Effects vs Resolution

Shaga · Dec 19, 2007, 03:53 AM

I don't have a very fast gfx card and I've been thinking what would you pick?

I would rather go with the 1024x all settings high against 1280x all settings medium. What do you think?

I'm currently playing crysis 800x600 so I can have more effects, better shaders etc.

Btw, won this card from here in one of the competitions. This card is broken now so can't take gaming at all currently. I contacted ATI(via email in business card with a signature which came with the gfx card). They are shipping me a replacement card. Hope they will pick something faster.

Sandok · Dec 19, 2007, 04:02 AM

Always effects

***Vikingod*** · Dec 19, 2007, 09:04 AM

I prefer higher settings to resolution, but only to an extent. I wouldn't play Crysis on 1024*768 just to bump it up to high. Medium looks almost as good, and that resolution just looks terrible to me. It all a matter of preference.

mkk · Dec 19, 2007, 09:13 AM

On an LCD monitor I'd go with resolution first unless it's a game where you don't need to read any text, like maybe a sports game or racing. I guess Crysis could be either way because I haven't played it, but in general I definitely go for the resolution that my flat panel monitor is made for and then turn off shadows, advanced effects or whatever necessary to make the game playable.

I had a fight with this when playing Bioshock and simply had to accept that top modern graphics is not for me. For what I've read of Crysis, the top graphics aren't fun for more than a select few.

However the lowest budget range cards may be so fillrate limited that say 1280x1024 isn't attainable even at low effect levels and then one does of course have to stick to the reality of that.

SimonShaw · Jan 7, 2008, 01:02 PM

Resolution for me, especially crysis.
Running crysis at 1024x768 all at max still looks worse than 1280x1024 at medium or high - mainly due to the huge amounts of aliasing

Lowfat · Jan 7, 2008, 01:28 PM

Always resolution for me. Just because native resolution on an LCD always looks better than not.

Zelig · Jan 7, 2008, 03:31 PM

Was effects for me when I gamed on a CRT, resolution now, nothing goes below 1920x1200. However, playing at high resolutions lessens the need for AA.

OmegaRED · Jan 7, 2008, 06:52 PM

For me it depends on the game. In the case of Crysis I went for resolution over effects. I prefer a low AA + higher res so games don't look aliased and pixelated. Some games just look terrible on lower quality (World in Conflict, Supreme Commander) and I always try to crank up the details rather than get a high res.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Jan 7, 2008, 07:12 PM

a mix of both

Dyre Straits · Jan 8, 2008, 04:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OmegaRED

For me it depends on the game. In the case of Crysis I went for resolution over effects. I prefer a low AA + higher res so games don't look aliased and pixelated. Some games just look terrible on lower quality (World in Conflict, Supreme Commander) and I always try to crank up the details rather than get a high res.

A little off topic, but since you mention it: What do you think of Supreme Commander? I just got this title as a Christmas/Birthday gift last Thursday. I'd just about played the demo to death.

Lowfat · Jan 8, 2008, 03:54 PM

I think SupCom was awesome. After I tire myself of Oblivion again. I am going to SupCom another go.