omgwtfbbq said:
actually your logic is incorrect. If A implies B, it does not follow that !A implies !B. In other words, if "High Resolution" implies "Low Draw Distance", it does not follow that "Low Resolution" implies "High Draw Distance". This logic is incorrect because all the implication is stating is if A is true, B is true, but states nothing about the value of B when A is false. In other words, you have committed a logical fallacy. the correct logic is "A implies B, therefore !B implies !A". In other words, if "High Resolution" implies "Low Draw Distance" then it follows that "High Draw Distance" implies "Low Resolution". This is valid logic, and is not a logical fallacy. It is however, incorrect due to the fact that the initial statement is incorrect, of course. There is actually very little relationship between draw distance and resolution, as they rely on different parts of the graphics pipeline. Your point still stands, of course. I just wanted to point out that many people misuse logic when they don't really understand it ;) |
There is no direct relationship, but certain factors can make one affect the other. Halo 3 has situations that do that.
My guess is that the lighting engine has effects the pixels, and not the texels, then it would use part of the frame buffer, and not the texture buffer. That would mean that resolution would be important.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs








