View problems with increased resolution - Page 4 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-07-2019, 05:13 PM   #31
bell_rj
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 240
Default

zhukov032186 has no issue with spotting. You shouldn't either. Notice his ironic signature! How droll.
__________________
PC specs:
Spoiler:
Rig specs: i7700k @4.45Ghz. 32GB RAM. MSI GTX 1070ti. 27" 1440p G-Sync monitor. Samsung M2 drive.
bell_rj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2019, 05:17 PM   #32
Tippis
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 670
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zhukov032186 View Post
As for hardware balancing, show me one example where somebody did that in ANY game?
They do it in the game that must not be mentioned (for visibility). They do it in a couple of space games (for controls).

It's all a matter of being determined enough to set a baseline for how things should look and behave under all circumstances and then employing whatever means and methods necessary to make every piece of kit perform as closely as possible to that baseline.

Just because you think it's ridiculous does not mean that it's not being done all over the place. It just means you have very narrow frames of reference and a preconceived notion of what it actually entails (hint: it has nothing to do with nerfing anything). The only ridiculous about any of this is how readily wilful ignorance is used as an argument to desperately cling to whatever crutch people are reliant on — it keeps appearing in any number of topics with no argument to support why this imbalance must at all cost be preserved…

Last edited by Tippis; 10-07-2019 at 05:20 PM.
Tippis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2019, 05:26 PM   #33
ac5
Member
 
ac5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 995
Default

VERY well said again Tippis.
I wonder what bell rj finds so droll.
ac5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2019, 06:01 PM   #34
zhukov032186
Senior Member
 
zhukov032186's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Posts: 2,549
Default

Model enlargement in your mentioned game (assuming that's what you're referring to) has nothing to do with ''hardware balancing'', it applies it to everyone as a generic aide to visibility. It is not polling your hardware, unless I'm grossly mistaken.

Oh? What kind of ''control balancing'' is being done in this space games and how well do they work? Enforced virtual joysticks for mouse users maybe? Yeah, a clunky ham fisted solution that just transfers the precision handicap from stick users to the mouse user. It still isn't balanced.

Which is kind of the point. There is little to nothing that can legitimately be done about people's hardware just so sore losers online won't say gems like:

''I lost because mouse is OP''
''I lost because 1080p is OP''
''blah blah some other lame excuse''
__________________
Zhukov attacks *FORUM USER* with Legendary Trollsword!
*FORUM USER* Constitution save roll.... Fail!
*FORUM USER* afflicted with ''Hurt Feelz'', -1 Concentration for two rounds
zhukov032186 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2019, 06:34 PM   #35
Tippis
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 670
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zhukov032186 View Post
Model enlargement in your mentioned game (assuming that's what you're referring to) has nothing to do with ''hardware balancing'', it applies it to everyone as a generic aide to visibility. It is not polling your hardware, unless I'm grossly mistaken.
Hardware balancing is inherent in the method. The whole purpose is to maintain a consistency in how large something appears on-screen, and to replicate visual cues in ways that that work across all kinds of display hardware. In the end, that's really all that's needed for visibility.

Quote:
What kind of ''control balancing'' is being done in this space games and how well do they work?
They work exceedingly well to the point where there is no “best input device” — only personal preference. Each input method (joysticks, mice, hand controllers, keyboards… probably yokes and the likes as well, although they're just joysticks with weird hinges ) has its own control scheme tuned to the same baseline of input control, and then further options are available to tweak the exact response curves to your liking.

Quote:
Which is kind of the point. There is little to nothing that can legitimately be done about people's hardware…
…except establishing a definitive, clear baseline and normalising all hardware to work as close to that baseline as possible. It's legitimate, and it can be done, and sore losers will spout the same gems regardless — in particular those who no longer can rely on their preferred crutch now that some other option becomes just as viable (or, as they would claim, OP).
Tippis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2019, 08:08 PM   #36
zhukov032186
Senior Member
 
zhukov032186's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Posts: 2,549
Default

Ummm... applying a 1.5x multiplier to an object at given range has nothing to do with hardware balancing. It does it whether you're at 4k on 65'' screen or 720p on a 17'' screen. It has literally nothing to do with hardware ''balance'' whatsoever. It IS an attempt to compensate for the fact the average monitor, particularly 10-15 years ago when it was about half the size they are now, which when combined with an ingame FoV etc etc made objects appear ''smaller than they are''. As screen size increases, this becomes less relevant in the first place as the FoV is coming closer to something ''reasonably appropriate''.

Otherwise, I stand by everything I said.
__________________
Zhukov attacks *FORUM USER* with Legendary Trollsword!
*FORUM USER* Constitution save roll.... Fail!
*FORUM USER* afflicted with ''Hurt Feelz'', -1 Concentration for two rounds

Last edited by zhukov032186; 10-07-2019 at 08:11 PM.
zhukov032186 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2019, 06:25 AM   #37
Tippis
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 670
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zhukov032186 View Post
Ummm... applying a 1.5x multiplier to an object at given range has nothing to do with hardware balancing.
But that's not what I'm talking about — I'm referring to the actual outcome, which has the inherent effect of normalising sizes across various FoVs. It was made to compensate for monitors that were in fact higher resolution (in terms of pixel density) than today's average, exactly because of the issues in the OP. The intent of the core methodology was not to fix an issue where objects would look smaller than they are due to resolution — it was to fix the problem that, when they're the correct size, they are smaller than they appear. It compensates for a cognitive process.

Unfortunately, while it would be easy to illustrate the effects this has, we can't really discuss the details (another reason why that rule is… problematic), but suffice to say that, at the end of the day, the way this particular methodology interacts with FoV, it yields a partial hardware normalisation almost by accident.

Not that the details really matter — it still comes down to the simple fact that it can be done; that it is being done; and indeed that it should be done, because again who in their right mind want an unbalanced P2W game (or, in this case, anti-P2W)? It's both feasible and desirable to solve this problem.
Tippis is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bugs, gfx, graphics, problems, visibility

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:36 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.