I still don't get the "be divisible by 48". Why? Why is this so important. I keep seeing you guys mentioning it. I run my game on 1080p and while it is quite zoomed out I kind of like it. My map sizes start at 35x25. I do get some black bars on the side but too me that looks great and the other reason
for this is that I use 1080p art for my game.
I've tried lower game res but the art really gets messed up when scaled inside the engine.
So in order to not have horrendous looking art I decided to set my game res to 1080p to match my art instead. Is this a bad move? The art is the most important for my game so...Yeah.
Best Screen Resolution
● ARCHIVED · READ-ONLY
-
-
I'm using 48 x 48 pixel ART so I've strecthed my resolution to maxuim without comperising quality and it's not a 1080p resolution as that would stretch my 48 x 48 pixel art.
-
Because in most established games in this genre, unless you're in a small interior space, the background extends to the edges of the screen. So by having your resolution be a full number of tiles, you can get that look without having to draw extra map to go over the edge. Additionally, if your width is not a full, odd number of tiles, your character won't be properly centered on the screen while you play (perhaps not enough for anyone to be bothered, but there it is).I still don't get the "be divisible by 48". Why? Why is this so important.
And that's fine. To me, that makes it look like a game wasn't designed for the screen size it's being played on.I do get some black bars on the side but too me that looks great
It depends? I have no idea what you mean by "the art" - most designers who make their own parallax maps or character sprites or busts choose to draw it at a size that will look correct compared to the size of everything else in the game.I've tried lower game res but the art really gets messed up when scaled inside the engine.
So in order to not have horrendous looking art I decided to set my game res to 1080p to match my art instead. Is this a bad move? The art is the most important for my game so...Yeah. -
In my case, I work on a mobile device project, and in first instance I use 816x376 to keep a good pixel aspect for the Game, but now Iincrease the resolution to 1280x640, characters look more small, but to fix this I use a zoom effect, even battle use zoom helping by Yep sequences, and the result is very very good, of course that have new issue but can be fixed using the imagination. like not use the relative touchpad and use a in screen pad, because compatibility issues.I still don't get the "be divisible by 48". Why? Why is this so important. I keep seeing you guys mentioning it. I run my game on 1080p and while it is quite zoomed out I kind of like it. My map sizes start at 35x25. I do get some black bars on the side but too me that looks great and the other reason
for this is that I use 1080p art for my game.
I've tried lower game res but the art really gets messed up when scaled inside the engine.
So in order to not have horrendous looking art I decided to set my game res to 1080p to match my art instead. Is this a bad move? The art is the most important for my game so...Yeah. -
I see. So that's why they keep saying having it divisible by 48 is a good thing. That makes sense.Because in most established games in this genre, unless you're in a small interior space, the background extends to the edges of the screen. So by having your resolution be a full number of tiles, you can get that look without having to draw extra map to go over the edge. Additionally, if your width is not a full, odd number of tiles, your character won't be properly centered on the screen while you play (perhaps not enough for anyone to be bothered, but there it is).
And that's fine. To me, that makes it look like a game wasn't designed for the screen size it's being played on.
It depends? I have no idea what you mean by "the art" - most designers who make their own parallax maps or character sprites or busts choose to draw it at a size that will look correct compared to the size of everything else in the game.
As for the art. I'm talking about busts. When I'm drawing something I always start at 1080p, going any lower just doesn't sit right with me because it gets too pixelated in my eyes. And scaling them down in the engine makes them look horrible in my opinion. This is why I chose 1080p as my games resolution.
I will try my best to make the maps look interesting but I do get the whole "Bigger res > larger maps > higher chance of boring map design" dilemma as I run into it each time I create a new map :D. I do get that it will be harder since there will be a bigger area to fill but I've also found that making large exterior maps gives one more room to create something eye catching.
On the other hand making interiors is gonna be a pain since I can't really just make them bigger or it will look like everyone is living in a mansion. -
I think 640*480 is ideal. Because when I set higher resolution I have to change nearly all of the things (windows / texts / etc.) But if you're not lazy like me, you can try increasing the resolution.What do you guys think the ideal screen resolution be? Default? Something bigger like most other games? Is it worth having to deal with incapability with certain plugins? Do you find games with the default resolution to be 'n00bish'?
-
I'd say it is a good idea to make it something that results in a multiple of 48 in both dimension because that makes it line up perfectly with the tiles and makes mapping easier. The default resolution equals 17x13 tiles and as such works just fine. However, it doesn't look all that great on wide screen which is, why I personally prefer 1104x624 (or, 23x13 tiles) because it is the closest to 16:9 you get that lines up with the tileset. It also makes editing the UI a bit easier because the screen height remains at the default value.
-
I have currently working on 2 Resolutions for my game, 1248x720 which gives off a nice 16x9 aspect ratio, and 768x480 which again gives off a nice widescreen aspect ratio of 16x10. For me I don't see the point in going any higher than 1080p or high res if your going for a retro style. I try to be a minimalist so I don't mind the lower res to keep storage of some of the art assets low.
-
I don't exceed 1600x900 since as others have said with 1080 or bigger it looks BAD, that and I keep a 2nd monitor at the resolution. (I map on something even bigger tho) 1600x900 does need some extra tiles on the sides since dividing by 48 will give a bit of a decimal or you make the edges a black tile or similar. But I've found it's more or less the absolute limit before tiles look weird unless you're working with different tile sizes; which needs plugins to work properly. It's not as bad as bigger sizes with decorating either, since a newer mapper will either make it too empty or make it odd with what they clutter with. It's just the right size if you want something bigger and still in the 16:9 ratio while being a more common resolution in games and such.
-
I'm starting on MV and currently I'm using the same resolution.For my project, I run a 960x540 resolution, which displays 20x11 tiles in-game (w/ a tiny bit extra on the top/bottom). This also fullscreens beautifully at 1920x1080 resolution. I also disabled the blur effect, but not via a plugin. I simply added this line of code into index.html:
HTML:...which goes right below this line of code:<style type="text/css"> CANVAS{image-rendering:pixelated;}</style>
HTML:<body style="background-color: black">
The 20x11 tile setup works perfectly for me since I wanted the dungeon maps cut up into smaller chunks. Basically, it's 1 encounter per map (which are more like rooms like old school Zelda). Town maps I keep as a single large map though.
I noticed everyone is trying to make their resolutions a multiple of 48. I used to fall for the same logic but realized you don't actually have to do it that way. The 960x540 resolution I use, for instance, is exactly 20 tiles wide, but can also display 11.25 tiles in height. That's why I simply round down to 11 for my dungeon maps. This leaves a 12px black bar/border on the top & bottom, which is barely visible and honestly looks like it's part of the phone's screen or the theatrical bar/border you see in movies. UI can still utilize the extra 24 pixels though (12px top & 12px bottom). But anyway, the whole point was so I could fullscreen at 1920x1080 w/o any stretching since it's a pixel-perfect 2x multiplier.
I've tried some of the resolutions listed in this post, but for my sprites 960x540 its my spot. In others engines, like godot, Pixel game maker mv, I use 320x180, for MV I just make 3x the size of my sprites and fits the same. -
Maybe the default size is for 1024x768 and 4:3, the default "safe mode" resulution on a modern computer. 816x624 windowed mode looks about right under that resulution.
And smartphone usually has a small screen. I know some people use RM to make mobile games that run inside a mobile browser.
The default map size 17x13 is just plain. Many old games were designed around that size, but with smaller tiles.
Why they use 17x13 instead of 18x14 is beyond me, maybe they want to have a "central" tile? -
Actually I do prefer these games instead of the stretched wide screen ones.Do you find games with the default resolution to be 'n00bish'?
When it comes to resolution, it really depends of your game. "How it will it affect the maps you made?" "And the game play?" These are questions you need to make to yourself before choosing to alter the screen resolution or not. -
Correct - the game camera is centered on the player's tile.Why they use 17x13 instead of 18x14 is beyond me, maybe they want to have a "central" tile?
Game window sizes that have an even or fractional number of tiles will result in fractional tiles being drawn at the edges, which has been known to produce graphical glitches. Best practice for RPG Maker is to make the window size be an odd integer number of tiles. -
I'm wondering now that there are new mobile phones and RPG Maker MV came 2015. Nowaway days mobile devices have improved a lot. So what will be the best screen resolution to use if you are making a mobile game.
-
For me in 2d games screen size is mostly a design choice, so personally I'm jumping from 512x320 to 800x500 (sometimes 640x400) of initial canvas resolution in a single game, depending on how much I want player to feel "closer" to the character and how much they should see. It's 16:10 mostly because of my monitor back then and "squareish" screen fit a bit more in these extreme cases.
Ofc game was not feeling well in 512x320, so I had to rewrite dialogs to use proper HTML and be independent of canvas size (technically it worked as is somewhat normal, but I wanted more stable output between scenes), and I completelly avoid all other game menus in this state. And sometimes in this state I upscale everything and use much larger tileset (up to 144x per tile) while having same "render distance", so it's technically up to 1536x960. -
I was quite happy with 624 x 480 (for flavour!), but I'm kind of regretting building the game on that since I've implemented achievements in Steam. If you go into fullscreen, which is usally 16:9 today, the black bars are eating anything popping up in the Steam overlay. If there is a solution for that with MZ and NekoGakuen, I haven't found it, and I'm quite sure I'll do the next game in 16:9, if only for that reason.
-
All of those Resolutions except 1536x960 are not particularly suitable for RPG Maker MV/MZ really as they are not divisible by 48(you should always aim for a resolution that can fit evenly into your Tilesize).For me in 2d games screen size is mostly a design choice, so personally I'm jumping from 512x320 to 800x500 (sometimes 640x400) of initial canvas resolution in a single game, depending on how much I want player to feel "closer" to the character and how much they should see. It's 16:10 mostly because of my monitor back then and "squareish" screen fit a bit more in these extreme cases.
Ofc game was not feeling well in 512x320, so I had to rewrite dialogs to use proper HTML and be independent of canvas size (technically it worked as is somewhat normal, but I wanted more stable output between scenes), and I completelly avoid all other game menus in this state. And sometimes in this state I upscale everything and use much larger tileset (up to 144x per tile) while having same "render distance", so it's technically up to 1536x960.
Anyway since my comment here, I've actually gone way lower, and rather liking the resolutions used for old consoles etc(and kinda went away from Widescreen, especially since I want more Vertical Space for Vertical Menus).
Anyways, Resolutions I like to use now:
256x144 for 16:9
256x240(NES/SNES styled)
160x144(Gameboy)
320x240(current Resolution and the default for 2k/2k3, perfect for my target platform of Anbernic 35xx retro handhelds(640x480) and is a very common retro computer resolution)
Then I just scale up the resolutions(like 2x(640x480) for playback on handhelds and 3x(960x720) or 4x(1280x960) on PC for my current project).
I find these super small game resolutions with retro graphics to match makes developing both more fun and easier/quicker to make graphics for and since I like to do a CMS anyway, default menus not fitting the resolution isn't an issue for me.