Hm, so you're saying that when in some recently installed DOSBox games the image is stretched to fill the whole screen on my monitor, it's because my graphic card or monitor is not keeping aspect ratio? I was under the impression that it worked fine before, but maybe that was only because GOG used the "aspect=true" option before which artificially stretches the image vertically?

My graphic card is set to keep aspect ratio and to override anything that tries to stretch, but when I checked the monitor menus just now, there's an option Display Mode: Full / Aspect, and it's set to Full, while Aspect is greyed out and can't even be selected. I'm not tech-savvy at all, so I don't know what that means. I always thought the graphic cards setting were working though ... :/

Well I can't remotely diagnose your setup, but a lot of DOS games run nearly widescreen without that aspect setting even if your computer is set to maintain aspect ratio because when it's given 320x200 (or a scaled up multiple of that) it dutifully maintains that aspect ratio without knowing that the old monitors would stretch that to full screen. I'm not sure if GOG has switched its configurations up recently as I always used to immediately change their default DOSbox config anyway!

You're right that you almost* always want the DOSbox aspect correction on, but you need it in conjunction with the "maintain aspect" on your GPU/monitor otherwise they'll just stretch it back out. If changing "aspect=true" worked for you then that suggests the rest of your setup is fine. You can check anyway by loading up pretty much any windows game and choosing a known 4:3 resolution, they'd get stretched if your other settings were wrong.

*See here for exceptions.

Aspect Ratio.

I would hate to see what a 4:3 game looked like stretched out on a 32:9 monitor.

A morbidly obese Prince of Persia performing death defying athletics?

it depends on wot u meen bi that
if i cna chnage aspecy ration without distortion
then **FIT TO SCREEN** is always best
if fit to svreen makes it distort thne nah **I wanrnt me games llooking like their god intended**
JUST LET THAT SINK IN

I'm pretty sure that's impossible.

Keep aspect ratio, of course.

You'd think that an old laptop is more than good enough to play old (DOS) games, but often they don't have the option for that.

I wish computer monitors (or graphic cards) had a Zoom or auto-Zoom function - like on TVs. For those 4:3 games with fake 16:9 cutscenes...

Why?

I ask because I used to have one (work) laptop with 16:10, and as far as I remember, it had the worst of both worlds, ie. either distorted picture or black bars both with 4:3 and 16:9. The same kind of abomination as the 5:4 aspect ratio monitors (I still have one of those too).

As I pointed out in another thread, keeping aspect ration should be the default. (You might notice that keeping the ratio seems to be the default preference, and I can't see any accessibility issue with this particular default.)

I would have to go with fit to screen as some modern games don't support 16:10 I'm quite used to some distortion. It's not something I really notice when I play. Older games it often depends on how bad it is but usually go with aspect ratio for those.

I don't understand why 16:9 got so popular, they aren't good for anything if the screen isn't huge like a TV. I wouldn't be able to play games on those that's for sure. Even if 16:10 is not always supported, usually only an issue with indie games, it''s the best combo for me when using it for both gaming, photo editing and programming.

Just for you (see attached pic). :-D

The way things distort when trying to eliminate black bars on 4:3 content is already irritating enough at 16:9, but when it comes to Ultrawides, the whole thing completely falls apart.

Okay, seems like everything is still in order on my part then, and it's just that GOG has stopped to toggle on that aspect options for old games by default. It tested it with current offline installers for Might & Magic 4+5, Ravenloft: Strahd' Possession, Ultima Underworld, and Eye of the Beholder and they all that option disabled and used the full height and width of the screen. It took me a while to notice though at first, because while the image appears to be slightly distorted, it doesn't jump into your face immediately, if you don't have a direct comparison (see attached screenshots). I don't know if the GOG staff members who configured the games thought they are supposed to look like that, or whether they thought most modern players wouldn't really care or even notice.

Btw, another difference I seem to have found is that the older offline installers would put a "DOSBox Configuration" link in the game folder, the same directory as "Launch ...", while the new ones don't. You can still find the GOGDOSConfig.exe in the DOXBOX folder, but it has to be run from the Start menu (So I have to attach it to the Start menu first). I hear that in Galaxy the DOSBox Configurator is easily accessible, but I won't further comment on that ...

I find 16:10 better than 16:9 (when diagonal is comparable), except for games and widescreen video.
Why? Because it has a higher resolution - e.g. 1920x1080 vs 1920x1200. But I'd rather have 2560x1440 (16:9) (my current monitor) than 1920x1200 (16:10).

Great, I had already typed up a longer reply and when I wanted to post it, it was swallowed by the GOG forums. Anyway ...

Thanks for the explanation! It seems like everything is still working fine on my end then. In other games the aspect ratio is kept. So apparently it's just that GOG has stopped to toggle on that aspect option for old DOS games by default, like they did before. I tested it with the current offline installers for Might and Magic 4+5, Ravenloft: Strahd's Possession, Ultima Underword and Eye of the Beholder. At least with my monitor and resolution, while the image does look slightly distorted, the difference doesn't immediately leap out at you though if you don't have a direct comparison and don't pay attention to it (see attached screenshots). I don't know whether whoever configured these games thought they were supposed to look like that or whether they assumed modern players wouldn't care of even notice.

Btw, I've also noticed that GOG seems to have stopped to put a DOSBox Configuration link in the game folder, along with the "Launch ..." link. You can still find the GOGDOSConfig.exe in the DOSBOX subfolder, but without the link, you have to attach it to the Windows Start menu first, before you can run it. (From what I hear, you can still access the Configurator in the optional Galaxy client easily enough ... ;P )

16:10 is very common when it comes to photo editing monitors. My comment was about why I choose fit to screen and it became an increasing problem with distortion with the popularity of 16:9 monitors. As I said, for most part this isn't an issue except a few games. I have tried 16:9 in the past and it just didn't work for me.