[Rant] Isn't It About Time We Had Standardised Settings?

Darkwave

Darkwave

Darkwave

Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2005
Posts
13,779
Hey guys,

I don't know about you lot, but it's really beginning to grate on me how game settings are so all over the place in terms of there being any sort of standard. Video/graphics settings in particular.

I just loaded up The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for the first time in ages and spent quite a long time looking for the anisotropic filtering setting, until I remembered that there isn't one. Aren't these basic options that should be in every game with the options of 2x, 4x, 8x and 16x as examples? :confused:

Sure, you can force it in your drivers, in which case it makes game settings redundant altogether when it comes to options like anisotropic filtering and antialiasing.

What bugs me most is when a game has AA levels as a slider or "1, 2, 3, 4, 5" etc. when that doesn't tell you which real AA setting you're going to be using at all on the 2x, 4x, 6x, 8x, 16x, 24x scale. :mad:

Had to get that out of my system, feel free to vent your displeasure of game settings.

Sincerely yours,
Ulfhedjinn.
 
it's not game settings that annoy me, it's the backwards compatibility, to insure maximum sales. Sometimes they should just scrap backwards computability and focus on newer cards/systems.
 
AcidHell2 said:
it's not game settings that annoy me, it's the backwards compatibility, to insure maximum sales. Sometimes they should just scrap backwards computability and focus on newer cards/systems.
Click to expand...

Which would make their user base very limited since not everyone can afford these newer cards/systems. Which in turn affects revenues/profits which in turn means they can't afford to develop newer/better/fancier games with high production values which in turn will make you unhappy. It's a vicious circle.
 
TakeoverBid said:
Which would make their user base very limited since not everyone can afford these newer cards/systems. Which in turn affects revenues/profits which in turn means they can't afford to develop newer/better/fancier games with high production values which in turn will make you unhappy. It's a vicious circle.
Click to expand...
I realise that. But I'm not saying do it with every game, but every know and then like when a new os is released. which is why I like the idea of dx10, i just wish vista was 64 bit only.
 
Standardisation of where save games files etc are put would also be nice, I hate how some games createa folders in my docs, some in shared docs %appdata% etc, its annoying.
 
Eriedor said:
Standardisation of where save games files etc are put would also be nice, I hate how some games createa folders in my docs, some in shared docs %appdata% etc, its annoying.
Click to expand...

yeh and where they install, doesn't vista have some sort of games folder?
 
Eriedor said:
Standardisation of where save games files etc are put would also be nice, I hate how some games createa folders in my docs, some in shared docs %appdata% etc, its annoying.
Click to expand...
Yes this would be nice, I would like all my game files to go to \My Documents\My Games\ (\Documents\Games\ on Vista?) but a lot of the time I end up with daft random folders in My Documents or elsewhere on my hard disk.

I think it's about time these hardware companies and game developers all had a nice little conference to chat about game settings and other things that they could standardise.
 
man does the folder thing bug me. I dont mind it cluttering up program files folder as inever go there but when the create folders in my documents it bugs the poop out of me. I could have around 5/6 folders in my documetns but because of games, skype, other things i have like 20 and i can't get ridof them. Very very annoying.

Another very annoying thing, though this is more with films, i hate it when there is milllions of dvd case designs for a program, e.g. family guy. They had normal plastic 1 dvd case design for season 1 and 2, then season 3 they changed to dvd case for each dsic meaning 3 cases for one dvd, then season 4 and 5 they went to the very thin cases making my collection look super untidy
 
Would be nice, I'd also like to see better coding as far as the selection of resolutions & refresh rates go.

Well coded games can detect ALL available resolutions & refresh rates as defined in the graphics driver - they don't simply present a hardcoded list which may or may not have the resolution you desire. For example Quakeworld presents me will a list of 65 different available modes. I guess the problem is this probably caused more work to be needed behind the scenes...

I do miss the old days (eg DOS) where you knew that ALL game related stuff was kept within the install folder, i.e. save games in a subdir rather than MyDocs, game settings in .ini files rather than registry etc.
 
i too wish vista was 64bit only, as it really needs something to move 64bit right into the mainstream in terms of drivers and software.

i hate the games that put folders in my documents. since when was a saved game a "document"?
 
Yeh games for windows works on bits of this. Save games have to be compatible with the vista game browser thing, not entirely sure what that means with respect to folders tho. Also they have to support widescreen and if the game supports a controller it must support the xbox 360 controller without the need for configuration I believe. Couple of other things I can't remember...
 
daven1986 said:
i too wish vista was 64bit only, as it really needs something to move 64bit right into the mainstream in terms of drivers and software.
Click to expand...

An interesting idea which has some validity (if Vista were 64bit only it would definitely push things forward compatibility wise) however it was probably released a bit too soon to be viable. Intel has only recently moved to 64bit for it's mainstream processors, so there's a whole host of people out there still running 32bit P4s etc who Microsoft would be missing out on in terms of upgrade sales.
 
It's very annoying and the one thing that i hope Games for Windows brings to the table. Some loose standard for options and specs catered for.

I don't think it will be more than a few years until we see some company bring out a games PC which they guarantee will last for 2/3 years.

Say charge £600 and get MS onboard with a Vista derivative that is specifically for games, then using Games For Windows brand to have games that will run this spec for the 2-3 years minimum.

Gamers that want to upgrade every 6 months still can, but those that don't want to, are able to purchase knowing that they will have support and compatibility for a set amount of time.

Of course a resolution would have to be specified (probably 1080P/1050) but other than that, it should be pretty easy.
It would need a lot of collaboration from various companies, but i really can see it happening.

PC gaming is still where the envelope is pushed and this will only become more apparent as this generation of consoles gets older (as with every cycle).
 
Ulfhedjinn said:
Hey guys,

I don't know about you lot, but it's really beginning to grate on me how game settings are so all over the place in terms of there being any sort of standard. Video/graphics settings in particular.

I just loaded up The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for the first time in ages and spent quite a long time looking for the anisotropic filtering setting, until I remembered that there isn't one. Aren't these basic options that should be in every game with the options of 2x, 4x, 8x and 16x as examples? :confused:

Sure, you can force it in your drivers, in which case it makes game settings redundant altogether when it comes to options like anisotropic filtering and antialiasing.

What bugs me most is when a game has AA levels as a slider or "1, 2, 3, 4, 5" etc. when that doesn't tell you which real AA setting you're going to be using at all on the 2x, 4x, 6x, 8x, 16x, 24x scale. :mad:

Had to get that out of my system, feel free to vent your displeasure of game settings.

Sincerely yours,
Ulfhedjinn.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, Im sure we have spoke about this before aswell on MSN, I mean just look at the state of Spiderman 3 when that came out on the Wii, I mean I understand it's a console game but that was just not acceptable.
 
My main issue is where games "auto detect" the optimal settings for your PC. Every time i load a game up that has this auto detection it says "Set to ultra mode" or whatever, theni check what settings its used and AA is disabled and its at 1024x768! Im sorry but i dont want to run a game at ultra detail at a lower resolution than my monitor! it defies belief!
 
Standardisation would be great, but backwards compatibility is a must, you can't have companies making directx 10 only games, becuase hardly anyone would be able to play it as it stands.
 
Killerkebab said:
I swear I am going to start punching walls the next time a game creates a folder in my goddamned documents, cluttering it all up :mad:
Click to expand...

From what I have read for a program to meet the standards for XP it cannot write to system folders including the Program Files folder. This is because the software has to work in a Limited account. In a Limited account the system folders are locked so cannot be written to. If a game was to write to its own folder it would throw a wobbly in a Limited account.
 
Also why do all games create a hundred and one different folders in the start menu? Surely you don't need every publisher, developer, distributor in the folder structure? Also why can't thye all go in the Games folder thats already in *** start menu, even if they are under a sub folder of that. Would make things a lot tidier as default and save me moving and deleting all the crap that appears by default.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom