Resolution vs Detail vs Smoothness Poll

[LOST TALE]

Answer implying the following:

 

-Detail level, resolution+AA, Smoothness are at acceptable levels ( where it doesnt annoy you )

 

these 2 preferences may help you decide:

 

-What would you lower first to get better detail/res/smoothness?

-What would you increase as a priority, if you had left over performance?

 

Smoothness: this includes framerate, image delay + less tearing and sluttering

Resolution: Resolution+ AA (the way the image is rendered)

Detail: Effects, Textures, Shadows, Ambient occlusion , Terrain decoration,...ETC

 

If a mod passes by, please forward it to someone of higher ranks until it reaches the web designers so we can have ponderation option for polls, It would make this much simpler

[_ASSASSIN_]

1.  1.Smoothness 2.Resolution 3.Smoothness
2.  1.Smoothness 2.Smoothness 3. Resolution
3.  1.Resolution 2.Smoothness 3. Resolution
4.  1.Resolution 2.Resolution 3. Smoothness

   YEP

[LOST TALE]

 

1.  1.Smoothness 2.Resolution 3.Smoothness
2.  1.Smoothness 2.Smoothness 3. Resolution
3.  1.Resolution 2.Smoothness 3. Resolution
4.  1.Resolution 2.Resolution 3. Smoothness

 

I noticed LOL

[EmoRarity]

Sometime when I word, I forget that letters words, and sentences.

[Pingypoker]

I am confused.

[Lord Pantaloons]

lowering the res would reduce the detail of the image

[EmoRarity]

Sometime when I word, I forget that letters words, and sentences.

[LOST TALE]

lowering the res would reduce the detail of the image

hold on I will calrify on the post

[mucitel1]

I would make sure it runs at 60fps first, then if it got over that I would put it to 1080p and after that I would crank up the details.

[s3ns3]

res is FIRST !!! why the hell lower the res. 

[Sarcasm]

The first thing to go is always AA, and resolution last.

[LOST TALE]

The first thing to go is always AA, and resolution last.

Linus would say the other way arround. Accoridng to what I understood from him, increasing resolution is better performance/quality wise

though in battlefield I would doubt that with the AA being so OP

[Sarcasm]

Linus would say the other way arround. Accoridng to what I understood from him, increasing resolution is better performance/quality wise

though in battlefield I would doubt that with the AA being so OP

Linus is saying exactly what I am...

[Hirad123]

I am stuck in between option 3 and 4

[boggle4321]

if you change the res, it looks like crap no mater what else you do

[TeKNiQue]

Run it in 1080p, then adjust the settings so that it runs at a stable 60fps

[LOST TALE]

Run it in 1080p, then adjust the settings so that it runs at a stable 60fps

that would be ? RES, FPS, Detail?

 

but what would you pick between:

-below 1080p

-below 60 fps

[TeKNiQue]

that would be ? RES, FPS, Detail?

 

but what would you pick between:

-below 1080p

-below 60 fps

I honestly don't know. I would rather have 1080p 30fps than 720p 60fps, but I would also rather have 1080p 60fps than 1440p 30fps. I guess both are equally important for me.

[Seldszar]

I don't get those choosing res over smoothness. If your play is staggered what fun is it when you can't even play properly...?

[LOST TALE]

I don't get those choosing res over smoothness. If your play is staggered what fun is it when you can't even play properly...?

''Smoothness are at acceptable levels ( where it doesnt annoy you )''

Maybe you would understand if you read.

 

I put everyone on to ask themsleves from the same personal point of view.

But some people fail.

[LOST TALE]

I honestly don't know. I would rather have 1080p 30fps than 720p 60fps, but I would also rather have 1080p 60fps than 1440p 30fps. I guess both are equally important for me.

What would be the bare minimum resolution and framerate you would accept? (2 seperate answers)

[Seldszar]

''Smoothness are at acceptable levels ( where it doesnt annoy you )''

Maybe you would understand if you read.

 

I put everyone on to ask themsleves from the same personal point of view.

But some people fail.

Thx for reminding me I misread in a nice way.

 

Edit : Although I wonder whats the point of having smoothness if its at a default level where it doesn't annoy anyone ... more smoothness when its already smooth?

[flibberdipper]

I like smoothness, then detail, then resolution. I played games at 15-20 FPS for so long, I refuse to play below 25. San Andreas on my netbook is a different story, since I like it so much.

[TeKNiQue]

What would be the bare minimum resolution and framerate you would accept? (2 seperate answers)

The minimum framerate would have to be a stable 30fps. If my game frequently dropped below that, I would have to do something about it. However, I would rather have low-medium settings at 60fps than having high-ultra settings at 30fps.

The minimum resolution I would play at is 720p, but if I didn't have a very powerful GPU, I would lower the settings to try to play at 1080p as much as possible. Fortunately I have a decent card, the 660 Ti, paired with a 2600k. No need to explain why I have an i7 and not an i5.

[LOST TALE]

Thx for reminding me I misread in a nice way.

 

Edit : Although I wonder whats the point of having smoothness if its at a default level where it doesn't annoy anyone ... more smoothness when its already smooth?

http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/15-30-60-fps.gif

Even if your eyes/brain could only see X number of images.

you must understand that following an image with the middle of your eye ( not middle but the high res part) is much easier if it doesnt have to teleport 60 times on the screen ( 60 fps ). the faste rit moves the more framerate will benefit.

In real life you can follow a poll (and focus it clearly ) at 100km/h on the autoroute because its IRL and the poll is not teleporting, so it aint that hard.