Graphic Options?
Graphic Options?
I was just wondering if anyone else thinks the graphics options changes their gameplay experience.
Re: Graphic Options?
If you mean camera settings by graphic options of course.
Anyway, why do you ask this? Do you want to get some information what graphic options others prefer? If that was the case you should just have asked for it.
Anyway, why do you ask this? Do you want to get some information what graphic options others prefer? If that was the case you should just have asked for it.
Re: Graphic Options?
well i think that's the graphics settings' purpose...
- Phytotron
- Formerly Oscilloscope
- Posts: 5041
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:06 pm
- Location: A site or situation, especially considered in regard to its surroundings.
- Contact:
Re: Graphic Options?
Yes, in several ways. The most obvious would be framerate. Sparks can both kill framerate as well as be a distraction. Some people claim the floor mirror serves some gameplay purpose for them, though I've never figured how and it's a major drag on framerate. There's also the matter of alpha blending of cycle walls. Translucency may be beneficial in the case of incam, but detrimental otherwise in terms of framerate; additionally, wall edges may be less distinct. The sky, more textures, more framerate. And, of course, higher detail levels generally equal more decrease in framerate.
Actual textures, or lack thereof, can have an impact as well. For example, I've always played with the floor completely off as gridlines cause too much noise and sometimes make it difficult to discern cycle walls, especially tightly grouped ones. In addition, player walls colored similarly to whatever the floor is can blend in to the floor. (I have similar trouble playing with or against the Jets in Madden. Har.)
Speaking of cycle walls, some find the actual texture can have an effect. I know sinewav, for example, insists on walls that have some sort of 'directional' on it, for practical purposes. I myself don't find any particular practical need for directionals as I'm always looking around and keeping track of where everyone has been and is going, anyway. Indeed, those too can cause visual problems for me since, depending on the type of graphic, they can cause visual interruption of where the edges of cycle walls are—in the way that a zebra's stripes make the individual blend in with the herd, or a tiger's make it blend in with the grass. So, I usually prefer very simple, or even completely plain cycle walls.
As far as rim walls, generally you don't want whatever color is at the base of the wall to match the color of your floor (whatever it may be) as it will make the edge basically invisible. I reckon some people like the high rim off to get rid of that visual distraction as well.
Then there's the cycle model. As you may know, the cycle is completely cosmetic; it has no solidity or volume, made obvious by the fact that the nose will pass through a wall you've hit, and that you can pass it through seams. A large, unwieldy model can be problematic in terms of predicting when you'll collide with a wall. Additionally is the issue of where the cycle turns. There's explanation of what I mean here and here.
So, there are some examples.
Actual textures, or lack thereof, can have an impact as well. For example, I've always played with the floor completely off as gridlines cause too much noise and sometimes make it difficult to discern cycle walls, especially tightly grouped ones. In addition, player walls colored similarly to whatever the floor is can blend in to the floor. (I have similar trouble playing with or against the Jets in Madden. Har.)
Speaking of cycle walls, some find the actual texture can have an effect. I know sinewav, for example, insists on walls that have some sort of 'directional' on it, for practical purposes. I myself don't find any particular practical need for directionals as I'm always looking around and keeping track of where everyone has been and is going, anyway. Indeed, those too can cause visual problems for me since, depending on the type of graphic, they can cause visual interruption of where the edges of cycle walls are—in the way that a zebra's stripes make the individual blend in with the herd, or a tiger's make it blend in with the grass. So, I usually prefer very simple, or even completely plain cycle walls.
As far as rim walls, generally you don't want whatever color is at the base of the wall to match the color of your floor (whatever it may be) as it will make the edge basically invisible. I reckon some people like the high rim off to get rid of that visual distraction as well.
Then there's the cycle model. As you may know, the cycle is completely cosmetic; it has no solidity or volume, made obvious by the fact that the nose will pass through a wall you've hit, and that you can pass it through seams. A large, unwieldy model can be problematic in terms of predicting when you'll collide with a wall. Additionally is the issue of where the cycle turns. There's explanation of what I mean here and here.
So, there are some examples.
Re: Graphic Options?
For incam, so I can find my way out. Helps 10% of the time, but that's the 10% I win and you loose.Phytotron wrote:I know sinewav, for example, insists on walls that have some sort of 'directional' on it, for practical purposes.
- Phytotron
- Formerly Oscilloscope
- Posts: 5041
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:06 pm
- Location: A site or situation, especially considered in regard to its surroundings.
- Contact:
Re: Graphic Options?
Oh, I thought you had said you liked them for general gameplay.