Resolution/FPS Overkill

At what point does a certain resolution become ideal so that it is detailed enough to not have any pixilation, blurriness, or visual artifacts? Same goes for framerate, at what numeric value or range is it ideal so that everything is extremely fast and smooth with virtually no lag or stuttering? And when does it become “overkill” – where anything beyond a certain point shows little no difference to our eyes thus only being a waste of performance and potential for price and hardware? I’ll share my thoughts below and what I think is the best, worse, and average out of those two.

I think the ideal resolution actually depends on a variety of factors: screen size, pixel density, medium (game, video, etc.), viewing distance, and soft/hardware. Let’s be honest here, you won’t be able to notice the difference between 720p, 1080, 1440p, and 4K on your smartphone, but it is very noticeable on a laptop or TV screen. Likewise, on a laptop display, anything beyond 1440p is essentially a waste of potential on the hardware used to render it. On a TV, you’ll only be able to distinguish better or worse resolutions when you view it very far away or very up close so tough luck there too.

As for framerate, I personally consider 45-60 fps to be normal, 25-40 fps to be extremely bad, anything below 25 to be unplayable or shit, 60-80 fps to be great, 90-120 fps to be amazing, and anything beyond 120 fps to be dangerous for the video card. Most people honestly can’t perceive the differences of framerates beyond 60fps as that’s the highest refresh rate for almost all monitors. Also even monitors meant for gaming or with higher refresh rate only go up to 120 to 144 HZ so anything beyond that is also a waste. Eventually, we have to set limits and prevent it from going even further.

I’ve done some research and apparently while we humans can perceive up to 1000 fps, most people can’t notice the difference beyond 150 fps even when trained. Military pilots that go through even more training can only perceive images rendered up to 220 fps whereas the common house fly perceives reality up to 240 fps. Clearly with all these deductions and evidence, the ideal framerate would be 50-75 fps for normal games and then 100-120 fps for shooters, fighting, and racing games. Now you honestly don’t need such ridiculously high fps unless you’re playing competitively.

Yes I know that most games that don’t require fast reflexes and high-speed action that lower framerates are more suitable and actually recommended. But the times and technology have changed so we can’t always stay at 20-30 fps forever right? Granted, I don’t really mind if a game like, say The Sims 3, has an average fps range of 30-50 fps but once it goes below a certain number (for me it’s 40) it begins to get laggy and choppy. Obviously, there’s not really much of a point in having fps that goes beyond the refresh rate of the monitor, but it makes it smoother and less input lag.

With resolution, I personally find that anything below 768p HD is just way too pixelated and blurry which disgusts me. For years I had to deal with playing on the Nintendo Wii (sorry my parents never bought me a PS3 and couldn’t get a job) and I hated how I had to play in standard definition since it looked ugly even when far away. 720p I can’t stand at all and I don’t even know why people consider that to be even high definition. 900p is actually decent and looks very good whereas 1080p is the ideal sexy resolution that me and many others strive for – it is the average resolution for Steam gamers.

Now depending on the other factors, ideal resolutions can change drastically as 1080p actually looks a little blurry on 20+ inch monitors used for PC gaming. I’ve seen UHD resolutions before and honestly, 4K isn’t even necessary unless you’re using a monitor or TV that goes beyond 40 something inches (forgot what the credible sources claimed). So much like how anything beyond 720p on a phone is useless, 4K and beyond – or the all new 8K resolution – is basically wasteful. My personal preference and opinion is that 1440p is the perfect resolution for PC monitors beyond 20 inches.

Ok, depending on the software and hardware the detail and clarity of what’s being shown on screen definitely changes a lot. For example, with my ultra-book that had Intel HD Graphics, I noticed that the games I played were still a bit pixelated at native 1080p; however, with my current laptop using AMD Radeon R5 Graphics, even at 768p it wasn’t as pixelated (plus the graphics looked better overall). At 900p and 1080p the games looked way better than what my ultra-book could ever hope to render even with anti-aliasing…well, it couldn’t handle anti aliasing or ultra settings sadly.

Also, newer games tend to have higher polygon count and higher resolution textures with better geometry and lighting, so naturally they’re visually superior. A game like Grand Theft Auto V for example will look good at 720p low settings than compared to say Garry’s Mod at 1080p high settings in terms of how pixelated and blurry it looks. So although my current laptop is only native 768p, because it has a better video card the quality of the graphics are vastly superior than my older computer at native 1080p with a crappy integrated potato card (ok, R5 is also integrated but it’s an APU).



Analyzing Trolls In-Depth

It seems that recently I keep writing and publishing posts that are very negative and controversial, and I do apologize in advance if it turns you off. However, I’ve been going through a lot of bullshit lately and this will help me release some of the anxiety I’ve built up ever since starting sophomore year in college. Sadly I haven’t even started to write any reviews because I had to study for mid-term exams last week along with this week (and also do more readings and write essays…ugh, so much work!) I’ll refrain from revealing the identities of the trolls I analyze for obvious reasons.

Most trolls seem to take sadistic entertainment from making others suffer for a variety of reasons, usually because they’re sociopaths or just from being immature/bored. But there are these small special breed of trolls that stand out among most for being very rare, possessing characteristics unique only to them. I have quite a few run-ins with these losers and they all eventually get banned from the forums that they’re in and become despised by the community they harass. I’ll avoid mentioning SJW/white knights as they’re entirely different group altogether.


The first main trait I notice they all share is that they’re disoriented with reality and are extremely deluded to the point of never following basic logic/reasoning. I’ve heard of a proverb where if someone is as hard as a mountain, you will never be able to move it no matter how hard you try. In layman terms, these people cannot be changed because of the fact that they refuse to listen to any sort of advice. We humans evolved from apes, not by following tradition, but by constantly changing and adapting to out environment so in time all these special assholes eventually get forgot.

If you try to argue with them, they will use every insult and troll tactic they know in order to offend and “trigger” you. And if that doesn’t work, they will simply consider your rebuttals and arguments as complete nonsense, or refute them in a way that makes them feel better and make them think they’ve won. When in reality, they only made a bigger fool out of themselves despite it being entirely clear to everyone that the troll has failed at provoking others and getting a negative reaction from them. These people won’t admit defeat even when it hits them right in their fucking faces.

The amount of denial that they go through is just astounding but their tenacity doesn’t actually achieve anything. Even when moderators get involved and lock their threads, give them warnings, and even issue forum bans, they still won’t acknowledge that they’ve failed in trolling and continue to spout their propaganda. They also keep making claims and fantasies of other people that aren’t even closely tied down to reality and have no premise nor proof of any kind. I realized that these people won’t change so the best way to deal with them is to just completely censor them.


Another trait these losers tend to have is to always resort to using scapegoats when they run out of insults and tactics to use. There are tons and tons of examples, but to prevent me from boring you readers, I’ll just list the few most important ones. As mentioned before, when they don’t want to refute your valid arguments they’ll just dismiss everything you wrote as utter nonsense or “ranting”.  They also tend to ignore many arguments and rebuttals that you bring up and then start going off-topic so they can have their own arguments benefiting them…straw-man much?

As with the actual definition of scapegoat, they tend to blame other people or other causes as justification for their actions or arguments. Specifically, they will point out any logical fallacy you’re using which in itself sort of a fallacy…no wait, more like hypocrisy with many of these trolls. Like straw-man, ad hominem, appeal to XXX, and so on; however, they usually don’t consider them fallacies (cause they’re that stupid).  So instead of trying to refute your arguments, they’ll try refuting your spelling/grammar, perception of reality, contradictions, and anything but the rebuttals.


Ah yes, something that not just the mainstream dishonest media uses, but also these extremely rare trolls. When they try quoting what you wrote earlier, they will intentionally choose to ignore many valid arguments or attempt to twist your words and use it against you. If there are instances where history can be deleted, it benefits them even more as they will remove the original source(s) themselves or have the moderators delete it for them. So for the most part, people can still check your and their post history to confirm the claims both parties make in most arguments.

It’s usually corrupted moderators and developers/staff that try to get content deleted (even though it’s still hidden somewhere in the servers) there are still some trolls that stoop to this level. That way, once it’s deleted they can continue harassing you despite having already debunked their lies earlier in the past. It’s very sad that these trolls will use whatever means necessary to win so badly to boost their fragile egos (some deranged kids will literally resort to DDOS attacks and hacking). Censorship is also sort of a form of scapegoat but I feel that it deserves its own category.

They also tend to use other forms of censorship such as making their profile comments only to be used by themselves or friends. That way, people won’t be able to expose them and they can easily delete any comments that suggest their true nature. Often times, they’ll also block any user that has criticized them before as to further prevent their friends and others from finding out the reality. Honestly, it’s the fucking internet not some professional debate in a college competition; like what do you have to lose by being honest…oh right, they lose their self-esteem and ego!


These trolls that are very persistent will continue trolling specific individuals in other threads and stalk their profiles non-stop. They also love to create flame/troll-bait threads for the sake of luring out trolls and other people for “bait” to start flame wars and continue their trolling. This type of toxic behaviour is probably the worst I’ve ever seen and is the quickest way for these types of lightweights to get permanently banned from not just the forums, but also from the websites entirely. It’s kind of self-explanatory so I’m not going to beat around the bush and elaborate upon this.


Last characteristic that all these losers share is that they tend to be extremely repetitive in not just their insults and arguments, but also their tactics and behaviour. It always feels like I’m talking to people that are brain damaged and can’t remember or process very basic logic/reasoning (aka mental retardation). Or in other cases, it’s as if I’m communicating with a prototype AI gone rogue. Eventually, over time they tend to repeat themselves and they become so predictable that literally none of what they write actually offends or “triggers” anybody…even those who are hyper-sensitive.

They then just become an annoying nuisance and then people will simply report them for harassment rather than trolling. When that happens, they’ll also end up being banned or they just get ignored and forever become forgotten so then move on and try trolling other people. I don’t know why these idiots are so deluded into thinking that their tactics will work on them when pretty much every troll uses common strategies that we’ve seen in elementary schools and social media sites. Oh well, they’re the ones that are going to get punished sooner or later and not me.

Future Dream PC Specifications

I’ve always wanted to be able to play the games that I want, but because newer games require more powerful hardware that’s not the reality I’m living. While I am glad that my current laptop is roughly thrice as powerful as my previous ultra-book, I’m still not satisfied yet. I can only play games at 900p high settings and get 45-60fps for titles released from 2009-2012; anything newer and I have to play at lower settings and resolution and/or get console quality performance. That’s why I plan to “upgrade” by buying an entirely new laptop meant for gaming in the future.

Current Laptop Specifications:

  • Form Factor: Laptop | Manufacturer: Lenovo
  • Model: Lenovo Ideapad 310-15ABR
  • CPU: AMD A10 9600P 7th Gen @ 2.4 GHZ (4 Cores)
  • APU: AMD Radeon R5 Graphics with 512 MB VRAM
  • OS: Windows 10 Home X64 Bit
  • RAM: 12 GB DDR4 Memory | Storage: 128 GB SSD
  • Display: 1366X768 HD 15.6″ 60HZ LCD
  • DirectX: Version 12 (Software & APU)
  • MSRP: $600 – 800 CAD {as of March 2017}

At first, being the naïve person that I was, I assumed I could just upgrade the CPU and GPU of my current laptop. But laptop parts, except for the RAM and storage, can’t be replaced separately like with desktops and workstations, so I have to spend even more money for an entirely new computer. Even then, I originally intended to get Intel Core i5 CPU that was quad core and had a clock speed of 3.0 GHZ. For the GPU, I thought that an entry level mid range card like the Nvidia GeForce GTX 750Ti was sufficient. I even thought that 1 GB of VRAM was totally enough to play newer games!

Of course, I consulted the Steam forums (feature discussions not the toxic forums) and reality hit me hard in the face. Then I went on Best-Buy, before going to Amazon and then Newegg to search for the perfect gaming laptop. My first year roommate told me that I’d have to spend at least 1000 CAD (800 USD roughly) and he was totally right as even entry level mid range laptops cost that much. When I tried searching for Alienware and Predator, prices typically ranged from 1500 to even 2000 CAD (1300 – 1800 USD)! I definitely needed to do more researching which I did later on.

Proposed Future Laptop Specifications:

  • Form Factor: Laptop | Manufacturer: Acer, Asus, Dell
  • CPU: Intel Core i5 7th Gen @ 2.5 GHZ (2 Cores)
  • GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 960 with 2 GB of VRAM
  • OS: Windows 10 Home X64 Bit
  • RAM: 8 GB DDR4 Memory | Storage: 256 GB SSD
  • Display: 1920X1080 FHD 17.3″ 60HZ LCD
  • DirectX: Version 12 (Software & GPU)
  • MSRP: $800 – $1000 CAD ($600 – $800 USD)

The above specs were essentially comprised of in laptops that were within the budget and gaming wants at the time. However, after again consulting with people on the Steam feature discussions they told me those specs while decent weren’t future proof. In layman terms, it wouldn’t let me be able to play even newer games and I did even more research after that. I discovered that while I can play games from 2013 – 2015 with those above specs at 1080p high settings and 60fps, I still have to lower the settings and/or get shit performance for games from 2016 and beyond.

A friend (no longer, but she’s a stranger) on Steam recommended I get Acer Predator and to look at laptops with similar specs. I then checked it and the price was way too expensive and the hardware was almost close to being high-end. Like do I really need Intel Core i7 or GTX 1060 with 6 GB of VRAM or even 16 GB RAM? I then decided to find a laptop that had specs superior to specs listed above but weaker than overpriced gaming laptops. That way I can be satisfied with both the price and hardware, and not have to worry about having to upgrade again in only a short amount of time.

To my joy and fortune, I managed to actually find the “middle way” by finding a laptop with the ideal specs and it’s around the same price as entry level mid range laptops. I have come to a dilemma and can’t decide whether to get the Acer Aspire VX15 or the Acer Aspire Nitro 5, as there was another Acer gaming laptop that was very cheap in price but sadly got sold out on Amazon for being so awesome. They both have literally the same specs (except for case, fans, battery, etc.) but VX15 is more expensive plus it’s shipped by Canada Computers while latter is cheaper and shipped by Amazon.

Future Gaming Laptop Specifications:

  • Form Factor: Gaming Laptop | Manufacturer: Acer
  • Model: Acer Aspire Nitro 5 or Aspire VX15
  • CPU: Intel Core i5-7300HQ @ 3.5 GHZ (4 Cores) 7th Gen
  • GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 with 4 GB GDDR5 VRAM
  • OS: Windows 10 Home X64 Bit
  • RAM: 8 GB DDR4 Memory | Storage: 256 GB SSD
  • Display: 1920X1080 FHD 15.6″ 60HZ LCD
  • DirectX: Version 12 (Software & GPU)
  • MSRP: $1000 – $1300 CAD ($800 – $1100 USD)

Well, even if both these laptops get sold out and don’t get restocked on Amazon or other websites, Acer will simply make newer gaming laptops in the future. Or I can always wait when I have the money and the need to play newer games, and then I’ll be able to afford such expensive and beautiful hardware. Now I just have to wait to actually get a job or find a way to make some decent amount of money. Speaking of which, I just installed Radeon ReLive so I’ll be recording game footage shortly so that my dream of being a YouTuber can finally become a reality after all these years!


Difficulty In Choosing New Games

Sorry for not posting in over a month, but as I’ve said countless times in the past, I am attending university and this year has been off to a…rough start. It doesn’t have anything to do with people I don’t like or courses being too hard, so don’t you people worry as negotiations with the landlord have helped. I wanted to actually post this last month, but because of such circumstances (I promised I won’t reveal much anymore sorry) I’ve refrained from doing so. To make up for that, I’ll be posting several different blog posts this week as I have no lectures…too bad I have to study for mid-terms. 😦

This issue has persisted even in the past when I was still playing on the Wii but it’s even greater now on PC. Whenever I get sick of playing the current game(s), I just want to move on and play new games. Problem is, I don’t really know what to play as I bought over 30 games during the Steam summer sale this year! I’ve tried Counter Strike: Source, the Sonic Adventure remakes, Sonic 4: Episode 2, Garry’s Mod, and even The Sims 3 yet I still keep going back to Left 4 Dead 2. Except for SADX and CSS, all the others I only played for a little bit, couldn’t get immersed, and then stopped playing them.

Well I’m currently playing Sims 3 and just started but haven’t really gotten immersed because it’s a kind of game where I only play it when I’m comfortable. That includes not having outside noise or interference, being relaxed from a good day, and actually being in the mood to play it. Anyways, about the process I usually determine what genre and then the franchises and then I go from there. There are many shooters that I have like CSGO, Borderlands 2, and Mass Effect that I’ll probably enjoy but I’ve been playing too much gun games so that’s why I’m avoiding them for now.

I know that things don’t always go the way you want it and that’s why I didn’t really play the Batman Arkham titles or the Tomb Raider games. I’ve always had this naïve belief that once I’m done with one game, I can magically get immersed and love the next game that I choose, with the cycle repeating happily forever after. But I’m not a child or even a teenager anymore and I have real life responsibilities to do (after all, I don’t want to risk getting kicked out of college for shitty grades). I’ll probably just play the older GTA games – GTA 3, Vice City, and San Andreas – later down the months.

Besides those, there are also many other factors that make it difficult to play newer games. Some games on my Steam wish-list are either too expensive (even during sales) and/or require hardware that is well beyond my budget. I do plan to buy a mid range gaming laptop – either the Acer Aspire VX15 or the Acer Aspire Nitro 5 – however I’m broke because of tuition fees and renting costs. I also kind of want to go back and play my older games and others that I haven’t touched yet on console though sadly I can’t since it would disturb the other tenants that live together with me.

So anyways, how easy or how hard is it for you people to choose new games to play when you guys are done playing current ones? I’m running out of stuff to say but I’ve said what I wanted to say just now. Well, one more thing is that I think the only way I could get fully immersed is if I choose a game that fits the right genre, and when I’m the right mood and environment to be very comfortable. You’ll be updated with the next few blog posts very soon so no need to keep on writing to continue this post. In fact, look out for another one shortly after this one is published. 😉

First Person Games Aren’t So “Realistic”

This blog post was originally something that I posted on my now discontinued Nigga Nintendo Nerd site that existed a few years ago. I’ve decided to reboot and retcon such a post now that I have more experience with shooters and first person games in general, so I can give a more detailed analysis. For those that are new, I used to have another WordPress blog prior to MRN back in the summer of 2014 but I cancelled it for many different reasons. One was the layout, another I was just desperate at writing, I wanted to write reviews, and because my classmate stalked me online.

Without further ado, I’ll get right into my “rant” and analysis on how and why first person games, and to a certain extent shooters, aren’t as realistic as they are marketed by the publishers. It’s not just about the view and perspective of first person games, but also the mechanics that are implemented. I know that video games aren’t simulators or VR (unless marketed and designed as such) so they shouldn’t be taken that seriously. However, it still makes me disappointed that people actually are naïve and stupid enough to believe that such games are very realistic and actually emulate reality very closely.

First Person “Perspective”

What really pisses me off about games that take place from a first person perspective is how much they fail at trying to copy real life. Yes, I can look and move around in all directions, although when I look down below me I see only the ground. Re-read the last part of the previous sentence, and you’ll know exactly what’s wrong… is that you can’t see any parts of your body except for hands and arms! So the developers think that having players see through the eyes of the protagonist is indeed realistic, but not including their body in first person mode isn’t?

When we all look down we can see our legs, crotch, stomach, arms, hands, and sometimes even our chest. But in many first person games you see none of that when looking down so it’s as if we’re playing as a floating head with arms and hands. Look, I get that you can’t really program the character to move their eyes and see their nose and parts of their face. It’s just really awkward when I enter a vehicle in first person mode and then it looks as if it’s driving itself or I’m using telekinesis, since I’m not using (able to see) any hands to maneuver the vehicle.

Now this wouldn’t be a problem for older games released on systems with hardware limitations or games that aren’t marketed as being realistic. Nevertheless, newer games and those especially promised to emulate reality shouldn’t fail to captivate consumers by not adding such a small detail that should be common sense. Not just the fact that such games and their developers technically broke a few laws, but also fails to deliver the realistic experience that was promised. Kind of like how the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X aren’t true native 4K resolution despite advertised as legitimate 4K.

Another characteristic of first person mode that isn’t close to its real life counterpart is the FOV or field of view. That’s basically how much you can see within your range of vision (which is your television screen or PC monitor). We humans tend to see our environment in a 180 degree angle whereas you can only see roughly 90 to about 110 degrees of the FOV in first person games. Also, we also view reality as a curvy “dome” and video games are displayed on a flat 2D surface. Some monitors are designed to be curvy but those are very rare and many games aren’t optimized for it.

The view model is the final and last feature of first person perspective that isn’t even close to how it is in real life. This is how close or far away the body parts are positioned from the screen. Many shooters depict players holding the gun with their hands so close to the screen and only being able to see a little past the wrist area. With the exception of pistols, I cannot even believe how developers can convince people to believe that people actually hold guns like that in real life. This is just nitpicking, but when looking in a mirror our characters aren’t replicated 1:1 to their reflections.

Problems Playing In FPP

So what’s wrong with not having an accurate first person perspective other than breaking minor laws and ethics/morals you ask? It makes the game a lot harder in specific situations or areas, especially those in the action and platform genres. Say I have to jump over to a far ledge and I have to do it quickly, but then because I can’t see the rest of my body I can’t properly distance how far I am from falling. I then either make it due to poor collision detection, pure luck, or just fall and fail simply because I couldn’t see my legs. And many games have platforming segments no matter what.

Or say I’m fighting a fuck ton of enemies or a boss that sends a thousand projectiles at my way. The reality is that I can only fend off those that I can directly see within my limited range of vision and somewhat with my hearing. To counter such limitations, developers usually add arrows or colors to areas where you’re getting hit off screen so you can react properly. I don’t know…maybe if you idiots allowed us to see more than just what’s in front of us and not have invisible bodies, then maybe, just maybe we could react before and/or faster instead of buying better monitor(s)?

Another issue is something that is specifically relevant mostly to shooters. Why can’t I ever use the sights of guns that have them attached to have better accuracy? If the developers are going to add the sights to guns like the M16 and AK47 to emulate the designs how come we can’t use them to make it more “realistic”? It’s not the same as a scope where we can use them to zoom in and aim at enemies from extremely far distances. And having a crosshair for aiming isn’t so realistic as only snipers and scopes have them, and you need training to even aim with guns due to recoil.

I can’t believe I forgot about this until now – collision detection is also another issue with first person games lacking visible bodies. I often think I bumped into a wall, obstacle, or enemy when really I didn’t and other times when I’m so far away I still somehow manage to touch them. This sort of inconsistency could be solved with better programming or by simply having a visible lower body. Sadly, developers don’t implement neither of these solutions and is more of a pet peeve than a difficulty spike for veterans compared to those of beginners and noobs.

Gameplay Mechanics In FPP

Let me discuss about the different mechanics that developers add into first person games to make it seem more realistic when it only makes it more fictional. First is the speed of movement and different ways to do so (crouching, walking, and sprinting). Why the hell is the default speed not aligned with the sounds of footsteps? How can developers actually think they can fool us thinking that we’re speed-walking but it sounds like we’re only walking? I know this might seem nitpicking though developers intentionally market such games as realistic so I’m going to criticize them for being so fake.

Also when crouching or crawling, it looks like the character is at a very low altitude; however, compare it to the height of nearby objects. Then you’ll notice they aren’t actually crouching and crawling, rather they’re just slightly ducking which gives slightly better accuracy when jumping and shooting. If you look at enemies crouching or crawling, it looks very ridiculous and makes them more visible targets in shooting games. Maybe if the developers actually made them crouch and crawl much lower it would be harder to be detected by enemies and be more realistic?

When it comes to walking and sprinting, you become as slow as a snail with the former and become Usain Bolt with the latter. Shouldn’t walking be a…little faster and sprinting be a little slower or at least with stamina to hinder it? Anyways, strafing is something that you wouldn’t normally do even when shooting in real life as it looks ridiculous and also isn’t effective when making turns. Speaking of Bolt, shouldn’t the characters ever tire out after awhile, especially those carrying heavy ass guns and equipment? And how come characters can jump high enough to go over hurdles?

I don’t understand how switching from first person to third person in some circumstances is acceptable as realistic? Like can I suddenly make my eyes teleport so that I can see from a third person perspective? I know it’s just video games, but how is it realistic to simply crouch for a few seconds and then regenerate? I find it more believable to heal from pills, med-kits, energy bars, or even hearts even though those defy logic and science too lol. Regenerating health and respawning upon death makes many shooters like COD and Battlefield very fake and not realistic.

I can honestly go on and rant about how unrealistic these games are so I think I’ll just end it here since you guys should understand my point now. There actually are lots of first person games that do try to be more realistic by adding lower body (Left 4 Dead), following the physics of actual shooting (CSS & CSGO), and having realistic FOV and view model (most Valve games). I can’t believe games like Zelda and Metroid implement features that are fake but still seem more realistic than what you use in typical fake shooters played by kids and man children living with their parents.