HIGH graphics vs LOW (thermal, sunburst, fog, etc.)

No they don't need to fix that. Having a better thermal and NV barely offsets the fact that in every other situation you can get benefits from playing on Low.

The perfect situation is that they make all settings the same with no cheap benefits from using any, but I don't think they will do that.

Using Low settings right now is a crutch that makes you find enemies noticeably better, they don't need to make this even worse.

Not simple, because the graphic quality is on itself what causes the problem. The extra flora and detail and overall graphics make regular soldiers, mines, cloaked infiltrators, etc. harder to see. More complex lighting conditions make nights more of a pain, also.

Make Low even better compared to High/Ultra and its use as a crutch will increase.

Some people feel they need a handicap so they mess with setting to give them a advantage.
Others need a challenge and play on the highest unaltered settings they can.

This is just the nature of competition some want a handicap other a greater challenge.

So...




Thoughts?

I usually play on all high. Lo and behold, simply setting "graphics quality" to low makes things easier to see and improves my framerate by a respectable margin of 10fps. Yeah, the game isn't as pretty, but not only can I see the VS shooting at me much more clearly, I can track them too, thanks to smoother framerates. My rig isn't crap, not the best, it can manage 30 fps in big fights (as of this GU, better before) but the more I can get, the better. As long as there are 1001 ways to die instantaneously, yeah, I'm gonna take my "handicap" and enjoy the game. I'm not playing to see the respawn screen.

High graphics vs low graphics is not as competitively significant as 30 fps vs 60 fps on two 60 hz monitors, or 120 fps on a 120 hz monitor. Being able to see a little farther with infrared/thermal by playing on high does not outweigh the 17ms or so a 60 fps player has on a 30 fps player, or the 25ms a 120 hz&120 fps player has on a 30 fps player (the 8ms or so between 60 and 120 fps, on a 60 hz and 120 hz monitor respectively, is not worth writing home about in my opinion, especially considering the hardware requirements to do so). Because it's far easier to achieve a constant (or as constant as the game allows) 60 fps using low settings and disabling things, it is less of a handicap to play at these settings, without having to buy a supercomputer to run PS2 at a constant 60 fps on high. Everything else is just icing on the cake.

If you can run 60 fps on high constantly, great. If you can't, tweak your settings until you can maintain 60 fps under most combat situations. It will make the game more 'fair', as it's a fair assumption to make that most people will be seeking to keep their fps around 60 so they themselves are not disadvantaged. If absolutely everything has to be turned off in order to do this, so be it.

I heard that no player should maximize their advantage, let's all just run around with the VS pistol

ps1 had this with flora

with flora on you couldnt see mines hidden in the flora - with it off you could

just saying people did the same in ps1 for an advantage (lower flora to be able to see hidden mines that you couldnt see on highest settings)
it was the same with stealth suits at some stage you could tweak the settings to see them easier

Maybe he likes to be able to see with out having bloom and flare turned up so high it looks like some amateur got to play with the graphics settings and maybe he want all the scope to see at the same distance.
Why havent devs figured out that gamers dont like fog effects like the ones we have in game? We want to see the game not some **** haze effect.

Time of day, fog and haze is just phase 1 of dynamic weather.

Just wait till we have rain and snow and dust storms (well, they already do do a dust storm of sorts north indar)

These are supposed to have sight distance limiting effects.... it's part of the environment.

I won't grudge someone who has a minor advantage because they're system can't render the effects as well... likely they have other disadvantages anyways....

people who intentionally turn it down (particularly when it doesn't provide any significant FPS boost) however I find as borderline cheaters. Sure, you won't cheat... but you sure as hell ain't against taking a voluntary handicap either.

Remember the kid in Goldeneye who'd always wait for everyone else to ready up then give himself a quick handicap boost before being last to ready up and start the game?

Remember how everyone hated playing with him?

Or maybe not... but there was one in every group so if you don't know him then........

What notebook do you have?????????????????????

Sorry its fine when done in a tasteful manner but it is not in this case. When it is night time and there is a huge halo around every light source it is overdone. Lots of the effects are cool like the bumping on the metal and the tracers but the lighting effects are badly done or just overdone tone it down a little bit. Like I said its like some little kid was given the settings controls and just messed it up.

some people like decent fps... derp

Haha. Metagame? Nah, just metagraphics..

It seem that turning Fog Shadows on while Shadows are off breaks the graphics for Fog and turns them off. Definitely not intended by the devs. The probably didn't test it too much because it is never intended to be able to turn shadows off in the first place. I'm sure they will attempt to fix it.

I was not referring to lowering your setting to get better FPS. There is a deference between playing on Low because it is the only setting that gives decent FPS and playing on Low for the handicap of easier game play.

Then you would be enforcing many people to 'leave the game'. The game already operates at an embarrassingly low framerate on machines compared to other titles. I have a 120hz monitor just for gaming, and this game is is lucky to maintain 30fps in medium sized battles.

So no thanks. There are many people from quake and other sim games where fps is everything who don't care about grass and smoke effects. They want a game that feels good.

the heck does the monitor refesh rate have to do with anything

It dictates the maximum possible framerate you can get. Typical LCDs are all 60hz, so even if your graphics card can put out more, you won't see them. Pro-gamers get angry if they have to play with anything under 100fps, and many refused to switch to LCDs because of the framerate and monitor lag. New gaming monitors like my BENQ are made just for games.

My point with all of this is that serious players are NOT ok with 30fps, and never will be.