🚀 go-pugleaf

"Folk" <Folk@folk.com> wrote in message 
news:stafk3hnrjknj9jbfhje4otir703ls47o3@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 18:36:59 GMT, me <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>goPostal wrote:
>>
>>>> Nope, it's not just you.  Maxing everything out makes thing look too
>>>> "busy", for lack of a better term.  Turning both sliders down to 1
>>>> don't make things look "better" IMO, but to me it does make other
>>>> players easier to see.  But then I turned things way down in 2k4 as
>>>> well.  The fast paced action of UT doesn't really need a lot of eye
>>>> candy.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've found myself doing that too sometimes. I'll crank the visuals way 
>>> back
>>> and it does indeed help gameplay. It's much more bland but with grass 
>>> and
>>> shit out of your way the players do stand out much better. I read once 
>>> where
>>> the most elite 2K4 player have settings only slightly better than 
>>> wireframe
>>
>>Game graphics get better, computers improve, trying to keep up, and
>>still we're turning graphics down to get better performance. I used to
>>do this in UT99!
>
> I'm not turning it down to get better performance.  My system runs
> with all sliders maxed at over 150 fps average and never drops below
> 60.  I'm turning it down so it's easier to see what I'm shooting at.

Yeah, same here. Once you have played a map a few times, opened it in editor 
to look for any surprises, and added it to your offline list I pretty much 
stop looking at visuals. I can go to blank walls and for me the game is 
still as fun.
The one exception for me personally is DM-Inferno. I freakin love that map. 
I can walk around looking at that for a long time and enjoy it. Playability 
isn't as good as most but visually it's right up there with the nicest maps 
I've seen. I wish I could decorate like that on my mapping.