EPTGraphics vs Gameplay - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
edahl
Norway483 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On February 22 2010 00:42 0neder wrote: I have only watched a few hours of Beta streams, and I can almost tell everything perfectly (and the Beta streams aren't full res). Your brain is solely concentrating on watching the screen. When watching the screen becomes secondary, because your brain is focused on actually playing, you want ms shaved off reaction times in any way possible. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
| ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
To people with a nice computer : I suggest you go to graphics options and change shaders from Ultra to Extreme. This made things alot, ALOT, clearer to me. | ||
|
SirNeb
United States243 Posts
| ||
|
genwar
Canada537 Posts
On February 22 2010 04:35 vaderseven wrote: I think that players that try to adapt will, with ease, over a fairly short time. 1-6 weeks of adjustment vs less graphics appeal. Its a personal choice I guess. To people with a nice computer : I suggest you go to graphics options and change shaders from Ultra to Extreme. This made things alot, ALOT, clearer to me. could you post a picture with the difference? | ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
| ||
|
shoop
United Kingdom228 Posts
1. I think it is extremely silly to discuss graphics settings as a moral issue. No-one is going to be peer-pressured and/or argued into using more "virtuous" graphics settings than he (she?!) likes. But this is not a problem, since (a) you don't have to look at the other guy's monitor, and (b) if you really feel disadvantaged by the other guy's willingness to play with ugly graphics, then you can just refuse to play games with him and create games called "D- Lost Temple ULTRA ONLY!" 2. I think Blizzard should get some feedback that (a) there are some concerns with the shader effects and visibility, (b) there are issues with low graphics settings and the force field and (c) do they realise that quite a few people will want to use low settings. 3. How would you feel about Blizzard taking this whole idea a step further and creating a graphics setting that is specifically designed around making everything easy to see? I'm thinking of a sort of uber shift+tab that kills all graphics crap and just shows you what you need to see. I'm sure this would prevent a LOT of headaches in future progamers and lead to better games. It's also probably not that hard to implement. | ||
|
genwar
Canada537 Posts
| ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
Let me say that extreme shaders + AA make the game alot easier for me to read. I played alot of HoN though so maybe I just read 3d RTS easier. A color mod that made the units just more SOLID colors would be the best path imo and I fall in the more the graphics are fine as is than the need to dumb em down camp. | ||
|
SirNeb
United States243 Posts
http://img7.abload.de/img/sc2_fov36k6.gif It might not seem like a big deal from 16 : 10 to 16 : 9 but I find that it's a significant convenience to have that extra inch of screen. I'm not sure if all competitive players will automatically use 16 : 9 resolution ratios but I don't see why not. | ||
|
Puosu
7028 Posts
On February 22 2010 15:28 SirNeb wrote: Someone made this gif on the starcraft beta bnet forums. http://img7.abload.de/img/sc2_fov36k6.gif It might not seem like a big deal from 16 : 10 to 16 : 9 but I find that it's a significant convenience to have that extra inch of screen. I'm not sure if all competitive players will automatically use 16 : 9 resolution ratios but I don't see why not. It was actually made by a TLer and posted here earlier. | ||
|
caution.slip
United States775 Posts
On February 22 2010 15:28 SirNeb wrote: Someone made this gif on the starcraft beta bnet forums. http://img7.abload.de/img/sc2_fov36k6.gif It might not seem like a big deal from 16 : 10 to 16 : 9 but I find that it's a significant convenience to have that extra inch of screen. I'm not sure if all competitive players will automatically use 16 : 9 resolution ratios but I don't see why not. OP here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=112931 | ||
|
xlep
Germany274 Posts
Don't think the issue with the screen ratios will be changed. It's just too big an issue for the "bulk" of casual players if Blizzard fixes it to one ratio. Though something could be included in a "competitive" graphics setting that locks everything to equal settings for all players and can be checked by observers or kinda set as a requirement for tournaments | ||
|
Red Alert
United States119 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. hah, my TF2 graphic settings are pretty high up there. As long as your gpu can get maintain a good fps, there's no reason to lower the settings on tf2. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11565 Posts
 , but it seems to be the trend with so many 16 monitors coming out. I didn't even realize the difference between 16 and 16:10 until somebody told me about it, and ugh ;_; | ||
|
jonich0n
United States1982 Posts
Unfortunately, as I'm not in the beta, all I've seen are screenshots and I'm not necessarily impressed with the lower visual quality settings, but I do appreciate the fact that they clear things up a lot... Man, I would have killed to have been the art director for this game :D | ||
|
HowardRoark
1146 Posts
On February 20 2010 14:15 Virtue wrote: Although i do frown upon the guy who chooses his settings(he can well run it at higher settings or w.e) so he get's the best view of things doesn't it seem cheap to you, no shame eh? I have never cared much for graphics. For me the underlying mechanics of the game means everything, and the less graphic detail and more clarity the better for me. I love to play Super Mario Bros 2 (The lost levels) because of the clarity and the cleverness of the game design. For a long time now I have suspected )and noticed) that the newer games with all fancy graphics instead lacks behind or atleast never surpasses the DESIGN and programming of older games. Take Fallout 1 and 2 as perfect examples. The game Fallout 2 with its lousy graphics are the best game I have ever played (after Starcraft), and the funny thing is that when you compare the depth of Fallout 2 and the new graphically better Fallout 3 you will find that Fallout 2 still have more depth. If you do not believe me, try and play them, or ask anyone who played both. After a decade or more when releasing Fallout 3 the depthness did not increase but did slightly decrease, compared to Fallout 2. The same goes with the Mario Kart series, the newest installment is lacking behind in everything but in graphics (and online play ofc), and the list can be made much longer. It seem as though in the last ten years any improvement in games have solely been on the graphics side (ofc with exceptions), and Starcraft 1 is a great example. Back in the 90ies the programmers had reached the reqiured level that would make it possible to create the perfect RTS, and so they did. Nothing have surpassed it yet, because all they seem to be able to surpass is the graphics, and for me graphics means nothing. With Civilization IV I did my best to lower the graphics as much as possible, and the optimum would be if I could just have symbols for everything, and this was just single player games. I guess what also matters is how a person use their imagination when playing a game. Perhaps I should do a survey how people that prefer books over movies and vice versa, rank the importance of good graphics to enjoy a game. I wish Starcraft 2 would be in 2D, but I know that they need 3D to enthrall the masses. However, I am going to turn down the graphics and enhance the clarity as much as I possibly can, and that means in single player aswell as on B.net. Would you call this an exploit? Heck, I am planning to post a thread about the need to add an option so that you can turn the units of different players into bright different colors (to differentiate in big battles), so you clearly can tell who is who. I guess that would really enhance the viewing pleasure for a non gamer that just want to watch it on TV as other sports. I guess that is what made SC1 so popular, because even the non gamer could grasp what was happening. When watching the BETA replays now, I guess a non gamer would have hard time to pick who is winning in a big battle 2v2. | ||
|
SUSUGAM
United States177 Posts
On February 20 2010 05:29 Bosu wrote: I am sure lowering the settings may make my play better and easier to focus on stuff, but I am not going to do it. I know people always say Gameplay > Graphics, but a good looking game adds to the fun. what. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
| ||
| ||
