How much Do u care abt how the game looks?

if you have a good Graphic card, would u use it to get 40 FPS with a good looking PICTURE that u wont notice in actual gameplay, or will you go for 100 FPS with smooth gameplay that gives u advantage over the other guy?

i tried increasing graphics settings, but i just DO NOT see a difference at ALL when in actual gameplay...except that i die faster.

Take ss and then compare them.

Exillian said:
Take ss and then compare them.

now here is my point. are you actually looking at the detail when running around, when under suppression, or when firing?

this game is NOT a screen shot, and im sure no1 can play it wiht 1 frame per second

I always lean toward higher FPS. I'm just lucky enough to pull good graphics and high FPS at the same time. Best of both worlds.

If you can tell a difference between high and ultra settings in this game... you've got some really good eyesight, lol.

gas4u said:
if you have a good Graphic card, would u use it to get 40 FPS with a good looking PICTURE that u wont notice in actual gameplay, or will you go for 100 FPS with smooth gameplay that gives u advantage over the other guy?

i tried increasing graphics settings, but i just DO NOT see a difference at ALL when in actual gameplay...except that i die faster.

Could look the same as BF2 but if it played better had bigger maps was more balanced and over all more fun wouldn't really care.

gameplay.

i read some articles on ADK website, and he mentioned and that you might be losing up to 200 ms by just increasing the stress on ur hardware....which means the other guy sees you faster.

i care abt visuals in SP games....but not THIS

Is Crysis 2 a better game than say, Super Metroid for the SNES?

Nope.

FAC-IN_Sneed said:
gameplay.

This

first and foremost, DICE needs to remove the sun glare/lens flare bullshit, THEN they need to reduce or turn off the stupid color filter, THEN they need to seriously improve their destruction engine as you can't blow up half the things you could in BC2, THEN they need to improve the disgrace that they call 'ultra' textures

do not understand your post because it is written like a child

framerate > eye candy.

I care a lot, if I didn`t care, I would be still playing bf2.

PvtJohnTowle said:
do not understand your post because it is written like a child

Or you're just being a dick that can't acknowledge that not everyone speaks perfectly fluent English. Like yourself for example. You seem to have very weak English grammar skills.

@OP: For me it's about FPS but I won't lower my graphics down to the point where the game starts looking ugly. By that I mean that I stay at full resolution, decent texture filtering, etc.

How the game looks??
Which one? BF3? or any game?

Framerates fo show

40 FPS is fine with me.

played SP on ultra, playing MP on low.

game is gorgeous, and it's the animation and movement that makes it a great experience, not the quality of BLOOM and BLUE

i turned graphics to low because ultra is the same just with more contrast,blur and unnecessary post processing shit

yeah, too bad you cant turn off the blue

FPS>Graphics
Graphics in BF3 are irrelevant anyway because the sun prevents you from seeing the eye candy

Flapdr0l1337 said:
yeah, too bad you cant turn off the blue

Use Fxaa injector + Digital Vibrance in display settings @ 70% or above. Removes blue majorly and brings out the lush colours.