

And I'm starting to think this is a driver issue as well, since none of those custom resolutions will stick.

Quarterback, I think you are confused.... all the vertical games you mentioned SHOULD fill the screen the same as they all have the same aspect... at least to the best of my recollection they do.

I'll totally agree on the confusion part    But the reason I was messing with 1941 and 1942 is because they do have different resolutions (according to MAME)     1942 is 256x224 while 1941 has a resolution of 384x224

What me and rebel were saying is that just because you are running the right resolution doesn't mean you still don't have to adjust your monitor to make them look right.  You do... or do like we said and use hw-stretch. 

I dig it.  And I did mess with the monitor's controls in an effort to fill the screen a bit more, but didn't get any real results.   And I'm still having issues with the -stretch, -hwstretch and -resolution switches.   I can't, for the LIFE of me, get the DOS mames to fill the screen no matter what set of parameters I use.   And not just the arcade screen, I can't get them to completely fill the PC screen either.   I'm clearly missing something on the DOS end of things.

Concerning your powerstrip issues.  When powerstrip asks you to restart, in my experience that means your video card doesn't support that resolution/frequency and it'll try (and fail) anyway. 

Yeah, that's why I didn't think it was the powerstrip bug that Hiub1 was talking about.  For whatever reason, Powerstrip doesn't want to play nice with my current setup.

the garbled picture when getting it in 640x480i is probably normal believe it or not.  Go in the back, adjust your horizontal and vertical hold and you shoudl be able to fix it.

I had some hope there, but after more knob-turning, I still couldn't get it going on.   I'm really thinking that powerstrip and my video card aren't communicating well.

I would still suggest upgrading to XP and trying out those drivers

I may give that a shot in the next week or so, but I'd still like to get a better grip on this DOS mame thing.  I mean, I'm happy to simply run DOS mame on this system and forego Windows all together.  And it just seems odd that I can't simply get MAME to do what I think it should do.

Maybe I need another thread and drag RayB and other Dos mame folks into this.   But I'll let you know if I have any success.
Thanks

[Howard_Casto]

Like rebel said... resolution has NOTHING to do with aspect ratio.  Nearly all games are designed to run at either 4:3 or 3:4 ratio, depending upon the orientation.

See back in the day arcade games had very limited processing power and storage space... one of the tricks to get the most out of a game is to tweak the resolution (squash it in one direction) and then the picture is physically stretched back to the proper ratio via monitor adjustments. 

Contrary to popular belief despite what nearly everyone will tell you, you should NOT be trying to run each game at it's native resolution, it is the very cause of the problem you are having. 

You run the monitor at it's max res.... set mame to run at that res, and turn on hardware stretch.  For a few games you'll find this method doesn't give the best results and you'll have to make special cases for them, but by no means should you leave mame's resolution set to "auto" and expect mame to figure it out.  Powerstrip doesn't help with the adjustments either, it merely makes you card capable of displaying odd resolutions. 

And btw... hwstretch doesn't work in dos.... if you are using dos then your only real course is to pain stakingly manually tweak each and every game in advance mame.  Powerstrip also doesn't work in dos (or at least not well enough).  What in the world are you doing?  If you are running windows then you should be running regular old mame (not mame 32, not dos mame). 

[Hiub1]

I really don't think that anyone should have too much trouble with this. I run games at the closest 224, or 256 vertical resolution, and the screen stays pretty well centered and the size is correct. One thing you would be amazed at, is how much the picture can change once the monitor is warmed up. For mine, it takes about 30 minutes or so for the optimal picture quality.

Even with low spec computers, I really don't see the advantage of running DOS anymore. It is just way too much trouble for what its worth. I find that XP based computers can run acceptably well even with old hardware.

[SirPeale]

Okay, here goes...

Although these games are the same aspect ratio (vertical @ 3:4) they're meant to be played on a dedicated board.  That means one game in a cabinet.

In the case of the first picture, an operator would simply adjust the monitor so the game fills the screen.

Problem here is you've got many, many games on one cabinet.  So if you adjust for one game, if you switch to the next one it may be off.

Now...how to come to a happy medium?  You could pick games that are all the same resolution, that'd work.  Of course, it would suck not being able to play certain games since I'm sure the computer supports the speed and the controls you have, but better that than resizing every time you want to play.

[quarterback]

Just as an overall reply.

My original question about whether or not I should expect games to (inherently) fill the arcade monitor, was answered and I do get it.   But no adjustment of my monitor's controls will cause any (not "all", but "any") games to fill the screen fully.

The DOS non hardware stretch issues and the powerstrip issues are separate.  I'm not expecting powerstrip to work in DOS.  But I was expecting that there was some way to use -resolution to change the way that DOS mame games look on a monitor (arcade or pc).  If that's a faulty expectation on my part, then so be it.

So I bought a 21" computer monitor today.    If I could have gotten powerstrip to work -OR- dos mame to change the shape of the game -OR- the hardware controls on my monitor to fill the screen, then I would have kept fighting the good fight.   But I couldn't.  I spent over 12-hours just on Friday trying to get one, all or any of these things to work with the arcade monitor.  And after spending many many days on this, and many many hours on Friday, I chose the path of least resistance.

Therefore, instead of spending ~$160 on a new 19" arcade monitor and then ending up spending more money on a computer (so I could run powerstrip) or more money on an arcadeVGA card, I spent $35 on a  21" pc monitor.  It'll be a bit of a ---smurfette--- to mount in my cocktail cab, but it'll work with the hardware I have, it'll work with the software I have and cost me far far less in time and cash than the arcade monitor option.

[Howard_Casto]

Are you going to get mad if I tell you that you probably wasted your money?

Arcade monitors always look better and the problem you are now telling us (which you didn't before) is quite common. Usually a cap kit or some minor misc repair will fix a monitor that can't stretch all the way.  If not then you are simply running the wrong freuency and a tweak in the settings or a new video card will fix it. 

I think a lot of people have the misconception that working with an arcade monitor is a plug and play procedure.  Unfortuantely, no matter which method you choose, a fair amount of setup and compromise is involved. 

A pc monitor is going to give a very "pixelated" display.  Some people tolerate it because either they aren't really familiar with how the games should look or don't have access to an arcade monitor.  It's a shame to just ditch one because it might need some repair though. 

[Hiub1]

I agree with Howard. Having an arcade monitor really boosts the experience of having an arcade. Once I saw how MAME looked, I never wanted to go back! I would say that you should keep at it, I really believe that if you were to install XP you should have it working in no time.

Off topic, but Howard I just finished setting up Johnny5, and let me tell you it looks freaking fantastic! Really adds a professional touch to the cab! One thing I would suggest you tell people is to turn off any windows animations, because prior to that I could see the window shrinking before Johnny5 came up with the AHK. Also I could not get either the CPO or instruction cards to show up, but other than that everything is flawless. Good touch with the aligning hotkeys, I wasted a bunch of time trying to get everything nice and neat and then I found the hotkeys doc!

Anyways, thanks!

[quarterback]

Are you going to get mad if I tell you that you probably wasted your money?

I won't get mad, but I also don't share that opinion.  I'm a child of the arcade heydays and I remember playing these games on an arcade monitor.   I'm fully aware of the difference.  My cocktail cab is sitting right next to my upright, and just 2 days ago, I was simultaneously running the same games on one (with the arcade monitor) and the other (with the PC monitor).   

You may think that playing games on a PC monitor is a waste, but I'll never be convinced that the $35 I spent was a waste of money (unless the monitor stops working tomorrow).  The tons of hours I spent prior to making that purchase are the waste, IMO.  If I had bought the PC monitor three weeks ago, this would all be old news.   That $35 bought me a full-screen playable machine almost instantly, which is a small small price to pay.   Certainly not a waste to me.

I think a lot of people have the misconception that working with an arcade monitor is a plug and play procedure.  Unfortuantely, no matter which method you choose, a fair amount of setup and compromise is involved. 

It's all relative.  But I spent more time in one day messing with the arcade monitor than I spent in a year setting up the PC monitor in my upright.  And it's not like I only spent one day messing with this arcade monitor.

It's a shame to just ditch one because it might need some repair though. 

I had already made the calls to Betson and gotten a shipping quote for the Tovis monitor Ken mentioned in the Vid/Mon forum.   I was already willing to drop $160 to get a brand new, clean and shiny monitor into my house.  But that $160 would only be worth it to me if that was the end of it.  If I could have spent $160 and been up and running, I would have done it.  But nothing in my recent experience leads me to believe that would happen. 

I simply don't have the time to dick around with it any more and hope it all works out this week, or next week, or the week after that.  The only reason I started on this particular arcade monitor project was because I already had this emachine mobo which can output arcade monitor frequencies.  A mobo which, even though it's old, can run the classic arcade games in DOS.  I had no interest in spending *any* money on this project.  I was doing it because it was, effectively, free and could easily be done with things I already had on hand.   However, if it worked out, I'd buy a brand new monitor and drop it in. 

In other people's lives it may be worth it to them to spend hours and hours and hours getting it to work so they can have the full-on arcade monitor experience.  For me, getting all the parts, wires, screws etc off my dining room floor and getting the machine running is more important.   And I'm so much closer to that today than I was on Friday.   

In fact, if I had bought this PC monitor on Friday, I'd now be posting pictures of my completed cocktail cab.  As it stands, I'm going to have to try and find a couple more hours this week to work on it.  But if I can get about 2-3 hours on it this week, I'll be full on good to go and be basically done.   And that, to me, is more important.  Particularly since I think the PC monitor looks great.  It's cooler than the fully flat-screened trinitron Dell in my upright simply because it's not-a flat screen.  No it doesn't look exactly like an arcade monitor, but it's good enough for me.

Clearly different things are more important to some people than others.  I hate microswitch joysticks, others love them.  I can't imagine playing these games on an LCD, but some people are very happy with an LCD.   To each his own.

[quarterback]

BTW, I completely appreciate everybody's help on this.  My arcade monitors aren't going anywhere right now (except back into the basement)  and I'm sure I'll be revisiting the arcade monitor setup again in the future with some different machine.
Cheers
qb

[tetsu96]

Probably one thing you can do if you haven't already is UNCHECK (or set in ini) the enforce aspect ratio.  I haven't used MAME in a while, but if I recall, enforcing the aspect ratio usually meant you never got a full screen image unless the resolution was 4x3 in proportion.

If you're using a PC monitor, this is all probably moot now, but the multisync monitors from WG / Betson / etc are pretty slick solutions.  In fact, using those with AdvanceMAME (or possibly AVGA with a std res monitor though I haven't tried that yet) is about as close to the original images in clarity /lack of as you can get.  It's not to say that 1600x1200 using anistropic filtering / aperature grill effects looks bad...  but not as good as on a more game oriented display.

Just my 2 cents...  if using a PC monitor works for you, then go with that.  Other solutions are out there if you want to do more later.

Oh - and smack anyone who'd rather MAME on an LCD.