Yes.
Depends on what kind of game on playing.
Yes.
fps>resolution>details
>>320274218
FPS>Resolution>>>>>Detail
>>320274218
I play on PC so I don't have to choose.
>>320274218
All of the above because I have a PC that isn't toaster :^).
>>320274458
Unless you have a 2k or 4k monitor, at least.
>>320274458
And this is why people hate PC players. Get the fuck over yourself. This thread obviously isn't for people running $2K builds.
Higher FPS of course. Higher FPS to me improves gameplay -which is the most important part of a video game- far more than the other two
>>320274218
FPS>Detail>Resolution(as long as its native I don't care much)
>>320274218
If you're playing on a console, you shouldn't be choosy (nobody sane buys consoles for graphical fidelity anyway), and if you're on PC, you don't even need to choose.
fps is most important.
Once you are at stable 60 is when you can worry about improving the rest of the game.
>>320274218
FPS>res>detail
>>320274723
But my 3 years old PC runs it 2k 60 fps very high/high easily and it was barely 1K$ back then
I don't need to chose because I'm master race
I always get 1080p and then work around everything else.Even if the game has shit detail a good res covers it up imo
>>320275009
>that garbage cpu
>>320274218
1080p fps detail
>>320275073
>shit detail
>a good res covers it up
You realize only a lower res would cover up shit detail right?
>>320274218
Detail, resolution > FPS
A pc user doesnt worry about fps because he can change it to whatever he wants. That is mostly max fps with max details
>>320274723
I could say the same for all the NEVER EVER
However PC is actually right about what they say so it's less cancerous
http://strawpoll.me/6275575
>>320275009
Almost as good as mine.
Please OP, don't post GZ. It hurts knowing what could have been :''(
>>320274723
>thinks graphics matter
>thinks a decent PC build costs $2k
>thinks that a decent PC build costs more than a console
>thinks they aren't holding back the industry
This is why people hate console players. Get the fuck over yourself. This hobby obviously isn't for retards.
>>320274445
>>320274453
These - though I don't go under native resolution in any circumstance, ever. Haven't had a need to yet, but sometimes can only play on high settings.
I would rather highest frame rate possible and stylized, cartoony if necessary, graphics.
if it's a shooter, i need my FPS high.
if it's anything else, i need my detail high. resolution is slowly growing bigger than those other boys though, resolution is becoming a big boy.
FPS > Detail >>> Resolution
>>320275739
when's hayter
>>320274218
WHY NOT ALL OF THAT, FAGGOT?
BUILD A BETTER PC
>>320274218
High Res, High FPS, low graphics.
If by detail you mean draw distance, then detail. Can't stand a short draw distance.
>>320276247
This.
>>320275695
Native resolution for the screen isn't necessarily the metric you should choose, there are a ton of 1080p 27" monitors out there.
PPI is what you're looking for, even 720p is acceptable if you're sitting far enough away from the screen and it's not larger than a certain size.
>>320274218
Detail>res>fps
>>320275421
I smiled.
>>320274218
FPS>Resolution>>Details
Granted games in native resolution are probably king, but if I'm getting ~25fps on 1080p and 60 on 720p I'd choose 720p anyday
>>320276413
>playing Fallout 4 on a toaster
>alien ship flies overhead and crashes in the distance
>"let's go check it out!"
>can't see where it went because my draw distance is too short to have seen it in the sky
>People choosing res over anything
Fucking what? I don't know if my eyesight is just poor but there's no remarkable difference between 1080p and 4k.
>>320274218
Resolution > FPS > the rest
>>320277227
By resolution most of people mean 1080p, because that's the standard.
4k and especially with 60 fps for long time will be SLI only (for latest releases).
>>320274218
I play on PC, so all 3.
>>320277089
>had it on high
>it was fogging
fucking dynamic weather....
>>320277546
Oh, right, I forgot consoles were still struggling with 1080p. I don't mean it in a smug way.
>>320275009
where are the pop-tarts
I prefer
GAMEPLAY
A
M
E
P
L
A
Y
>>320274218
V = F - R(D + nP)
V - visuals, F - FPS, R - resolution, D - detail, nP - number of Polygons
[/spoiler]fite me
>>320274971
>>320275185
>>320275548
I have an overclocked 6700k and 980ti and most games barely get past 1080p at 60fps. PC is suffering from bad developers just as much as console. You can't fucking play any game like TW3 at 60fps without a ridiculously expensive PC.
>>320278292
That's also because some devs actually make options settings where ultra isn't equivalent of console settings.
In TW3 console settings are something about medium with ultra textures, which my 7950 is able to play in 45-60 fps.
>>320278783
Yes but games like TW3 and F4 still look like dogshit at ultra and barely run on any machine. Also what's the point in having a PC where performance is dropping below 45fps? All platforms are different shades of shit.
>>320274453
>>320274445
Basically these.
If your framerate is sub-optimal, drop details until it's a steady match for your monitor's refresh rate (usually 60hz or120hz or 144hz)
If you're already on the lowest settings and framerate is still sub-optimal look up if there are any tweaks that can further improve performance.
If all else fails lower the resolution until optimal framerate is achieved. If framerate is still sub-optimal after all settings are on their lowest and all performance tweaks have been attempted and the resolution is at it's lowest, consider upgrading your PC.
>>320274218
Fps
fps>detail>resolution
1080p is already not that much of an improvement over 720p, even for PC gaming. Main reason I got a 1080p screen is cause of sweet 120Hz.
>>320275009
>windows 8 32-bit
my god you went all out
I prefer games that aren't a bud ridden mess or incomplete. Games that aren't obviously finished and then have portions of them taken away from the final product to be sold months on down the line as content that was created while production of the game was in the final phases. I prefer games that don't require you to pay for a different weapon skin or character color when you could just press a different button for a color change.
Thank fucking christ I kept my old consoles. You'll excuse me while I go have fun with vidya.
>>320279091
its not pc's fault. Devs make games console-first insstead of the way they used to do it. Because sales. You cant blame them I guess I just wont ever be upgrading my pc ever again.
>>320278292
>>320278292
>I have an overclocked 6700k and 980ti and most games barely get past 1080p at 60fps.
>6700k and 980ti
Did you use chocolate as your thermal paste?
>>320279850
as long as you dont buy games on launch you can still enjoy modern gaming.
Those AAA titles are damn worth the 5 bucks 2 years later.
>>320274218
Why not all of them?
>>320274218
There's no compromise on PC so why should I care.
Otherwise, detail/grafix is the least of my priotees.
Depends.
I like high FPS, but I'd rather the game not look like pic related.
>>320276171
spend 800 bucks to play the same game nah.
FPS > Detail > Resolution
Honestly, 60frames and 1080p is the standard nowadays, A little scale down to 720 wouldn't hurt. I just want a game to look crisp and tasty.
I'm sick of seeing horrible shadows reflections and lighting.
>>320281678
That's what I'm talking about bby
Frame Rate>Detail>Resolution
High FPS is really important.
It makes a world of difference even if you're playing an old console game.
>>320283769
how can you say its the standard? devs dont even make games for pc. If you think up-scaled console ports is the standard you'd be wrong.
If multiplayer or online game:
FPS > Resolution > Detail
If singleplayer game that takes skill and reflexes
FPS > Resolution > Detail (same as above)
If singleplayer game that doesn't take too much skill or reflexes:
Resolution > Detail > FPS (as long as it is at least 30)
>>320282303
games used to look like that and it was fine.
it saddens me that no longer will one spend hours on game and have no idea what the enemies are supposed to be
>>320284363
>games used to look like that and it was fine.
For 2002, sure.
Not for 2015.
>>320284465
More like 1998 you complete underage
>>320284574
I'm referring to >>320282303 stupid.
It has a very similar look to F Zero GX.After Googling though, I realize that it actually came out in 2003.
>>320274218
>I can't play anything less than 60 fps anymore
>Prefer 1080p or more but if I have to turn it down a bit fine
>Detail hardly even makes a difference past medium as long as the other 2 needs are met
1080p monitor
but i downres my games to 1360x768 because my gpu runs cooler (55-60dgc) than 1080p (60-70dgc) other res give me black borders
sharpness is gone... passable console bluriness
>>320274218
Better animations
I rather have good and steady FPS than more resolution or more details.
>>320274218
Who else 1080p 144Hz masterrace???
>>320285465
am I only one doing this?
>>320286504
I use 1366x768 becasue its my 32 inch tv's native resolution that I use to play all my console ports.
Some games don't bother me when they dip below 60fps, like GTA V still looks and feels great at 45 fps, which only happens when i'm in michael's house or at ammunation for some reason.
Driving around on ultra I see 60 fps with occasional dips to 50, which i have zero issue with, and i honestly wouldn't notice if not for the fps counter.
But other games, i seem to notice it more. Fallout 4, for example, is super noticeable when it gets down to 45 fps in downtown and it bothers me. There's a slight input lag so maybe that's it. Also racing games need to be 60fps.
If a game is running less smooth than I'd like, i usually start by turning shadows down to medium, and then i'll turn to textures. I keep distant objects maxed just because i hate pop-in.
I never do less than 1080p though. That's just bullshit.
what temps can a gpu handle on load?
mid 70's are fine right?
air cooled btw
I play on PC. I don't have to choose.
>inb4 some malnourished consolefag grovels at my feet
>>320274218
60FPS, I don't care if it looks like a 360/PS3 game.
>>320274218
it really doesn't matter. if it looks good and has good frame rates then that's okay by me. i don't mind them using some kind of voodoo magic to do so either.
FPS > detail > resolution
All of them
>>320277929
>I prefer GAMEPLAY
Nice meme. Framerate is more important than gameplay/fun.
framerate > resolution > fun > detail
>>320284173
>devs dont even make games for pc.
This is a weird meme
>>320291591
theres like 1 AAA company developing games for the pc. whatchu talkin bout.
>>320279091
>rah rah rah everything is bad
I will never understand why people like you willingly live.
>>320275009
>Quadro for games
>a 4000 pound MEMBRANE keyboard
>a fucking WIRELESS LASER mouse
>overpriced universal IEMs while you could get 3-driver customs for that price
Congratulations, this will run games like shit. Not joking, my 1000$ desktop is better. I assume you thought this was "lmao hilarious", but it's really just some 9fag sorting each component list on pcpartpicker by price.
>>320292284
>I meant AAA devs!
There are more like 5-10 btw
>>320277227
I expect people to call you out for not seeing the obvious difference. It's not jarring, but noticeable. If I showed you 2 screens with a static image, one Full HD and the other 4k, you'd almost definitely notice the difference.
>>320294201
not trolling, please name them, I am curious
>>320274218
fps > resolution > detail
>>320274218
1. Framerate*
2. Resolution up to native of your screen
3. All other graphics aka "detail"
*The only critical with this formula is that point 1 has no cap so you'd have to make all games run at infinite frames in theory. In theory more frames are always better - yes, past the refresh rate of your screen (because input responsiveness and frame latency). In practice you have to compromise and that compromise is subjective.
Personally, I believe that once your game achieves 100 fps on low range systems you've got the green light to add more detail for higher settings. Your low settings should definitely run at 100 fps on weak systems though. For reference, right now I believe people on APUs and recent laptops should be table to run your game at 100 fps ON LOW SETTINGS. It's okay if low settings look bad, their explicit purpose should be running on weak hardware, not impressing anyone.
See Crysis' low settings for how low you can really go. Low shadows = no shadows. But at the same time it's a game that missed its contemporary hardware window and only got playable years after its release for most people. As I said, that decision is subjective. They felt they were better off catering to high end only at launch and it definitely paid off, despite what EA would have you believe.
FPS is always the most important. A lower resolution or lower details don't usually effect gameplay as much as the FPS does.
>>320294201
like I give a flying fuck about indie shit.
>>320274723
3 year old budget machine ~600$ runs it maxed 1080p 60 fps steady..
The problem is all the retards that don't know how to consume properly.
>>320295140
>critical
*critical flaw
>table
kek
*able
>>320274218
Higher detail.
What would you rather see, a detailed painting or a 120fps high resplution HD brick wall?
>>320274218
The 3 of them.
>being a console nigger
>>320274218
i always tweak for max resolution + high fps and can settle for medium detail. obviously AA is the first thing to go, followed by shadow quality. texture quality and draw distance are then dropped slowly until i get a good fps for the game, some games require more fps than others to fully experience
>>320295613
how dumb can you actually be wtf
>>320292583
>rah rah rah I have nothing to contribute to this discussion
I will never understand why people like you willingly post a celebration of their own ignorance.
FPS > Details > Resolution
High resolutions just make shitty textures look shittier.
>>320295565
A 120 fps native resolution wall that looks enough like brick I know it's supposed to be a brick wall.
All of the above because I have a really good computer that can handle it
>>320274218
1. You ALWAYS play at you're monitor/TV's resolution, that's what a resolution is for and a good example of how little console shitters now about "graphics"
2. Frame-rate should be at a constant 60fps for a 60hz monitor and 120fps for a 120hz.
3. Detail is nice but solid frames are more important. Depth of Field/Antialiasing/Particle Effects are the first you should turn off if you cant maintain desired FPS.
And most importantly, console shitters cant even change most if any of the above, so therefore it is inferior to a PC.
>>320295565
Implying you are playing a static image.
Then again you're console running at 17 FPS might as well be.
Console users everyone.
>>320274218
I am a pc player, so all of them.
>>320296714
>console shitters
said PCuck
Resolution(as long as it's 16:9 cause I hate black bars or stretched image)>FPS
>Actual resolution>Detail
>>320274218
Good games actually. That's why PC is inferior to consoles.
>>320295336
Good goy.
>>320294631
Creative Assembly (Total War: Warhammer)
Epic (UT4)
EA (Sims 4)
CIG (Star Citizen)
Arenanet (Guild Wars 2)
Blizzard (Starcraft 2)
Firaxis (Xcom 2, Civ V)
Whoever made Wildstar
Bohemia Interactive if Arma 3 is considered AAA
>>320297807
More like cucksole user, considering you have no option of how you're game looks. You just take what you are given like a what? Thats right! Like a cuck, a cucksole users.
>>320298039
I love this meme.
>>320298389
half the list is games from 5 years ago.
>>320274218
Better story
>>320298849
>Undertale
Already stopped reading
>>320298887
You have a very active imagination there, little fella.
>>320298771
Well, unlike your exclusives my don't look like horseshit
>>320299260
Name one as technically impressive as UT4 or Star Citizen, I'll wait.
>>320299870
Every one of them since I'm talking about released existing games. Now go back playing Undertale or toilet simulator.
>>320299071
Threadly reminder
>>320300349
>I only play what metacritic told me
I bet Gone Home is also amazing game for you
>>320300249
Nah I'll just go back to playing UT4 and Star Citizen, thanks. Enjoy posting your collages of upcoming games
>>320299218
starcraft2 :5years, gw2: 3years a few f2p's which are always trash. Firaxis was the 1 AAA company I was referencing. pretty abysmal list to be honest.
>>320300349
>Undertale is considered best PC game
No wonder it's dying platform
>>320300670
It's alright.
>>320300706
>I play non existing games
This is what you get if you are PCuck I guess.
>>320275137
>xeon processors
>garbage
whats it like to be a literal retard?
>>320300842
>>Undertale is considered best PC game
Not really
>No wonder it's dying platform
Yup, any day now...should be dead...any day now...
...
>>320301489
>multiplats
>games from eons ago
Woah mate, you are really good at moving goalposts.
>>320301089
>non existing
Huh, my computer must not have gotten the memo.
I have this weird obsession to have minimum 60fps. So for example if I have to crank the settings down so the game runs at like 100 fps 99% of the time but has this small bit where it drops to 61 fps 1% of the time I HAVE to do that. I can't stand anything lower.
Also I play games like cs go without v sync even though there's a lot of screen tearing at 250 fps just so I can have that uber smooth 3.5ms gameplay.
>>320301871
>Undertale's the best game on PC!
>No it isn't, these ones are better.
>You moved the goalposts!
This is what happens when you spout buzzwords without knowing their meanings, friendo.
>>320301489
personally I wont be upgrading my pc ever again devs ran off to consoles this gen. in fact right after I upgraded last time. I been jsut sitting around waiting for games. its all f2p garbage or console ports.
>>320302221
>talk about8th gen exclusives
>retard suddenly moves to old multiplats
>>320301989
That's a nice picture from google. You play UF4 as well?
>>320298389
indie games suck man. I got burned too many times before refunds needed to be a thing to ever want to spend money on that crap again. Its fucking shovelware.
I want the experience that the devs wanted me to experience. With that being said if they make my experience shit to cater to console fags I won't play it.
EX: Every Ubisoft game ever
>>320302992
instead I will return to play trash can simulator or Gone Home.
>>320302992
might as well say all games developed for consoles. becasue thats exactly it. I find myself using a controller for pretty much anything that comes to pc now since it was designed around using one. pc ports dont even implement the mouse and keyboard correctly in single player games.
>>320302732
I was responding to your claim that Undertale is the best PC game, which it isn't according to metacritic. You can take your lumps like a man or you can pretend that everyone reading that was supposed to divine that you meant "only 8th-gen games", even though you didn't say that.
As for the screenshot, that's probably been posted in dozens of threads. It's a pretty great screenshot if I do say so myself. What's UF4 btw?
>>320302449
>Implying
You can't fool me anon, as a former console-only gamer I know that one does not simply go back from PC gaming.
>>320303440
Since discussion started about exclusive games still don't know why you assume I was talking about multiplats.
You taken screenshot from google to prove you play game. I meant UT4. Another game from your backlog?
>>320274218
Stable Framerate>Resolution>Detail
Meaning I'll got for framelimited 30 (fuck vsync) over 60 if its the only way I can play the game in 1440p
>>320303628
>Stop talking bad things about muh PissSea.
Why PCucks are so insecure?
I'd play a shitty 2d Pixel game if it has sufficient TECHNOLOGY in it.
Honestly, TECHNOLOGY and small hidden details are what make a game unique and lovable.
>>320279850
Spoken like a true sir
*tips*
>>320303153
Enjoying the 2 games you own on PS4?
Maybe you like your 30fps ONLY ON XBOX ONE.
Personally I've been enjoying 4K Witcher 3
Try playing TW3 without drops in framerate.
Now try playing it in a resolution higher than 1080p (which is the only way to get rid of jaggies since the devs are too incompetent to include proper AA) at anything higher than 20fps. I'll wait.
Absolutely nothing on the market will give you that.
>>320304293
Except you don't anon. Also nice "exclusive" game.
>>320304170
Coming from someone who says "PissSea"
>>320303948
>Since discussion started about exclusive games still don't know why you assume I was talking about multiplats.
The game at the top of that image is not multiplatform.
Higher FPS, the others are tied
Framerate is most important, can't stand games with bad framerates
>>320304680
You can play 4k Witcher 3 on consoles?
>>320305065
You cannot fucking read properly?
>>320274218
Why choose?
>>320305164
Are you asking me?
>>320303628
I'm just being an conciencious objector. I have been pc since nes. I watched it happen and I'm pissed I bought a pc this time because devs arent making games for it unless its f2p garbage or shovelware indie shit.
>>320305429
No, your mom.
By the way post your 4k Witcher screenshot. This time try to not take it from google.
fps>detail>resolution
Detail is hugely important, but being smooth is essential. OP's pick looks like the PS3 mgs5
Higher FPS, followed by higher resolution.
Honestly if games went back to the graphics of the mid 2000s, with those glorious physics and clever uses of bumpmapping etc, I'd be totally okay with it.
In fact I think video games as a whole would noticeably improve.
>>320305582
I'm not the dude who was playing it, you just implied the 4k Witcher 3 was NOT exclusive to PC, and I was curious how you figured that. I can see now you have no answer, though.
por que no las dos
>>320278292
The only real nigger here. Same, Im not a poorfag so I own a high end PC and a PS4/Wii U.
Developers are fucking pc ports up so they can sell their gpus better. They also let their console counterpart run better. (Batman Arkham Knight)
>>320305479
>I'm pissed I bought a pc this time
Yeah see this is the part where you're being too obvious, no one will really fall for this. It's obvious you're using this claim to propel yourself to a sort of high ground of objectivity and no one just builds/buys a $600+ machine without knowing exactly what they want it for.
I'm gonna give you a passing grade this time but I expect more from now on.
>>320306000
I upgraded 4 years ago.
>>320274218
Fps, detail, resolution, I don't go below 720p, but my monitor is only 17 inches so it's not a big deal.
>>320305906
I implied Witcher 3 is not exclusive to PC which is true. So yeah, you cannot fucking read properly. Also nice bragging about something you don't have.
>>320279850
Even tho you sound like a fat retard you are right
>>320306000
>I'm gonna give you a passing grade
Not him but I give you prize for biggest asshurt of this thread. Are you proud?
>>320306235
I never once bragged about it. I don't even LIKE Witcher. You're just salty you have to settle for low resolution and framerates, and I find it funny how you try to defend it.
>>320306520
>you're just salty
This is best you can came up after losing all arguments? I don't even have Witcher 3 my boy.
>>320306839
The irony
>>320295565
videogames aren't pictures anon.
>>320275009
dear god, what the fuck are you going to do with that processor and all that ram
Are you trying to build the matrix?
detail > resolution > fps (as long as it's at least 30)
Framerate autists are the worst.
>>320307038
Maximum pleb
>>320275137
cost 3600 pounds. garbage. ok.
>>320307157
I'll sell you the contents of my garbage can for 3600 pounds, right now.
>>320274218
FPS affects controls, so it's the most important one up to a certain point (60 FPS).
Resolution affects the information available so that is next.
Details are nice to have, but ultimately don't affect core gameplay.
>>320306447
Another case of the empty can rattling loudest
>>320307149
Bloodborne was the best looking game of 2015 and runs 30. Nobody outside of severe autists gives a fuck about muh frames
>>320278292
yeah its fucking stupid. Gpus are so overpriced.
And you need sli in order to be able to constantly rely on 60 + fps, for a few years, with everything on ultra.
>>320307332
Except everyone who likes good gameplay
Which is everyone that isn't a dirt-eating casual
>>320307332
But it's not even the best-looking PS4 game of 2015.
>>320285465
theres a setting in your gpu control center to stretch the screen if its 720 p or 1080p or whatever, google it.
no black borders then
>>320307332
>console users
Why do you even post in these threads when all your shit is locked anyhow
>>320307482
Bloodborne has amazing gameplay and it's not a game for casuals. Your arguments just went down the toilet anon.
High res textures and good lighting is more important than model detail.
FPS > Detail > Resolution.
>>320307852
Because unlike you they get games which are not indie shit?
>>320307919
>being this delusional
>>320275009
>no poptarts
>>320307919
And it would be much better with 60 fps
>>320304553
two 980 tis would
>>320308164
nice argument
>>320308173
No, gameplay would be the same. DaS1 and DaS2 with 60fps play the same.
>>320308342
>No, gameplay would be the same.
It would literally be more fluent
Faggots defending 30 fps because they're locked into it are the worst
>>320308265
They would not, not possible to hold a decent framerate with that game at that resolution.
>>320308342
Bloodborne's game play is awful and it's a game for casuals.
There's my argument
>>320308438
If you have problem with game at 30fps you must be casual.
PCucks brag about 60fps since they cannot brag about anything else. Truth is they usually play at 30fps with 1080p or below.
>>320308484
That's not argument. That's your opinion with nothing to back it up.
>Lower poly models that are less render intensive
>Great texture work and lighting effects
>Model detail indistinguishable when in motion
Kojima got it right
>>320275421
>only 451 degrees
You might want to consider upgrading
>>320308817
Welp, then you have no argument either.
>>320309398
My arguments are reviews, opinions of other gamers which are not butthurt PCucks.
>>320308853
>>Great texture work and lighting effects
objectively wrong
>>320309539
Not legitimate arguments, however.
>>320274218
With PC, I get all three
Higher FPS > Higher Resolution > More Detail
Anyone stating otherwise is a fucking retard that needs to off themselves for the sake of the industry.
>>320309581
There obviously has to be sacrifices in order to get constant framerate on all platforms.
But they do scan in objects and faces into the game and then scale the polycount as needed. Fox Engine could do way more but it banks on lighting and textures to convey the photorealism.
>>320309975
But more detail is more important than a higher resolution you fucking retard.
>>320309718
Those are arguments. Now show me yours.
>>320310175
The textures and especially lighting isn't anywhere close to photorealistic and the faces are entirely average among AAA titles.
You just posted some LQ shit that MMOs have achieved already.
Game looks alright with sweetfx at times but the graphics are last-gen.
>>320275009
>18-core CPU at only 2.3GHz CPU
>Nvidia Quadro
>wireless mouse
Obviously you're not trying to play vidya on that, my $1300 rig from 2011 could wreck that on a vidya performance battle.
>>320274723
Implying it requires a $2000 PC to play a game without having to worry about performance at max settings.
>>320274218
>tfw GZ was really fucking nice looking, also held a metal gear feeling in the setting
What the fuck happened in TPP?
>>320275009
>32 bit windows
>128gb memory
You know nothing about master race.
>>320310482
>Game looks alright with sweetfx at times but the graphics are last-gen.
Obviously, since the engine is tied to last gen consoles too and that's holding the engine back to a degree.
>>320274458
>my toaster runs shitty indie games with both, easy :^)
>>320308029
Mmmmm, indie "shit".
>>320310397
>those are arguments
>because I say so
>but yours isn't an argument
>because I say so
>>320311228
>to a degree
In literally every single way is it last-gen. There's nothing interesting about the visuals, it's on par with old Call of Duty games.
The image you posted isn't even using the same rendering you get when you're actually playing the game.
>>320311234
>Multiplats aren't real, don't buy them they hurt Sony
>>320311628
>The image you posted isn't even using the same rendering you get when you're actually playing the game.
No shit. The interior isn't render intensive so they can the engine can affort to load in a higher res model.
It's not like they use the same model for DD in cinematics that they use for in game.
>>320308442
how about 4 ?
Singleplayer:
Detail > resolution > fps
Multiplayer:
fps > resolution > detail
This is non-negotiable, objective fact.
>>320296714
>2. Frame-rate should be at a constant 60 fps for a 60 Hz monitor and 120 fps for a 120 Hz.
Not true. Higher framerates can be felt due to frame latency. Frame latency is the time between the last drawn frame and the next screen refresh. 60 Hz means that your screen refreshes every 16.67 ms.
>0 ms: first screen refresh, a previously drawn frame 1 with a tear to an incomplete frame 2 is displayed. frame 3 begins to render.
>12 ms: frame 3 is completed. frame 2 can be discarded at this point, if that hasn't already happened. the GPU begins to render frame 4.
>16.67 ms: second screen refresh, frame 3 with a tear to the completed section of frame 4 is displayed.
In this example the worst possible latency of frame 3 is 16.67 ms since it uses some information from 0 ms. The latency of frame 4 is at worst
>16.67 - 12 ms = 4.67 ms
The actual felt latency comes down to how much of frame 4 was in fact completed. If frame 4 dominates then your experience will be closer to 4.67 ms, if frame 3 fills most of the screen then you will feel closer to 16.67 ms!
Those 16.67 ms are what you get when you activate VSync and your GPU only draws one frame per Hz (then waits for refresh). On the other hand, getting only 4.67 ms latency on every refresh would require a high framerate:
>16.67 ms / 4.67 ms = 3.57
>60 fps * 3.57 = 214.13 fps
That's a STABLE 214 fps, an idealized scenario in many ways. Meanwhile in the real world Most people who "try to hit 60 fps" actually play with something close to the full 16.67 ms. Now imagine your screen had 16.67 ms of input delay. Displays like that existed in the early TFT days and they felt terrible to use. With input delay we insist on minimizing it, buying 2 ms screens these days. And then we display frames with 16.67 ms of latency and think nothing of it.
tl;dr: Your screen refresh rate should not be your fps target. You should aim way higher than 60, regardless of refresh rate.
>>320310926
Those FUCKING console graphics. Jesus christ how horrifying.
>people actually play games like this in the year of our lord 2015
>>320311260
>tfw Halo 5 devs steal from an indie studio
>>320311994
The exterior isn't render intensive either, the game runs on potatos.
SO many people argued about that dog, glad you acknowledge it at least. It really sucks that the game's visualsand gameplay+storyturned out to be crap compared to what was advertised.
>>320300775
In other words, you think that 10 divided by 2 is 1. And really, a newer Starcraft game has released since Wings of Liberty, so literally all 9 of those companies have released a PC exclusive more recently than 5 years ago.
>>320310926
The hospital escape was incredible though.
>>320312989
wait what? its f2p or games from years ago.
>>320274458
You chose to always stay subpar.
>>320312780
Are you joking? The visuals and gameplay are as everything as advertised, if I recall the only thing we didn't get was animals on Mother Base.
Story yeah is subpar, but the gameplay is by far the best.
>>320274218
FPS=Detail >>>>>>>>> Resolution
Only PC mustard race retards think looking at poor graphics in high resolution is in any way acceptable. Do they literally enjoy eating shit? The higher the resolution, the higher the detail level/poly count/texture resolution needs to be for it to not look ugly as sin and lose all artistic merit.
If you emulate games at a higher resolution than the original console or play old games at HD resolution you are cancer.
>>320312651
Thats the 360 or ps3 version
>>320313095
Literally the only good part of the game
>>320313162
>He's just saying "years" now
1 of those games (2 if you wanna count GW2) is F2P. All but two of those companies have released PC exclusives last year or later, or their game isn't even out yet.
Just bow out tbqh family
>>320274723
>Cant build a comp
>>320313959
>If you emulate games at a higher resolution than the original console or play old games at HD resolution you are cancer.
Lol, imagine if you actually believed this though
>>320312651
Your picture looks much worse. As usual PC fags have no understanding of art.
>>320274545
I have a 1ms 144hz 4k screen and sli TitanXs
Im fine.
>>320302732
the open world bit is in open testing right now for sc you massive cuck
>>320313959
1/10
FPS>detail>resolution
>>320314192
you cant even count nigger I'm done with you.
>>320275548
>holding back the industry
>literally the only thing that connects AAA games to the casual market/the masses and allows them to actually be profitable
>>320274218
Higher fps is useless
>>320313586
The gameplay is worse than Peace Walker and it's the most casual MGS there is.
The visuals were downgraded big time.
Higher FPS > Detail > Resolution
If it plays good, I don't care what the game looks like.
>>320314842
this is where your argument goes bad. developing games for high end gaming creates new tech that can be handed down to consoles if you are designing things to run on consoles then you have to seriously take hardware power into consideration when designing it. meaning you know you cant do x becasue theres no way it would be able to run on consoles.
