Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TZoningHard

New FPS guide

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, TZoningHard said:

he gets 200 frames lowest on WZ

 

Yep... but still game look like sh... :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it. Personally i think the brightness settings (mainly those) do give him an unfair advantage. Areas where i would have to turn on my Flashlight to be able to see, he can just shoot right away. One of the rounds showed was actually Warsaw Night Time and it looked bright as day, how is this not an advantage. 


Anyway, the video is nicely made and it does work as promised, so i'll say thank you anyway and that was a good job. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have my settings though the normal menu and I have my brightness up to were I can see well. I understand trying to keep everyone one the same page so people dont have to lower the look of the game to not be at a disadvantage.

Looks dont really matter that much to me outside style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/31/2018 at 6:57 AM, TZoningHard said:

any advatage is a advatage people will take.

Well, the Dev already said, that in the future this won't be allowed. This guy is injecting code into the game, to make things appear more vividly and easier to spot. 200FPS is a damn joke...

 

Secondly, Obviously this guy might as well not even compete if he needs so many hacks/handicaps.

At a Lan Party, he'd be tossed out for being a needy egotart. Everyone knows, if that needy "hacker" showed up for a Tourney (that had pre-configured rigs), he wouldn't get one kill....  because he's been playing in arcade kiddie mode. Glad the Developer's are all over this.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its .ini ...

not even close to hacking or injecting code.

 

People are fine with gray scale setting in game that will look worse then this which devs said they might put into game for performance.

Mainly they said the issue is that not every one can modify the ini which I disagree with that not every one is able to configure it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issue is, that he can see somebody in an area that was deliberately designed dark, whereas other people can not see as good as him there. There is plenty examples like the corners of b2 in Warsaw small the spawn rooms in Moscow around b2 or the shopping center delta.

 

But mainly noticeable is that he bypassed the night mode from tdm by having everything bright as day. So while everybody struggles, one person can run around like God. Definitely this is not how it was meant to be. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

? This config is wrong. Some parameters can`t be = 0

U even didn't turn off shadows  (cos did mistake with values)

Your config.

20190102201855_1.thumb.jpg.1d388b821cf921206068741ef714b663.jpg

My config.

20190102201640_1.thumb.jpg.e43d5c760ec37f8f6b2b34a4c70df1ec.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@maddinii I hope devs will release ultra low settings officially. Which can helps people to play on 2 VRAM. And than they will block editable .ini cos a modification for performance would be meaningless, only for "cheating"

Edited by ೞoℓf✌
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2GB VRAM? Jesus... it's pure masochism to play game on UE4 on such rig. I'm not fun for creating ULQ settings.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2019 at 7:34 PM, TZoningHard said:

its .ini ...

not even close to hacking or injecting code.

 

People are fine with gray scale setting in game that will look worse then this which devs said they might put into game for performance.

Mainly they said the issue is that not every one can modify the ini which I disagree with that not every one is able to configure it.

 

 

Doesn't matter what you think….  You've already read what the Dev said about it and that such things (in the future) will not be allowed. Period!

 

And yes, writing in new code into the .ini file (notice I didn't say change code)….  is cheating. The sad thing here, is that you constantly try to belittle people who want fair gameplay. I've been gaming for 30 years & obviously know what an .ini file is and does... because that is how you got games to work since the DOS days.

What you don't understand, that it is not acceptable to change those files for advantages in gameplay. The slider in-game for "camera shake" only goes down to 40, while he hacked the game so that his slider would go all the way down to ZERO. <--- Cheat! 

 

Subsequently, It is not savvy to hack the ini...  it is done because such people are snowflakes and can not deal with reality (of their own gameplay) and need to change their in-game experience to be competitive. (ie: egotart)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2019 at 12:54 AM, trig0tron said:

200FPS is a damn joke...

Anything below 144fps in a fps game is a damn joke imo. So keeping a game at 200+ fps to ensure that it never drops below 144 is optimal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tweak said:

Anything below 144fps in a fps game is a damn joke imo. So keeping a game at 200+ fps to ensure that it never drops below 144 is optimal.

Game is still in development.

144fps is great for Tourneys but the difference between 144 and 200 are essential nil in actual performance. I have several Quake/CS:GO systems all high-end and ultra-high FPS (180fps+) & they are just a bragging rite, it doesn't make your online gameplay any better. It is 10x more noticeable going from 60fps/Hz to 120fps/Hz, than it is from going to 120FPS/Hz to 144fps/Hz… and from 144 to 166 doesn't do much of anything in actual reality.

 

Your ploy of 200FPS or nothing, is because you are defending the .ini hack. (Why not just get a better vid card if ultra FPS matters so much to your gameplay..?) 

Edited by trig0tron
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, trig0tron said:

Game is still in development.

144fps is great for Tourneys but the difference between 144 and 200 are essential nil in actual performance. I have several Quake/CS:GO systems all high-end and ultra-high FPS (180fps+) & they are just a bragging rite, it doesn't make your online gameplay any better.

I mean, keeping it at 200+ at all times to ensure it NEVER drops below 144 fps is most hardcore fps players goal when it comes to performance. I run CS:GO at 300+ fps, not for bragging rights, but to ensure it never drops below 144, ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Tweak said:

I mean, keeping it at 200+ at all times to ensure it NEVER drops below 144 fps is most hardcore fps players goal when it comes to performance. I run CS:GO at 300+ fps, not for bragging rights, but to ensure it never drops below 144, ever.

No, it is in your head and you are doing it for 200FPS frapping.

You are doing it to remove obstacles from the game, period. Not because you need 200 FPS.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, trig0tron said:

No, it is in your head and you are doing it for 200FPS frapping.

You are doing it to remove obstacles from the game, period. Not because you need 200 FPS.

 

 

You still dont get the point, and your answers make no sense. Remove obstacles ? Is lag an obstacle ? Not once did I mention the .ini "hack" or defend it. So stop talking shit please. And without knowing my rig you assume I have a bad GPU and ask me why I dont upgrade it ? I have a 1080 and its not the issue. Everyone who has been playing WW3 for a while knows that its far from optimized and some potato setups run better than some high end setups.

Now I will try one last time to explain why I "need" my fps at 144+. Your twisting my words and just talking bs, never did I say I see the difference between 140 and 160 fps, or 144 and 200. Go ask some pro gamers instead why they play on 200hz monitors etc, tell them to go back to 100hz because the improvement after that is minimal.

My monitor: 144hz

When you play a game, even if you have 200 fps, it can drop below 144fps. When it drops below 144fps, you are at a disadvantage, assuming you play against other competitive players, which all run 144hz+ monitors. In games like CS:GO, if you play at a high level(which you obv dont), one fps drop/stutter can ruin a whole match if it happens at the "right" time in the right round. By locking it at 300fps in CS:GO I can make sure it never drops below 144. If I would lock it at 200fps it would sometimes drop below 144 which would be an issue.

In WW3 I could probably 100-0 you with 40fps even if your on 200+ by just playing right. But if this game blows up and gets competitive and full of teams and good players, I wouldnt compete without having stable 144+ fps because I would be at a constant disadvantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tweak said:

You still dont get the point, and your answers make no sense. Remove obstacles ? Is lag an obstacle ? Not once did I mention the .ini "hack" or defend it. So stop talking shit please. And without knowing my rig you assume I have a bad GPU and ask me why I dont upgrade it ? I have a 1080 and its not the issue. Everyone who has been playing WW3 for a while knows that its far from optimized and some potato setups run better than some high end setups.

Now I will try one last time to explain why I "need" my fps at 144+. Your twisting my words and just talking bs, never did I say I see the difference between 140 and 160 fps, or 144 and 200. Go ask some pro gamers instead why they play on 200hz monitors etc, tell them to go back to 100hz because the improvement after that is minimal.

My monitor: 144hz

When you play a game, even if you have 200 fps, it can drop below 144fps. When it drops below 144fps, you are at a disadvantage, assuming you play against other competitive players, which all run 144hz+ monitors. In games like CS:GO, if you play at a high level(which you obv dont), one fps drop/stutter can ruin a whole match if it happens at the "right" time in the right round. By locking it at 300fps in CS:GO I can make sure it never drops below 144. If I would lock it at 200fps it would sometimes drop below 144 which would be an issue.

In WW3 I could probably 100-0 you with 40fps even if your on 200+ by just playing right. But if this game blows up and gets competitive and full of teams and good players, I wouldnt compete without having stable 144+ fps because I would be at a constant disadvantage.

You are the one making ignorant remarks.

AT A TOUNREY...… your comments make sense, but not over the internet... where your reaction time at 200Hz, means nothing. Plz stop with the 200FPZ stuff, it is laughable. I agree with your premise, that dips in FPS are horrible, but that is dips below 100hz, or down to 60hz. Not from 200FPS, down to 120FPS for a microsecond, over the internet.

You are frapping urself over the total FPS number, and not frame times and monitor speed and reaction time and internet latencies. 

 

I 100% agree that STABLE frames are important for top professional gameplay, and/or top game enthusiasts (which I am). But over the internet (not lan) it doesn't matter as criticle as you deem. Secondly, you are removing in-game obstacles for an advantage...  that is your main point in WW3.

Because why would gamma give better FPS..? It is for YOUR in-game advantage. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I struggle to follow this topic right now. I do understand, that 60 FPS is better then 30 FPS, as you can see the difference in game and your movement and gameplay seems overall more fluid. I can not however see the difference in 60 and 100 FPS. Besides that having 30, 60 or 100 FPS does not change the accuracy of me and my weapon, so how is 200 FPS going to change how good you are? 200 FPS is way more, then you eye can actually see. 

 

As for the other part: Not sure what is meant with obstacles? Do you mean the light as an obstacle? With that i fully agree, but besides that i don't know what this means, as i can't see any removed obstacles. 

 


What i can understand is the FPS drops. Like when the FPS drops very quickly you would encounter game stuttering, yes i have seen this before. As for me there is quite an easy solution just by pressing a few buttons. I turn off Vertical Refresh in game and activate that one from AMD Radeon Software, because it's a lot quicker and then i'd go and activate Radeon Chill which keeps my Framerate between x and y. The refresh would make sure that in heavy scenarios (like an airstrike hits next to you and in a second you have all those particles) the software wait's a second before showing the Frame. At least this works perfectly fine for me. 

 

 

As for the actual topic i think we all (and yes that includes me, i do apologize) are being to harsh. Keeping it by fair criticism is fine, but at this point it's going to far. Topic was meant as a helpfully adviser for all people out there, including those involved in the topic and i believe we are doing unfair with this kind of discussion. Why would you want to hate against somebody who literally posted something with the intent of helping others? Seems wrong to me. 

PS: No, this statement does not chance my opinion on the guide as such, it's still the same as above. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

120 is better then 60, changing ini is sometime the only way to get constant 120/144 which people really want and not

The eye sees a clear difference between 120 and 144. 200+hz monitors are not quite on market the enthusiast market but I can clearly see the frames still with 120hz maxed frames in games. The eye does not see in hz nor frames.

more frames do give a huge advantage with aiming and reaction time. when you have a 60hz monitor you have to wait for the frame to refresh and update with what has happen on screen. If you are looking at a corner waiting for a person to come around you are also waiting for the screen to refresh to see that player. from 60-120 that time is cut into half.

 

For the longest time people were saying that there was no see able difference between 80 and 120 but that was debunked and is common knowledge that higher frames are noticeable and will make you be able to play better.

Similar to 2k is not noticeable difference then 2k situation which was wrong as it is very noticeable but not as important to frames.

I haven't seen anything higher then 144 but there is very noticeable difference and personal performance in gaming. Every review for 240 is saying its noticeable, 144 is still the standard right now but 240 is standard for pro esports.

 

60 FPS looks slow and sluggish to me now after I got a 144hz to the point I see every one teleporting around between the frames. Even 144 isn't perfect and I can slightly see some individual frames

 

I turn my light low settings  and bright-ness high though in game settings so I can actually see but the obstacles being potato mode arent helping any one do better by seeing around them or past them.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...