Quality vs. Performance

[billyro]

Quality or performance? This poll is directed at the graphics in video games - the speed the game renders, and the quality it produces.

 

If you had to choose one of the above, which would it be? You're not allowed to say, "I never worry about this because my computer is legendary," since that is considered cheating (and jealousy inducing).

 

 

 

I chose the Low Quality, High Performance option. I don't know why, but when a game is rendering very fast, it's just more appealing to me than a prettier game that loads slower.

Edited December 30, 2013 by billyro

[K00L]

I've played on my laptop and previously eight year old computer long enough to prefer performance over graphical quality. If I could run things well with high quality visuals I would. But sacrifice good performance for looks? No, not unless it's like what I did the other day. Just for fun/screenshots. (My brother plays some games in 800x600, windowed, every setting off. I can't even watch him play, it's bad.)

[Thor.]

I like ultra maxed out, but with some under the hood catalyst tweaks and OC :geek:

 

High quality-performance. So i did not vote.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Thor.

[Meihyr]

I chose the Low Quality, High Performance option. I don't know why, but when a game is rendering very fast, it's just more appealing to me than a prettier game that loads slower.

 

Pretty much the same with me. I'm not really bothered too much with the quality (lots of my games are set on Low / Medium). I'd just like for a smooth performance.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Tealbow

[billyro]

I like ultra maxed out, but with some under the hood catalyst tweaks and OC :geek:

 

High quality-performance. So i did not vote.

 

Yeah, but let's say that you have a mid-range computer, just for this poll. Which do you choose?

[Werne]

To be honest, I've always had low-end to mid-range machines, mostly because I can't afford better. And I was raised on games like Super Mario, Tetris, DOOM, etc so I'm used to things guys nowadays call "bad graphics". Now that I think about it, I haven't played any of them old games in a long time, maybe it's time to wipe the dust from my old SEGA and fire it up (got a 16-bit Genesis 2 in pristine condition, nearly 20 years old and still better than this modern PS4/XBone crap).

 

Anyhow, enough with the rambling. I prefer performance over quality, visual appearance is of least importance to me, even though I have a machine that can run games like Skyrim on high at stable 60FPS. And to be completely honest, I actually play Skyrim on low/medium, the game feels weird on high since I always played it on low with an old Radeon 4350.

 

What can I say, I'm just not into looks, I wouldn't have even bought new components if my old PC were to still run the games at a stable framerate. Basically, if the game looks good and runs smooth, great, but if it'll only run smooth if I make it look like crap, still equally great to me. :happy:

[Thor.]

After playing games like Kotor back in the day with my first pc, and looking back at it and now i am Kind of Disgusted that jagging still exist in gaming, and tearing and low poly aa. Oblivion and the others was a good example.

 

graphic detail, equals innovation.

Edited December 31, 2013 by Thor.