I also said that if they added the option to disable features(easier than adding those features) it would be great. It would work for me, I'm not that picky regarding settings.
How come games for PC stopped during that slippery slope? some games have barely any graphics settings, many don't have a FoV slider, most don't have a FoV slider that allows a decent FoV.
There are no slippery slopes.
see #1
An ideal? According to whom? The one who makes the game or the one who buys it?
the developer who is making their vision on a platform. who the fuck else SETS the goddamn performance/visual tradeoffs.
No one is asking for that. People are mainly asking for two choices. A choice between 1080p 30fps and 720p 60fps. Not an outlandish requiest since 'an ideal' for games is usually one of those, depending on if it's a shooter or not. They don't even need to alter any graphical settings. Just resolution and fps. Some are asking for more, but can't they give even that?
given the choice i would pick 1080p 30fps 100% of the time. unless it was a competitive FPS where i was playing a tournament or something. otherwise who gives a shit. something like COD runs at 60fps. gtav is about look at feel.
So does almost everyone. The issue is that what devs think is best/best isn't best for everyone.
devs should not fucking care what you think is best. a small subset of users not liking motion blur should not be the driving force behind their creativity or their vision for a video game. you're amazingly self centered.
It would seem like the other guy who warned me about you was right. You are an ass. Your experience over others' experience I see. If you're worried about people gaining an advantage by having different graphical settings, you might not be an ass, but rather an idiot. Tomorrow I could explain it to you, if you need me to. I can't be assed to do it now.
what the fuck are you even talking about? my buddies and i play the game and we experience the same thing. that's the point.
as far as gaining an advantage, as a former pc gamer theres SHITLOADS of ways that graphical settings tweaks gain advantage, including but not limited to hit detection and shadow rendering. that's why lan tournaments are set hardware with no custom configs.
Good for you. Other's like 60 fps and do think about it when being locked to 30fps.
how does that trump a point "we don't think about it." the point is that it's not even important enough to have a feeling about when you're playing GTA V in 2013 instead of april 2015. nobody gives a flying fuck.
for that matter why even be locked at 60. if your monitor can do better and you are packing the graphical muscle why not have them deliver 200 fps. why are you settling to be locked at 60?
For people like you the game could have, hear me out, default settings! You can put the disc in, press "Play" and enjoy the game just like the devs intended it to be played.
correct. that's what it has. it's called gtav on [platform]
Those who disagree with the devs can go into the settings menu and choose a different setting, a setting that the devs don't believe to be the optimal one, but still acknowledge that some might prefer it.
you still haven't made a case for WHY the developers should spend their time catering to people who might not agree with their vision for their intellectual property?
WHY should they develop concessions, and then support those options, on the chance that someone on reddit named kelmi doesn't like motion blur when most everyone else may enjoy it?
and again to address the slippery slope that you obviously don't understand. why should they stop at only allowing you to turn off motion blur? why not reduce the textures? maybe the lighting effects bother some people. maybe the animations or driving physics.
where is the line that YOU decide "well i dont like that they choose it for me" but in the same breath you decide "well IM TOTALLY OKAY with them CHOOSING FOR ME what options i have."
you can't have your cake and eat it too. the PC is a platform whereby one has total configurability. A console is simply not.
you can't say "im not okay with them giving me no choice. but i'm okay with them giving me 1 choice." because what of the other asshole that wants 2 choices? and the guy who wants 4 choices? and the guy who wants 8?