I can certainly understand the desire to play with low graphics in a competitive setting, but I like the way the game looks on Ultra and it's nice to present it in that way for those who are not as concerned about the intricate details of the battle and more interested in the overall spectacle.

StarcraftMan

Canada507 Posts

April 15 2010 08:20 GMT

#202

On April 15 2010 08:02 ymirheim wrote:
So, does anyone know if it is a bug that important things like scanner or nuke dot don't show on low? And if blizzard has already been made aware of this. Because clearly this is something they would want to fix.

Take a screenshot and report this to Blizzard. You should be able to see the nuke dot or scanner regardless of your settings - it's not a "feature" to be unable to see the nuke dot or scanner on low settings.

WarChimp

Australia943 Posts

April 15 2010 08:21 GMT

#203

I always play low graphics (with like models and terrain set to the highest) because I have this texture problem, like 5mins into the game an incorrec tpixel or whatever just stretches out, and I can't fix it unless I alt tab, I don't know if that made any sense to any of you guys lol. But yea, I don't mind it on "low" graphics it doesn't really bother me, especially since I came from, StarCraft 1

yomi

United States773 Posts

April 15 2010 14:24 GMT

#204

does anyone know exactly which graphics setting controls the force field visibility?

ZenDeX

Philippines2916 Posts

April 15 2010 14:38 GMT

#205

On April 15 2010 23:24 yomi wrote:
does anyone know exactly which graphics setting controls the force field visibility?

Shaders and Lights.

roemy

Germany432 Posts

April 15 2010 14:59 GMT

#206

ever since i fried my GFX, i had to switch to lowest settings.

worst part: there's no indicator whatsoever for cloaked hostile units. you cannot see an observer wobbling about over your base _at all_. even if i had ghosts, i wouldn't know where to aim the EMP unless i get a detector

Skee

Canada702 Posts

April 15 2010 15:02 GMT

#207

On April 15 2010 23:59 roemy wrote:
ever since i fried my GFX, i had to switch to lowest settings.

worst part: there's no indicator whatsoever for cloaked hostile units. you cannot see an observer wobbling about over your base _at all_. even if i had ghosts, i wouldn't know where to aim the EMP unless i get a detector

I found that it was just as easy to see cloaked units on low. If not easier.

Black Octopi

187 Posts

April 15 2010 18:16 GMT

#208

On April 16 2010 00:02 mity wrote:

Show nested quote +

I found that it was just as easy to see cloaked units on low. If not easier.

He means ENEMY units! On low cloaked units are completly invisible. Also, on low if the enemy has just some DTs mixed in with his army you won't see any indication they are attacking your units such as Marauders splitting in half.

MorroW

Sweden3522 Posts

April 15 2010 18:19 GMT

#209

i have lowest settings and i can see the dts and observers just like in sc1 o,o
using lowest cause my computer cant take any higher btw xd

pzea469

United States1520 Posts

April 15 2010 18:31 GMT

#210

been playing on ultra since i got it. I tried low for a while but visibility seems the same to me.

Rantech

Chile527 Posts

April 15 2010 18:45 GMT

#211

i just got a beta, and even if the game looks great on high, i have to test it on my own.

anyway i think i will turn the destruction effects off, i predict them to be really annoying at bnet games.

CharlieMurphy

United States22895 Posts

April 15 2010 20:21 GMT

#212

On April 15 2010 14:40 zomgzergrush wrote:

Show nested quote +

With your specs, yeah that is pretty normal.

Show nested quote +

Lots of kids these days will have 0 interest unless it's shiny.

How do I improve that? Losing frames is really bad..

GoDannY

Germany442 Posts

April 15 2010 20:38 GMT

#213

My PC suggests ultra, but during 2vs2 its really on the edge, not because of the graphics (2gb VRAM) but rather because of the 1 core cap. I usually run Win7 and some messengers in the background so I was close 100%

Anyone knows if they gonna implent multi-core support?

However, I use custom settings: It's the set of "high", with reflections, shader and all bling bling off or medium, shadows on medium (enough to see the overlord shadow but I dont want to waste fps on "soft" shadows I dont give a damn about), 2D Portraits (because they sometimes distract me) and effects on ultra (I LOVE these animations). It works with between 60-90 fps mostly idling on 88 or sth.

So it's like the medium way, I love the spladder and stuff so I got it in but the other "improvements" like reflections etc. just eat performance unneccesary.

Besides that, I hate getting bad performance due to battle.net and that weird micro-lagg issues many ppl complain about - really annoying -.-

For the "show" or for casts I'd prefer Ultra since the game is really nice and sth to see. Especially if people who do not know THAT much about SC2 it's definately more entertaining than some pixelguys beating each other up. For play: a matter of comfort, same as keyboards for instance - if you feel comfortable with it - do it - period.

Black Octopi

187 Posts

April 15 2010 23:35 GMT

#214

On April 16 2010 03:19 MorroW wrote:
i have lowest settings and i can see the dts and observers just like in sc1 o,o
using lowest cause my computer cant take any higher btw xd

Enemy cloaked units? (not your own). I can only imagine either you have lighting set to medium or higher or this is a graphics card issue.

abrasion

Australia722 Posts

April 17 2010 07:49 GMT

#215

I am a complete newb but I can't see things properly in high detail.
I have a pretty high end machine but for some reason screen scrolling seems to really tax the PC - so I drop the left column to lowest for everything but I keep the cool physics and explosions - ditching the lighting, shaders, shadows etc though.

Looks fine - especially since I'm an ex War 3 player anyhow.

EDIT: Single player - max detail, of course - can't wait to play it.