Minimum GFX settings PLEASE! - FAO Rocket

[irzero 56]

Rocket.

Please can you force a good level of Trees and Grass in the standalone.

In the Mod everyone plays with no trees and grass coverage to get a tactical advantage. I know of players playing with 2560x1600 with minimum coverage on a GTX Titan.

This is a joke. No player should be able to reduce graphics to gain tactical advantages.

Please force a high level of coverage to provide cover for players hiding and scouting.

For all the cry babies out there who will say their rig isnt powerful enough then they can choose to reduce the resolution to 1280x786 or something. This will be their trade off. They will lose resolution rather than cut down the coverage to gain FPS.

I have seen people go as far as deleting Trees and Grass from their system folder to gain tactical advantages to see tents and vehicles and players who are hiding from bandits.

Please do not let this happen.

[Inception. 9443]

Lowering resolution isn't always going to substitute for higher-quality grass/textures.

[ZomboWTF 527]

You are forgetting that not everyone has the latest PCs, grass can eat a LOT of performance, just like shadows

reducing the resolution for people with worse computers is a joke, not every performance issue can be countered by decreasing the resolution, as dayz is often CPU bottlenecked and sahdows or grass details/render distance have a big cpu usage, just like tree details

also the "deleting trees and grass" entirely is a hack, and not related to quality settings, so dont mix that up

Edited June 1, 2013 by Zombo

[irzero 56]

You are forgetting that not everyone has the latest PCs, grass can eat a LOT of performance, just like shadows

reducing the resolution for people with worse computers is a joke, not every performance issue can be countered by decreasing the resolution, as dayz is often CPU bottlenecked and sahdows or grass details/render distance have a big cpu usage, just like tree details

also the "deleting trees and grass" entirely is a hack, and not related to quality settings, so dont mix that up

Trees and Grass is NOT a CPU problem and neither are shadows.

Also DayZ has CPU issues in towns and not woods and fields.

Reducing the resolution IS a fix for poor FPS. In fact resolution is the single biggest GPU hog outside of MSAA/SSAA.

Also im not saying fix it to maximum but fix it to a medium/high level. Shadows people can live without or on low thats not the issue.

Also im sorry but if you have a old computer then save some money and buy a newer one. New CPU's are cheap from AMD and so are quite powerful GPU's. There needs to be a fixed setting as a minimum in this game since tactical advantages are important in a game with perm death.

[Inception. 9443]

It really isn't much of a tactical advantage. I play with grass/objects/terrain/textures down all of the time [due to my PC's poor performance] and it doesn't change much.

[irzero 56]

Lowering resolution isn't always going to substitute for higher-quality grass/textures.

Yes it is.

Try playing Crysis 3 on High at 1900x1200 and then play it on high at 1280x786. Check the FPS on both.

Also ARMA engine has low resolution texture settings with high levels are trees and grass. This can be done with minimum GPU since textures are going to be low resolution.

But the issue i see is people running 1900x1200 on High texture settings with near zero grass and trees.

[irzero 56]

It really isn't much of a tactical advantage. I play with grass/objects/terrain/textures down all of the time [due to my PC's poor performance] and it doesn't change much.

Of course it is.

Once i turned it down i could see people in ghillies in the trees and grass from miles away. On high i walked past a ghillie within a few feet and didnt even see him.

[Inception. 9443]

Of course it is.

Once i turned it down i could see people in ghillies in the trees and grass from miles away. On high i walked past a ghillie within a few feet and didnt even see him.

The grass part is somewhat acceptable but I don't see what you mean by the trees. When I have my textures down low, the leaves of the trees expand therefore sometimes covering a player who wouldn't normally be covered if I were to have my textures up. Thus, it is a disadvantage for myself. Unless of course you're referring to those deleting their trees by removing files; if so, ignore my former sentences.

EDIT: I talk about from a distance, of course.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Inception.

[irzero 56]

The grass part is somewhat acceptable but I don't see what you mean by the trees. When I have my textures down low, the leaves of the trees expand therefore sometimes covering a player who wouldn't normally be covered if I were to have my textures up. Thus, it is a disadvantage for myself. Unless of course you're referring to those deleting their trees by removing files.

Rocket should fix both at a level which provides cover and fair play. There is a setting on Trees which makes them so skinny they may as well not be there. Grass is the most important personally. This needs to be fixed because on low there is zero cover in woods. You can be hiding in grass on your screen which isnt there on theirs.

[Inception. 9443]

Rocket should fix both at a level which provides cover and fair play. There is a setting on Trees which makes them so skinny they may as well not be there. Grass is the most important personally. This needs to be fixed because on low there is zero cover in woods. You can be hiding in grass on your screen which isnt there on theirs.

Which is a problem, yeah. It also takes away from the immersion.

Although I do believe Rocket has stated that there will be some sort of *locked* graphical setting.

[leviski 2152]

My answer

Upgrade your dusty old rig

[bogroll 35]

My answer

Upgrade your dusty old rig

Agreed, but I always find it painful to suggest that to people as decent gear isn't cheap. Core i5, Z77 mobo and Nvidia gtx 660 say for a good gaming experience costs a lot of wonga. We've all been skint once or twice. Something to save up for though :)

[dgeesio 1034]

wont happen close thread.

people with low spec pcs need lower setting also it needs to run on consoles comfortably when it comes out on them when released.

[Feral (DayZ) 622]

it is currently possible to gain an insane advantage over others by tweaking the graphics settings, it is a no brainer that this is unacceptable, trees and grass need to be controlled server side so that everyone on each server is playing on a level playing field, even if this means different servers for people with differing qualities of PC hardware.

[OrLoK 16182]

My answer

Upgrade your dusty old rig

Fine. You pay for it, moneybags.

Reducing detail for a tactical advantage is an old technique and happens in many many games. The best way to solve it it to make the setting server side (like in some arma missions) and if a server is too "hires" for you one can play on a "lower res" server.

Simples.

L

[s4pphire 45]

I agree.

Grass/tree details have to be locked, it's absolutely ridiculous how you have to play on low settings if you want to be competitive. And to those saying it's my own choice to play on low settings; no, I don't, I would essentially forfeit a certain type of terrain to anyone with low settings.

Grass has to be visible beyond 50 meters, tree details should be equal from any distance/level of quality and view distance for players has be to be drastically increased. If this makes the game unplayable on your Pentium 4, then I'm sorry to say that perhaps it's time to upgrade it.

Fine. You pay for it, moneybags.

Reducing detail for a tactical advantage is an old technique and happens in many many games. The best way to solve it it to make the setting server side (like in some arma missions) and if a server is too "hires" for you one can play on a "lower res" server.

Simples.

L

That works for me.

Edited June 1, 2013 by s4pphire

[Cap'n (DayZ) 1827]

I've complained about people with very nice computers playing on very low settings before, and I can see why locking certain things might be unfair to people with low end PC's. But lets give an example; One time, me and a friend were heading into Stary Sobor to loot the supermarket for some much needed food. I had a mid end PC(GTX 650 Ti, i7 3770) and had everything either High or Very High. We where coming out of the tree line, when I hear my friend start shooting. He tells me he killed a guy, and it took me a while because he was very well hidden under the grass and shadows with the ghillie suit on. I was relieved to see my friend still alive, and I asked him how he spotted him. He told me like this; I terrain to the lowest settings. I looked at him funny. He had a pretty decent computer, good enough to play on Medium to High with grass and everything(He had a better CPU than GPU). I ask him why, and he says; it gives me a tactical advantage. I could see the logic behind this, but its kind of unfair for people with ghillie suits who think they're well hidden but someone with grass disabled(terrain on lowest disables grass, tbh) can EASILY spot someone from that range. So, I think terrain should be locked at low(grass is still kept at low settings).

[Cap'n (DayZ) 1827]

wont happen close thread.

people with low spec pcs need lower setting also it needs to run on consoles comfortably when it comes out on them when released.

The consoles GPU is equal to an HD 7770/7750. I don't think they'll be locked THAT low. Plus, they only need 30 FPS so higher settings can be achieved.

[Cap'n (DayZ) 1827]

Agreed, but I always find it painful to suggest that to people as decent gear isn't cheap. Core i5, Z77 mobo and Nvidia gtx 660 say for a good gaming experience costs a lot of wonga. We've all been skint once or twice. Something to save up for though :)

You can get a 7750 and a 6100 with some decent ram and mobo for under 600 easy. Unless your that poor, its achieveable.

[irzero 56]

Quite frankly why do people with crap PC's think they are entitled to play games?

If your PC cant handle it then thats called tough luck. Save up like the rest of us and buy decent hardware. If not then buy a console.

Whats not acceptable is when tactical advantages are given to people who cant be bothered to get a half decent PC.

Fix the settings on High and if you want more FPS then use a lower resolution.

[entspeak 374]

If the game allows people with crap systems to play, then that's the deal. It's not a matter of entitlement. If my computer couldn't play the game, I wouldn't. So, the issue is with the developer and not the gamer.

I also think certain things should be locked: view distance, terrain at low, gamma and brightness.

So long as a game gives a tactical advantage to turning things off, people will do it... it's lame, but that will only change if the developer changes it.

[Goggalor 191]

I guess there's something wrong with me, because I don't really care what people do with their graphics. If they want to play an uglier game to gain an advantage, go ahead. I'll never know how or why they killed me, so I'll happily respawn and stroll off back into the woods with every setting turned down, so I can play on my laptop, and never think about it again.

I must not be very competitive.

[xx_fr0st-w0lf_xx 53]

Server 1 > Low res, low grass low trees no shadows

server 2 > med res, medium everything shadow optional

server 3 > high res everything at high

It is locked for each server so no one has a advantage over anyone

[guisho 258]

I don't think they're going to allow deleting files and similar because Steam checks the integrity of all games before launching them, so it's pretty much impossible to run DayZ or any other game without all the files or at least the correct version of them.

[hawc 63]

Quite frankly why do people with crap PC's think they are entitled to play games?

If your PC cant handle it then thats called tough luck. Save up like the rest of us and buy decent hardware. If not then buy a console.

Whats not acceptable is when tactical advantages are given to people who cant be bothered to get a half decent PC.

Fix the settings on High and if you want more FPS then use a lower resolution.

Exactly, I'm really sorry that some people can't afford high tech stuff(even I have a 5+ y old pc, will probably have to upgrade) but a line has to be drawn somewhere. In the past I sometimes couldn't play some games and just had to wait to get a better hw, I didn't get jealous and accuse people of being rich assholes...

What is the point in improving graphics if people will use the lowest setting? It's like the win xp people complaining new games should support it.