/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3280050
320x200 fits in 64k, 320x240 doesn't. Non-square pixels were fairly common back then, some even quite extreme

>>2891114
it's not as much a wide resolution, as it is a short resolution. Fewer pixels means less work for CPU and GPU. Especially for text, but also general imagery, we rely more on horizontal information than on vertical information. So instead of making the entire output proportionally smaller, it's smarter to use a distorted viewport with tall pixels.

>>2549993
Even more extreme, 640x200 was a real mode in CGA. Nobody sane would run this as extreme widescreen. The pixels are officially 1:2.4 and CRTs will display a 4:3 image with very long pixels