View Poll Results: In Far Cry, is it key to have high or very high details set or medium at 1600x1200?
- Voters
- 18. You may not vote on this poll
-
Far Cry - more imporant to have high or very high details, or medium with higher Res?
I was wondering. If you had a 19" monitor that could do 1600x1200, would you rather run Far Cry at 1024x768 with High or Very High details on, or run at 1600x1200 with Medium detail level active?
-
Awesome.
I run pretty much all my games at 1024x768, so I vote A.
-
Sleeps with the Fishes
What I think is most important is the enviroment detail. SHould be set as high as you can because it literally affects the game content ie birds and fish, dragon flys and even trees. In other words if you have it on low or medium you wont have schools of fish or dragon flys etc.
THe nex thing i like is the "corpse stay" if you have a good computer set it to 999 secs or at least 300 secounds. I think the default is 30 secs. then the bodies dissapear. I like them to stay as long as possible.
edit: I didnt even know this was a poll. pffft... considering the added content when the enviroment setting is high or very high, I think this is a trick question or at least a secoundary question.
Last edited by Freddy_Kruger; 01-03-2005 at 02:45 PM.
-
gran tiburón blanco
Re: Far Cry - more imporant to have high or very high details, or medium with higher Res?
Originally posted by Bearded Kirklander
I was wondering. If you had a 19" monitor that could do 1600x1200, would you rather run Far Cry at 1024x768 with High or Very High details on, or run at 1600x1200 with Medium detail level active?
Been hardcore 1600x1200 and nothing else for quite some time. The display I just ordered only handles 1366x768 so I'll have to downsize on the resolution. The display will be upsizing to 32" with much better color and 8ms response
Eric
-
Awesome.
There are dragonflys in the game at high detail? Thats awesome!
-
Astronomy Shark
I chose 1024x768 for the above reasons of missing out on the added details and objects at the high detail levels.
Last edited by speedyaxon; 01-03-2005 at 09:14 PM.
My Current System
C2Q Q6700 @ 3.4Ghz, 1.31v | Zerotherm NV120 Nirvana | Asus P5W DH | 4GB Corsair G-Skill PC6400 | 1GB HIS IceQ4 4870 Turbo | X-Fi Xtrememusic | Megaworks 650 6.1 | 500GB WD SE16 | Corsair TX750W | TT Tsunami | Log. MX3100 Duo | Dell 2007WFP | Vista HP x64
3d05 - 20025 | 3d06 - 15570
My Heatware | My Rig Pics/OC | Sharkyforums 3dmark Team |
Currently Playing- DoW:2, UT3, TF2, NWN2
-
Some games, like UT2004, I want 1600x1200 over anything else. Far Cry, however, begs to have lots of detail on. I think I'd rather run that game at 1280x960 or 1024x768 with some details on and maybe some AA also instead of 1600x1200 with everything set to medium and no AA at all.
Perhaps it does depend on each game and the genre you are playing at. Hrm...
I have a feeling even if I upgraded from my 9800 Pro 128 meg to a 6800 GT on my 2.8ghz P4, I would not be able to run Far Cry at 1600x1200 with high or very high detail and stay above 30 fps. Not sure, but it's a guestimate.
-
Sleeps with the Fishes
Yeah, it really sucks the juice out of the CPU. Best and freshest looking shooter of 2004 IMO.
-
Great White Shark
I play Fc at 1024x768, max ingame setting, 4xAA/8xAF and it looks stunning as it is. FRs' pretty good at 'bout 60-100+ fps, just try it with HDR enabled, you can't do AA, and FRs take one hella dive. A 6800GT should be able to do 16x12, but I ain't sure what the FR would be like...possibly >30fps perhaps.
Save Ana
http://www.jpages.net/HelpAna.htm
Main Rig - All AMD build: R9 3900X | GB X570 Aorus Xtreme | 2x 8GB 3600CL17 Patriot ViperRGB | Sapphire Nitro+ RX 6900 XT | 256GB Sabrent Rocket NVMe M.2 (OS) | 4TB Samsung 860 EVO SATA SSD | 2TB Samsung QVO SATA SSD | 2x 1TB Samsung 850 EVO | 6TB WD Black | Corsair HX 1000 Platinum | CM H500M | Samsung LC49HG90DMEXX 32:9 | iFi Micro iDSD BL | LG SL8YG Soundbar | 64bit Win10 Pro
-
gran tiburón blanco
Originally posted by mikeysg
I play Fc at 1024x768, max ingame setting, 4xAA/8xAF and it looks stunning as it is. FRs' pretty good at 'bout 60-100+ fps, just try it with HDR enabled, you can't do AA, and FRs take one hella dive. A 6800GT should be able to do 16x12, but I ain't sure what the FR would be like...possibly >30fps perhaps.
When I tried the demo I was getting 70ish at 1600x1200 and 4xAA. Possibly dipping into the 40's or 50's during certain scenes.
Eric
-
Great White Shark
The shadow details can be turned down and don't seem to effect the overall effect, but all the other stuff should be set to as high as possible to really get all the environmental effects of this game. I would gladly sacrifice resolution to 1024x768 to get all the environment the game has to offer.
So, I vote for the first option.
Prince of the OC Crusaders
Intel i7 3.2GHz @ 4.24GHz
Cooler Master V8
Asus P9X79 Pro
16GB Patriot Viper Extreme DDR3-1600 (quad channel)
HIS R9 290X @1050MHz
Asus 20x DVD-RW DL DVD-RW
-
Since I run all games at 1280x960 (or x1024), I won't be answering the poll.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|