• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Modern Warfare 2 Will Render at 600p

Rez said:
90% of games support the 360 pad and the rest can be tricked into accepting the 360 pad.

Ya i've been playing through Fallout 3 on PC with a 360 pad and it works perfectly. Also used it without issues in Outrun Coast 2 Coast, Crysis, Flight Simulator X, and even ArmA 2(though you can't invert the aim in that game).
 

sinnergy

Member
brain_stew said:
That's not correct, this setting only applies to alpha textures and the amount is determined by how many msaa samples you're using.

To enable true supersampling you need to download nhancer from here:

http://www.nhancer.com/

You can then choose from a range of supersampling and (my favourite) "combined" supersampling/multisampling aa modes and apply them on a per game basis.

Combined 2x2 supersampling w/ 4xmsaa w/transparency multisampling is damn nice looking and the performance hit isn't too great at 720p with modern GPUs, quite a few games will run with this setting just fine.

You can also try "options > enable experimental modes" in nhancer to get access to some new multisampling modes including the infamous quincunx (of PS3 fame) and 4x9Tap which is a similar algorithm to quincunx only for a 4xmsaa application and the results are generally better.

Is something like this available for ATI cards?
 
I thought this gif was appropriate

mr50l.jpg
 

Haunted

Member
Rez said:
90% of games support the 360 pad and the rest can be tricked into accepting the 360 pad, if kicking back with a controller is what makes you happy.
Exactly. As usual, the PC provides the best of both worlds.

classy tag, btw



edit: using the comfy couch or the small monitor argument is as asinine as me saying that the 360 is worse than the PS3 because I have it hooked up to a 8" portable television lying face down in the bathroom instead of my 32" HDTV in the living room.

It's your fucking fault.
 

Opiate

Member
Rez said:
90% of games support the 360 pad and the rest can be tricked into accepting the 360 pad, if kicking back with a controller is what makes you happy.

Do they? Huh, I guess I never tried. I strongly prefer the KB/M for almost everything, so it wasn't a concern to me.
 

ScOULaris

Member
Ico was rendered at a low resolution (even by PS2 standards) on purpose. And it wasn't to allow the game to run at a higher framerate, but rather to further distance the game visually from other games on the system at the time.

If Ueda believes in low-res, so do I. :D
 

inner-G

Banned
SuperEnemyCrab said:
Ya i've been playing through Fallout 3 on PC with a 360 pad and it works perfectly. Also used it without issues in Outrun Coast 2 Coast, Crysis, Flight Simulator X, and even ArmA 2(though you can't invert the aim in that game).
It's awesome with The Witcher and Last Remnant too.

xpadder FTW.
 

roMonster

Member
brain_stew said:
That's not correct, this setting only applies to alpha textures and the amount is determined by how many msaa samples you're using.

To enable true supersampling you need to download nhancer from here:

http://www.nhancer.com/

You can then choose from a range of supersampling and (my favourite) "combined" supersampling/multisampling aa modes and apply them on a per game basis.

Combined 2x2 supersampling w/ 4xmsaa w/transparency multisampling is damn nice looking and the performance hit isn't too great at 720p with modern GPUs, quite a few games will run with this setting just fine.

You can also try "options > enable experimental modes" in nhancer to get access to some new multisampling modes including the infamous quincunx (of PS3 fame) and 4x9Tap which is a similar algorithm to quincunx only for a 4xmsaa application and the results are generally better.

Is there anything like this for ATI cards?
 

i-Lo

Member
Yes, it's a shame that game will technically run at 600p and more shame that the price of this game is being hiked in UK.

Two very non-bullshit facts.

However, visual perception of the game's graphics followed by personal impression and "fun" that this game may offer for its price are two very subjective aspects.

A poor looking game with 720p will look poor no matter what but a good looking 640/600p game will look better than the poorly made proper HD res game.

Again, to reiterate, sitting at some distance from the tele, is it really going to be that relevant? If the game "looks" good to you, would it really matter when you going to spend hours fragging away?

Of course, I am in no way defending IW for producing a game with sub-HD game but I think they can justify their choice for the sake consistent (not locked) 60 fps.
 

Sleeker

Member
Does using a 360 pad on PC mean you are disadvantaged in MP against KB/M players?
I was pretty good at COD4 on 360 but Im getting MW2 for PC
 

HUELEN10

Member
Sleeker said:
Does using a 360 pad on PC mean you are disadvantaged in MP against KB/M players?
I was pretty good at COD4 on 360 but Im getting MW2 for PC
For the most part, YES I am not PC gamer, heck I don't even play shooters, but Keyboard/mouse or Wii Nunchuck Combo trumps a regular controller for these types of games due to their accuracy any day of the week!
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
Sleeker said:
Does using a 360 pad on PC mean you are disadvantaged in MP against KB/M players?
I was pretty good at COD4 on 360 but Im getting MW2 for PC
Hmm, yeah.
 

vocab

Member
Sleeker said:
Does using a 360 pad on PC mean you are disadvantaged in MP against KB/M players?
I was pretty good at COD4 on 360 but Im getting MW2 for PC


Oh god yes. With Keyboard and mouse, there's a lot more freedom of movement. You can't do some of the most basic shenanigans with a 360 controller simply because the analog stick is limited. Also, how the hell would you lean with a 360 controller? You probably gotta bind it to something, but I'm pretty sure it will feel clunky with so many buttons right next to each other. One of the biggest problems I had with console COD4 (only played 360 version) was that the breathe button was pretty much the same button as the walk button, which is awful. I know you could change this, but I rather just hit Shift or make a bind that automatically breathes as soon as I scope for the sniper ( :D ).

You should just stick with Keyboard and Mouse for this game. It will be rewarding as hell when you get the hang of it. You'll be wondering why console just doesn't use mouse and keyboard instead of controller. There's a huge difference.
 

Kibbles

Member
HUELEN10 said:
For the most part, YES I am not PC gamer, heck I don't even play shooters, but Keyboard/mouse or Wii Nunchuck Combo trumps a regular controller for these types of games due to their accuracy any day of the week!
Yeah but it's so uncomfortable. I don't know how any can manage playing for a while that way. I'd much rather use a controller. Although, unless the game is compatible and made with the 360 controller in mind, the controller can feel like shit in a lot of PC games.
 

vocab

Member
Kibbles said:
Yeah but it's so uncomfortable. I don't know how any can manage playing for a while that way. I'd much rather use a controller.

I play in the most awkward way most of the time (when I'm not taking it serious of course). I have my legs up on my desk with my left hand threw my legs while using the keyboard, and my right hand just uses the mouse. Seriously It looks just as awkward as it sounds. There's so many ways you can approach a keyboard and mouse it's not even funny.
 

ghst

thanks for the laugh
vocab said:
Oh god yes. With Keyboard and mouse, there's a lot more freedom of movement. You can't do most some of the most basic shenanigans with a 360 controller simply because the analog stick is limited. Also, how the hell would you lean with a 360 controller? You probably gotta bind it to something, but I'm pretty sure it will feel clunky with so many buttons right next to each other. One of the biggest problems I had with console COD4 (only played 360 version) was that the breathe button was pretty much the same button as the walk button, which is awful. I know you could change this, but I rather just hit Shift or make a bind that automatically breathes as soon as I scope for the sniper ( :D ).

You should just stick with Keyboard and Mouse for this game. It will be rewarding as hell when you get the hang of it. You'll be wondering why console just doesn't use mouse and keyboard instead of controller. There's a huge difference.

house! i got a full house here!
 
i prefer the controller to a K&M mostly because WASD is not analogic.

in action games you can tell the diference as you usually need an extra key for slow walking and sneaking while, in a gamepad, you control everything with the left analog and it feels more intuitive, like sneaking around in MGS/Splinter Cell, etc.

but the mouse is indeed better for aiming.

i guess the left stick beats the keyboard and the rights stick loses to a mouse.
 

vocab

Member
Pantheon Of The Lesser said:
i prefer the controller to a K&M mostly because WASD is not analogic.

in action games you can tell the diference as you usually need an extra key for slow walking and sneaking while, in a gamepad, you control everything with the left analog and it feels more intuitive, like sneaking around in MGS/Splinter Cell, etc.

but the mouse is indeed better for aiming.

i guess the left stick beats the keyboard and the rights stick loses to a mouse.


That's a weird position, because I never heard of it before. The mouse compliments the keyboard, simply because you use both to maximum your movement. Strafe jumping, circle jumping, bhop, all work together with Keyboard and mouse. Also the extra key for slow walking isn't really a big deal. I don't like the pressure sensitiveness of an analog stick at all. Metal Gear comes to mind. You either barely tap it or use full force to run. It's just meh because there's barely no middle ground. It seems you are more focused on proper movement, instead of just doing it without thinking. The Shift key is right next to wasd, and it's highly convenient to just hold it to walk.
 
vocab said:
I don't like the pressure sensitiveness of an analog stick at all. Metal Gear comes to mind. You either barely tap it or use full force to run. It's just meh because there's barely no middle ground.
Then you should've been playing Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory and not whichever Metal Gear iteration you played.
 

isamu

OMFG HOLY MOTHER OF MARY IN HEAVEN I CANT BELIEVE IT WTF WHERE ARE MY SEDATIVES AAAAHHH
Talamius said:
If this console generation really does last 10 years, it'll be the best thing to ever happen to PC gaming :)

agreed
 

McLovin

Member
Sleeker said:
Does using a 360 pad on PC mean you are disadvantaged in MP against KB/M players?
I was pretty good at COD4 on 360 but Im getting MW2 for PC
I actually tried this.. and you will get raped. The PC folk are on another level.. you will swear they are cheating (some of them are) but for the most part they are just that good. Get use to the Kb/M combo.. and make sure its wired. In the end I ended up going back to the console version.. the pc version was a total waste for me :(
 

speedpop

Has problems recognising girls
Sleeker said:
Does using a 360 pad on PC mean you are disadvantaged in MP against KB/M players?
I was pretty good at COD4 on 360 but Im getting MW2 for PC
You're gonna get raped if you use a gamepad. Expect to be drilled.
 

StuBurns

Banned
I'm kind of surprised they haven't started building some kind of stick into keyboards for character movement in shooters, I think it'd be preferable to WASD. But on the subject, yeah, keyboard/mouse will slaughter a gamepad every time if they're of equal skill. The mouse as an aiming device is still light years ahead of a stick. And it actually changes the pacing in some games. If you haven't played HL2 with a mouse you're really not experiencing the design how it was intended, it's a lot slower on consoles, you don't get the same energy pushing you thru areas.
 

Draft

Member
WASD crushes the analog stick, at least in most shooters.

Most games don't do anything interesting with movement speed, like momentum or inertia. You either stand still, sneak/walk or full on sprint. 4 fingers controlling 4 digital inputs is going to kill one thumb controlling one analog input every time.

The only game that immediately springs to mind as more controller friendly is Splinter Cell, because it does have a fairly in depth range of movement speeds that the analog stick controls. However, Ubi's PC solution is having the mouse wheel control speed, which feels very natural and works well.

KB/M dominance pretty much extends through any game that uses the first person or third person over the shoulder perspective.
 

RavenFox

Banned
McLovin said:
I actually tried this.. and you will get raped. The PC folk are on another level.. you will swear they are cheating (some of them are) but for the most part they are just that good. Get use to the Kb/M combo.. and make sure its wired. In the end I ended up going back to the console version.. the pc version was a total waste for me :(
lol thats right buddy. I use both PC and console. PC for years, have to keep the skills up.
 

Zeliard

Member
Pantheon Of The Lesser said:
i guess the left stick beats the keyboard and the rights stick loses to a mouse.

bluescreenoflife said:
The argument begins and ends with this.

It really doesn't. "The left stick beats the keyboard"? What? A keyboard has a million more available keys and makes things like binding a much simpler and far more versatile task. Console games till this day rarely ever let you bind your own individual keys and that's been ubiquitous in PC games for ages.

That's why people always mention the keyboard instead of just leaving it at "mouse is superior to a gamepad". The keyboard is just as critical because it gives both the developer and the player far more options.
 

ACE 1991

Member
Honestly, this isn't much of an issue, due to the fact that MW1 had a lot of AA. In halo 3 for instance, it's sub 720p resolution was quite an issue because it had very little AA.
 

AlStrong

Member
ACE 1991 said:
Honestly, this isn't much of an issue, due to the fact that MW1 had a lot of AA. In halo 3 for instance, it's sub 720p resolution was quite an issue because it had very little AA.


Well, it's 2xMSAA versus single sample.
 
24 pages huh...are we aiming for 1 page per missing p?

Here's my take on the whole kbm vs controller thing.

KBM turns everything into a twitch fest, you look around like you're on unrealistically on speed and you move like a robot. It also makes every FPS feel the same. Keyboard sucks and is not built for games, but one thing is does have is an endless amount of buttons. Mouse wheel is a + too.

Controller takes more skill and practice (and ironically so considering it is more casually popular) you move realistically, but you turn like a robot. The buttons are 10 times more convenient, but you have a limited amount of them to assign.

Neither of these things are super superior awesome, but they both have their perks. It all depends on what the game was made for. Most fps's out there are definitely made for the PC. No doubt about that, but I found COD4 was made with the controller in mind.

Of course you can perform better with a kbm, but because of the unrealistic performance of the players, it turns every single freggin fps into a twitch-fest. I hate that so much,especially in games like COD that are already semi-twitchy to begin with. I felt COD4 played better with a controller. Aiming felt like aiming with a controller...not twitching unrealistically like a spaz. It seems it was balanced with the controller in mind in terms of perk power, turning radius, things like that. It took more skill and strategy to get the kills and felt more rewarding when I did. he intensity was more potent with a controller, because the "Oh Sh*t, there he is!" moment of truth where both you and the enemy spot each other and line up the shot was half a second longer and more climatic. On the PC, if I blink i missed the moment of intensity between two players.
You also get that "point and click" feel with a mouse, but a good game with lots of immersion makes me forget all about that feeling very quickly. Didn't get that feeling too much with COD4 on the PC.

In games like L4D, TF2, Quake, Unreal, etc are made with the mouse and keyboard in mind first and foremost. You need to twitch to be a hunter in L4D. You need to twitch to spin around a lot in Unreal. But to me, it can get too twitchy. Unreal and Quake series aren't what they used to be in terms of popularity, and I'm all for that. We need PC gamers to rely on brains and teamwork more than mouse-point-skill. TF2 comes to mind here. We need more games that give PC gamers that opportunity.
But there are games like Halo and Goldeneye that are made in mind that you can't twitch and the entire game is designed around that.

If I want super-twitchy I'll play L4D or Unreal 2006 on my Pc. If I want minimal twitching I'll pop in a Halo with a controller. If I want that rare breed that is right smack in between the two, I'll play CoD4 with a controller (or TF2 on my PC). It doesn't hurt that the controls in COD4 are better than any console fps I've ever played.
 

ghst

thanks for the laugh
CultureClearance said:
24 pages huh...are we aiming for 1 page per missing p?

Here's my take on the whole kbm vs controller thing.

KBM turns everything into a twitch fest, you look around like you're on unrealistically on speed and you move like a robot. It also makes every FPS feel the same. Keyboard sucks and is not built for games, but one thing is does have is an endless amount of buttons. Mouse wheel is a + too.

Controller takes more skill and practice (and ironically so considering it is more casually popular) you move realistically, but you turn like a robot. The buttons are 10 times more convenient, but you have a limited amount of them to assign.

Neither of these things are super superior awesome, but they both have their perks. It all depends on what the game was made for. Most fps's out there are definitely made for the PC. No doubt about that, but I found COD4 was made with the controller in mind.

Of course you can perform better with a kbm, but because of the unrealistic performance of the players, it turns every single freggin fps into a twitch-fest. I hate that so much,especially in games like COD that are already semi-twitchy to begin with. I felt COD4 played better with a controller. Aiming felt like aiming with a controller...not twitching unrealistically like a spaz. It seems it was balanced with the controller in mind in terms of perk power, turning radius, things like that. It took more skill and strategy to get the kills and felt more rewarding when I did. he intensity was more potent with a controller, because the "Oh Sh*t, there he is!" moment of truth where both you and the enemy spot each other and line up the shot was half a second longer and more climatic. On the PC, if I blink i missed the moment of intensity between two players.
You also get that "point and click" feel with a mouse, but a good game with lots of immersion makes me forget all about that feeling very quickly. Didn't get that feeling too much with COD4 on the PC.

as long as junior members exist, so will this argument.

it's the new comfy couch.

it's usually a product of the poster in question being roundly terrible with the unchecked greatness of mkb, finding their calm from the storm known as ability on the island of molassesus autoaimia. if you wish to contest debate this fact, we'll jump on to quake live and instagib and will provide us with exhibit a.
 

[Nintex]

Member
CultureClearance said:
If I want super-twitchy I'll play L4D or Unreal 2006 on my Pc. If I want minimal twitching I'll pop in a Halo with a controller. If I want that rare breed that is right smack in between the two, I'll play CoD4 with a controller (or TF2 on my PC). It doesn't hurt that the controls in COD4 are better than any console fps I've ever played.
What you need is to adjust your mouse sensivity.
 
D

Deleted member 30609

Unconfirmed Member
speaking from personal experience, I find that the only people who seriously argue that a controller has any tangible pluses over the keyboard and mouse setup are either people who doesn't play PC games very often, or people who first started playing FPS with a controller (probably, but not always, with Halo).

anyone (prove me wrong) who uses a K&M for a decent chunk of time, enough to find their ideal mouse sensitivity and key bindings, realises that it just feels so much more natural when compared to a controller.

A dual-stick controller is a great substitute for a K&M, but it will always be just that: a substitute.
 

Ceebs

Member
CultureClearance said:
24 pages huh...are we aiming for 1 page per missing p?
KBM turns everything into a twitch fest, you look around like you're on unrealistically on speed and you move like a robot. It also makes every FPS feel the same. Keyboard sucks and is not built for games

Being used to Kb/M, when I play a console shooter it takes me ages to get used to the analog stick to aim. It feels like you have to wrestle with it to aim where you want. You can drop sensitivity to make this easier, but then you are further in the hole in terms of speed. Much prefer a mouse that you just point and click.
 

J-Rzez

Member
EviLore said:
Gamepad FPS = skill. Hence the autoaim.

You can look at it from any angle. I play on both consoles and PC. Is the mouse more precise and faster with look speed, especially with a good Razer? Sure.

Do controllers have the movement advantage? Yes. Trying to justify WASD as superior to an analog stick is taking it way too far no matter how you try to spin it.

Stick to what you like, or get decent at both. "Skill" applies to both kb/m and controllers, if you like it or not.

The only thing that can get slapped at controllers is Auto-aim. Not all games are overly intrusive like CoD and Halo though.
 
I think CultureClearance made some good points even if his "a controller takes more skill and practice" probably annoyed some people. A mouse is more accurate for aiming, and I don't think anyone seriously argues that it isn't, but playing an FPS feels artificial to me compared to a controller because of the pointing and clicking.

Having your finger on the right trigger on a controller and pressing it feels more like shooting a gun. It's something that helps the immersion for me. And I actually do like the extra challenge of strafing and aiming with a controller.

edit: For example in Far Cry 2 I turned off auto-aim because it annoyed me to babied like that. Scoping in with the sniper and it automatically locks on to a target in the bushes that I can't even see sickened me.
 

vocab

Member
CultureClearance said:
In games like L4D, TF2, Quake, Unreal, etc are made with the mouse and keyboard in mind first and foremost. You need to twitch to be a hunter in L4D. .

LOL no you don't. I can play Hunter while eating a bowl of cereal. 99% your post is so ignorant it's not even funny.
 

ghst

thanks for the laugh
The-Warning said:
I think CultureClearance made some good points even if his "a controller takes more skill and practice" probably annoyed some people. A mouse is more accurate for aiming, and I don't think anyone seriously argues that it isn't, but playing an FPS feels artificial to me compared to a controller because of the pointing and clicking.

Having your finger on the right trigger on a controller and pressing it feels more like shooting a gun. It's something that helps the immersion for me. And I actually do like the extra challenge of strafing and aiming with a controller.

i love when we come to it that faced with objective inferiority of the tool that their console manufacturer of choice has bound them to, console things start arguing that pivoting around like an arthritic robot from the 50s constitutes realism.
 
Top Bottom