which menu? shader menu? if so, the changes won’t stick unless you’ve saved a globla/core/game/content_dir preset
1 Like
Look for a “retroarch.slangp” in your shaders folder and delete it.
1 Like
Thanks fella deleted that 
. Also do certain vertical games when the scaling is set to ‘core provided’ go tiny when the MegaBezel shader is applied? As in tiny viewpoint.
If by ‘core provided’ you mean the Retroarch>>>Settings>>>Video>>>Scaling>>>Aspect Ratio>>>Core Provided, this should always be set to “full” for border shaders, including the Mega Bezel.
1 Like
That’s what I meant yes, on the wildcard thread I’d been speaking with hsm. He mentioned to me that because I’d opted to use the MegaBezel plus overlay method instead of just using MegaBezel on its own, I could use the Core Provided option to help performance a little. In my slightly drunken state yesterday a few things happened and I wasn’t sure if they were connected. One of the things was that certain vertical games would be displayed in a very small window when the Core Provided option was selected but ok when full was selected. Today I’ll find out if the vertical games that display correctly use the same core as the ones that don’t or wether some specific games suffer from this issue or if I’ve done something. Only things I remember doing was selecting the Apply Changes option by mistake and I think I also pressed F2 instead of F1 to go into the Retroarch gui.
1 Like
I wouldn’t use core Provided with an overlay, the shader still handles the aspect ration. The Retroarch settings only control what is hidden behind the overlay.
Try 4:3 instead and see how it goes.
Here is a shot of a vertical FB-Neo game running on a base Mega Bezel Preset.
This is using 4:3 but looks the same using Core Provided. If anything weird is happening look at the core’s rotation options and make sure they are set at the Mega Bezel recommended settings.
Here is a shot of what happens if FB-Neo “Vertical Mode” is enabled.
From the installation notes on @HyperspaceMadness’s thread.
Pay special attention to the RA and Core rotation settings.
3 Likes
Thanks m8 yeah I did follow the installation instructions, although the core that’s giving me the problem is Mame current. The viewpoint size looks the same size as in your screenshot using FB Neo so I’m betting that Mame current may need the vertical mode turning off aswell. Just out atm but thanks for bringing that up m8 
I can’t find any vertical mode or similar options on the mame current core. I’ll just keep the aspect to full like it was before
Nope, (MAME - Current) is different than other cores, and shouldn’t display this issue.
Check that the Retroarch setting for “Allow Rotation” is also off.
A screenshot of the (MAME - Current ) showing this would be good. I could try to recreate the issue.
1 Like
Ok m8 then maybe there’s another config file that’s causing it. Because my arcade pack used to have custom aspect co-ords located in the config folder i’d expect this to be the problem, however the game .cfg now only contains this line: input_overlay = “.\overlays\arcade\batsugunsp.cfg” which is what i want and so it can’t be that.
Here are some screenshots of the Mame core set up:
I turned the overlay off for the purpose of these screenshots.
Ok I think I know what is going on, and for now the fix is to set the retroarch video aspect ratio to 1:1 or 5:4.
Basically there is a parameter:
HSM_VERTICAL_PRESET
which in the ui shows up as: Preset is for Monitor Portrait Mode (Smaller CRT Screen)
This parameter controls if the mega bezel to have this reduced screen size for if you are using your monitor in portrait mode, right now when it’s set at 0 it automatically looks at the aspect ratio of the viewport(where you see the carbon fiber) to determine if it is it uses the ‘HSM_VERTICAL_PRESET’ mode.
So this issue you are running into tells me that the way I have it set up is bad, and we need 3 values for this parameter,
0 - Auto 1 - Don’t use Portrait Mode 2 - Use Portrait Mode
but for now set the Retroarch video aspect ratio to 1:1 or 5:4.
I also think I might rename this parameter to HSM_PORTRAIT_MODE_SCALE_REDUCTION_MODE or something like that to reduce confusion, because it affects you regardless if you are playing a vertical game or a horizontal game
2 Likes
Ok brill thank you for the quick reply! Will this solution effect the shader’s ability to auto resize?
No, it will just tell the shader that it is always in a horizontal viewport, so don’t shrink the screen.
I guess it would not allow you to use the portrait mode feature when you change your windows desktop to portrait mode, but my guess is you are not doing that
1 Like
No I won’t be doing that you’re right, also it’s worth mentioning that on vertical games that use the mame 2003 core this doesn’t seem to be an issue. I’ll double check that though shortly
You could, but why?
Most games are 4:3 anyway. I think you might run into issues with screens that have 1:1 or close aspects.
1 Like
Hsm had mentioned that I’d get a boost in performance using it and that being as the sides of the screen are cut off it would only be an option if I was using the Retroarch overlay system (which I am). I’m ok with using Full tbh.
1 Like
You are not limited to those two choices. As I mentioned, you can use 4x3, which reduces the size of the viewport by 40%, giving you the increase in performance.
1 Like
If you are using overlays and do want the performance boost then set the viewport to 1:1, not core provided as this will change all the time and will make a vertical viewport when you have a vertical game
As @duimon says 4:3 will also give a performance boost
The reason that 1:1 would probably be ok, is because of the kind of graphics Boz does the screen is somewhat smaller than the height of the screen.
Here’s a 1:1 game with 1:1 video Aspect, you can zoom in quite far without chopping off the sides
Here’s a 4:3 game with 1:1 video Aspect, you have to be zoomed out more to avoid chopping off the sides
So looking at it here if the Non Int Scale ends up at 70 or less then nothing will get chopped off
1 Like
We need another vote, 4:3 vs 1:1 
2 Likes