> > Hm, maybe I should have read this more closely before I wrote my other response,
> > because I think I see the problem now. What you are saying is that MAME is not
> > circumscribing the game within the render_target bounds I provided; it is
> > circumscribing a virtual screen that itself circumscribes the game, with the
> virtual
> > screen being the same aspect ratio as the original monitor of the arcade cabinet
> for
> > the game (or however else the layout file associated with the game tells it to be).
>
> It's more than that. I can tell by your language that you are still thinking very
> narrowly about the variety of games in MAME. Some games have 2 or 3 monitors. Some
> games have no monitors at all. Many games have non-monitor artwork. All of these are
> taken into account and rendered to the target. A given game may have multiple
> "views", which describe how those elements are rendered, and these are all
> user-configurable from the video menu. Also whether or not artwork is rendered and
> the rotation of the game are fully under user control.
>
> There are user options already available to "fit to screen" (see -nokeepaspect, which
> ignores aspect ratio) as well as "zoom to maximize the screen but leave any side art"
> (in the Video menu). If you want to force "fit to screen" on, that's your perogative;
> you can just mimic the code in -nokeepaspect to get what you're after.
>
> Aaron
Thank you for your patience and your response. Yes it is much more complicated than simply thinking about a single screen game with no additional components in its view beyond the game screen.
I think that the -nokeepaspect option may be what I am really looking for. My goal is to fit all of the content of a view on the screen displaying that view without any unnecessary borders; but clearly alot of care has to be taken to ensure that unusual view configurations are respected.
Thanks again.
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: Another annoying MAME code question
Reply
