Shouldn't there be a minimum size for gallery pics? I'm not normally a forum Hitler by nature, but there's a pic been recently added which is 320x240 and even on a 1024x768 screen, I can't make out a thing. If I was up at 1280 or 1600 - as many are - I'd be lucky if I could spot the picture let alone anything IN the picture.
Now what really bothers me is that the guy who posted that pic is gonna get a whole bunch of low scores that he may or may not deserve simply because people can't make anything out.
Now if it's a retro remake and it's actually running at 320x240, that's one thing ( although it really wouldn't be hard to resize it to 640x480 for us to see it ) but for a 3d game which could be run at any resolution, it's just silly to have it so small. And it's not like we don't already have rules about what can and can't be posted to the gallery.
Now what really bothers me is that the guy who posted that pic is gonna get a whole bunch of low scores that he may or may not deserve simply because people can't make anything out.
Now if it's a retro remake and it's actually running at 320x240, that's one thing ( although it really wouldn't be hard to resize it to 640x480 for us to see it ) but for a 3d game which could be run at any resolution, it's just silly to have it so small. And it's not like we don't already have rules about what can and can't be posted to the gallery.