|
Member
(06-12-2012, 10:46 PM)
|
#254
I would love to play a game that has no textures or fancy shaders, just High-Res Geometry (or normal mapped low poly geo), basic colors and GI as an art direction.
So, something like this Lighting+Normals (Or detail Lighting mode as it's called in UDK) only version of the UDK Showcase map: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() The lighting makes this pretty simple scene really stand out.
Last edited by Computron; 01-11-2013 at 08:46 PM.
|
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 10:49 PM)
|
#256
It's kinda funny that FC looks almost as good as Crysis here, i.e. Crysis looks like shit on low settings. But as has already been mentioned, the fact that it goes all the way from "amazing" to "shit" of course means that it should be able to run on a much wider range of hardware than many console ports. And that's a good thing.
|
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 10:50 PM)
|
#257
DUDE.
Thats's source engine, plug in these Half Life 2 DS console cammands I posted earlier:
Quote:
![]() I wanna see that.
Last edited by Computron; 06-12-2012 at 10:52 PM.
|
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 10:57 PM)
|
#261
Eh, that might be true for netbooks, but only really shitty laptops would have to go down to the ultra-low settings on display in this thread. A decent laptop will run at least console-like visuals fine, and an above-average one easily surpasses that. A laptop doesn't automatically equal shit for games anymore, even though they obviously won't max out the most demanding games.
|
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 11:12 PM)
|
#268
|
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 11:14 PM)
|
#269
When I need more frames, the first thing I do is decreasing the resolution.
In fact, Many games look better in lower resolutions as you won't see the imperfect stuff like the bald woods in skyrim from a distance. I actually played skyrim in 800x600 due to this. |
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 11:22 PM)
|
#275
|
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 11:23 PM)
|
#276
Hmm, really? On high settings at 1080p, my laptop (which is not really a beast; there were considerably more powerful (and much more expensive) laptops available when I bought it last year) runs it at 60 fps. Or it did when I tried it, which was quite some time ago. Does it run worse lately?
Last edited by RoadHazard; 06-12-2012 at 11:25 PM.
|
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 11:33 PM)
|
The Sims 3
#279
Here's some Sims 3 for you. First two shots also include max setting comparisons for you, but the other two do not (I took them after I had already switched to lowest settings and couldn't be bothered to switch back since it takes like 5 minutes to reload lol)
![]() Max setting comparison ![]() Max setting comparison |
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 11:34 PM)
|
The Sims 3
#280
![]() ![]() Dat draw distance... As you can probably tell, the Sims themselves aren't that bad, and indoor stuff actually looks pretty decent. But the neighbourhood is where it looks ugly as sin. Just awful. Amazing FPS boost though, really wish I had the same performance on max haha |
|
Member
(06-12-2012, 11:44 PM)
|
#286
Updated size rule for 4:3 images, 1280x1024 makes more sense as someone said :) |
|
(06-12-2012, 11:48 PM)
|
#289
|
|
Nelotard
(06-13-2012, 12:30 AM)
|
#297
|
|
Member
(06-13-2012, 12:54 AM)
|
#299
This thread got me to try Crysis 2 on the lowest possible settings at 720p.
Hot damn, the game still looks great! I funny thing is that Crytek didn't technically have a "low" setting, the lowest you can go is "High". Seriously, Crysis 2 is the best looking performing game I've played, it's DX9 is prettier than the majority of DX11 mode in other games and runs a hell of a lot better to boot. |