Client Screen Size

[SinJin]

Going too big would force an increase of the draw distance and that would create a huge impact on the server and bandwidth.

I'd like to see it happen but it will kill the server and/or bandwidth with its current performance issues.

[minck1]

With so many people already running Pacho's client at 1400x1000+ resolutions, I dont think making the standard client 1280x1024 would change much.

[Brickbreaker]

type ':fs 1' for fullscreen

[Pacho]

The server already sends enough data to fill a 1024 x 768 screen.

[theTrav]

Going too big would force an increase of the draw distance and that would create a huge impact on the server and bandwidth.

The server already sends enough data to fill a 1024 x 768 screen.

Specifically, my understanding is that the server sends you data based on where it thinks you are.
How your client chooses to render that data is completely irrelevant to the server.

If you spend some time playing around with pacho's client on super high res, you will notice that while you get map tiles all the way to the edge, many of the foreground elements are not drawn until they are within a sufficient range of you. There are also some artifacts around updating things that go out of range etc.

I repeat.

So far as I can tell, bandwidth would not be significantly impacted by increasing the resolution to 1024x768 (or ever 1200x800 to give some love to us widescreeners)

I haven't really thoroughly investigated that assertion, so it's possible that I'm wrong, but I have looked at the code and I'm pretty sure that statement is accurate.



Appendix:
I believe that the client doesn't even specifically ask the server for data to draw, the server works out what you're going to want to draw now and in the near future and sends it to you for whenever you need it.

[Pacho]

Yah, I've noticed that things start to pop into existence after about 1024 x 768.

[Bigfish]

i hope loftar will implement this to the standard client