widescreen resolution removed from the game.
" Do you mean non-UW monitors are free now? Where can I get mine? :pog: Preferably 3 units at once:) |
|
" " Since you're deflecting, does that mean you have nothing more to add to the conversation? Ruthless should be [Removed by Support]. Last edited by AdRonZh3Ro#4713 on Jul 2, 2024, 6:03:31 PM
|
|
|
Point was, trying to drag hardware cost as an argument of why a dev shouldn't bother to adjust to that hardware - is ridiculous, sorry for being blunt. Normal devs cater to better and more expensive hardware, adding raytracing and new version upscaling support to games which didn't have it on release. And you say no need to change black bars because only a few expensive guys have the hardware:)
If GGG agreed with you, PoE would still be running DX9 or whatever it was at release time. |
|
|
o7
S L O W E R
|
|
" Missed the point again. Are you doing this on purpose? Every system needs a graphics interface like DirectX, but only a tiny fraction of machines use an ultrawide monitor. It is not required to play video games, and if you do own one you can still play the game. It's always the same platitudes. Can we stop with the strawman arguments already, Echo? Boring. " Don't say it if you don't mean it. The opposite of knowledge is not illiteracy, but the illusion of knowledge. Last edited by ArtCrusade#4438 on Jul 2, 2024, 6:54:25 PM
|
|
|
DX12 and new particle system also do not required to play PoE, ask GGG why they went through all the trouble, enduring backlash on performance problems along the way.
First, UW users are not such tiny fraction as you make it to be. Second, supporting them is easier compared to adding another renderer to the game. |
|
" It is like the... 5th or 10th time he's straw manning, isn't it? " " Tackle specifically bought a monitor to play 32:9. You can buy a 16:9 to play 32:9, but it will look worse, simply because it isn't the native resolution. If anything, he's the one that dragged hardware cost as an argument to keep the 32:9 resolution inside the game, not me, but you're so used to arguing in bad faith and straw manning that you can't tell the difference anymore. Ruthless should be [Removed by Support]. Last edited by AdRonZh3Ro#4713 on Jul 2, 2024, 7:20:04 PM
|
|
|
Okay, let it be tackle who first mentioned cost (won't bother checking it, even though context was likely different from what you imply). If you consider this inappropriate, why throwing same argument on me later? I was responding to you, not to him, and reserving myself from pointing out your straw manning here.
To get back on track, hardware cost shouldn't be part of either "for" or "against" black bars design. And my non-strawman arguments remain a few (dozen) pages back. You ask me a question, then immediately jump on my answer with "deraling", "strawman", "we will report you" :shrug: |
|
" Won't lose sleep over the bad faith arguments, but I could do without the smugness with which they're presented. @Echo: 96.2% of gamers do not use ultrawide according to a Steam poll. Your "not a tiny fraction" fits more than 25 times into the "everyone else." Besides, you don't have to ask GGG why they go through the trouble of working on DX12 and particles. Performance is a thing people actually care about. Thank you for making the argument for me. The opposite of knowledge is not illiteracy, but the illusion of knowledge. Last edited by ArtCrusade#4438 on Jul 2, 2024, 7:25:34 PM
|
|
" No, it's not "let it be". It was. It's a fact. Period. The only difference is that the argument was to keep it instead of remove. And i'm not implying anything, i'm quoting directly. " Isn't this what you mean "keeping on track"? " " Because you make an argument, we reply, then you change your original argument with some random rhetoric that is clearly not on track to keep your argument relevant, hence and repeat. :) Ruthless should be [Removed by Support]. Last edited by AdRonZh3Ro#4713 on Jul 2, 2024, 7:37:16 PM
|
|
