Widescreen Gaming Forum

Here's how you can help. Start by saying the minimum criteria for a game to recieve a D or better for widescreen support from you. Then the minimum for a C, and so on. If you want to include +'s and -'s, go ahead. Be as detailed as possible, and feel free to make references to the MGL or other terms that are used on this site.

D
Must have MGL classification of Stretch, Vert-, or Hor+.
If MGL classification is stretch, it must support at at least one mainstream widescreen resolution (includes 1280x720, 1280x768, 1280x800, 1680x1050, 1920x1080, 1920x1200).
If singleplayer is important, the majority of the game must be playable at 'D' level or better.
If multiplayer is important, it must be possible to set a server to allow 'D' level support or better.
Examples: Battlefield Vietnam, Max Payne 1&2, Need for Speed: Most Wanted

C
Must have MGL classification of Vert- or Hor+.
Must support at least one mainstream widescreen resolution.
Must support at least one mainstream widescreen FOV proportion (16:9, 15:9, 16:10).
If singleplayer is important, 90% or more of the game must be playable at 'C' level support or better.
If multiplayer is important, the majority of servers must allow 'C' level support or better.
Method for enabling 'C' support must be a one-time fix, it can't require the user to do anything special each time you play the game.
Examples: Battlefield 2, Half-Life (Steam-powered), Star Wars: Republic Commando

B
Must have MGL classification of Hor+.
Must support ALL mainstream widescreen resolutions.
Must use the correct FOV proportions for all mainstream widescreen resolutions.
If singleplayer is important, the entire game must be playable at 'B' support or better.
If multiplayer is important, all servers must allow for 'B' support or better.
Method for enabling 'B' support must be either .ini or Native.
Examples: DOOM 3, Giants: Citizen Kabuto, Psychonauts

A
Must have MGL classification of Hor+.
Must support every widescreen resolution that Windows can handle.
Must use the correct FOV proportions for all mainstream widescreen resolutions.
HUD must not be stretched.
If singleplayer is important, the entire game must be playable at 'A' support. Cut-scenes must meet the standards as well.
The game must support all of this natively (patches are allowed). Enabling widescreen must not require anything outside of the ingame options screens.
If multiplayer is important, all servers must allow for 'A' support.
Examples: Black & White 2, Half-Life 2, NASCAR Racing 2003

So go ahead, post your own. And let me know if any of my examples are inaccurate.

I like that grading. It works very well.

For the + and - on games you could have it so if it is in the D range and it doesn't match 2 of the 4 requirements it will be a D-. If it meets 3 of the 4 then it is a D and if it meets all 4 then it is D+.

For the C, B, and A range you could have it so if they meet 4 of the 6 required it is a C-, B-, or A-. If it meets 5 of the 6 it is normal and if it meets all 6 it gets a +.

I'm glad someone else had an idea like this. I want to develop a "WSGF Certified" or "WSGF Approval" seal/logo/certification thingy. I'd like to develop criteria for PC monitors, HDTVs, video cards and games.

I think the rubrick will help grade games on our list (maybe that was your intent), but I'd also like to figure out standards for certification.

This sort of stemmed from the idea of a "WSGF certified" seal of approval. I think it's a great idea, and I would very much like to see game boxes with some kind of "Widescreen approved" seal at the store. But I also thought that if you make a binary appraisal of something that there are so many factors of, you run the risk of making the requirements too high and making the seal too uncommon to be recognized (and therefore unused), and you run the risk of making the requirements too lax, making the seal too common to be valued (and therefore unused).

Eventually, I'd like to form a full scale rubrick complete with a grading scale from 0 to 100, and judge a number of games with it. After enough games are judged, we're in a better position to figure out what appropriate standards are.

Am I making sense? More importantly, am I assuming too much responsibility?

You are making sense, and no you aren't assuming too much responsibility. What you did was much more detailed that what I had thought. My initial thoughts were as such:

PC Monitor:
8ms response time (or something determined good enough for gaming)
hardware enabled 1:1 stretch (to support games that aren't widescreen)
DVI port (at a minimum)

HDTV
RGB, DVI or HDMI port that supports widescreen at 60Hz
Monitor profiles to load into Windows XP, to provide proper res and scan rates

Games
Support common 16:9 and 16:10 resolutions out of the box
Offer a Hor+ view
Offer a greater FOV
Maintain proper aspect ratio

We might also want to include for the games

Whether it supports equally well

ATI
Nvidea
SLI
CrossFire (shouldn't be an issue).

These are becoming known problem areas.

Vid Cards
Further, we may want to have a WSGF GFX card minimum recommendation of what WS resolutions are supported by what level of GFX card for various games.

I would just as soon leave things that are not specific to widescreen out of it.