Steam installieren
Anmelden
|
Sprache
简体中文 (Vereinfachtes Chinesisch)
繁體中文 (Traditionelles Chinesisch)
日本語 (Japanisch)
한국어 (Koreanisch)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarisch)
Čeština (Tschechisch)
Dansk (Dänisch)
English (Englisch)
Español – España (Spanisch – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (Lateinamerikanisches Spanisch)
Ελληνικά (Griechisch)
Français (Französisch)
Italiano (Italienisch)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Ungarisch)
Nederlands (Niederländisch)
Norsk (Norwegisch)
Polski (Polnisch)
Português – Portugal (Portugiesisch – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (Portugiesisch – Brasilien)
Română (Rumänisch)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Finnisch)
Svenska (Schwedisch)
Türkçe (Türkisch)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisch)
Українська (Ukrainisch)
Ein Übersetzungsproblem melden
Diskussionsregeln
Diesen Beitrag melden
First off, the cheaper GPUs are still pretty expensive that a kid without allowance or any type of income will not be able to buy. So like I said before the game is free for a reason, to allow for a bigger fan base. If a person is able to buy $60 games like the new CoDs and BFs, and are able to afford decent setup....doubt they would play this very often if you get what I mean.
Second, I am talking from experience here too. Before I bought my new GPU and am using it now, I did play on lower settings because it all I was able to do. I had an intel hd integrated gpu. While yes I had some sort of "advantage", keep in mind, because of the intel hd, my game constantly stuttered, and would whip around and then sometimes just seem to die for no reason, but it was because my "picture" was behind. perfect PL% and ping, but my FPS was 30 MAX, and kept stuttering down 20-29ish. So while yes I had an "advantage" it came with a price of its own. I am somewhat against people who have nice gpus using lower settings for that said advantage. But oddly enough, I am actually doing WAY better with higher graphic settings.
So that advantage for people who dont have a "dedicated gaming pc" and use this has off time, or dont want to put money into games, but rather other things. There is reason its free after all. But their "advantage" does come with the price of stuttering and crappy graphics. If you have money for a better gpu, more likely you also have money to buy better games as well...if you get me.
Anyway, good luck to all, and have a nice day/night/evening ;)
It is a common occurrence in any multiplayers game,just because someone have a beefy computer doesn't means others do and some have beefy computers doesn't mean they can do it without overheated their laptops.
Yes,you can have a very good advantages with min setting like any other competitive games but it doesn't worth banning entire low specs players,it just as demanding as eSport.
And probably running at 30ish fps or below, unless they intentionally use it to gain a small advantage on a rig capable or 60fps or higher at max settings.
... no just no being able to see through cover over 300m is the worst kind of crutch imaginable its broken and if it wasn't via an ingame setting it would be considered cheating in any game where cover doesnt stop shots and even then its a poor mans wall hack
If they just replaced things with 2d sprites so you couldn't just see through bushes and some walls/fences after a few hundred yards i wouldn't give a rats arse
But in a game where visual cover is often the only cover on some maps making it only show up to some people is about as poor a design decision as i have ever seen in a multi player game
-What does that mean for anyone who can't play the game that they were marketed for years? WT is coming up on 8 years. People have invested time and money into it. You take away the ability to play and what happens? Refund requests, lawsuit threats, etc/ the list could go on.
-What about support for different graphics cards and systems? Take that away and you've lost part of your customer base, not to mention all the possible negative press.
Why would any developer do that?
Rather then being soley critical why not just own up to the fact that the current implementation is incredibly unfair and needs some work?
No deleting it isnt a reasonable option but leaving it as is is just as unreasonable
There is ZERO excuse for the current state of affairs when hundreds of other games have proven 2d auto rotated sprites are doable and have next to no no performance impact unless your rig cant even run doom from the 90s in which case maybe upgrade from a graphing calculator
Excuse me how exactly is it unfair if you could simply play on low settings too if it is such a gigantic advantage. Many people do opt in to play on low settings to get the absolute best performance to stay competitive in certain games. I would only call it an unfair advantage if you did not have access to it. Imagine people would complain now that high settings was unfair because some people can't afford it. This whole argument is pointless.