Should we have a Jazz 2 resolution changer?

[Odin]

Personally, I think that it may help in certain circumstances, but it should not be released to the public. If you have it, more power to you.

Discuss.

[Doubble Dutch]

*discusses*

[Violet CLM]

Yes, but it shouldn't be able to go past 640x480. Either that or it should be limited to single player. Whichever.

[Tik]

Anyone who would use this for cheating is pathetic. Let it be available to everyone to use for whatever reason.

[Fawriel]

The downside is that you wouldn't really know someone was using it to cheat, would you?

[Black Ninja]

I voted for the last option so I could quickly access the results. This poll is going to greatly help in my decision to release the program or not.

[blurredd]

Yes, but it shouldn't be able to go past 640x480. Either that or it should be limited to single player. Whichever.
I think the poll could use better options. Or maybe the poll question could be more specific.

For resolutions above 640x480, keep this in mind: The background layers (and sometimes foreground layers) in many levels won't look too good with higher resolutions since they weren't designed for this. In addition, if users are able to attain resolutions greater than 800x600, there's likely to be even more of a disparity in how levels are made.

[Marijn]

Someone sad that in the OEM version ther WAS a 800*600 option, but they take it out.. I think for a reason ;).

[FQuist]

Anyone who would use this for cheating is pathetic. Let it be available to everyone to use for whatever reason.
A lot of people would do this though.

[Grytolle]

A lot of people would do this though.It wouldn't be cheating if it was commonly accepted. :roll: Seriously, seekholefix is so cheatish too ;(

[FQuist]

You've read <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showpost.php?p=356847&postcount=102">this post with arguments</a> in the other thread, so you might know that's not true. Since barely anything gets very "widespread" in this community (remember: most people still host battle1 and don't visit sites/play a lot of other levels/have a lot of utilities), and since it couldn't even become widespread because a lot of people's computers wouldn't bear the highest resolutions some other players might be able to attain, there's no way in which it would be used by anyone else than a certain elite with the right interest (I don't get what's exciting about it anyways. Just boring to see everyone coming from miles afar) and computer technology.

[Fawriel]

It could be used to certain events... like, in a battle, acertain member or more could be assigned be a "ninja" or something who has to try to sneak up to others with the help of the resolution changer, but gets worse weapons..
..something like that.

[LittleFreak]

I agree with Violet.

[R3ptile]

Just limit it to 800x600 or 1024x768.

[White Rabbit]

Quite a few limitations would have to be put on the program in order to make it as "fair" as possible (and even then not everyone will manage to download it on J2O), such as setting a restriction on the maximum resolution, enabling it for singleplayer only, or, like with the publicly released Ultrawarp, have the resolution changer require an unique access code, generated by a separate program, to run. Every time the program is opened, it would generate a different 'lock' code and therefore need a different unique 'key' code, reducing it to whatever became of Ultrawarp.

Actually, I think it's no longer available for download anymore). I also don't think OL gave out many access codes this year. :p

[Bobby aka Dizzy]

It wouldn't be cheating if it was commonly accepted. :roll: Seriously, seekholefix is so cheatish too ;(

I have a feeling that you don't really know how seekerhole fix works. I'd argue that it's a <i>disadvantage</i> if you are a client and run that program in general.

[Birdie]

Yes, but it shouldn't be able to go past 640x480. Either that or it should be limited to single player. Whichever.
It would be easy to make it work in multiplayer :\
So nah I don't want this thing at all due to all of the reasons fquist keeps saying in all these threads ;) some people wouldn't be able to use it, and then it would get rid of more stratagy in the game. Or what stratagy is left.

[Pako]

It would be easy to make it work in multiplayer :\
So nah I don't want this thing at all due to all of the reasons fquist keeps saying in all these threads ;) some people wouldn't be able to use it, and then it would get rid of more stratagy in the game. Or what stratagy is left.
Thanks, you gave me an idea: Making strategy levels, sort like AoE games.

[R3ptile]

Or what stratagy is left.
Lots. I swear. But only true duellers know it.

[Stijn]

I don't get what's exciting about it anyways
Perhaps it would finally look good at TFT screens with a fixed resolution 8)

[LittleFreak]

Thanks, you gave me an idea: Making strategy levels, sort like AoE games.

=b
How would you create an RTS game with JJ2? ^^;;

[Pako]

=b
How would you create an RTS game with JJ2? ^^;;
Hmmm... maybe recluting other players ot your army and make them fight for you. Also, workers that shoot unmasked blocks to make them masked, or make them hit trigger crates wich only them can access to, and chatting to your city via teamchat.

[LittleFreak]

I doubt that would work, but you can try if you want to. :roll:

[R3ptile]

Vote wisely, vote yes.

[ThunderPX]

Out of curiosity, how many votes does one option need for the vote to pass?

[DanYjel]

Releasing of this mean total death of JJ2. Because
1) The winner will be that one with the highest resolution
2) 640*480 is enough for MP games
3) It eliminates things like RF advantage
4) The game is not about seeing as much as possible, but about action on there where you can see...

And, if this will be released, with like 90 % probability, I ended with JJ2 ;(

[Marijn]

Releasing of this mean total death of JJ2. Because
1) The winner will be that one with the highest resolution
2) 640*480 is enough for MP games
3) It eliminates things like RF advantage
4) The game is not about seeing as much as possible, but about action on there where you can see...

And, if this will be released, with like 90 % probability, I ended with JJ2 ;(
I agree with the bold stuff.. :lol:

[n00b]

So if things look bad in 800x600, will anyone fix the overly-played levels to look good in the new res?
I notion the idea that everyone who votes Yes shall fix the levels.

And if someone isn't using the res-changer in MP, isn't that giving others the advatage and thus techincally cheating? Because I'm (-) fine with 640x480, and probably won't use the program.

[R3ptile]

I'll volunteer to fix all J2MC levels (which are also the "overplayed" ones).

And about the second thing you asked, it's like asking if disabling Ambient Lighting is a cheat.

[cooba]

Ugh, I'm back on the skeptical side after I realised what I posted. From my quick calculations, 800x600 would let people see ahead approx. 5 additional tiles ahead. How is it a benefit making the game harder, I don't know. Also, it would move down the background layers by said 5 tiles and move up foreground layers by said 5 tiles, causing stuff to look quite ugly. How would that help playing, I don't know either.

[Birdie]

Just limit it to 800x600 for MP and 1024x768 for SP.
;( I keep saying that it would be easy to make it work in mp.

[Grytolle]

I have a feeling that you don't really know how seekerhole fix works. I'd argue that it's a <i>disadvantage</i> if you are a client and run that program in general.I do, I recreated it for shaneybot.

FQuist: I did read it, it didn't make much sense.

Stop ignoring only allowing splitscreeners to play in higher resolutions!

[Monolith]

No.

or... Yes, but it shouldn't be able to go past 640x480. Either that or it should be limited to single player. Whichever.

I strongly believe the viewable play area (e.g. the area in which you can see the level, players, bullets, and such) should not be allowed to go above the original default of the game (640x480) in multiplayer games. The reason for this is that it would allow certain people (like those who downloaded the program) to have an unfair advantage over others who are playing using the default. If you don't believe this point, <b>try dueling someone who is playing at 640x480 while you play at 400x300</b>.

If you want a utility that increases the size of the window, but keeps the play area no larger than 640x480, then that's fine. To get an idea of the sort of thing I'm talking about, press F3 while in-game in JJ2. Also being able to play split-screen with all the screens at 640x480 might be nice.

Perhaps it would finally look good at TFT screens with a fixed resolution 8)
If you're playing on a TFT display and are concerned about quality, then don't play fullscreen. Either that or make sure you are playing at a resolution that is a direct multiple of 2 of the fixed resolution of your TFT display. I suppose one way a resolution changer could help would be to allow those resolutions that are those direct multiples of 2, but again so long as the play area does not exceed 640x480 for the above stated reason.


And I would like to hear some reasonable counter-arguments to Frank's post (http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showpost.php?p=356847&postcount=102). Most of what I seem to be hearing is along the lines of "oh, stop whining, it'll be alright" without any real points (presumably because those people want the advantage).

[Black Ninja]

Out of curiosity, how many votes does one option need for the vote to pass?
It's going to take something like a 3/4 majority to really convince me.

[Grytolle]

"That's not really true. It doesn't matter wether this utility is released or not, people will gain an unfair advantage in both situations. However, if you release it, the unfair advantages people have will be much bigger."

The advantage will be smaller, as more people share it. The ones that have i, if most people don't, would/should be easy suspected of "cheating".

"1. Only people who frequent the popular sites at the time the tool is released are likely to get it. A large amount of people don't visit these sites very often."

The people that don't don't play competitive games very often, and it's not that for them to find their way here.

"2. From all the people who play jj2, most of their computers will be able to play 600 x 480. However, with higher resolutions, only the computers of some will be able to bear them. If you have a huge resolution like 1280 x 1024, only a certain group of people will gain the largest advantage."

640x480 isn't so bad anyways. Any argument against 800x600?

"This means, releasing it creates a huge inequality between people with different computer speeds. When you release it there will be an unfair advantage, moreso than if you would not release it and people don't spread/abuse it and it is kept to a select few. If it's not released, the game is "ruined" how? Because Black Ninja and some others can play another way? It's not like you can't adapt."

So if everyone can adapt, why not release it?

"Another invalid argument. Bullets may not go farther but your sight goes farther, and you can adapt your strategy to the multitude of extra information you get on movements. You can dodge faster, move another way, attack people more easily, etcetera."

That's how it is with the current things too, and apparently *most* people can handle 800*600, just like *most* people can handle 640*480

"Regarding splitscreen, how many active forum/site frequenters actively play splitscreen? Compare with how many play online multiplayer, please."

I don't know. I did it those holidays, and it was not very fun. The reason so few play is probably the huge disadvantage it gives.

[R3ptile]

I'll just tell you why yes:

Handling 800x600 or 1024x768 isn't really as hard as you make it sound.
This is the dream of many players.
I just can't resist finding out how Jazz works with a higher resolution.
It would improve, or change the gameplay.
I could finally see something in windowed mode.
When playing in a server with many players, the player list would take a lot less space.
Playing in splitscreen mode would be much easier.
With this patch, or whatever you would want to call it, we'd be able to play new, much bigger maps.
I can't really see why people would resist using it.


By the way, I love how the only people who voted no (except Danyjel) are the ones who don't duel often and participate in tournaments anymore.

[LittleFreak]

Handling 800x600 or 1024x768 isn't really as hard as you make it sound.

You say. The computer I play with has about 1400 MB, which is average in the world of today with 3600 computers (or even higher, I don't know), but very high for a game like JJ2 which can run on 100 MB PCs. And come to think of it, it can't handle full screen windowed mode.

This is the dream of many players.

It's the dream of many guys to be able to hypnotise any girl they want to so they get as much sex as they can get. Is it a good thing just because it's their dream?

I just can't resist finding out how Jazz works with a higher resolution.

It is an interesting thought, yes, but that still doesn't prove any good argument to support the patch.

It would improve, or change the gameplay.

It would certainly change it, yes. But if the gameplay was really improved is the question. I doubt it, for the reasons several people stated already.

I could finally see something in windowed mode.

I can see fine in windowed mode. I don't know about you.

When playing in a server with many players, the player list would take a lot less space.

True, but unneccessary. Just deactivate the list with F9 if it bugs you.

Playing in splitscreen mode would be much easier.

Yes.

With this patch, or whatever you would want to call it, we'd be able to play new, much bigger maps.

How so? Just the sight gets increased, not the level width.

I can't really see why people would resist using it.

Well, not everyone's mind functions like yours I guess.

[R3ptile]

It would certainly change it, yes. But if the gameplay was really improved is the question. I doubt it, for the reasons several people stated already.
That really depends.

I can see fine in windowed mode. I don't know about you.
Alright, but people with a very high Windows resolution like me can't.

True, but unneccessary. Just deactivate the list with F9 if it bugs you.
No. I still have to see it.

How so? Just the sight gets increased, not the level width.
Answered your own question I guess. As the sight increases, bigger levels should be more playable (Divide and Conquer, Dawn Of Combat, etc).

[LittleFreak]

That really depends.

That gives me an idea. Wouldn't it be possible to have the resolution changer level specific? I doubt it's possible without hacking JCS, but if the screen size could be specified upon creating the level, inbalance problems wouldn't be there anymore.

The other three points depend on how you view it, so I'll not go any further into them.

[ThunderPX]

I fail to see how disk space affects the performance of JJ2, LF.

[cooba]

bigger levels should be more playable (Divide and Conquer, Dawn Of Combat, etc).Or maybe leave the bigger levels for JDC events where they don't require 800x600 to be playable.

[R3ptile]

Those levels feel lonely even with 16 players.

[cooba]

Those levels feel lonely even with 16 players.Not really.

[LittleFreak]

I'm not talking about disc space, Thunder. =b

But I realise why you're confused, it's of course MhZ not MB.

[cooba]

http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/6932/640x6000ef.th.png (http://img129.imageshack.us/my.php?image=640x6000ef.png)

Not much of an advantage or visual improvement, is it...

[CrimiClown]

I think it shouldn't be released. It'll look crappy and be against all Epic's morals... <s>Okay, publish it!</s> Just be HAPPY with what you got.

[Alex]

I would really really like the patch, who cares about the 2 tiles extra in every direction? its just nice to see further, it doesnt help your weapons, and makes your aim less acurate but it does look better on bigger screens. (or on any screen for that matter)

[LittleFreak]

5 tiles, actually, which is a lot when you think about it being to all directions.

[cooba]

5 tiles, actually, which is a lot when you think about it being to all directions.5 as in the total amount of additional horizontal tiles, which makes 2.5 extra. Check my earlier post.

[LittleFreak]

Ah, okay. My fault.

[R3ptile]

Chippie voted no, but changed his mind. So it's 18-9 now.

[cooba]

Consider my mind changed too. Back to 17-10 ;)

[R3ptile]

</s>:(

[Birdie]

=D Yay Cooba has come to the light!

[n00b]

BTW, I've noticed we've yet to actually see how JJ2 looks in hi-res.
Basically we're voting for whether or not we want a time machine, without actually knowing if we're getting a real timemachine or an empty box reading "TIM3 MACIN3" (note-Read the 3s as backward Es.)

[Marijn]

BTW, I've noticed we've yet to actually see how JJ2 looks in hi-res.
Basically we're voting for whether or not we want a time machine, without actually knowing if we're getting a real timemachine or an empty box reading "TIM3 MACIN3" (note-Read the 3s as backward Es.)

With other words... you want to see it first, just like me! Prove its cool. :p
But hea.. Ther is no way back..

[n00b]

With other words... you want to see it first
Sure with other words, but they wouldn't exactly be my words.

[Violet CLM]

BTW, I've noticed we've yet to actually see how JJ2 looks in hi-res.
Basically we're voting for whether or not we want a time machine, without actually knowing if we're getting a real timemachine or an empty box reading "TIM3 MACIN3" (note-Read the 3s as backward Es.)
<a href="http://www.tachyonlabs.com/sam/MYresolution.png">Of</a> <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/d3/MYsecret.jpg">course</a> <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/d3/MYsecret2.jpg">not</a>.

[n00b]

<a href="http://www.tachyonlabs.com/sam/MYresolution.png">Of</a> <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/d3/MYsecret.jpg">course</a> <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/d3/MYsecret2.jpg">not</a>.
Oh, those pics had a higher res? Never actually noticed when Blur had them in his sig.

[ThunderPX]

Oh, those pics had a higher res? Never actually noticed when Blur had them in his sig.

Except that it says "800x600" at the bottom ;p

[n00b]

Except that it says "800x600" at the bottom ;p
Never actually noticed
<BR IS A FURRY!~ Trafton>

[EvilMike]

I want to see jj2 able to run in a higher resolution. But I also want to see it continue to be limited to a visible area of 20x15 tiles. Kind of like how if you run jj2 in window mode and hit the "maximize" button, only better.

I voted yes because of this.

For running the game in a higher res and expanding the viewable area, I would not like to see that. The reason, is not because it would give people an <b>unfair</b> advantage, so much as it would just give people an advantage while also making the game look ugly.

[Birdie]

Alright, but people with a very high Windows resolution like me can't.

I have high resolution but i always play in windowed mode normaly.

[Odin]

I want to see jj2 able to run in a higher resolution. But I also want to see it continue to be limited to a visible area of 20x15 tiles. Kind of like how if you run jj2 in window mode and hit the "maximize" button, only better.

I voted yes because of this.

For running the game in a higher res and expanding the viewable area, I would not like to see that. The reason, is not because it would give people an <b>unfair</b> advantage, so much as it would just give people an advantage while also making the game look ugly.

I thought about this, but I wasn't sure if it were able to be implemented easily. That would be ideal, though; you wouldn't gain an unfair advantage, while you have extra room for text and the player list.

[Birdie]

;D to do this you would need to expand everything but text...

[Monolith]

Nobody even took notice of my post. ;|

And I support EvilMike's ideas.

[Stijn]

while also making the game look ugly.
The game already looks ugly and stretched out on my screen, because it's widescreen. And widescreen screens are slowly becoming more common.

[EvilMike]

The game already looks ugly and stretched out on my screen, because it's widescreen. And widescreen screens are slowly becoming more common.
Expanding things horozontally actually wouldn't be quite as bad (though a few problems might still occur). In fact, I think expanding the jj2 resolution to support widescreen would be perfectly legitimate, so long as the viewable area didn't increase TOO much.

The reason is because most backgrounds rely on being aligned vertically, rather than horozontally. Increasing the resolution would wind up displacing them, creating floating mountain ranges and whatnot. You'd also experience some other visual problems, seeing things you aren't supposed to see (I place all sorts of junk out of the playable area in my levels, such as trigger systems, cutscenes, and so on).

This wouldn't be such a problem with widescreen support. But changing the resolution to something like 1280x1024 would look horrible.

[Grytolle]

Full screen sucks :(

[R3ptile]

It looks great in screenshots, so release.

[cooba]

It looks great in screenshots, so release.....obvious hoaxes....

[jam]

What screenshots?

[R3ptile]

What screenshots?
<a href="http://www.tachyonlabs.com/sam/MYresolution.png">Of</a> <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/d3/MYsecret.jpg">course</a> <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/d3/MYsecret2.jpg">not</a>.
<those>

[Stijn]

....obvious hoaxes....
So what? If the res changer is actually released the game will probably look like in those screenshots.

[cooba]

So what? If the res changer is actually released the game will probably look like in those screenshots.Sprites will be likely to look like squished in MSPaint and layers will float, so not really.

[Stijn]

why would sprites look squished?

[cooba]

why would sprites look squished?If they look MSPaint expanded in resolutions like 400x300 DirectDraw, I'd guess they'd look MSPaint squished in 800x600 DirectDraw. LOGIC WINS AGAIN

[Stijn]

You mean one pixel would become, for example, four pixels? Maybe. But then again, that's the whole purpose of increasing the resolution I suppose :)

[R3ptile]

Cooba, if all sprites were squished, BN would've already told.

[cooba]

Perhaps BN's playing windowed mode then? :7

...which reminds me. Why hasn't anyone asked BN for screens?

[Stijn]

BN, can we see some screens?

[R3ptile]

Please?

[n00b]

Expanding things horozontally actually wouldn't be quite as bad (though a few problems might still occur). In fact, I think expanding the jj2 resolution to support widescreen would be perfectly legitimate, so long as the viewable area didn't increase TOO much.

The reason is because most backgrounds rely on being aligned vertically, rather than horozontally. Increasing the resolution would wind up displacing them, creating floating mountain ranges and whatnot. You'd also experience some other visual problems, seeing things you aren't supposed to see (I place all sorts of junk out of the playable area in my levels, such as trigger systems, cutscenes, and so on).

This wouldn't be such a problem with widescreen support. But changing the resolution to something like 1280x1024 would look horrible.
I agree with this statement now that I think about it

[Birdie]

Evil mikes post is very, logical.

[FQuist]

Nobody even took notice of my post. ;|

And I support EvilMike's ideas.
I also support them.

Do please reply to <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showpost.php?p=357052&postcount=33">Monolith</a>'s post (and while you're at it, <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showpost.php?p=356847&postcount=102">re-read mine</a>). Arguments like "It's cool we should have it" just don't cut the cake, really, and it's too bad only the skeptical side (and Evilmike with his well-written post being on his own side) seems to be posting well-written arguments that aren't made up of one (sometimes cryptic) line. This isn't just about "omg bigger resolution cooolllll" like some people seem to be arguing - higher resolutions have genuine effects on the gameplay, and if you're concerned about the game's playability and not just its GFX, it could be wise to spend some time to consider the gameplay side, and post a good argument against the skeptic side. It's hard to take most of the replies here seriously.

If you're just concerned about the GFX and don't care for the gameplay arguments, you're probably better off playing another game that looks better than an eight-year old game.

I would like to give <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showpost.php?p=356980&postcount=17">Birdie's</a> point some attention, too. I'm not sure how this utility would work, if it would just hack the JJ2 registry or if it would do certain things through gameplay. Either way, if you've got a tool that edits certain things only in certain modes/resolutions, it will probably - especially if it's a registry edit (just a matter of copying and pasting) - be not too hard to crack the utility to make it work under all modes. Send it to some friends and you're done. I hope it will be possible to create a resolution changer that works according to Evilmike's, Violet's and other people's suggestions, but I fear it won't. But I'm not Black Ninja.

[Black Ninja]

BN, can we see some screens?
When it's bug-free, you'll see some screens. I've got a few tricks up my sleeve that will blow you guys away.

[n00b]

When it's bug-free, you'll see some screens. I've got a few tricks up my sleeve that will blow you guys away.
Ha, I knew it! BN does keep mini-rocket launchers up his sleeve! Everyone take cover!!

[Black Ninja]

I'm going to go ahead and rephrase my earlier post, because this topic is starting to make my happy hurt. I'll post screenshots when I'm good and ready. You can chose to believe that I actually have a resolution changer, or you can believe that I'm just feeding you bull. It's really up to you.

In any case, I still will *never* release this program until I have spoken with several key people on the subject.

[Birdie]

In any case, I still will *never* release this program until I have spoken with several key people on the subject.
Iam I key? =D

[Trafton]

I am ambivalent. I think it would be used for cheating. Then again, I think that this is such a trivial issues there there is nothing much worth considering there. On the other hand, there is no way to test for this in something like a duel.

I do not think that Option 3 is much of an option. <i>Invariably</i>, limited release programs do not have a limited release.

[R3ptile]

If you call this cheating, then you may consider turning Ambient Lighting off as cheating as well.

[cooba]

If you call this cheating, then you may consider turning Ambient Lighting off as cheating as well.Eh, no.

[R3ptile]

No?

- They both give you an advantage
- They both make the game easier
- It would be considered as an unfair advantage if both were released only to several people

[R3ptile]

Aren't those reasonable arguments? I don't get your point. You're just against high-res without thinking, no matter what. This is bad.

And I find it interesting that all people who voted no except two or three (or, say, an extreme maximum of FOUR) don't play the game actively anymore.

[cooba]

- They both give you an advantageTurning Ambient Lighting down is an advantage now? No MP level is dark enough to not see other players, so I don't get you here.- They both make the game easierIn SP, maybe. But then again no one cares if you're playing SP in 1024x768 or not.- It would be considered as an unfair advantage if both were released only to several peopleThose several people who have the resolution changer don't play actively (or at all).You're just against high-res without thinking, no matter what. This is bad.You're just for high-res without thinking, no matter what. This is bad.And I find it interesting that all people who voted no except two or three (or, say, an extreme maximum of FOUR) don't play the game actively anymore.So what?

[R3ptile]

Turning Ambient Lighting down is an advantage now? No MP level is dark enough to not see other players, so I don't get you here.
It helps you to see better, so yes, it's an advantage.

In SP, maybe. But then again no one cares if you're playing SP in 1024x768 or not.
...huh? It makes the game a lot easier in MP, as it was said several times in this thread.

Those several people who have the resolution changer don't play actively (or at all).
But sooner or later some other people would find out how to play with higher resolutions, and then the game would be ruined.

So what?
So we should ignore their votes since they don't even care about the game.

[Stijn]

No MP level is dark enough to not see other players, so I don't get you here.
You obviously didn't play my earlier levels :P

[cooba]

You obviously didn't play my earlier levels :PAs if people were still playing them online.

[Stijn]

I recently hosted one, yes.

[cooba]

I recently hosted one, yes.And do I see other people hosting it? Do I see people dueling in it? You hosting a level once doesn't really count.It helps you to see better, so yes, it's an advantage.As long as the level doesn't have lighting reduced to anything below 60%, no one would consider that as an advantage letting people to see better....huh? It makes the game a lot easier in MP, as it was said several times in this thread.Two posts don't make "several".But sooner or later some other people would find out how to play with higher resolutions, and then the game would be ruined.It took BN 2 years to figure out higher resolutions, and so far no one's inclined enough to try finding out. So even if people figure out 800x600 and beyond, they won't do it anytime soon.So we should ignore their votes since they don't even care about the game.Nimrod and Monolith don't play actively. Does that make them not care about the game?

[R3ptile]

I still will *never* release this program until I have spoken with several key people on the subject.
Some people are towardly biased for it, some others are towardly biased against it. Some play this game 24\7, some others play it once a year or even less. I just hope you are going to contact the right people.

It took BN 2 years to figure out higher resolutions, and so far no one's inclined enough to try finding out. So even if people figure out 800x600 and beyond, they won't do it anytime soon.
Well, just so you know, Jam already came pretty close.

Nimrod and Monolith don't play actively. Does that make them not care about the game?
Nimrod said several times already that he doesn't care about the game anymore. If he meant it or not, I don't know.

[FQuist]

No?

- They both give you an advantage
- They both make the game easier
- It would be considered as an unfair advantage if both were released only to several people
Ambient lightning is a general jj2 feature, it was purposedly added by the developers, and <i>everyone</i> has it. Everyone has equal opportunity to use it - indeed, it won't give many people computer problems either. Instead of making up more one-liner arguments. The thing is, with high resolutions, it was not added by the developers, not everyone has it, etc.

To say that the no voters "don't even care about the game" is just laughable, btw. I would gather that if you spend hours running the listservers, creating tileset utilities or creating security apps (Monolith), make new levels (ShadowGPW), create a lot of cool stuff (BlurredD) or spend hours maintaining a site (me) you care about the game. All your one-liners are pretty silly.

I'd think that if Nimrod didn't care for the game he wouldn't spend hours setting up the bash, creating security tools and running the listservers, btw.

[R3ptile]

The thing is, with high resolutions, it was not added by the developers, not everyone has it, etc.
..huh? If BN releases it, everyone would have it.

I'd think that if Nimrod didn't care for the game he wouldn't spend hours setting up the bash, creating security tools and running the listservers, btw.
That's helping the community. Obviously not what I meant.

By "caring about the game", I was referring to actively playing. All those people you mentioned have nothing to do with it.

[cooba]

By caring about the game, you have to do something with playing.......................not at all. And for the record, I play weekly; just so I'm not deemed as "inactive" while I quite shouldn't be.

[n00b]

some others play it once a year or even less.
And others casually play this game.
I find it so funny you look at the JJ2 playing world in such Black and White terms. It seems to make your opinion less well formed and more towards "Propaganda for r3p's cause!", if you leave out other playing "groups".

..huh? If BN releases it, everyone would have it.
Some people even In this forum never check the downloads, even if the download link is in this forum. Getting everyone to have it is going to be harder than you think.

By caring about the game, I meant you have to do something with playing. All those stuff you mentioned, doesn't have anything to do with actively playing the game.
WTB does playing 'activley' in over-competized matches has anything to do with 'caring'. Isn't running the listservers you play on enough? Guess we don't need those.We don't need Security tools so Orbitz, ThaSpaz, and UF can continue terrorzing crap, heck who cares about banning them! That OBVIOUSLY doesn't care about the game. "Helping the community" is mor e"caring for the game" than playing in tournements. Look I won a tournament! I *CaRe*! I play 2v2 every single minute of my waking life! Thats caring fer sure!!!
I'd say Nimmy has done more caring than you ever have.

[FQuist]

..huh? If BN releases it, everyone would have it.

No. <a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showpost.php?p=356847&postcount=102">Read this post</a>.

I'm not going to answer the silly "you don't care" argument. If you care yourself, you could try to be nicer to people, create a nicer atmosphere so more people would be bothered to play and you could try and bother to read the counter-arguments and reply in a non-one liner fashion.

[R3ptile]

A J2O news post would be enough. Every Jazz player knows J2O, otherwise he\she wouldn't get the list servers patch.

n00b, I'm sorry, but IMO the ones who "play 2v2 every single minute of my waking life" are the only ones who deserve to vote.

FQ, are you trying to say I'm not nice to people? Well, go play JJ2 once for a change. You're basing your opinion on #jj2 conversations without even knowing me, and it's bad.

[n00b]

A J2O news post would be enough. And yes, every Jazz player knows and visits J2O often, otherwise he\she wouldn't get the list servers patch. And no, FQ, because then people wouldn't even bother to read my posts.
I doubt if a link is easily found in the forum, and a forum member doesn't click it, that they will click a link in a J2O newspost.
And no, FQ, because then people wouldn't even bother to read my posts.
The reason why F-quist asked to do that is so he can read your posts. So Fquist, and everyone else against Res-changing aren't people anymore?

[FQuist]

A J2O news post would be enough. And yes, every Jazz player knows and visits J2O often, otherwise he\she wouldn't get the list servers patch.That's just not true. If only because J2O isn't the only site with the listserver patch. Just check around, there's enough people that never visit the site. It was quite obvious during the bash, with many people not knowing what it was, despite it having been on the J2O news for some time. Indeed, the Bash Info server kept getting people who didn't know what the bash was or who kept asking the Idle Server for duels. That doesn't seem like they check J2O regularly.

And still, there's the computer hardware argument that you have read, but continue to ignore. Many people will not be able to run the high resolutions, unless you limit the resolution changer to 800x600, which - if you care read my posts - is probably not feasible. You keep changing your arguments, now you say no-one will have an unfair advantage, while earlier you said people should just buy better hardware.

[cooba]

Stop Replying To My Posts Before I Finish Editing Them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111 WHAT'S THE RUSHYou edit posts after people reply to them if anything ;)

[R3ptile]

now you say no-one will have an unfair advantage, while earlier you said people should just buy better hardware.
what?

[FQuist]

Oh, come on...

<a href="http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showthread.php?p=356854#post356854">Link</a>. (also, it's not just about monitors, computer power and video cards, too). As I've pointed out again and again and again (and you keep ignoring), there will be a higher difference in advantages between people if a tool is released without certain limitations, than if it's not. It's pretty inconsistent to say the game will be "ruined" if only a few people have the advantage, but not if more of the active people have it, while a lot of people do not have it.

[R3ptile]

well know what? go make a poll and ask who's computer can't handle 800x600
also, if someone can't 800x600 and really cares about the game, he'd already bother to upgrade his computer. it shouldn't cost too much money anyway.

however it's not like epic wouldn't release a game with high gfx because some computers aren't good enough to run them. that's why i couldn't get your point.

[cooba]

well know what? go make a poll and ask who's computer can't handle 800x600How can people know if their computer can't handle JJ2 in 800x600 (which is what FQ meant) if 800x600 isn't yet released...

[FQuist]

R3ptile, I haven't been talking about 800x600.
And still, there's the computer hardware argument that you have read, but continue to ignore. Many people will not be able to run the high resolutions, unless you limit the resolution changer to 800x600, which - if you care read my posts - is probably not feasible.
Last post now, since you don't even bother to read my posts anyways.

[n00b]

Once again stop using "obsesses over tournements and higher res" as a synonym for "cares"

[R3ptile]

How can people know if their computer can't handle JJ2 in 800x600 (which is what FQ meant) if 800x600 isn't yet released...
you make it sound like jj2 requires some AMD 128-BIT 40000000 GHZ

[n00b]

Hey guys, Doom 3 lags in 800x600. JJ2 must lag too.

[R3ptile]

well if you can run doom 3 at all you could run jj2 with your max. screen's resolution easily

start thinking a bit, maybe?

[FQuist]

I'll post to say that contrary to what Cooba said, I didn't "mean" 800x600.

[R3ptile]

whatever, all those arguments aren't going to change anyone's mind i guess, just make them more confused. i give up.

PAGE CLAIM :D

[Stijn]

Pageclaim!

EDIT: For the record, I was earlier than ThA BLiNG BLiNG RaBBiT

[n00b]

start thinking a bit, maybe?
How about you start replying to all of Fquist's posts (and other people's posts).
Do you not reply to them because you know they're right and you can't make a snappy "linear" comeback?
whatever, all those arguments aren't going to change anyone's mind i guess, just make them more confused. i give up.
Of course not- You only argue against the low points of other's arguments.

[White Rabbit]

I'm not worried that higher resolutions are going to make the game look worse or mess up the layers in a level. People are playing beyond what a level, and the game, was designed for when using anything above 640x480, so it's not the levelmaker's fault but the player's own choice to sacrifice graphics for resolution (actually, for a standard 17" monitor, full screen 640x480 looks pixelated...a higher resolution could actually bring about the same pixel sharpness that windowmode does).

A bigger issue is that higher resolutions would ruin the carefully balanced gameplay of levels which people have designed to work for 640x480 and of course the simple fact that people can see you before you see them.

There's also a minor risk that people may start downrating existing levels/tilesets because they don't look good in 1024x768 full screen, but I think that's just them being unfair, not a fault of higher resolution. What if you are a 320x120 user? Will you be allowed to downrate a level's eyecandy because your resolution prevents you from seeing anything?

Higher resolutions would mean that different levels could be made, with a new style of gameplay, long-distance face-offs, among many other things. Its current disadvantages are crippling, however, and I don't think it should be released in such a free and un-limited fashion. If possible, a resolution changer should become a new version of JJ2, compatible only with itself and no other ones, and not just done by a simple value change in Jazz2.exe, which you can just revert back to 1.23/1.24 with a hexeditor.

[Black Ninja]

Ok, here's a status update for everyone. I'm still stressing about the release of this program every day, and I still am no closer to releasing it. However, I have a few questions for you to think over.

1.) What if it worked only in offline games? SP and Splitscreen, I mean.

2.) What if it was, as WR suggests, its own version?

[FQuist]

If the first option can be done securely in a way that's not possible to hack, great.

The second option doesn't convince me. It might just create another split within the community - with differing versions playing online. If we're going to do extra versions they should work only for sp (and not be easily editable) or it should be reserved for a real game update.

[Odin]

We have the capability to release a seperate "1.23res" version. That sounds like a great idea. That way, duelers can't cheat without consent of the other player.

[FQuist]

That might cause a community version split, Odin.

[R3ptile]

I like the second option a lot and don't care about a split, as most people who are against the patch don't even play the game actively.

[cooba]

[19:17] &lt;Fooruman&gt; My plan is, as of now, to make an SP-only hi-res game and see what people think
[19:17] &lt;FrankQ&gt; can people hexedit the mp back in?
[19:17] &lt;Fooruman&gt; No. The MP will be completely removed.
[19:17] &lt;FrankQ&gt; and if you just merge the versions again?
[19:17] &lt;Fooruman&gt; It would take more than some stup with a hex editor to re-add it
[19:18] &lt;Fooruman&gt; Trust me, it would be all but impossible to get MP to work.
[19:18] &lt;FrankQ&gt; If that's true, then great

[Cpp]

[19:17] &lt;Fooruman&gt; My plan is, as of now, to make an SP-only hi-res game and see what people think
[19:17] &lt;FrankQ&gt; can people hexedit the mp back in?
[19:17] &lt;Fooruman&gt; No. The MP will be completely removed.
[19:17] &lt;FrankQ&gt; and if you just merge the versions again?
[19:17] &lt;Fooruman&gt; It would take more than some stup with a hex editor to re-add it
[19:18] &lt;Fooruman&gt; Trust me, it would be all but impossible to get MP to work.
[19:18] &lt;FrankQ&gt; If that's true, then greatI challenge that ;)

[R3ptile]

keep voting yes guys :Z

[White Rabbit]

Overlord affirms that he is more than a stup. :o

I've also thought about the implications of a third online multiplayer version of JJ2 but the situation right now is that people can either play together, unfairly, or play on equal terms but separate from each other. I prefer the latter although I know that either way, the people who don't have the resolution changer lose out, so I support an SP-only release (but I hope you mean offline-only because this will remove the benefits of high-resolution splitscreen and...even multiplayer over TCP/IPX :p).

[Black Ninja]

I challenge that ;)
If anyone's going to challenge that, I hope it's not you, Overlord ;p

[n00b]

I challenge that ;)
You mean:
http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/files/images/Objection1.thumbnail.jpg

[Odin]

That might cause a community version split, Odin.

1. No more than the 1.23/1.24 split.
2. Any split would be eliminated since a 1.23res patch is publically available.

[cooba]

2. Any split would be eliminated since a 1.23res patch is publically available.Do you expect everyone to play on 1.23res?

[NovaStar]

Actually guys there IS a resolution program available, jam's JazzRes.
You shoulda known before this thread was even made. :lol:

[Stijn]

But that doesn't support resolutions larger than 640x480 ;o

[Odin]

Do you expect everyone to play on 1.23res?

No, but since it is publically available, there should be no reason for community splits, since theoretically everyone can play in 1.23res.

Actually guys there IS a resolution program available, jam's JazzRes.
You shoulda known before this thread was even made. :lol:
<You're a disgrace to Australia. I wish I wasn't a partial citizen of Australia because of you.>
1. JazzRes cannot be downloaded anymore, because of Quist's censorship of the program.
2. As stated before, JazzRes cannot go above 640x480 (IIRC it can go to 800x600 and maybe 1024x768 in the menus, but it will crash as soon as it starts a gameloop, i.e. playing an actual game).
3. Even if JazzRes could go above 640x480 and still work, BN's new resolution changer is supposedly superior to JazzRes.

[NovaStar]

(FTG)

If someone, lets say, a... a... lemme think... computer geek, had an old version of windows on his computer and didn't know about a new one, lets say Windows 2000 and he didn't know XP existed. He meets another computer geek, right, and after a bit of talking the 2nd computer geek asks him what the best version of MS Word is. The 1st computer geek says MS Word 2000 because (to him) that's the newest and the 2nd computer geek calls him dumb because Word 2003 was newer. As we all know, Word '03 is only on Windows XP, and of course the 1st geek, only knowing Windows 2000 is the newest, is confused. So the 1st computer geek asks what this Word 2003 is, and the only reply he gets is "Stupid."

So, basically, the 1st computer geek doesn't know that there's a newer version of Word than Word 2000, and he is confused and is trying to find out what W03 is and all the other computer geeks call him stupid because they all have the newest version.

Get it? If you don't, well, I can only reword it as I'm not too good at explainng.

[Previous quotation edit - FQuist]

[Black Ninja]

Hello, everyone. I'm not ready to make any kind of release yet, but I'd like to clear up some misconceptions on what this patch is and also what it is not.

This version of JJ2, shamelessly called 1.foo (yeah, so sue me), will FULLY support resolutions up to 1024x768. It will also have partial support for resolutions up to 1280x1024. More info on specifically what I mean by that later on, when I feel like releasing it. The program will allow you to choose the high resolutions using the ingame menu, or the dropdown video menu if you're playing in a window. You'll even be able to change resolutions during a game with no problems at all. I <b>MUST</b> point out, however, that it takes an amazing computer to run the game at 1024x768, or even 800x600. I also must point out that, while high resolutions are extremely appealing on paper, the game is not without its flaws when run at a high resolution. Some sprites were not meant to be resized, and they will look pixelated. Some things, on the other hand (like textured backgrounds), look amazingly better. It's really a give-or-take thing. I still plan to release a single-player only version of the patch, but I don't have a set release date or anything. It's mind-numbingly difficult to work on this. In any case, I promise I'll have some concrete info and screenshots for you guys in the near future. Just bear with me for a little while - you can't rush perfection.

[Stijn]

I am still wondering how it requires a very good computer to run higher resolutions. If a heavy 3D game like Oblivion runs smoothly in that resolution, why wouldn't Jazz2? Are you using some "trick" like adjusting the resolution every second because JJ2 automatically changes it back, or something?

And, will a widescreen reolution like 1280x800 (my screen's native resolution ;)) be supported?

[ThunderPX]

I am still wondering how it requires a very good computer to run higher resolutions. If a heavy 3D game like Oblivion runs smoothly in that resolution, why wouldn't Jazz2? Are you using some "trick" like adjusting the resolution every second because JJ2 automatically changes it back, or something?

Either that, or bad coding on Epic's part =P

[FQuist]

When the game was made, I gather 1280x1024 was like... impossible... to even think of.

[Torkell]

As we all know, Word '03 is only on Windows XP
Point of order: Word 2003 runs fine on Windows 2000. I should know, I use both.

<small>Yes, I do get what you're trying to say</small>

[Black Ninja]

Ok, in response to questions: Yeah, it's bad coding on Epic's part, and no, I don't use any "trick" like that. Also, that particular resolution isn't selectable ingame, but you *will* be able to kind of "create" your own resolution if the ones ingame aren't good enough. As always, more on that later.

[White Rabbit]

Epic recommended the use of 8-bit colour, hardware acceleration and no textured backgrounds when running JJ2 on a weaker computer. How significant is the performance gain in higher resolutions when these 7 year-old suggestions are taken?

[Black Ninja]

Believe it or not, WR, those suggestions still make a huge difference. My computer, which can run UT2004 at 120 FPS at full detail, can run JJ2 at 1280x1024 at 40 fps or so. If I turn on hardware acceleration and 8-bit, that goes up to about 60 fps.

As an interesting side note, my patch will also have an option to change the games FPS cap to 120 fps instead of 70 fps. The game is beautiful at 120 fps, let me tell you.

[Erik]

So, basically, the 1st computer geek doesn't know that there's a newer version of Word than Word 2000, and he is confused and is trying to find out what W03 is and all the other computer geeks call him stupid because they all have the newest version.

the problem is, computer geeks don't use Micro$oft Word.

[Odin]

the problem is, computer geeks don't use Micro$oft Word.

1. Yes, they do. The other, more popular alternative (OpenOffice.org) runs much slower on even high-end computers.

2. Never, ever, use $ in Microsoft again. I will seriously hurt you.

[Birdie]

(like textured backgrounds), look amazingly better.
Good, I was afraid that they would look somthing like this:
http://www.freewebs.com/birdie8d/pictures/bge2.png

[Black Ninja]

I remember that screenshot. No, props to Arjan or whoever it is that fixed it - it looks fine.

[Birdie]

I remember that screenshot. No, props to Arjan or whoever it is that fixed it - it looks fine.
I got that screenshot myself by memory editing :(
I have more ;D

[Black Ninja]

I must've seen some other screenshot. I seem to remember some pic of Carrotus where there were textured BG problems. Ah well, my bad.

[cooba]

I seem to remember some pic of Carrotus where there were textured BG problems.<img src="http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/3300/earlycarrotus25oo.jpg"> ?

[Birdie]

:O Ooh I've got to try to get that to happen.

[cooba]

I wish to revive this discussion.

The prime argument of the people opposing the release of the high resolutions hack was the so-called unfair advantage. However, earlier in the thread I pointed out that the 800×600 resolution expands the view by 2 tiles and a half, which no one exactly seemed to notice. 2.5 tiles is a distance that a player's rabbit beats in split a second if he's running, and people are running more often than not in games like duels on clanwars.

If that doesn't convince you, <strong>tell me if this looks like potential unfair advantage:</strong>

<img src="http://chaos.foxmage.com/cooba/resolute.png" />

This image is not fake.

Furthermore, I arranged a battle1 duel with SuperJazz to see if there is any unfair advantage. I played in the 1024×768 resolution and lost 0-5. Granted that 1024×768 is glitchy as far as I can tell, and that I'm far from a great player, but there was little to no advantage at all that I personally felt.


I believe that 800×600 would be a resolution safe enough to be made public.

[FreeFull]

I agree with Cooba.

[Superjazz]

Bring it on.

[Stijn]

<s>it's not fake? whoa give me this odyssey edit with 800x600 text tiles</s>

I have always been supportive of releasing it, but I'd like to re-emphasize that I agree with cooba on that 5 tiles extra don't make a significant difference.

A key argument against making this public is that it would be unfair because a lot of people wouldn't get it because they don't know J2O. However, most people who play in duels or clanwars ("serious" players) actually do, if not only because JDC is hosted on J2O. What does it matter if people can see 5 tiles further than others in, say, a hotel level or polskiBoy32's public battle1 serwer? As long as it does not interfere with games in which people are actually really playing to win, I don't see a problem.

There's still the argument that not everyone has a badass 1600x1200 screen and that the difference between, say, 1600x1200 and 640x480 does make gameplay unfair. Fair enough. A limit of 1024x786 would seem sensible, as this is a resolution supported by most modern equipment.

I am also of the opinion that artificially holding the development of new features back because "some people maybe won't get it" is stupid. After 10 years one can expect that a game has been hacked to death and patched to the max. While Jazz 2 has not been expanded as much as other games as old (or even younger), I think it is not unreasonable to expect people to look around a bit for patches or tools that enhance the game.

[Birdie]

Unfortunately, "polskiBoy32's" hotel isn't the only level that will be played. While it isn't hard to fix levels to work with 800x600, I don't really care much for weather or not the 800x600 version is released, all it really means for me is changing my jazz2 shortcut.

[KRSplat]

In my opinion the best way to reduce any potential advantage that could be gained from using any JJ2 utilities is to release them publicly so they aren't special anymore. You don't see people spamming servers with other tools that you could download from J2O.

[Odin]

After getting a widescreen monitor for Christmas, I've been thinking of the implications of LCD users, especially those who don't have a standard 3:4 ratio display. One of the benefits of a resolution changer would be to allow people with non 3:4 resolutions play in fullscreen.

Of course, somebody playing Jazz 2 with a 1440x900 (16:10 ratio) resolution, like myself, would have an obvious extreme advantage, being able to see much more than even somebody running Jazz 2 in 1024x768. In my opinion, there should be a resolution cap that cannot be passed, since once we reach a certain point in resolution, the size becomes overbearing and impossible to play in (would you seriously like to play at a 1600x1200 resolution? Too much information coming in at once, you'd probably focus on the area near your character anyway.).

[R3ptile]

jj2 blows for my 22" widescreen, please release this fix

[DoubleGJ]

I don't see this a problem. The only thing that could be considered somewhat bad is that it will be no longer useful to leave parts of levels that are far from the reachable areas empty, like in some of the official levels. Some of the singleplayer tricks, such as jumping into long shafts without knowing what's on the bottom, can also lose on that.

[Grytolle]

if you find that boring in single player, play in a lower resolution

...unless those are made unavailable :OOOOO!

[Vegito]

To be honest I'd like to have a high reso hack public.
People can choose if they wanna play with it or not.

[Unhit]

A higher resolution does indeed offer advantages, even in cooba's screen (you can see the seeker upgrade), but wth, as stijn pointed out, those who play the game competitively will all be able to profit from it. so bring it on, with a cap (!) my eyes thank you <3

[cooba]

It's not as much of a resolution changer as a hacked Jazz2.exe with the additional resolutions as options. I figure it would be fairly simple to add the 16:9 (as well as probably more ratios) resolutions.

I supposed that the rescap of 800×600 would have been enough but if you guys want to go for 1024×768 then be my guest. Just be warned that 1024×768 is where the game starts looking weirdly small in fullscreen (and the layers are broken even harder).A higher resolution does indeed offer advantages, even in cooba's screen (you can see the seeker upgrade)Normally you would have to crouch or get off the platform to see the power up spawning. If anything, I consider that as an argument of 800×600 speeding up the gameplay (in a very minor way).

[Birdie]

Just so you know, the resolution hack was actually designed for 800x600, no higher. The 'extra' higher resolutions were just for testing purposes.

[Vegito]

"I have always been supportive of releasing it, but I'd like to re-emphasize that I agree with cooba on that 5 tiles extra don't make a significant difference."

Also, it makes a hell lot of a difference if you're used to it ;)
Just so that you know ;P

[cooba]

Also, it makes a hell lot of a difference if you're used to it ;)No. The game just <em>looks</em> a lot bigger in fullscreen, but in reality it's the mere 2.5 tiles.

[Vegito]

Im experienced with it too.
I just let you know that it makes a whole lot of a difference if you're used to it, which I am.

[Cpp]

This hacked version of jj2 originally gave me the idea for blackout (http://www.jazz2online.com/jcf/showthread.php?t=16995) because it completely failed to render the tileset at very high resolutions. The screen appeared black. I've always supported higher resolutions for jj2.

[Raven aka StL]

One of the worst ever gameplay-related modifications.
JJ2 is supposed to be played with the standard resolution.
Seeing a bigger area is easy to tolerate as cheating.
It gives an enormous edge over those who don't/can't do it.

[Sonyk]

One of the worst ever gameplay-related modifications.
JJ2 is supposed to be played with the standard resolution.
Seeing a bigger area is easy to tolerate as cheating.
It gives an enormous edge over those who don't/can't do it.
What is the standard resolution? You could just as easily say the game was designed for 300x200 and that we shouldn't be playing above that.

[Tik]

It's going to break layers in a lot of levels, isn't it? Especially older ones. Personally I could not care less what impact it has on online play, especially if everyone chooses to use the same settings.

A solution, though (I imagine) difficult to implement, would be to have j2l's have hardcoded settings for proper screen resolution size and all other video/sound related options.. just to add fairness as well as a fix for old levels, not to mention another layer of customisation for level makers. I suppose another tool to bypass this would just pop up but whatever. Screen resolution could be visible by a server's host and "cheaters" could be kicked as well.. I could muse all day, but I imagine it won't go anywhere, so file this under 'wouldn't it be neat if...'

[EvilMike]

It's going to break layers in a lot of levels, isn't it? Especially older ones. Personally I could not care less what impact it has on online play, especially if everyone chooses to use the same settings.

Mostly just an issue in single player. For that, the player just has to play in the resolution it's designed for. It's no big deal because if someone is playing a SP level with non-recommended settings, they might as well just get it over with and type jjgod. All it really takes is putting a disclaimer in the readme file ("this was designed for 640x480").

For multiplayer, interestingly enough most levels don't break that much. The worst you'll usually see is stuff like floating mountains.

[Slaz]

Indeed, you still need to know how to play the game, and know the map. I also believe that higher resolutions don't make the game more fair or unfair.

In that case, I suppose the 'auto weapon switch' fix could even be considered more unfair, as players who use it have to press less buttons (the number keys), allowing a minor gameplay speed boost haha. :p

[Raven aka StL]

It's the most obvious thing ever, that seeing a considerably bigger area at any given time gives you a gigantic edge over other players of the same level, who don't.

That'd make it a whole lot easier to track other players' movements and to avoid shots.
Again, this should be real damn obvious.

If you don't care about it, don't try to make it sound like it doesn't matter either.

[Slaz]

Knowing where other players are is one thing, the real deal is to roast them, and no bigger resolution can give you those skills. Of course a bigger overview gives you some advantages, but I don't believe it really impacts the actual outcome of the game (it's all about the players/teams personal skills)!

[Dermo]

It does not post that much of an unfair advantage:

I wish to revive this discussion.

The prime argument of the people opposing the release of the high resolutions hack was the so-called unfair advantage. However, earlier in the thread I pointed out that the 800×600 resolution expands the view by 2 tiles and a half, which no one exactly seemed to notice. 2.5 tiles is a distance that a player's rabbit beats in split a second if he's running, and people are running more often than not in games like duels on clanwars.

If that doesn't convince you, <strong>tell me if this looks like potential unfair advantage:</strong>

<img src="http://chaos.foxmage.com/cooba/resolute.png" />

This image is not fake.

Furthermore, I arranged a battle1 duel with SuperJazz to see if there is any unfair advantage. I played in the 1024×768 resolution and lost 0-5. Granted that 1024×768 is glitchy as far as I can tell, and that I'm far from a great player, but there was little to no advantage at all that I personally felt.


I believe that 800×600 would be a resolution safe enough to be made public.

And also, if people really want to whine about advancement, make an option in JJ2+ as stated above.

[Raven aka StL]

None of that takes away the fact that a smart player can take advantage of seeing a (even slightly) bigger area and gain a potentially significant edge over their opponent.

I rest my case... if someone wants to try to ruin the remaining competitive gameplay on a whim, they may do so. :|

[Grytolle]

None of that takes away the fact that a smart player can take advantage of seeing a (even slightly) bigger area and gain a potentially significant edge over their opponent.

I rest my case... if someone wants to try to ruin the remaining competitive gameplay on a whim, they may do so. :|

When everyone plays on the same resolution (or lower, which ofc won't be blocked), that doesn't hold true. That's what the suggested /maxresolution command is for. 12 years ago it was potentially unfair that some people couldn't handle 640x480. I'm quite certain that no-one can 't handle 800x600 and very few can't handle 1000x640

[Slaz]

When everyone plays on the same resolution (or lower, which ofc won't be blocked), that doesn't hold true. That's what the suggested /maxresolution command is for. 12 years ago it was potentially unfair that some people couldn't handle 640x480. I'm quite certain that no-one can 't handle 800x600 and very few can't handle 1000x640

There's truth here. Back in 1998, those pre-Pentium processors like the Intel 486/486DX and cheap graphics adapters from Trident/Chips/Maxtor etc, were still very popular setups. Especially for kids and teenagers on a low budget like me (I was 8 back then so yeah). And the 640x480 resolution could make a shuttering framerate even on 8-bit mode. Not that all of this is relevant to today's situation, JJ2 was 'meant' to be played on 640x480 in the end, after all.

[SPAZ18]

So, why am I getting all this garbage on my screen?

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/3521/bigjazz.png (linked because it's 1920 x 1080!)

I'm running this in Windows 7 64bit.

[PurpleJazz]

You must play in 8 bit, with MMX capabilities turned off.

[CrimiClown]

So, why am I getting all this garbage on my screen?

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/3521/bigjazz.png (linked because it's 1920 x 1080!)

I'm running this in Windows 7 64bit.

Maybe because JJ2 isn't built for fullHD?

[SPAZ18]

Well, I put it on 8-bit, turned off MMX and it works. However, when I tried it in Noobed CTF, it just refused to work.
In "Destroyed Cassis Factory" it would keep crashing randomly. :confused:

[Dermo]

None of that takes away the fact that a smart player can take advantage of seeing a (even slightly) bigger area and gain a potentially significant edge over their opponent.

I rest my case... if someone wants to try to ruin the remaining competitive gameplay on a whim, they may do so. :|

A whole 2 and a half tiles. You're really going to complain about 2 and a half tiles? Get a life.

Well, I put it on 8-bit, turned off MMX and it works. However, when I tried it in Noobed CTF, it just refused to work.
In "Destroyed Cassis Factory" it would keep crashing randomly. :confused:

It is not fully stable, it is a beta.

[Black Ninja]

Dermo, the difference is 2 and a half tiles at 800x600. At higher resolutions, it's more. Get a life. ;P

So, I've experimented with this resolution changer a bit. It's quite cool to see JJ2 realized on my HDTV. <s>now if only the game had 7.1 surround</s>

So far I would not say that the 'advantage' higher resolutions gives you is significant. The game still requires skill to be good at. True, you can see people coming from further away; however, for all you know they have the exact same program with the same resolution.

Also, I thought I'd add (for anyone who didn't figure it out already) that my resolution changer was abandoned long ago. I got 800x600 working pretty well, but anything above that caused untold misery. The one sort-of-advantage to my tool was that it did allow custom resolutions to show up (weirdly) in the in-game menu. No, I don't still have it; it was lost long ago when my Windows XP machine went kaput.

[Seren]

Look once more at the screenshot and see that 800x600 shows a Seeker PU which is not visible in 640x480. I don't play online, so my opinion in this case doesn't really matter, but I find it an advantage, since a player know did it already respawn or not. Such a thing is also useful in new levels, where a high-resolution player will see everything before the other players do, and he will know where should he go to get a PU/carrot/whatever. If someone still doesn't believe that resolution can change player's chances, try to win a duel in 320x240. It's only 5 tiles less, really.

Btw, two and a half of tile more is 125% of a normal range (10 tiles). In 1280x960 it's already 10 tiles more, so 200%. In my opinion it's a cheating program.

[Grytolle]

Btw, two and a half of tile more is 125% of a normal range (10 tiles). In 1280x960 it's already 10 tiles more, so 200%. In my opinion it's a cheating program.

How is it cheating if all players use it?

[Foly]

/maxresolution would be a very good solution to the "cheating problem".

(/maxresolution 320x200 = nice for survivor)

[Seren]

How is it cheating if all players use it?

1. If I'm not wrong, even Plus isn't used by all of the players. As someone said before (can't find), not everyone know about J2O.

2. My screen max resolution is 1024x768, and I guess I'm not the only one like this.

/(/maxresolution 320x200 = nice for survivor)

I want such a thing to be able to play without slowdowns and disadvantage (in 320x200, 8-bit and low details I'd have something like 30 fps! I would rock!)

[FawFul]

/maxresolution please.

i think it's not going to be better, i want to see a bigger resolution, but i rather have 640x480. but i want a way to control that everyone is using the same resolution, otherwise it would be unfair.

[Grytolle]

(/maxresolution 320x200 = nice for survivor):D or for DnC

[Dermo]

Dermo, the difference is 2 and a half tiles at 800x600. At higher resolutions, it's more. Get a life. ;P

So far I would not say that the 'advantage' higher resolutions gives you is significant. The game still requires skill to be good at. True, you can see people coming from further away; however, for all you know they have the exact same program with the same resolution.
<!>

[Black Ninja]

A thought occurs - I'd be intrigued by being able to remove the FPS cap. Not sure if this is really possible though (and obviously it would require a capable monitor / TV).

[Raven aka StL]

If the transition is made to bigger resolutions, games will generally become longer and the gap between a veteran player and a moderate player will decrease, because it will become (potentially a lot) easier to read the opponent's movements and strategies.

In tight levels where speed is pretty much the deciding factor (like bbswing), in most key-situations you can easily see which way the opponent's going to come at you with a higher resolution.

People could do well to understand that -- over the years -- gameplay has developed around seeing the standard 640x480 area and it will significantly mess up various areas of competitive gameplay if people start seeing a bigger area.

Sure it's nice to see a bigger area at once, and it could be considered more refined and an upgrade to the gameplay, but it has more downsides than people seem to be able to comprehend.

EDIT: and compromises like downtuning with a command won't make much a difference.

[Grytolle]

EDIT: and compromises like downtuning with a command won't make much a difference.
This is where you completely stopped making sense :p

[Toni]

I totaly agree with stl. If players see big area of a level (and maybe the whole level - BBSwing) it would be unfair for everyone. Matches will be played 1 hour if you set maxscore and don't timelimit. Everyone will just stand in some part of a level, and looking at other players, where they are. I don't like this idea but maybe this can be good for hotel levels (what I don't play, but if program is released, then it can help to some players and they can see the whole hotel and be orientated where they are ;) ). If someone make /maxresolution command and it be functional, then.. this idea is good. But only for fun servers. NEVER IN DUELS/2v2/CW/Ladders etc. It can be used in duels and 2v2s but just for fun. I won't this program be used in CWs, ladders and in JDC events becouse if you see 16 players (or maybe 32 with a new plus.. maybe someone host a Battle JDC event with 32 players) you will be confused and you will not see all ammo where they are placed (if you don't know level before, and take in minds that there are no players who download levels for a next JDC event), and if you know where are ammo and PUs, maybe you cant see them... because of rushed game and 8 layers what are colorful, and ammo can be invisible.

Believe me. DO NOT USE THIS PROGRAM in Duels/2v2s/JDC Events/CWs/Ladders etc. if all players don't agree on that.

[NovaStar]

Whether one agrees with it or not, I think we should at least have a /maxresolution command for those who do disagree.

I was considering saying something along the lines of not using it in duels/2v2s/JDC/CW etc if there is still disagreement, since it really wouldn't be too much of an inconvenience to use the original max res... but it depends on what rules are made for such events. And people lie on the internet ;|

[[GpW]Urbs]

ohh playing against players with higher resolution is possible.
i played in 320x240 for a couple of years till i got a better pc, cuz i decided 20-30 fps is more of a disadvantage than a smaller screen:)
but ya, works well for open games, not so well for competitions...

on the other hand, it's definitely worth pursuing, maybe we'd see some amazingly humongous levels being made for the new specs?:)
Are there any size limits on JCS? If so, can some1 break em down?
Cuz that would like totally create a whole new game.
Although from my personal experience, 320x240 was wild. I mean, no strategy, just shooting. And part of the fun with jj2 is shooting seeks and RF's blind, hoping they will hit - or rather inticipating they will. I just hope the game doesn't slow down with higher resolutions. But then again, we'll never know if we don't try. Would be nice if the 640x480 wouldn't completely die out though...
Since I don't compete I guess I wouldn't really care whether some1 on the server had a bigger field of view than me - but it could be a bit of a downside for JDC and other tourneys. I guess there are ways of blocking thist stuff, right? And is cheating really a big problem on jj2?
OK, it's true, I'm not the quickest of cats, so I most likely wouldn't spot a cheater if he/she were right in front of me with a nuke, but still, usually somebody else notices and the person gets kicked.

EDIT: dayum, looks like I voted for yes... hmms, i guess I'm a schizo...

[burnout92]

I played with Jazz Jackrabbit 2 in 1024X768 8-bit MMX off. When i go online game it will crashed and throw back to the Windows.

[Bartjaah]

I would love a 16:9 Jazz Jackrabbit 2 for my JJ2 recordings on youtube. Not for online gameplay nor cheating.