EPTHopefully it'll be easy to switch between graphics presets so that you can watch replays on high but play on low if you want to, though.
Graphics vs Gameplay - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Bash
Finland1533 Posts
Hopefully it'll be easy to switch between graphics presets so that you can watch replays on high but play on low if you want to, though. | ||
|
Catch]22
Sweden2683 Posts
On February 20 2010 07:34 Bash wrote: Every single competitive FPS player plays his game of choice at the lowest possible graphics settings (my TF2 nearly looks like Quake1, for example), even going as far as to use 3rd party programs to take it even further, if it's allowed. I'm sure the same will be true for SC2. Hopefully it'll be easy to switch between graphics presets so that you can watch replays on high but play on low if you want to, though. What? Watching CS players they most def do NOT dial it down to the lowest setting so I don't know where you are getting your sources from. | ||
|
eMbrace
United States1300 Posts
| ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
| ||
|
-fj.
Samoa462 Posts
Maybe what Day was talking about though is that lack of specular makes the game easier to read, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's right.. I think they really need to look at their color pallets and re-arrange them for maximum readability, then make sure they keep that same readability across detail levels. That said, by my criteria SC1 also has big readability problems, soo I think primarily people just need to play it more and get used to it. | ||
|
Bash
Finland1533 Posts
On February 20 2010 07:44 Catch]22 wrote: What? Watching CS players they most def do NOT dial it down to the lowest setting so I don't know where you are getting your sources from. Meh, I don't know a damn thing about CS or COD, I don't really see them as worth my attention. Players in every incarnation of Quake, QWTF, TFC, ETF, Natural Selection, TF2 and any other fast-paced FPS do exactly as I've described, and any player that originates from said games does it in other games he plays as well. | ||
|
Emon_
3925 Posts
On February 20 2010 05:33 mahnini wrote: ![[image loading]](http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/2289/screenshot005ec.jpg) Ugh - Even Starcraft 1 has more character then this. . . It just looks bland and ugly. The highest settings looks amazing though. | ||
|
Treeplant
United States214 Posts
On February 20 2010 07:44 Catch]22 wrote: What? Watching CS players they most def do NOT dial it down to the lowest setting so I don't know where you are getting your sources from. Lol, if you look at the setups for ANY professional or serious players, they use mainly 640x480 or 800x600 resolution, lowest graphic settings possible (yep, no AA or AS). Here is proof of the configs from the overall best team, fnatic. http://www.fnatic.com/players/CS/ Playing on 640x480, like the best players f0rest and n0thing, looks like playing with legos. You should know that; you're Swedish. Swedes are gods at CS. Of course the spectators and videos always use the highest quality possible, though. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
On February 20 2010 08:26 Emon_ wrote: Ugh - Even Starcraft 1 has more character then this. . . It just looks bland and ugly. The highest settings looks amazing though.  quickly open and close the ultra setting picture and try to pick out which unit is which you'll have a much harder time than with the low setting.most of this is just for the sake of discussion anyway, no one is stopping anyone from playing on ultra or low. play what you prefer | ||
|
Emon_
3925 Posts
On February 20 2010 08:29 mahnini wrote: quickly open and close the ultra setting picture and try to pick out which unit is which you'll have a much harder time than with the low setting.most of this is just for the sake of discussion anyway, no one is stopping anyone from playing on ultra or low. play what you prefer We just have your pictures to go by =) Maybe there are settings to turn down the unit textures and keep the detailed environment. Could possibly make it more distinguishable. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
| ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
Weird as it seems, I always felt that the absolute least amount of information my brain had to process, the better. I swear I had faster reaction times in black and white. | ||
|
Skyze
Canada2324 Posts
I run War3 and Heroes of Newerth in the lowest settings.. even tho my comp can handle the highest.. Im not sure my comp can handle SC2's highest, so i might not have a choice, but either way, I suspect there'll just be too much "detailing" to make things clean for me to see properly in heavy competitive play with too high of settings. | ||
|
Klapdout
United States282 Posts
I didn't expect starcraft 2 would be different, though I can't test it out to be certain. | ||
|
PobTheCad
Australia893 Posts
| ||
|
cloudica
England43 Posts
Here's something to think about though - Warcraft 3/WoW have a "Spell Effect" detail level - if you turn that completely off you can't see exactly where some area-effect abilities hit (and you can't move units out of the way if you don't know where the danger area is). I don't know if SC2 has/will have something like this, and I doubt it'd apply to anything important like Psi-storm (can't name any similar abilities off the top of my head) but best test it first to be sure. I'm sure there are other things you would want to see as well (e.g. leftover smoke effect after burrow gives away a burrowed unit for a second or two - but again I haven't played the game so don't know if that applies  ). | ||
|
Leviance
Germany4079 Posts
| ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
| ||
|
oob
Sweden630 Posts
On February 20 2010 08:04 Virtue wrote: ionno about these people that want lowest settings you're def not playing the game as indented and if anything you just sucked the fun out of the game it's clear when you choose lower visuals to win vs the original visuals that you're only playing to win not because you like the game or anything imo. What? PLaying the game "as intended" has nothing to do with the video settings. And a game doesn't get less fun because it doesn't look as good, we're on a site covering an 11 years old game, rofl. If choosing lower video settings makes it easier to actually play, then I think that's a good enough reason. Your post makes no sense at all tbh.. :s | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
No that's my logic it makes perfect sense. And playing an 11 year old game vs intensionally crippling the looks is much different. Would you turn up the gamma on your tv when you watch a horror movie so you could see everything better? Imo it ruins atmosphere. | ||
| ||
