Performance or Graphics?

[Hazar]

Which do you prefer? Do you like the game to run as well as possible with high framerates or like it to run looking its best, sacrificing some performance?

this is assuming you have to make a trade-off between the two like you would have to with most new games.

 

[ktimekiller]

as long as its around 30 fps, im satisfied

 

[Ennui]

Performance. Graphics have never been a big deal. I like to ooh and ahh as much as the next person; so I'll run a game at max at first to see what it's like, but after that I have no problem sacrificing graphics for performance.

I'm quite the fan of both in tandem, actually, which is half the reason I love Source.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

touche'

 

[Xendance]

Performance. On my other PC, that was critical.

 

[Bulletbrain]

Performance. But they shouldn't be mutually exclusive. Take Max Payne 2 for example. Looks great, runs great.

 

[Hazar]

for me its actually graphics. I want them to look as good as possible, and if that means low framerates (even down in the teens, as long as its steady) is fine with me.

 

[Cole]

graphics, but if the game doesn't feel smooth i'm gonna lighten up on graphics. However if the graphics don't come off as nice I probably wont play the game. Note, "nice" doesn't mean quality. Starcraft and Diablo 2 have nice graphics. Wc3 has nice graphics. Doom 3 with everything turned off does not have nice graphics.

 

[AmishSlayer]

I drop my graphics down until I get good load times and great framerates.

I keep my gfx on highest for the first bit of each game just to see what it does look like, and when that wears off I drop it down and get into the gameplay.

 

[Uriel]

Both, can't stand lag or choppyness, but I do enjoy beautiful graphics.

 

[The Brick]

Performance gets the major priority in multiplayer for me. But in singleplayer games such as STALKER, the atmosphere makes half the game. So then I go for graphics as long as it's playable and the sound doesn't skip.

 

[Asuka]

Voted for Graphical Quality but as long as its playable.

 

[Gunner]

Both, no compromise!

That's why God invented medium settings.

 

[Cole]

or why Science invented really really fast computers.

 

[Tyguy]

I also like great audio....any fps is bad unless the weapon sounds feel immersing. AM I ->?

 

[Gunner]

or why Science invented really really fast computers.

No GOD. Science is Satan's handywork.

 

[Cole]

I absolutely hate when weapons sound like shit. Ruins the game for me!

 

[The Brick]

I also like great audio....any fps is bad unless the weapon sounds feel immersing. AM I ->?

Yep also loved STALKER for that one.

 

[Cole]

No GOD. Science is Satan's handywork.

No Science invented really really fast computers.
God invented the high price tag!
Satan ate a bunch of chicken wings at KFC!

 

[Hazar]

I'm actually more focused on SP with this.... I can see reducing graphics setting to get more performance in MP where it can make quite a bit of difference.

 

[lePobz]

I'm right in the middle, which is why I love forza motorsport 2 so much. It's sexy when it needs to be, fast when it needs to be, and sometimes its right in the middle. Sexytime!

 

[Jimmeh]

Yeah usually in multiplayer games I just want it running as smooth as I can. For singleplayer though I tend just bump up as many settings as I can until things start getting unplayable.

 

[Asknoone]

So long as I can play it without too much fuss, graphical quality. I've never really understood why since I'd never call myself a "graphics whore."

 

[Gunner]

I'm actually more focused on SP with this.... I can see reducing graphics setting to get more performance in MP where it can make quite a bit of difference.

Problem is, as mp maps get larger and larger... I mean, personally I used to be fine without AA two years ago but nowadays I find myself squinting at targets in the distance with AA on. Model setting has to be high too otherwise I also find myself missing headshots.

No Science invented really really fast computers.
God invented the high price tag!
Satan ate a bunch of chicken wings at KFC!

lol!

 

[Qonfused]

I'm a graphics whore. So yeah.

 

[Asus]

Performance gets the major priority in multiplayer for me. But in singleplayer games such as STALKER, the atmosphere makes half the game. So then I go for graphics as long as it's playable and the sound doesn't skip.

Pretty much the same here. Pump up the quality, AA and AF settings. Although I might not have as high of a priority for performance in MP. I won't turn down the settings as long as it's 60+ steady. After all, I won't be able to see any more than that from my LCD.

 

[Tagaziel]

Performance, always.

 

[bam23]

I set my graphics to low at first, then slowly ramp it up till I find a good mix between the two.

Can't stand a game without anti aliasing though.

 

[Hazar]

to all you performance whores: what kind of fps do you consider your minimum?

 

[Jimmeh]

I think minimum fps does vary a lot though depending on a genre. For a fast-paced twitch shooter you'd probably want things silky smooth at all times, whereas in an RTS or something slower-paced you might not be too fussed if the frames drop down into the 20's and 30's (or even lower).

 

[leib10]

Since my computer sucks, I have to go with performance since it can't handle much eye-candy.

 

[boglito]

Performance needs to meet a minimum standard (drops down to 20fps is ok for me in any game, but never lower) and after that it is eyecandy all the way. I don't care if I could potentially increase my kpd by 0,1 by turning all options to "fugly".

.bog.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

both, but of course level it to performace a bit more if I didn't have a choice.

 

[Loke]

Performance by faaaaar.

 

[Acepilotf14]

How about, since my computer can play most games to the max with great frame rates, graphical quality... but, technically, I can have both. -wink

 

[Bad^Hat]

Performance! Always performance. As long as I'm not running it at 800x600 or below at lowest possible settings, I'll always sacrifice graphics so I can get it running smoothly.

 

[Hazar]

what's "running smoothly" for you guys?

 

[Cole]

Smooth is so when the eye see's it, and it doesn't look jerky. It flows and feels seamless.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Performance is always more important, what the hell is the point in great visuals in a video game if you can't actually play as intended.

 

[Hazar]

isn't it intended to look its best?