Which resolution do you play in?

[Excavus]

God damn, some of you people really need to upgrade your systems. This isn't 2004 anymore.

[Yronno]

Am I really the only one who said 'Other'? Is 1600x900 that weird?

[MaJ.P.Bouras]

There..Alone no more

[Ciupita]

1680x1050 16:10

[Stonechater]

I play 1080x1024, can I play with higher? Because it's the highest I find under "graphics"

Help!

[Kelmola]

I play 1080x1024, can I play with higher? Because it's the highest I find under "graphics"

Help!

Maybe your monitor does not support resolutions of more than 1280*1024? IIRC BF2/FH2 only shows the display modes compatible with your hardware (as configured in Windows).

Also, as a suggestion for the devs, I would build on the assumption that relative share of users with 16:9 aspect ratio will only increase: as people buy new comps - whether laptops or desktops - those come nowadays with a 16:9 display. The odd 16:10 ratio seems to have been a passing fad.

[Capten_C]

I'm a convert 1980x1080 is best. 

[Strat_84]

Well, the only real odd ratio for a computer is 16:9. This is well suited for TVs, to watch films, but on a computer that's just ridiculous.

The point is that screen makers saved 1/10 of the display matrix while selling the screen for the same price. And customers were fooled ... 

Hopefully professionnal screens may remain 3:4 or 16:10.

[Kelmola]

I was just stating what I observed, not saying I would prefer this development. I would love to stay in 4:3 ratio while doing "desktop work" (ie. writing, spreadsheets, presentations, image processing, even regular web browsing), but if I get a 19" 4:3 display (even or manage to find one in the first place), or a 21" 16:10 display at the same price as a 24" 16:9 (just checked the prices of a local retailer), I would still choose the biggest one as it has essentially the same amount of vertical pixels showing (typical example resolutions would be 1280*1024, 1650*1050 or maybe 1920*1200, and 1920*1080, respectively) but has still elbowroom for widescreen images.

Probably for this reason, the IT stores/departments I have recently visited have only had 16:9 models on display for consumers. (Another self-fulfilling prophecy: demand lowers prices and since only one type of panel is commonly supplied, Joe Public does not know to demand anything else...) Hopefully, the 2.40:1 ratio found in some very rare (as of now) TV sets (to fit the movie "standard" Cinemascope aka ratio between 2.35:1 and 2.4:1) is never adopted in the computer industry...

[Nerdsturm]

I just got a new monitor last week and from shopping around the I can confirm that the vast majority of the decent monitors were 1920X1080. I was kind of looking for a 1680x1050 one, which is what I had before, but the 16:9 aspect ratio really doesn't bother me.

[Kev4000]

Am I really the only one who said 'Other'? Is 1600x900 that weird?

Up until the past couple years. Computer monitors seem to be making a switch over to 16:9 as well. Previously, 16:9 was used mostly for TVs which were either HD-ready or full HD.

[[A9]Bard]

It's weired (or more likley I am!  )
I have tried the 1680x1050 and the 1920x1080 and everything looks smooth and beautifully detailed. But on a 24" screen on these settings, FH2 almost feels like one of those military strategy games. Infantry a mere 50-100m away look like ants 
Not liking it, so gone back to 1024x768, yep things are slightly stretched, and I know I'm loosing out on uber details but I've played so long at this setting, It's home sweet home 

I feel the same way.. i tried some other settings but everything was so sharp.. I´m used to the smoothness.. so I switched back.. thou it sometimes feel it gets me killed bcuz dissadv.? Can this be true???

[Capten_C]

It's weired (or more likley I am!  )
I have tried the 1680x1050 and the 1920x1080 and everything looks smooth and beautifully detailed. But on a 24" screen on these settings, FH2 almost feels like one of those military strategy games. Infantry a mere 50-100m away look like ants 
Not liking it, so gone back to 1024x768, yep things are slightly stretched, and I know I'm loosing out on uber details but I've played so long at this setting, It's home sweet home 

I feel the same way.. i tried some other settings but everything was so sharp.. I´m used to the smoothness.. so I switched back.. thou it sometimes feel it gets me killed bcuz dissadv.? Can this be true???

I'm sticking with it. Looking back, although I didn't know any better at the time, the 1024x768 did give me an advantage with extreme range shots. Enemies were bigger on the horizon  rifle sights bigger, so now I can no longer do that, disadvantage? Well my Extreme range days are over, but the close up eyecandy is worth the trade, as I'm a CQF player anyway. I'd say I was only at a disadvantage whilst my eyes n brain got used to teh change over a few days.....Brencarriers still look too small to me  in 1920x 1280 though! 

[Thorondor123]

Using 1024x768 when the monitor's native resolution is 1680x1050 or 1920x1080 is a crime against monitors, GPU's and games.

[cannonfodder]

1280 x 1024...but I got me a new GFX card last week, so I might bump it up to 1600 x 1200.