Granted that should have had a paragraphs separation, ULQ is so low if you showed me a WT mobile screenshot and a ULQ screenshot I could not tell the difference. Continued support of legacy hardware does add the need to test on the lowest possible setting along with other settings, more so in this case since ULQ does disable some of the rendering features, such as the small bit of terrain above the actual terrain for track deformation and improved shadows that often may look like there are no shadows, along with more aggressive culling of objects that does have an effect on gameplay.
And yet again I do apologize about mentioning peoples buying power, especially with how the global economy is rn, but is an aspect of having very low minimum requirements, sadly the gap between countries wealth exists and gaming being a global thing, ditching older hardware support will affect certain regions more than others. I hope the AI bubble pops so that components become cheaper and people can experience more up to date hardware, it and the crypto bubble did drastically increase prices of PCs and their parts even in the used market.
Never said that, i’m happy with whatever comes to limit a long standing exploit but what would capping fps achieve other than turning the game in to a horrible slide show why would people spend money on pc systems which are designed to be scalable or the game if that happens and the game is doomed to run like a console you may as well just buy a console and retire the PC version. People are responsible financially for their own pc systems if you don’t want to improve them that’s on you.
Idk what to tell you man. Why would i lie about my settings? The ss is from Alaska map. You can try to see how it looks on your end with both low and high tree range. My uneducated guess would be that maps have different foliage quality and that map is especially bad (not that foliage is particularly good on any map)
Given the E-waste disaster which is happening with the windows 11 roll out and the forcible ditching of unsupported hardware there, the second hand part sales are probably about to boom grabbing cheap used pc parts to replace older ones is going to be even easier. some of the stuff i’m being forced to toss at work because of it would make someone a nice little second hand machine with very little effort outside of replacing cpu’s and motherboards - look around on ebay folks
And yet this doesn’t affect their profit more than just straight up deleting part of the playerbase. It also wouldn’t add an insane amount to their workload, considering the tons of graphical settings that already exist. Player Retention is also vital for a game like War Thunder, its an old game with a bad reputation.
I also know there can be small advantages when using ULQ, but that comes down to Gaijin poorly modelling it. I see no reason why Grass (for example) has to be taller or thicker on higher qualities when you can always just force render low quality grass in the players sight.
If you looked at WT from 2012 and now you would see vastly different games, just because they haven’t stopped updating and released the same game but with a dagor engine update, doesn’t mean that graphics have improved drastically, even more so with a likely dagor engine update in the future, it has been over 2 years now since the last update to the engine.
If they do want to keeping very low end systems playing this game they can release a WT Lite or Legacy, that makes it so that there are no “high fps exploits” as you would class them, lock to 60 FPS and ULQ and boom, a new game at the cost of just another launcher/steam page. There is a reason the mobile version of a certain other game is on steam, it is for very low end systems.
Yeah, that strategy has done wonders for GTA Online’s numbers. /s
You can believe you’re entitled to hyperrealism and outstanding graphics at the playerbase expense, and so we’re here entitled to reply that your proposal is absurd for a free to play videogame.
GTA5 is not really a fair comparison, it is not cross platform and has custom servers on Legacy, if we do look at the (steam) player numbers, Enhanced is lower on player numbers but Legacy has an increased player count specifically due to FiveM.
I believe that no one is entitled to any game frankly, gaming is a luxury, see that as rude or unfair if you want, but I am not entitled to have the game run on my system nor are you, it is a live service game that gets constant updates, so requirements are bound to change. If Dagor 7.0 brought with it the end of ULQ support I would not be surprised, ULQ is frankly legacy hardware support that allows for modern under-powered devices to play as well.
If we are talking free to play games, I can yet again mention CSGO/CS2, that also had an engine update that did impact a part of the playerbase, this did reduce player counts.
Also cutting legacy hardware does not only mean more realism and better graphics, it can also be features that get limited. When radars first came to the game it was rather buggy since at far distances planes didn’t render at all, so even the radar could not detect them since they were not rendered, this is an optimization feature that impacted gameplay outside of graphics, so who is to say some other issues are not caused by similar optimizations.
Having higher FPS and refresh rates is a clear exploit, so that needs to be limited.
You referring to that as a slide show just goes to show the difference and the unfair advantage it gives to it’s users.
Thanks for proving my point.
Well, if you want completely fair and balanced settings in a “competitive” game you’ll just have to deal with it, at least if you don’t admit you have double standards.
Don’t isn’t the same as can’t.
Yeah, e-bay surely has amazing deals for all countries around the world.
Some countries have really bad used market and you can’t do anything about it.
It literally uses the system you’re proposing. You then mentioned deep nuances which doesn’t necessarily rule out nor dismiss my argument towards the end goal you’re pointing which is separating the playerbase between two clients and systems of the same title, the thing GTA V did with the legacy and enhanced versions.
That is a subject of debate, not a matter of fact. I may argue that AAA games are indeed a current luxury. The rest, however, are in a wide grey area which ultimately depends on technical and practical goals each studio may want to push. In that regard, War Thunder as a free to play service doesn’t owe you nor anyone an explanation about their current minimum specs nor their settings, or why they will keep them as they are right now.
You said comparing War Thunder to GTA Vs legacy and enhanced situation was unfair, but now you’re comparing a competitive game with a casual game. Guess we’re now even.
Let me get this straight, just in case you’re not getting it:
War Thunder is a casual, free to play game whose ultimate goal is to monetize on every possible player that can get into. Cutting its playerbase, even the ULQ segment who really needs it, is cutting their own revenue potential.
I’m not even appealing in favor of potentially disenfranchised players, I’m arguing because the whole point you’re building sounds more like a whim than anything constructive or useful to either Gaijin or players at all.
i’m biased to having good graphics yes, i can’t fix the rest of your issues, you might be boned if gaijin ever decides to up the minimum system requirements and remove ulq
Yeah WT is a casual game, a decent sim-cade casual game at that, which does try to sell itself on realism.
I mentioned CSGO/CS2, because that from my perspective of “limiting the potential of what can be added” fits more, GTA 5 Enhanced didn’t add anything that game changing, just a visual overhaul, and Legacy has the FiveM community. One feature I know changed CS is the new smoke they added which was not limited by the Source 1 engine anymore so could be affected by bullets and grenades.
My arguments are not the best worded I do agree, I have not spent enough time arguing online or offline to specify every bit of my view.
This stance is purely based on the CURRENT implementation of ULQ, if they updated it and made it closer to even low, add that small layer of not actual terrain that is only for tire tracks and small rocket impacts, just turn off the deformation and it should not impact performance much. Improve the rendering so it doesn’t unload assets in your field of view. Since maps don’t have randomly generated trees/structures, improve the baked in shadows on maps so people stand out less.
Looking back after these arguments I should have probably made a thread called “ULQ Needs a rework to be closer to low” or something similar, but lets be honest ULQ has been a rather controversial setting for quite a few years now.
