This was a mess and unfortunately even with the comprehensive fixes listed over at CivFanatics in this thread, edge scrolling on the Right and Bottom of the screen simply did not work as expected. I am a fan of edge scrolling as I essentially like to play Civ one-handed. As far as 4k crispness goes, this is the only thing that appears to need fixing. To me, it would make more sense for the game to store high-res copies which are then downscaled at lower resolutions, instead of vice-versa. This is a bit disappointing for a 2016 game, and for 2D elements for which I am sure the artists have high-res copies available. However, the rest of the UI is clearly upscaled and icons in particular are blurry enough to be noticeable. Fonts are rendered very sharply at 4k res and look crisp. The UI scaling works well when enabled and nothing requires me to squint. The actual 3D rendering is fantastic, wonders look very nice in particular, with intricate ones such as the Bolshoi Theatre really showing off the benefits of 4k. I played through two games on high detail at 4k, with MSAA turned off. Out of the box, running at 4k res this game looks incredibly sharp. This machine (MSI GS63VR-6RF) has a 4k display with a GeForce GTX 1060 (Optimus, so no G-sync) which is powerful enough to play the game at just-maybe-acceptable frame rates at native res.
#1080p civilization v images 1080p
After all, gaming beyond 1080p is only going to become more and more common as this game matures. It hasn't been 100% smooth sailing, so I thought it might be good to have a place to record issues as they're encountered. Those particular games you listed probably wouldn't benefit hugely from 144hz.Since I couldn't find anything definitive in one place, I thought I might just share my experiences so far with Civ6 on my new 4k-capable laptop. Lightning fast reaction and buttery smooth motion isn't that important for a turn based strategy game. In those specific games having a larger monitor will probably help more than anything and more pixels would help too. If you were playing shooters, action, racing, etc games then a faster refresh rate would pay off more. I know you can overclock a lot of 60hz 1440p monitors too if you are willing to try that. They can usually hit 80-96hz+ based on what I've read. More pixels than a regular 1080p display and better gaming performance than you'll get at 1440p It might be worth looking at a 1080p ultra wide too. That being said I personally wouldn't be happy with the framerates at 1440p on a GTX970, especially without Gsync. I am looking at new monitors myself right now and am leaning more towards a 144hz 1080p display.
I play mostly fast paced games though and am a bit of a framerate/frametime snob. Looking at benchmarks there are just too many newer games that don't run well (60fps+) at 1440p on a 970, whereas at 1080p they run great. 1080p usually gets 70-90% better performance than 1440p. Whatever I end up getting I will always have a 2nd monitor too which makes 1080p a lot more palatable in terms of desktop real estate and multitasking.
0 kommentar(er)
