Originally Posted by john4p
This applies for example to SuperNES-games which have a resolution of 256x224 and get stretched to 4:3.
It's not the case for Amiga 320x200-games: that's why they have black bars on 4:3 or 5:4-screens like here:
On a 16:10-screen this fits perfectly without any bars:
If you'd stretch this to have fullscreen on a 4:3-display it'd look like this:
Or even worse stretched on a 5:4-screen:
That's not how the games are supposed to look. Because of that we have black bars on standard displays for these games. But they are perfectly suited for widescreens.
And that's why these 320x200-games are almost fullscreen (zoomed) on the PSP's ~16:9-screen and the Pandora
's 15:9-screen (5:3).
P.S. 320x256 is exactly 5:4 - so for these games a 1280x1024-screen is perfect while for 320x200-games a 16:10-widescreen is best (1280x800, 1440x900, etc.).
It's not about pixels. It's about what screens Amiga games were made for. Try Zany Golf on a 16:10 fullscreen and get back to me. Or try any 320x256 PAL game on it. The 256/512 scanlines will be squashed to fit vertically in 480 vertical lines, and the 320/640 pixels will be stretched to fit in 800.
Unless you're claiming that fat black bars on the sides of the vertically shrunken PAL graphics is the 'ideal screen format' for said gfx.
16:9, 16:10 and other abbreviations refer to the ratio of screen width and height, not the number of pixels.