Mortal Kombat HD Remix with MUGEN

smoke.tetsu said:
You do realize they are using an already created engine for the game though right? As far as I know if you want 4:3 gameplay all you need to do is set MUGEN to a 4:3 resolution. The way you describe things it sounds like they are programming the whole thing from scratch. Does MUGEN even support decorated pillar boxes anyway? Before we go on about it we should consider exactly how MUGEN works in respect to the resolutions it supports.
Click to expand...

Yes I know they are using mugen...
I'm talking about the invisible walls of 4:3 and their relation to the edges of the screen. Plus a couple of minor things like title screen, and maybe life bar placement would have to be swapped for 4:3 versions. I'm not the programmer here so I need Interloko's input on this idea. It is just an idea and if he's got a better one then no problem.

EDIT:
When I say 4:3 it is in regards to the OPR, because that's the closest ratio it can be matched to.
 
Really? When displayed on an HD monitor it fits 16:10 a lot more I've noticed it has the same thickness of pillar boxes as when a game is set to 16:10.
 
Yeah I did, but yeah, again it's more like almost 16:10 I mean look at this example.. if you scale a screenshot to 1200 height it just comes out to about 25 pixels less width than 1920 which gives very thin pillar boxes such as here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28944/MK/sixteenbyten.png

My computer's screen is 16:9 though and I never use 16:10 resolutions if I can help it.

If you are a purist though then I would imagine 16:10 resolutions would offer the same gameplay as the original even if it was increased by the 25 pixel difference. But I kind of think a purist would not want an HD remake in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Also when you consider that even the change to 16:9 isn't as extreme as compared to when using the OAR (4:3) rather than the OPR since the pillar boxes there aren't as thick as displaying a 4:3 screen on a 16:9 display. They are small.. not as small of course as in MK's OPR on 16:10 but still smaller than 4:3's pillar boxes. I mean.. look at this 16:9 screenshot again: http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/466/pillarbox.jpg

Technically speaking 16:9 is less height than 16:10 since the lines of resolution for example in full HD is 1200 for the height on 16:10 and 1080 for the height on 16:9. Obviously when trying to fit the height of 16:10 onto 16:9 it needs to be scaled down a bit causing pillar boxes.

But still they are using an already made engine and I think the resolution will come down to mostly what the person sets it to... although positioning of the UI is important. If you intend on supporting less wide resolutions you'd probably need to keep the UI within the less wide "safe area"... or don't use absolute positions for UI elements. Like when customizing a desktop called litestep one had to use negative numbers for the position of certain things in order so they can be on the same place no matter what resolution it's being displayed at. Relative to the screen.

Negative numbers meant position this from the bottom edge no matter the resolution. Rather than the absolute position positive numbers gave. So if I wanted a 64px box at the bottom left no matter the size of screen I set it to -64. Although I'm not sure that's the answer for MK... probably not. Maybe for UI elements that are at the bottom of the screen although MK doesn't have any. The Brutalities bar was at the bottom of the screen but that didn't appear until MKT and SNES UMK3. :P
 
Last edited:
smoke.tetsu said:
Also when you consider that even the change to 16:9 isn't as extreme as compared to when using the OAR (4:3) rather than the OPR since the pillar boxes there aren't as thick as displaying a 4:3 screen on a 16:9 display. They are small.. not as small of course as in MK's OPR on 16:10 but still smaller than 4:3's pillar boxes. I mean.. look at this 16:9 screenshot again: http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/466/pillarbox.jpg

Technically speaking 16:9 is less height than 16:10 since the lines of resolution for example in full HD is 1200 for the height on 16:10 and 1080 for the height on 16:9. But obviously when trying to fit the height of 16:10 onto 16:9 it needs to be scaled down a bit causing pillar boxes.

But still they are using an already made engine and I think the resolution will come down to mostly what the person sets it to... although positioning of the UI is important. If you intend on supporting less wide resolutions you'd probably need to keep the UI within the less wide "safe area"... or don't use absolute positions for UI elements. Like when customizing a desktop called litestep one had to use negative numbers for the position of certain things in order so they can be on the same place no matter what resolution it's being displayed at. Relative to the screen.

Negative numbers meant position this from the bottom edge no matter the resolution. Rather than the absolute position positive numbers gave. So if I wanted a 64px box at the bottom left no matter the size of screen I set it to -64. Although I'm not sure that's the answer for MK... probably not. Maybe for UI elements that are at the bottom of the screen although MK doesn't have any.
Click to expand...

AFAIK the resolution will be set at 720 height permanently, unless you're in full screen at which your monitor will naturally scale it. I am making all of the UI to OPR so it is within a safe area by default, however there are elements of the in-game UI such as lifebars that don't look appealing at their normal position when put in 16:9. Plus the title screen of MK has a wider frame which is needed also for aesthetic reasons. There may be other things I haven't accounted for yet too.

Anyway I know Interloko is doing some tests and perhaps he can figure out a different solution, I've just offered my thoughts and want to find out if it's the best course of action.
 
MikeyMK said:
Ok, gotta say I'm slightly disappointed. I was really looking forward to the screen being 1280x720 for a full screen HD MK1. Are we still doing that?.......
Click to expand...
game's default resolution = 1280x720 i just said i'll use 1134x720 to play it.

zozman said:
guys , We want the latest developments in the MKHD project's progress as a percentage

We are waiting impatiently.
Click to expand...
it was just about time...

smoke.tetsu said:
The pillar boxes are so small when the game is set to "OPR" that I'd imagine there'd be minimal or no changes to the gameplay if expanded to the full screen width to 1280. The screen would be about %12 wider.
Click to expand...
more than 10% wider and minimal or no changes to gameplay, really?
you are worry about a crack on the pit or a pillar and not this? seems like you are just a visual purist

ok it's time to make some test
 
interloko said:
game's default resolution = 1280x720 i just said i'll use 1134x720 to play it.
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you mean. Is this a personal configuration you would be setting for yourself? Because if you do there are elements of the UI that would be cut off the screen. Lifebars for example would have to be moved back to their original position otherwise they'll be right at the edges. The 16:9 formatted title screen would also be cut, and maybe other things. I mean it's up to you if you want to do that for yourself but I'm just pointing out some issues you'd run into.

Or...do you mean invisible walls at 1134 width in 1280x720 resolution?

PS:
Please read my big post on this page if you haven't already, I'd like to know what you think of the idea
 
Last edited:
As far as I know, if you change the resolution of mugen, it scales the entire window. It doesn't crop, everything scales with it.
 
Bleed said:
As far as I know, if you change the resolution of mugen, it scales the entire window. It doesn't crop, everything scales with it.
Click to expand...
yes but for this example the result of changing 1280x720 to 1134x720 is not that good. actually you are scaling only the width with these resolutions.
the "better" result is getting the game stretched, you can prevent this if you set some options but is not looking good, maybe can be done but it will require a lot of work.
taking in count we will be using other sprites for sure there will be little changes in the gameplay, so i think (and after a few tests) the best idea is continue working at 1280x720

jarvis653 said:
I'd like to know what you think of the idea
Click to expand...
working with invisible walls will require a lot of extra work
 
interloko said:
taking in count we will be using other sprites for sure there will be little changes in the gameplay, so i think (and after a few tests) the best idea is continue working at 1280x720


working with invisible walls will require a lot of extra work
Click to expand...

I don't think invisible walls would look good anyway, so probably not worth the effort.

I am fine to stay with 1280x720 if you think it can work. You're the programmer here and I know you really care about the gameplay, so I trust your judgement. I hope we can get it as close as possible, all things considered.
 
I started on the animations, It'll take me a day or two to get it looking right though. I'm working on a lap top and it's pretty laggy. I'm getting a new computer next week, one of those gaming set ups, so it should be moving along quicker then.
 
Great news Bleed!

for my part sadly this week i haven't enough free time :( anyways, next week i'll have much more and i planned to advance in diferent fields.
last night i've been tweaking a tool i made for "automatic" creation of colision boxes in mk style.
 
Oh man Bleed, I'm excited for you. I just upgraded my laptop to a Quad Core i7 with 8 Gigs of ram and I'm able to do stuff now that I could never do before...it's so liberating when technology doesn't get in the way of the art.


Bleed said:
I started on the animations, It'll take me a day or two to get it looking right though. I'm working on a lap top and it's pretty laggy. I'm getting a new computer next week, one of those gaming set ups, so it should be moving along quicker then.
Click to expand...
 
interloko said:
seems like you are just a visual purist
Click to expand...

You say this like it's a bad thing. And why are you getting on my case about it if you are going to continue to be making the game to be a fully 1280x720 widescreen game anyway? Since this is the case it's not like what I'm saying is contrary to what the project is. This is not a black and white situation where either everything has to be 1:1 to the original or nothing. Artwork is the most important thing in this project anyway. Not trying to be antagonistic or flame or anything but really. Sometimes this project seems a little schizophrenic. You get on my case for things like this but then you say the best thing to do is continue to work at 16:9. All of my criticism at least for the artwork only served to help make this project better.

I regret opening up the can of worms that is the aspect ratio thing... I apologize for that.

jarvis653 said:
I don't think invisible walls would look good anyway, so probably not worth the effort.
Click to expand...

:) This reminds me of the part in the movie Time Bandits where they ran into an invisible barrier (since obviously they couldn't see it) and they said, to paraphrase... "What is it?" "It's an invisible barrier" "So THAT is what an invisible barrier looks like!"
 
Last edited:
smoke.tetsu said:
You say this like it's a bad thing. And why are you getting on my case about it if you are going to continue to be making the game to be a fully 1280x720 widescreen game anyway?....
Click to expand...
no, it isn't a bad thing but in the case of pit stage you were saying something like: "in arcade there isn't a crack here" and stuff like that, you want it arcade perfect, and when you talk about the gameplay: "is 12% wider but will no change the gameplay"
that's why i told you are just a visual purist.

my test didn't go well, so since first choice was 1280x720 i prefer to continue that way.

now i'll add jarvis653 images as place holder and will start working on base of them
 
Yeah although you are misquoting me.. I didn't say absolutely no change I said maybe not that big a change. But again everything isn't black and white and it wont either be 100% different or 100% the same. And maybe I am a visual purist.. but not totally because I'm for HD and other improvements... a true visual purist wouldn't want anything but the original graphics... a true purist would not want this project either because with different graphics there will be differences as well there too. Like you noted with different sprites.

It's just that some things are more feasible to make truer to the original than others such as the visual style and I was just trying to help at least with the visual aspect. Is this a problem for you? You make it sound like I either have to be for making everything exactly the same as the original 1:1 or nothing should be. Well I'm sorry but I don't have black and white thinking.

There's room in this project for making everything as visually close to the original as possible in HD but with widescreen which is the path it's going down anyway so what's the problem? I see none except perhaps personal problems or personality conflicts.

I hope to continue to make good constructive criticism for the art in hopes to help out but I hope I don't have to constantly have to fight people who think I either have to be totally for making everything 1:1 or nothing. Especially when the game is going to be widescreen anyway.

Some of the my criticism was just common sense anyway like on a real bridge the cracks would not be perfectly symmetrical on both sides. My advice was followed anyway and The Pit is turning out very well so I don't see what the problem is.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top