[Bug 57972] New: Certain display modes (e.g. 1152x864) not available in virtual desktop mode

[WineHQ Bugzilla]

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57972

Bug ID: 57972
           Summary: Certain display modes (e.g. 1152x864) not available in
                    virtual desktop mode
           Product: Wine
           Version: 10.2
          Hardware: x86-64
               URL: https://archive.org/download/BloodRayne2Demo/BloodRayn
                    e2Demo.rar
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: download, regression
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: win32u
          Assignee: [e-mail]
          Reporter: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail]
   Regression SHA1: 8f85c444596154c876c7aff3a2866407ea508974
      Distribution: ArchLinux

In Bloodrayne 2 video options the display mode 1152x864 is available as a valid
mode, yet the game fails to start with the error "Can't find valid video mode
for 1152x864".
This happens in virtual desktop mode when the size of the VD is set to anything
but 1152x864.
In other games the display mode 1152x864 is now completely missing from their
video options.

This used to work before
commit 8f85c444596154c876c7aff3a2866407ea508974
win32u: Generate fake resolution list from the host modes.

OpenGL vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL renderer string: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER/PCIe/SSE2
OpenGL core profile version string: 4.6.0 NVIDIA 570.124.04

wine-10.3-101-g245d3230271

[Bug 57972] Certain display modes (e.g. 1152x864) not available in virtual desktop mode

[WineHQ Bugzilla]

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57972

Olivier F. R. Dierick  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #1 from Olivier F. R. Dierick  ---
Hello,

I don't know how that default_size list was chosen before or why the list was
modified by that commit, but IMO, it should include all the old display
standards.

Instead of listing them by ratio, I suggest to list them by standard, so that
the maintainers remember where those numbers come from and don't mistakenly
remove them.

1152x864 is XGA+ [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution_standards

Regards.

[Bug 57972] Certain display modes (e.g. 1152x864) not available in virtual desktop mode

[WineHQ Bugzilla]

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57972

--- Comment #2 from Rémi Bernon  ---
On Windows the available display modes are mostly dependent on the display
drivers and monitor specs, I don't think standards really matter here.

The virtual desktop display mode list was modified based on the testing that
went into Proton display mode emulation. That testing showed that multiple
games are broken when the screen sizes list gets too long, and although Wine
doesn't yet support any kind of resolution limit, it would be good to have at
some point.

The default list is pretty much arbitrary, but including more display modes
from the host monitors makes it then more likely to contain modes that are a
good fit for the physical monitor aspect ratio, instead of a long default list
that only contain standard modes but badly suited aspect ratios.

Fwiw we could also consider making that default list configurable.

[Bug 57972] Certain display modes (e.g. 1152x864) not available in virtual desktop mode

[WineHQ Bugzilla]

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57972

--- Comment #3 from Olivier F. R. Dierick  ---
Hello,

The technical limitations of some application is a valid reason to limit the
list, so I retract my previous comment.

I usually set the virtual desktop resolution in winecfg and nvidia-settings
lets me add custom resolutions, so I'm not really affected by the commit
changes.

I know some old win 95/XP era games that switch to a lower resolution when
playing cutscenes. Those may break if they can't switch to the lower resolution
if they are not reported. In that case, having a configurable list of alternate
reported resolution would be necessary, if the user can't define them in the
display driver settings.

Regards.