EPTBest graphic settings for optimized play? - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Dirkinity
Germany409 Posts
| ||
|
Whatson
United States5357 Posts
| ||
|
Targe
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On January 21 2013 02:22 Whatson wrote: LOL good luck spotting burrowed units on any setting. Maybe ultra. You can spot invisible units pretty easily on low anyways, the new texture settings make it so easy as long as they're moving even a little bit. Usually it's an observer I'm looking for and they are always above your army, so just zoom in and out to check if its there then scan and let the marines do their work  | ||
|
llIH
Norway2144 Posts
The graphics don't even look bad. It is crisp with no unnecessary glare as well. And of course the frames are smooth. | ||
|
MichaelJLowell
United States610 Posts
On January 21 2013 01:19 kuruptt wrote: Again people I don't care what looks best to me. I just want to see cloaked and burrowed units easier without going to super ultra high because I feel as the lower the settings the more responsive it is. So I want to know the best way to do this. As stated from many people in this thread koreans use mostly medium settings! The hybridic settings from existor is something like this. Need more input and conclusive information! I'll just say this: If you're playing a video game and passing on the most aesthetically appealing graphics for any reason other than "my computer cannot comfortably run the game at that graphics setting", you're doing it wrong. The goal of a video game is to get sucked into the game world, not to marginalize the art design so it gives you a better chance of winning. | ||
|
MichaelDonovan
United States1453 Posts
On January 21 2013 05:58 MichaelJLowell wrote: I'll just say this: If you're playing a video game and passing on the most aesthetically appealing graphics for any reason other than "my computer cannot comfortably run the game at that graphics setting", you're doing it wrong. The goal of a video game is to get sucked into the game world, not to marginalize the art design so it gives you a better chance of winning. Casual perspective on a competitive game. | ||
|
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
On January 21 2013 05:58 MichaelJLowell wrote: I'll just say this: If you're playing a video game and passing on the most aesthetically appealing graphics for any reason other than "my computer cannot comfortably run the game at that graphics setting", you're doing it wrong. The goal of a video game is to get sucked into the game world, not to marginalize the art design so it gives you a better chance of winning. maybe if you're playing for screwing around rather than getting better... maybe | ||
|
Comadevil
Germany214 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PVppgIw.png) settings. U can reduce effects still if u want. It looks good but there are not so many effects which distract you | ||
|
deo1
United States199 Posts
Basically, what SSAA does is render the entire scene (textures, geometry and all) at 2, 4, or 8 times the default resolution. It then averages the color of all of the pixels at the higher resolution that fit in the same area as the pixel, and uses this color in the downsampled image that gets displayed. The result is a crisp, clear, ultra-smooth image without artifacts or blurring of other cheaper anti-aliasing methods (e.g. FXAA which is an image post-process, or even MSAA which only works on polygons). I think in the world of pro play where every advantage matters, more teams should look into ultra high spec PCs that can do this kind of fancy processing. Combine SSAA with one of the custom graphics settings like in this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=350426 and SC2 can be super crisp and clean. | ||
|
MichaelJLowell
United States610 Posts
On January 21 2013 06:08 MichaelDonovan wrote: Casual perspective on a competitive game. Lol. Let's replace all the in-game models with crudely-shaped, single-color, low-poly game models, because that will make them more visually distinctive and easier to manipulate towards positive ends. That will make the game more immersive. Do you know how much of an idiot you sound like? On January 21 2013 06:10 zhurai wrote: maybe if you're playing for screwing around rather than getting better... maybe You play the game (and all games) because it is supposed to be enjoyable. Satisfying, visceral visual feedback should be a chief goal of any good real-time strategy game. If you are lowering the graphical settings for the purpose of "getting better", you are doing it at a detriment to your own enjoyment of the game. This is something that really should have stopped when players were doing it in Quake III Arena, or Unreal Tournament, or whatever game community pioneered it. | ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2142 Posts
On January 21 2013 06:30 MichaelJLowell wrote: Lol. Let's replace all the in-game models with crudely-shaped, single-color, low-poly game models, because that will make them more visually distinctive and easier to manipulate towards positive ends. That will make the game more immersive. Do you know how much of an idiot you sound like? You play the game (and all games) because it is supposed to be enjoyable. Satisfying, visceral visual feedback should be a chief goal of any good real-time strategy game. If you are lowering the graphical settings for the purpose of "getting better", you are doing it at a detriment to your own enjoyment of the game. This is something that really should have stopped when players were doing it in Quake III Arena, or Unreal Tournament, or whatever game community pioneered it. Some people just don't care that much about the graphics - after all, it's the actual gameplay that should be most interesting in a game, the graphics only serve to make the gameplay more pretty to look at. For instance, people still play Brood War despite it using 2D sprites, because it is a very well designed and balanced game. | ||
|
MichaelJLowell
United States610 Posts
On January 21 2013 06:47 -NegativeZero- wrote: Some people just don't care that much about the graphics - after all, it's the actual gameplay that should be most interesting in a game, the graphics only serve to make the gameplay more pretty to look at. For instance, people still play Brood War despite it using 2D sprites, because it is a very well designed and balanced game. Aesthetics (graphics, sound, music, narrative and worldbuilding) are all a justification and extension of the game mechanics. Visually-appealing aesthetics may not be necessary for a great game, but they make a good game better, and there's plenty of examples within the real-time strategy genre (Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness, Commander and Conquer: Tiberian Sun, Supreme Commander) to justify that. The salaried players may be lowering all of their game settings in order to enhance their performance, but they do it because their job is to play the game at the highest level possible. They play the game for reasons completely different than the typical player, and it has nothing in common with amateur, recreational play. There's no reason to deny yourself a visually-appealing game because you're more preoccupied with the final outcome of the game than what's happening during the game. | ||
|
kuruptt
Canada168 Posts
On January 21 2013 06:30 MichaelJLowell wrote: Lol. Let's replace all the in-game models with crudely-shaped, single-color, low-poly game models, because that will make them more visually distinctive and easier to manipulate towards positive ends. That will make the game more immersive. Do you know how much of an idiot you sound like? You play the game (and all games) because it is supposed to be enjoyable. Satisfying, visceral visual feedback should be a chief goal of any good real-time strategy game. If you are lowering the graphical settings for the purpose of "getting better", you are doing it at a detriment to your own enjoyment of the game. This is something that really should have stopped when players were doing it in Quake III Arena, or Unreal Tournament, or whatever game community pioneered it. Casual indeed. Most people that play sc2 play it for competitive reasons. When money is on the line every edge counts and most people don't play sc2 for the "nice graphics". Including me, I was playing on low before because it was much more responsive and less distracting for me which generally made it more fun to me. Don't get me wrong I have a beastly computer that can max out this game no problem, I just much prefer good settings to see invisble units better to give me an edge even if it looks shitty. Fortunately, most people in this thread recommend the same exact settings in the Hybridic thread which makes the game look AMAZING while maintaining all the benefits of easy eyeing of cloaked units. Right now I have this: Texture: Ultra Shaders: Medium Shadows: Medium Models: High Effects: Ultra Can we all agree this is the best settings right now? Again, don't care about looking the best I just care about best setting invisble units! | ||
|
Erik.TheRed
United States1655 Posts
| ||
|
kuruptt
Canada168 Posts
I also didn't get to try effects that much either, but for now I am leaving that on low until more testing and whatnot. | ||
|
MichaelJLowell
United States610 Posts
On January 21 2013 09:13 kuruptt wrote: Casual indeed. > Commits his time and energy to becoming good at one single video game, a slightly-above-average RTS. > Describes himself as a "low silver player". > Calls other people casual. On January 21 2013 09:13 kuruptt wrote: Most people that play sc2 play it for competitive reasons. When money is on the line every edge counts and most people don't play sc2 for the "nice graphics". Thank you for not reading my post. This was addressed. The grand majority of the people playing this game will never taste any level of play where "I gotta win this tournament so I can feed my family" trumps visually pleasing graphics. You are included in that group. The sooner you recognize this, the more interesting your game experience will be. | ||
|
DusTerr
2520 Posts
On January 21 2013 05:58 MichaelJLowell wrote: I'll just say this: If you're playing a video game and passing on the most aesthetically appealing graphics for any reason other than "my computer cannot comfortably run the game at that graphics setting", you're doing it wrong. The goal of a video game is to get sucked into the game world, not to marginalize the art design so it gives you a better chance of winning. Lowering the graphics so you can see something important better is exactly the same as lowering graphics so your computer can run the game "better". The fault lies with the art designers, not the end users. Secondly, how does any of this apply to other games such as basketball or darts? It's not about getting sucked into another world, but allowing your mind to forget the current one by fully focusing on something else. Playing the single player campaign on highest possible settings or playing competitively on low can both do that. | ||
|
johnny123
521 Posts
Let me clarify by first saying. Starcraft 2 is a way more CPU bound than GPU bound in regards to delivering the best performance possible. Everytime i see somebody write . i play on all low except for models set to high. I just sigh because that accomplishes nothing basically if the cpu is your bottleneck ( more than likely the cpu is the bottleneck for most performance issues people face playing this game) If your system can play the game when models are set too high. It makes hardly any difference in performance. Let me explain what i mean . Take idra for example. A while back he said his reasoning for playing on All low settings was that it increases performance. What i have to say about that is, Its not the graphic settings that are causing performance issues. ITS THE CPU BOUND nature of the game. sc2 doesnt require a powerful gpu by any stretch of the imagination. You can play this game of integrated hd 3000 hd 4000 intel graphics . My point is, idra's performance increase comes from the fact that the cpu settings are set to low under very intense times of the games where tons of units are on the screen. If idra puts all high graphic settings on high and sets all the cpu settings on low. He will see no performance issues at all. The graphic card will deliever its full potiential because sc2 requires hardly any gpu performance. If you have a processor that is an i5 or a latest i3. You actually will never be cpu bottlenecked under intense battles. Therefore if you graphic card was made in the last 5 years and costed atleast $75 dollars. You can run this game in ultra with absolutely perfect frame rates. The biggest settings that have impact on cpu performance? -setting models to high ( yes that sounds wierd, but it also has impact on cpu) -setting game physics to high -having reflections on. ( sc2 is pretty good about telling you what setting taxes what). If at the start of the game you experience a huge boost in framerates and as the game goes along, you see those frame rates start declining. Believe me it has nothing to do with the graphical settings. To keep the performance strong, turn down the cpu only setttings ( that includes setting model quality to low as it affects cpu as well) So for the guys that have medicore graphic cards, and i5 processors. Stop turning down your graphics to low. As your computer is FULLY capable of delivering solid performance the entire game. Use a cpu monitoring program such as CORE TEMP to see how loaded your cores are during the game. If any hit 100% start turning down CPU settings. Dont bother with turning down the graphics as it will make minimal difference. My point is, Just make sure you know what your bottleneck is. If the bottleneck is the cpu, It makes no difference to turn down your graphic settings. As it will still slow down when all settings are at low. If the bottleneck is the gpu. Then only turn down the graphic settings. You can go ahead and leave the cpu settings on high. | ||
Grimmyman123
Canada939 Posts
I wanted to be able to see cloaked units, burrowed units easier, AND have models high so I can see what kind of unit is warping in, as it warps in for vs protoss. Wings of Liberty: All LOW settings including Low shaders, Models on High. Everything else on LOW. Hots does not allow low settings for shaders and another one, for models on high, as they are tethered. So I increased the 2 settings so I can have models on high, but I see a frame rate drop because it if, from the high frame rate in WoL I enjoy. | ||
|
CPTBadAss
United States594 Posts
It seems like Medium is a setting a lot of pros like but I'm just guessing. I don't know what people like and I think it's a bit subjective. | ||
| ||
