Bink vids Question (the 2 new ones)

[Subz]

i finally saw strider and coastline big version of bink.

why does valve insist on recoarding @ 1024 and lowest gfx settings/option?

i mean it had amazing atmosphere and effects, but the jaggies and blurry textures hurt mah eyes.

Cmon valve make with the high-res stuff it can't possibly hurt you.

i should e-mail this to gabe

 

[Mr-Fusion]

Wait a couple more days dude. FSAA *should* be switched on for all the new vids we'll get.

 

[Tadashi]

Maybe valve don't want, that the D3 fanboy do suicide^^;;

 

[Naveed]

May be because with FSAA turned on they cannot get decent frame rates.

 

[SMT]

Bink compression doesn't help matters either, y'know.

 

[DimitriPopov]

Why do people have such a hardon for FFSAALJF whatever. You cant even watch a video without ignoring the TINY jagged lines? Sure I turn it on , but Im not addicted to it like its crack or something.

 

[Naveed]

Why do people have such a hardon for FFSAALJF whatever. You cant even watch a video without ignoring the TINY jagged lines? Sure I turn it on , but Im not addicted to it like its crack or something.

Because people don't find them impressive anymore as they used to look last year, because standards of visual quality are increased in one year. So people should remember that these are videos from last year and they should wait for new videos

 

[Subz]

Maybe valve don't want, that the D3 fanboy do suicide^^;;

too true lool.

 

[Subz]

Why do people have such a hardon for FFSAALJF whatever. You cant even watch a video without ignoring the TINY jagged lines? Sure I turn it on , but Im not addicted to it like its crack or something.

dude. 1024. nuff said. Who plays games at that uber low res anymore?

sorry but ffsaaljf whatever you meant by that isn't the biggest peice to the puzzle.
the resolution is. atleast up the rez valve.

 

[DimitriPopov]

I just watched strider again , and it looks fine to me. You have to really look to notice the jagged lines.

 

[Subz]

i see jaggies and its very blurry textures.

U can tell its very low settings. I guess im jaded?

 

[Shuzer]

No FSAA/AF != low settings

 

[nerdcorerocks]

.

i think i'd like to correct you. those are not the "lowest" graphics quality settings. those were the basically theh best at the time. you're just referring to AA and AF, which are enhancement settings in my opinion. personally, I think the videos look fine at that resolution and without AA or AF. and if you're worried about aa, don't worry. i've played a little "something" that let me know that hl2 works fine with it on without a huge performance hit. so if you really care that much, just close your eyes and pretend that there are smoothed out jaggies. I also don't know why everyone is complaining about the current graphics of hl2. its at least on par with anything thats out today. i don't see a problem with it. hl2 doesn't need the best graphics to be the best game ever. hell, it shouldn't have the "best" graphic ever. it has to be diverse and let people with pos computers run it too. counterstrike is so huge because even crap of the crap computer can run it decently. so they definately had to take that into account.

 

[SMT]

dude. 1024. nuff said. Who plays games at that uber low res anymore?

sorry but ffsaaljf whatever you meant by that isn't the biggest peice to the puzzle.
the resolution is. atleast up the rez valve.

Believe it or not, some people still have monitors that won't display resolutions over 1024x768, or won't display them properly, or won't display them at the default Bink refresh rate. What good would it do for them to spend all that time downloading a video, only to be disappointed or angered because it's set to play at 1600x1200? Valve is making a move for compatibility here and making sure everyone can see the videos, because not everyone feels like going and downloading Bink Tools to resize (and, indeed, not everyone should have to).

Incidentally, have you looked at the Half-Life 2 survey on www.steampowered.com? Out of almost 1 million unique users surveyed, 29 percent use 1024x768 and 20 percent use 800x600. Compare that to the 5 percent who use 1280x1024 and the paltry 1 percent who use 1600x1200 and you'll immediately understand why the videos are published in 1024x768.

 

[Shuzer]

i think i'd like to correct you. those are not the "lowest" graphics quality settings. those were the basically theh best at the time. you're just referring to AA and AF, which are enhancement settings in my opinion. personally, I think the videos look fine at that resolution and without AA or AF. and if you're worried about aa, don't worry. i've played a little "something" that let me know that hl2 works fine with it on without a huge performance hit. so if you really care that much, just close your eyes and pretend that there are smoothed out jaggies. I also don't know why everyone is complaining about the current graphics of hl2. its at least on par with anything thats out today. i don't see a problem with it. hl2 doesn't need the best graphics to be the best game ever. hell, it shouldn't have the "best" graphic ever. it has to be diverse and let people with pos computers run it too. counterstrike is so huge because even crap of the crap computer can run it decently. so they definately had to take that into account.

aka :

No FSAA/AF != low settings

 

[Sorze]

heh... This isn't completely unexpected, being a geeky gaming forum, but still...
Thinking graphics suck because they're not using AA or whatever is stupid.

And about 1024x768 being uberlow resolution:

Congratulations! You're an elitist!

 

[DimitriPopov]

And about 1024x768 being uberlow resolution:

Congratulations! You're an elitist!

Thank god , that was my thought too but I didnt mention it. Who the hell really plays games at higher res than that? At that point youre probably taking a performance hit for not much visual gain , other than things being smaller.

 

[Subz]

it doesn't look good at such res. just my opinion

 

[moppe]

Thank god , that was my thought too but I didnt mention it. Who the hell really plays games at higher res than that? At that point youre probably taking a performance hit for not much visual gain , other than things being smaller.

Actully, I'm doing it.

 

[shadow stalker]

i personlly think 1024x768 is just fine. (although my PC isnt up to much, and can't take much higher res then that). I can't really see any differnece between 1024x768 and 1600x1200, to me the only difference it makes, is it makes the HUD really small looking...

 

[qckbeam]

I thought the videos were beautiful atmosphere wise. Very detailed, very fun to watch. However I'm something of an AA whore, so having that on would have been nice. Still, for a video I've seen 10,000 times now, it's impressive stuff

 

[tehsolace]

Be thankful valve even handed those bink videos out to the public...they could of just left you with the camera video from E3. Considering how much information is being handed out about the game, I'd say valve is being very generous already..."don't push your luck" as they say.

 

[Sorze]

Moppe, you play at a higher res than 1600*1200 ? Dear god, watch your eyes man!

I have a gig RAM, GeForce 4 ti 4600, 2.4Ghz, 250Gig HD, and I feel pretty good about that. It played Farcry at medium settings (high on some water etc) with good fps. Overall, I'd say that's a pretty good PC, but I'm quite sure some (lots ?) of people here wouldn't agree..

I know it's not DirectX 9, but it's a workhorse! (Highest settings on UT2k4!, but still, 1024*768)


I never play at higher resolutions than 1024*768, quite enough for me, and I'm sure, for alot of others too.






In closing, I have no idea what the point of this post is, but that's besides the point. Or is it...?

 

[nerdcorerocks]

Thank god , that was my thought too but I didnt mention it. Who the hell really plays games at higher res than that? At that point youre probably taking a performance hit for not much visual gain , other than things being smaller.

i wouldn't really go that far. i like to play at 1280X1024 since i have a 19 incher. it actually does make a fair difference with respect to "jaggies"