EPTAs a side note, I don't know of anyone's stream that is 1080p right now. 720 is hard enough!
Preferred SC2 Stream/VOD quality
| Forum Index > Polls & Liquibet |
|
ghen
United States1356 Posts
As a side note, I don't know of anyone's stream that is 1080p right now. 720 is hard enough! | ||
|
Lysteria
France2279 Posts
And HD for SC1, obviously. Some streams are quite painful to watch sometimes.  | ||
|
letian
Germany4221 Posts
| ||
|
Zerum
Sweden348 Posts
| ||
|
im a roc
United States745 Posts
| ||
|
writer22816
United States5775 Posts
| ||
|
monkh
United Kingdom568 Posts
| ||
|
Lucumo
6850 Posts
On June 03 2010 20:45 writer22816 wrote: Don't care, why would you watch SC2 when you could watch BW? Exactly my thoughts. | ||
|
Raelcun
United States3747 Posts
| ||
|
nate_river
40 Posts
| ||
Hyde
Australia14568 Posts
On June 03 2010 20:38 Zerum wrote: I don't like the "ultra" settings and prefer the IMO optimised medium settings for view the battlefield. its allot less cluttered and the effects are clear. The poll isn't for in-game graphics. It's asking about streams and vods. I choose medium, simply because internet in Australia sucks and our speed can't cope, not to mention we have data allocation and HQ streams eat up a lot of bandwidth. | ||
|
eNoq
Netherlands502 Posts
| ||
|
Navane
Netherlands2748 Posts
| ||
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
| ||
|
k!llua
Australia895 Posts
Standard would be fine though. | ||
|
Doko
Argentina1737 Posts
A lot of people are streaming at 720p (1280,720) without the necessary bitrate to maintain quality which ends up in major artifacs specially when there's a lot of camera movement. The ones that do usually have complains about lag so im going with the safe route. | ||
|
Corak
Germany187 Posts
| ||
|
Kyuki
Sweden1867 Posts
| ||
|
Necosarius
Sweden4042 Posts
| ||
|
FreshVegetables
Finland513 Posts
| ||
|
Corrupt
Bulgaria1312 Posts
| ||
|
Marradron
Netherlands1586 Posts
| ||
|
slowmanrunning
Canada285 Posts
| ||
|
Belano
Sweden657 Posts
| ||
|
Uriah
France54 Posts
 | ||
|
nurle
Norway308 Posts
| ||
|
Bisu-Fan
Russian Federation3329 Posts
ME TOO!!! Is there even a way to change quality in BW streams? I'm a noob sorry~ | ||
|
seRapH
United States9756 Posts
| ||
|
Atrio
Philippines30 Posts
| ||
|
ithree
443 Posts
when live obviously lag is a big issue but on demand like youtube, who cares just leave it for a minute or two. voted med/med because encoding's a bitch | ||
|
QueueQueue
Canada1000 Posts
| ||
|
BloodDrunK
Bangladesh2767 Posts
BW fanboy forever. | ||
|
durecell
United Kingdom85 Posts
| ||
|
speedphlux
Bulgaria962 Posts
| ||
|
Amnesia
United States3818 Posts
On June 03 2010 20:45 writer22816 wrote: Don't care, why would you watch SC2 when you could watch BW? | ||
|
flammie
61 Posts
vod - 720/high since there is no downloading speed issue but my monitor isn't 1080p | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11552 Posts
| ||
|
newvsoldschool
428 Posts
Streams... I can't say I'm a fan. I rarely watch live SC because of the ads and choppy video/buffering even with a good internet connection. | ||
|
Mykill
Canada3402 Posts
Ultra sometimes slows it down... Medium is second best imo! | ||
|
Frah
Canada96 Posts
| ||
|
J1.au
Australia3596 Posts
| ||
|
SoL[9]
Portugal1370 Posts
| ||
|
saikeraku
Canada2933 Posts
| ||
|
Thrill
2599 Posts
| ||
|
XFire
United States131 Posts
| ||
|
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
| ||
|
FaCE_1
Canada6172 Posts
| ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
I prefer High. I can barely tell the difference between Ultra and High as it stands but there is enough of a difference between Medium and High that I will see it. | ||
|
KP_CollectoR
United States744 Posts
On June 03 2010 22:25 Necosarius wrote: Don't care, I don't watch SC2 streams. | ||
|
Cheezy
Sweden112 Posts
| ||
|
Spidinko
Slovakia1174 Posts
| ||
|
nitdkim
1264 Posts
| ||
|
Brammaha
United States17 Posts
| ||
|
BlackHat
United States264 Posts
| ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
 | ||
|
NuKedUFirst
Canada3139 Posts
| ||
|
MasterZilla
Sweden234 Posts
| ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
| ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
| ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
| ||
|
Grebliv
Iceland800 Posts
| ||
|
DROPPINBOMBS
United States312 Posts
| ||
|
bakedace
United States672 Posts
| ||
|
Kalpman
Sweden406 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
Oh, well if day9 streams in medium, that's actually what i want lol. oops. | ||
|
pronoob5
United States90 Posts
| ||
|
Requisition
United States97 Posts
On June 03 2010 20:45 writer22816 wrote: Don't care, why would you watch SC2 when you could watch BW? Because SC2 is a better game. On June 04 2010 07:03 pronoob5 wrote: I can only effectively watch medium =( and idk why anyone would need more Need? No one needs more than low. People want more and why wouldn't they? It looks better. | ||
|
Azrael1111
United States550 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On June 03 2010 20:29 ghen wrote: I want the stream as high quality as possible because my computer and download speed can handle it. I understand though that concessions have to be made for crappy computers and/or bad internet speeds. So while I voted for Ultra/Ultra I can understand if medium or standard gets a bunch of votes. As a side note, I don't know of anyone's stream that is 1080p right now. 720 is hard enough! Pretty much this. If you asked last year I probably would have said low though lol | ||
|
Shouryu
Norway132 Posts
| ||
|
SC2Phoenix
Canada2814 Posts
| ||
|
SarcasticOne
Australia213 Posts
btw, if anyone says 1080p, your monitor better be able to actually do 1920x1080 (sorry, it's something i've noticed alot recently with people showing me "1080p" video's on a 1366x768 or 1440x900 monitor...) | ||
|
BamBam
745 Posts
On June 04 2010 06:00 DROPPINBOMBS wrote: I dont think that anything lower than like Medium should be acceptable, to not run Medium to high, you have be using a suppppeerrr shitty computer with a hamster for a power supply and a pop tart for a video card. Only acceptions would possibly be like HuK who is forced into a shitty internet provider. Other than that I feel that low setting for SC makes it look like mashed together colors with lego soliders on the field. But that sjust my opinion, I'm just glad that there are Streams for SC2 period. Low quality is actually preferred for most (myself included) even with a computer powerful enough to run on ultra, it keeps things less cluttered, easy to distinguish units, and overall its smoother as you dont need any fancy dandy special effects. Just enough to know whats going on. Plus I mean, who doesnt like legos? Though for streaming purposes, high settings are perfect. Ultra is pointless and medium doesn't do much justice to the game itself graphic wise xD | ||
|
Rhodan
Australia232 Posts
| ||
|
Whyzguy
Canada263 Posts
What kind of beastly connection are you running? imo High is enough. | ||
|
joe.kukish
Costa Rica14 Posts
| ||
|
shrinkmaster
Germany947 Posts
i think high settings (720p) are a reasonable tradeoff between quality and speed. | ||
|
Synwave
United States2803 Posts
| ||
|
Xinliben
United States931 Posts
| ||
|
Amnesia
United States3818 Posts
On June 04 2010 07:17 Requisition wrote: Because SC2 is a better game. Need? No one needs more than low. People want more and why wouldn't they? It looks better. lol'd | ||
|
wishbones
Canada2600 Posts
| ||
|
EZjijy
United States1039 Posts
| ||
|
AaronEB
United States76 Posts
| ||
|
Guc
Australia28 Posts
| ||
|
Ariel.ff
Canada22 Posts
seriously, its like it's screaming at me. | ||
|
jacen
Austria3644 Posts
500kbit stream looks fine with 480p to maybe 560p. But a 800kbit 1080p stream will be barely watchable. | ||
|
zrules
United States88 Posts
| ||
|
Ampere
United States27 Posts
On June 04 2010 13:59 zrules wrote: I hate HD and High quality... I rather have performance for everyone be good enough... I care so much more for the quality of a commentator and the gameplay than how "Shiny" or "Pretty" the lights are... I completely agree with about the good commentator and gameplay being the most important things about streams/VODs. I actually have different opinions on both though. I prefer the highest quality possible (1080p) when I'm watching videos on youtube or day9's bliptv; it's just so nice being able to see everything so clearly, and you can go back and pause at a certain point if you missed something and it'll be easy to find. With streaming it's a little different though. I think medium-high is great because it's not laggy (hopefully) and you can see well enough to where it's not unwatchable. | ||
|
PineappleSage
Canada109 Posts
| ||
|
StewKer
United States301 Posts
On June 03 2010 20:45 writer22816 wrote: Don't care, why would you watch SC2 when you could watch BW? I care, why would you watch BW when you could watch SC2? Anyways, I chose medium (720p) for streaming, as in live feeds. When it comes to VODs though, where you are able to buffer, I selected High (1080p). | ||
|
ultimateq
United States114 Posts
| ||
|
Late
Latvia418 Posts
| ||
|
InfiniteIce
United States794 Posts
Once you record in 480, for example, you cannot go back UP to 1080. For streams...I don't know if 1080 is necessary, I honestly don't think that there is any streaming service that can handle a 1080 with TONS of viewers. 720 would probably be sufficient for "HD", but for streams, as they are live, and put a HUGE toll on the streamer's PC, I am OK with being lower quality/res (i.e. 480). <-- This is why I voted 720p. I don't think that 1080 is quite necessary yet; there are a lot of 720 monitors out these days (even my 15" laptop does 720p), but not so many 1080p monitors, and I don't know that many people watching streams/VODs on their HDTV (though I'm sure there are a few.) But hey, as high as they can go is really the best option, because you can always go down, you can't go back up once you record in lower quality. | ||
GTR
51446 Posts
On June 04 2010 12:32 Guc wrote: My computer can handle ultra, but unfortunately Australian internet standards blow goat dick...so medium would be great! I think the best idea would be a full high-def stream, and then a Livestream restream for those with shit internet. | ||
|
knyttym
United States5797 Posts
| ||
|
Axonn
Croatia287 Posts
| ||
|
DTWolfwood
38 Posts
| ||
|
CCGaunt
United States417 Posts
vods can come to a stable agreement between ultra and low | ||
|
emucxg
Finland4559 Posts
| ||
|
KingFool
Canada428 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 39582
317 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.speedtest.net/result/836571527.png) Yeah, I'm gunna have to go with standard - low quality here O.O | ||
|
hejakev
Sweden518 Posts
| ||
|
nurle
Norway308 Posts
On June 04 2010 07:17 Requisition wrote: Because SC2 is a better game. Need? No one needs more than low. People want more and why wouldn't they? It looks better. Did u call a game in beta better than SC BW ? especially when sc2 isnt even good atm. u are stupid! | ||
|
bITt.mAN
Switzerland3693 Posts
Well I'm forced to watch HQ cuz everyone who streams has graphics on high and that way you can't see anything unless you can match the visual quality (why can't they stream in low-def ) | ||
|
khellian
Korea (South)922 Posts
| ||
|
djWHEAT
United States925 Posts
Most streamers use 360p/480p with my personal preference being 360p because that offers the most accessibility to folks WORLDWIDE. Secondly, I can still run a 720x480 stream, at 100kbps - which will still look like ass. But "technically" it's a 480p SD NTSC resolution. So there's alot more to the technical specs behind a stream than just it's resolution and just it's bitrate. Even a 1080p VOD on YouTube is still compressed down to like 2.5kbs bitrate. So that doesn't even count as "High-Def" since say a Blu-Ray player is like 36kbs. The only thing that makes it "High-Def" is the number of lines of resolution (1080). Not trying to troll, just trying to point out some pretty crucial differences! | ||
|
omgCRAZY
Canada551 Posts
| ||
|
zrules
United States88 Posts
http://www.cracked.com/article_18571_5-reasons-its-still-not-cool-to-admit-youre-gamer_p2.html | ||
|
DrivE
United States2554 Posts
| ||
|
koppik
United States676 Posts
| ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
| ||
|
Mactavian
Canada60 Posts
| ||
|
Feverus
71 Posts
| ||
|
Anomarad
Canada565 Posts
On June 03 2010 20:45 writer22816 wrote: Don't care, why would you watch SC2 when you could watch BW? This guy has it right. | ||
|
aimaimaim
Philippines2167 Posts
| ||
|
abrasion
Australia722 Posts
| ||
|
trancey_
Germany729 Posts
| ||
|
Kaniol
Poland5551 Posts
On June 03 2010 22:28 Corrupt wrote: Doesn't matters, SC2 has crap graphics anyways. You probably just watch low quality streams. The game in maxed details is just BEAUTIFUL! I went with 720p since there's not too much diff. between 720 and 1080 On June 05 2010 02:30 nurle wrote: Did u call a game in beta better than SC BW ? especially when sc2 isnt even good atm. u are stupid! Don't call people stupid just because they like the game you don't, that is very immature and inappropriate. Let's not make stupid splits into sc2-sucks people and sc1-sucks people. I played both these games and i think they are both great and i don't see any point in flaming people just because they stayed with SC1/switched to SC2 (however i only see people flaming SC2, why is that? Fear of SC1 dying? SC1 was "dying" so many times that there's no need to be afraid of it at all). I still hold huge respect to SC1 even though SC2 appeals to me more than SC1 nowadays does. | ||
|
Felby
Norway81 Posts
| ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
Elprede
74 Posts
| ||
|
oN_Silva
197 Posts
1080 no question. | ||
|
Luke-
3 Posts
I don't care much about the graphic settings though. | ||
|
TriniMasta
United States1323 Posts
| ||
|
TriniMasta
United States1323 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On June 06 2010 18:38 oN_Silva wrote: wow i didnt know sc player are too poor for decent computers and high speed internet... 1080 no question. Well, considering they're playing a 10 year old game... Anyways, I don't think the poll answers are very good. It's like, "Would you rather have a small, medium or large pizza?" Since there's no downsides attached to the options (and I doubt most people took the time to consider them), of course people go for bigger. 1080p is fine, except the delay in encoding and uploading is not, and it only provides a marginal improvement over 720p. If you factor in time, I bet most people would even prefer to settle with 480. SC2 is nice looking and legible on all of them, and while the 1080p option would be nice for those of us with displays and internet connections that can handle it, the extra wait like we saw with HDH sucked imo. I streamed a couple of Day9's casts onto a 42" LCD HDTV, and it still looked pretty beautiful. I don't think the switch to HD would've changed that much, if you're at normal viewing distance. | ||
|
buncool
France70 Posts
| ||
|
L0n3W0olf
Slovenia34 Posts
1080i I'd say is a bit overboard right now, atleast for net streams. It's a lot more packets to transfer, presents a bigger CPU load and It only stands out at higher resolutions anyway. | ||
|
zDreaM
United States16 Posts
| ||
|
Catreina
United States304 Posts
My screen res is 1680x1050, but I stream at 1280x800, and that is excellent enough quality for me to watch others at - though higher resolution is always fun to watch. High. | ||
| ||
