SC:R Launch Detected - Page 32

On July 31 2017 10:28 Dazed. wrote:
Windowed fullscreen is definitely many times slower than my regular mouse speed, in or out of a game.

On July 31 2017 08:32 blade55555 wrote:
Good thing is that if you don't like the graphics, you don't have to play with it. You can play with original graphics or just stay on normal BW.

On July 31 2017 12:10 r.Evo wrote:

That's not really an option when the HD version shows you quite a bit more screen estate unless you don't mind handicapping yourself.

On July 31 2017 12:27 GTR wrote:
i wouldn't say its a handicap - just look at counter-strike where a majority of the players still play in 4:3 despite the increase in the field of view when playing widescreen

On July 31 2017 12:27 GTR wrote:
i wouldn't say its a handicap - just look at counter-strike where a majority of the players still play in 4:3 despite the increase in the field of view when playing widescreen

On July 31 2017 12:43 207aicila wrote:


CS and other old shooters, unlike today's Xbox generation games, were fully configurable through .ini and/or .cfg files (or the dev console) including FOV that went up as high as you needed it. And surely for competitions they're told exactly what FOV to use for their setup so they don't get an unfair advantage.

The real reason they use CRTs for those kind of games is because the refresh rate is substantially higher than your average LCD monitor which only does 60 Hz. In other words, there is a bigger advantage to a game running at higher than 60 fps (which those games obviously do), since the monitor itself is capable of updating the image on display at more than 60 Hz. Only recently did they start making fancy LCDs with the same goal in mind, but they're obviously far more expensive and aimed at a very niche PC-master-race-with-a-lot-of-money-to-spare demographic.

On July 31 2017 12:57 r.Evo wrote:

I don't think that's a valid comparison. Main arguments from CSers I've heard (apart from the obvious "I'm used to it") are things like getting better aim from the slightly zoomed in view or a general better focus on the areas that matter all the way to simply performance issues, even on high end rigs. Compare the FoVs between for example Quake players and CS players and the differences become even more obvious. All in all CS is a game where the 'higher focus' you can gain from 4:3 is a lot more forgiving or even beneficial compared to other games or genres. Note that also, since it's a FPS the FoV can be set higher or lower even at different ratios. You can play Quake in 4:3 with 120 FoV if you'd like to for example which would be equivalent to playing Broodwar with a zoomhack.

A good example here is Dota, also a game where the "I'm used to it" argument could apply to quite a few pros but I can't think of a single one (are there any?) who plays with a 4:3 ratio, simply because seeing less is such a gigantic disadvantage. The differences are pretty massive (we're talking ~40% more screen estate if I remember correctly) and the only major thing you're losing is more distance to edge scroll.

If anything the situation in Dota 2 is a lot more comparable to BW than Counterstrike is.

On July 31 2017 10:15 Ancestral wrote:


Windowed fullscreen the mouse behaves exactly as it does in your OS because the resolution doesn't change. However, that's not what most people are used to.

On July 31 2017 14:21 iamho wrote:
How's the reaction to remastered been so far in Korea?