Analyze This: Graphic Settings and UserOptions.ini -- Is Your Game Running Optimally?

[ItZMuRdA]

The latest episode of "Analyze This" is out, focusing on a question I get a TON on my live stream on a daily basis. Hopefully this helps someone out, please share and ask if you have any questions! Below the video is the full text from the description, don't get scared away by TL;DR!

PlanetSide 2 - Analyze This: Graphics Settings and UserOptions.ini - Is Your Game Running Optimally? - YouTube

The "Analyze This" series of videos typically includes detailed commentary while exploring various avenues of theorycrafting to min/max gameplay. It's everything from meticulously analyzing settings, sensitivities, and keybinds, to digging deep into what a game has to offer in order to utilize advanced decision-making techniques through unorthodox methods of analysis. You can essentially look at this as the homework and research that I often do when not actively gunning down my enemies, and be sure to note that it all goes a long way toward improving your overall success as a gamer.

This particular video focuses on two questions that I get many times everyday on my live stream: "What are your graphic settings?" and "What does your UserOptions.ini file look like?" I give you an overview of all of the settings and then go into depth as to why I make certain choices. I've spent a lot of my own time tweaking these settings to both my likeness and for maximum performance, but your results may vary. Please be encouraged to ask questions!

Lastly, but not least, I finish up the discussion with a shoutout to what is likely the best PlanetSide 2 tweak guide available on the net -- a great resource for you to use (and one that I wish was available back when I was doing all of this tweaking solo)! That, of course, is the PlanetSide 2 Tweak Guide done for Nvidia by Sean Ridgeley. While it focuses specifically on Nvidia GeForce GPUs, there are many great tips that can also be utilized by individuals with ATI/AMD Radeon cards. Be sure to check it out here: http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/planetside-2-tweak-guide.

The above is not by any means the only resource on this type of stuff that is available, so do search far and wide, there is a lot of great information even as close as the official forums at http://planetside2.com or from the wonderful community at http://planetside-universe.com. As I said earlier, feel free to ask questions in the comments or in my stream as well and I'd be happy to try to help out!

In a nutshell, my ingame settings and UserOptions.ini looks like this (disregarding personal preference items such as FOV):

Render Quality: 100%
Render Distance: 1000
GPU Particle Quality: Off
Overall Quality: Custom
Graphics Quality: Medium
Texture Quality: High
Lighting Quality: Low
Shadow Quality: Off
Fog Shadows: Off
Effects Quality: Low
Terrain Quality: Low
Flora Quality: Off
Model Quality: Low
Particles: Low
Motion Blur: Off
Ambient Occlusion: Off

which generally translates (with some additional lines for things like LOD and ParticleDistanceScale) to the following in the configuration file:

[Rendering]
OverallQuality=-1
GraphicsQuality=2
TextureQuality=1
ShadowQuality=0
LightingQuality=1
EffectsQuality=1
TerrainQuality=1
FloraQuality=4
ModelQuality=1
ParticleQuality=1
ShadowLOD=0
ParticleLOD=0
EffectsLOD=0
TerrainLOD=0
FloraLOD=0
FloralLOD=0
ModelLOD=0
RenderDistance=1000.000000
Gamma=0.000000
MaximumFPS=122
UseLod0a=1
VerticalFOV=74
FogShadowsEnable=0
MotionBlur=0
VSync=0
AO=0
GpuPhysics=0
ParticleDistanceScale=0.650000
MinimapMode=1

[Terrain]
RenderFlora=Off

*It should also be noted that I advise setting your UserOptions.ini to "Read Only" when you are done making changes to any of your settings, as that will prevent them from getting wiped accidentally. Keep in mind that any settings you change in-game while Read Only is active, however, will not save after you exit that session.

As always, thank you so much for stopping by and for all of your support and feedback. If you found this useful, please hit that thumbs up button and subscribe to my channel for future content! Be sure to keep an eye out for more videos in this series, as well as other series to come in the very near future. Please leave your comments, questions, and requests below! Check Tesco Offers (https://www.offerstw.com/tesco/) and Lidl Offers (https://www.offerstw.com/lidl/). Also, please be encouraged to check out my daily live stream at http://itzmurda.com or http://twitch.tv/itzmurda_tv (giveaways are done occasionally for followers!) or visit me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/xitzmurdax.

[maradine]

Thumbs up for providing a textual TL;DR.

:thumbsup:

[OCNSethy]

Thanks MuRdA, Ill be sure to check out your vid try your settings when I get home tonight.

[omega four]

If you love to fly as much as I do, the rendering distance = 1000 is too low. You'll be blown out of the sky just as an enemy ESF renders on your screen.

[ItZMuRdA]

Glad to help! Do note that results will naturally vary for everyone, but since I'm asked a lot I thought I'd offer up the settings to see if they might assist anyone!

[ItZMuRdA]

If you love to fly as much as I do, the rendering distance = 1000 is too low. You'll be blown out of the sky just as an enemy ESF renders on your screen.

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration, though I could understand turning it up if you like to pilot a lot. I know some that fly at 1200-1600 quite effectively. I usually don't fly much, however, so it's plenty for engaging ground targets and not slamming into things. :P

[OCNSethy]

Glad to help! Do note that results will naturally vary for everyone, but since I'm asked a lot I thought I'd offer up the settings to see if they might assist anyone!

Ive seen your in-combat vids and other "Analyze This" espisodes too... you dont seem to have too many problems gunning and running :)

Congrats on your engagement too, btw :cool:

[omega four]

If you think it's a bit of an exaggeration, we should dogfight in ESFs. You with render dist = 1000; me with render dist = 6000.

I won't be done traveling on business until this Friday but we can find some time on Saturday.

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration, though I could understand turning it up if you like to pilot a lot. I know some that fly at 1200-1600 quite effectively. I usually don't fly much, however, so it's plenty for engaging ground targets and not slamming into things. :P

[Crator]

Any idea what UseLod0a=1 does exactly? Line of Distance?

[OCNSethy]

Any idea what UseLod0a=1 does exactly? Line of Distance?

Could be adaptive Level of Detail. ie; objectives further away are drawn at a lower quality to improve framerate.

[ItZMuRdA]

If you think it's a bit of an exaggeration, we should dogfight in ESFs. You with render dist = 1000; me with render dist = 6000.

I won't be done traveling on business until this Friday but we can find some time on Saturday.

I said that I don't dogfight often at all; I don't see much point in that. The only point I was making by saying "exaggeration" is that I've been using 1000 for months and never really felt like it hindered the hours I've spent in the air. Piloting is by far my worst role in this game, though. You're more than welcome to use a higher render distance if you fly a lot, though I don't think 6000 is going to help you much more than 2000. It doesn't actually change the distance of rendered units such as players and vehicles.

Could be adaptive Level of Detail. ie; objectives further away are drawn at a lower quality to improve framerate.

Indeed it is. I'm not sure how much it helps but I have mine at 0 just for any extra performance boost!

Ive seen your in-combat vids and other "Analyze This" espisodes too... you dont seem to have too many problems gunning and running :)

Congrats on your engagement too, btw :cool:

Thanks and double thanks on the congrats! :)

[camycamera]

i will have a look at this later tonight and might sub, i love these informative videos. thanks! and congrats! xD

[ItZMuRdA]

Thanks camy. Subs on YouTube are free, you should hit that button (if you haven't already) for coolness factor. :)

[Rolfski]

Thks for the guide. You where talking in the video about ParticleDistanceScale (=0.650000 by default), that would impact the distance at which bullet holes render. For me, that makes this is a very important setting because the only way to properly test the effect of compensators and forward grips is shoot at walls over long ranges.
So my question to you is: What's the maximum value of this setting and how badly does it effect frame rate?

[ItZMuRdA]

Thks for the guide. You where talking in the video about ParticleDistanceScale (=0.650000 by default), that would impact the distance at which bullet holes render. For me, that makes this is a very important setting because the only way to properly test the effect of compensators and forward grips is shoot at walls over long ranges.
So my question to you is: What's the maximum value of this setting and how badly does it effect frame rate?

A good question indeed. I'm not sure what the max value is, but you could certainly play with it. I didn't find any need to even attempt to go beyond 65m. I did notice slight performance increases when I had it turned down, though, so I imagine you will notice a decrease if it even lets you turn it up. Let us know if you try it out!

[Rolfski]

A good question indeed. I'm not sure what the max value is, but you could certainly play with it. I didn't find any need to even attempt to go beyond 65m. I did notice slight performance increases when I had it turned down, though, so I imagine you will notice a decrease if it even lets you turn it up. Let us know if you try it out!
That setting is not in my useroptions.ini. Which means they have either taken it out or it is a Nvidia physx only setting (I'm on AMD). Editing it in did not do anything for my bullet hole distance rendering so I'm really curious what setting actually does. Not being able to properly test attachments has being one of my biggest annoyances so far.

[ItZMuRdA]

That setting is not in my useroptions.ini. Which means they have either taken it out or it is a Nvidia physx only setting (I'm on AMD). Editing it in did not do anything for my bullet hole distance rendering so I'm really curious what setting actually does. Not being able to properly test attachments has being one of my biggest annoyances so far.

It still works (as of GU10 at least), but I don't believe goes in by default. Are you sure you have it typed correctly? Just add it somewhere under [Rendering].

[Rolfski]

I added it like this with a zero value and it did absolutely nothing to my particle/bullet hole rendering:

[Rendering]
GraphicsQuality=3
TextureQuality=1
ShadowQuality=0
RenderDistance=3000.000000
Gamma=0.000000
MaximumFPS=120
UseLod0a=0
VSync=0
OverallQuality=-1
LightingQuality=3
FogShadowsEnable=0
EffectsQuality=3
TerrainQuality=3
FloraQuality=3
ModelQuality=3
ParticleLOD=2
MotionBlur=0
AO=0
ParticleDistanceScale=0

[ItZMuRdA]

I added it like this with a zero value and it did absolutely nothing to my particle/bullet hole rendering:

[Rendering]
GraphicsQuality=3
TextureQuality=1
ShadowQuality=0
RenderDistance=3000.000000
Gamma=0.000000
MaximumFPS=120
UseLod0a=0
VSync=0
OverallQuality=-1
LightingQuality=3
FogShadowsEnable=0
EffectsQuality=3
TerrainQuality=3
FloraQuality=3
ModelQuality=3
ParticleLOD=2
MotionBlur=0
AO=0
ParticleDistanceScale=0

It's somewhat possible GU11 removed its usefulness, but try it with a value of 0.00001, as that's what I used to use.

[Crator]

I had forgot about the PhysX setting (have had it off for a while). Turned it on high to see what it did and looks great but not too long after playing with it on my FPS went to crap. Set it down to low and it still looks nice and is pretty stable.

[Wahooo]

[Terrain]
RenderFlora=Off

Mine always reverts to =On when I load the game? Any idea why?

[SerethiX]

Set ini to read only

SerethiX - www.serethi.de

[ItZMuRdA]

[Terrain]
RenderFlora=Off

Mine always reverts to =On when I load the game? Any idea why?

Aye, is your useroptions.ini on read only? Make sure you uncheck that to save the change, then you can recheck it.

Also, your FloraQuality may have to be set to Off (which is now a value of "4" in the .ini) in order for it not to get turned back on.

[Rolfski]

It's somewhat possible GU11 removed its usefulness, but try it with a value of 0.00001, as that's what I used to use.
Setting it to 0.0001 didn't do anything either. Does changing/adding this setting still work with you?

[ItZMuRdA]

Setting it to 0.0001 didn't do anything either. Does changing/adding this setting still work with you?

To nitpick, I used 0.000001 to preserve the same number of digits, but I doubt that matters. Maybe they disabled it, I'll go try!

[ItZMuRdA]

Yep, looks like it still works. I'll post a VOD of the stream after for you to see what I mean.

[Belhade]

Aye, is your useroptions.ini on read only? Make sure you uncheck that to save the change, then you can recheck it.

Also, your FloraQuality may have to be set to Off (which is now a value of "4" in the .ini) in order for it not to get turned back on.

Interesting. Are there any other values where 4=OFF?

[ItZMuRdA]

Interesting. Are there any other values where 4=OFF?

I don't think so. I think that happened with Flora because they added "Off" as a quality function in a later patch, post-release, so 4 was the unused number. Same like TextureQuality=0 is actually ultra for textures. There's some funky ones.

[ItZMuRdA]

To nitpick, I used 0.000001 to preserve the same number of digits, but I doubt that matters. Maybe they disabled it, I'll go try!

Here's the link to the vod:

http://www.twitch.tv/itzmurda_tv/b/422359712

I tested it at 0.000001 at the beginning. Starting at about 1 minute 30 seconds in the video.

[Rolfski]

Thks for the vid but I used exactly your setting and nothing happened on my end. Maybe it has something to do with other settings as well.

Question is: What max distance bullet hole rendering can you get with that setting? I'm standard on 40+ meters now. Not sure what to do to max it out but if it works on your end, maybe you can get a clue because believe me, this is a very important attachment test setting.

I've seen dozens of YouTube weapon reviews and guides over the course and so far no one has ever been able to properly analyze and demonstrate the effects of fwd grips and to a lesser extend compensators. Everybody is mostly in the blind with this.

[ItZMuRdA]

Thks for the vid but I used exactly your setting and nothing happened on my end. Maybe it has something to do with other settings as well.

Question is: What max distance bullet hole rendering can you get with that setting? I'm standard on 40+ meters now. Not sure what to do to max it out but if it works on your end, maybe you can get a clue because believe me, this is a very important attachment test setting.

I've seen dozens of YouTube weapon reviews and guides over the course and so far no one has ever been able to properly analyze and demonstrate the effects of fwd grips and to a lesser extend compensators. Everybody is mostly in the blind with this.

I'm moving a lot today but I'll give it a shot later on tonight when I settle in. I tend not to do weapon reviews for my YouTube unless it's a particular exception, since so many people cover them already in great detail. You may be right about this one particular thing, though. I'll give it a look.

In the meanwhile feel free to adjust other settings to mine to see if it makes a difference, not sure what it could be, but they're all there in the OP.

[ItZMuRdA]

I'm moving a lot today but I'll give it a shot later on tonight when I settle in. I tend not to do weapon reviews for my YouTube unless it's a particular exception, since so many people cover them already in great detail. You may be right about this one particular thing, though. I'll give it a look.

In the meanwhile feel free to adjust other settings to mine to see if it makes a difference, not sure what it could be, but they're all there in the OP.

Checked in for you today Rolf. It's hard to confirm if the setting does anything beyond 65m, it's possible that it draws tracers and things at a larger range. It was really hard for me to test -- it might not.

I can say, however, regardless what the setting was on, bullet holes drew at a max of about 30 meters, so it doesn't seem to change that at least.

[Rolfski]

Thanks mate, I was already afraid of that. Having bullet holes rendered for a longer time at a longer distance for attachment test purposes, is a Quality of Life feature I requested but unfortunately didn't get implemented.

[ItZMuRdA]

Thanks mate, I was already afraid of that. Having bullet holes rendered for a longer time at a longer distance for attachment test purposes, is a Quality of Life feature I requested but unfortunately didn't get implemented.

np. Glad to help, sorry to disappoint!

[blashyrk]

The title of this thread is perfect; no, my game isn't running optimally! It isn't running optimally for anyone, it's simply an unoptimized game ;).

I have AMD FX-8350 @ stock 4.0Ghz and I can't ever get more than 20+-5 FPS in big battles.

I tried every tweak, config and suggestion people have posted (yours included) and nothing seems to help. Ironically my older rig (AMD Phenom II X4 @ 3.0Ghz) never drops below 30FPS, I can't seem to understand what's making the difference.

Sorry for the rant, I do appreciate you trying to help us by posting this guide and I really hope someone has benefited from it.

[Dragonskin]

The title of this thread is perfect; no, my game isn't running optimally! It isn't running optimally for anyone, it's simply an unoptimized game ;).

I have AMD FX-8350 @ stock 4.0Ghz and I can't ever get more than 20+-5 FPS in big battles.

I tried every tweak, config and suggestion people have posted (yours included) and nothing seems to help. Ironically my older rig (AMD Phenom II X4 @ 3.0Ghz) never drops below 30FPS, I can't seem to understand what's making the difference.

Sorry for the rant, I do appreciate you trying to help us by posting this guide and I really hope someone has benefited from it.

It's not all about your CPU. What is your GPU? Nvidia or AMD/ATI?

Here is my rig.
AMD FX 8350 @ 4.0 Ghz
8Gb (2X4gb) G. Skillz PC1600 DDR3
ATI Radeon HD 7970 B.E. 1 Ghz 3Gb GDDR5

I can get up to 114fps on near ultra settings.. but dips down to high 40s or mid 50s in extremely large battles. I should be getting better frames, but unfortunately the game is optimized for Nvidia.. hence the Nvidia PhysX ability in the game. With the game coming to the PS4 which is an AMD multi-core (8 cores) processor and it having a ATI video card then hopefully they will roll out better optimization for AMD/ATI users.

The crappy part to me is I get lower frames the lower my settings are set. I have to be at least on High for it to start using my video card more than my CPU. Custom settings with some things on high and ultra has netted the best results with things like Fog Shadow =off, Flora=off. There is more to finding the right settings that using the presets.

[blashyrk]

It's not all about your CPU. What is your GPU? Nvidia or AMD/ATI?

Here is my rig.
AMD FX 8350 @ 4.0 Ghz
8Gb (2X4gb) G. Skillz PC1600 DDR3
ATI Radeon HD 7970 B.E. 1 Ghz 3Gb GDDR5

I can get up to 114fps on near ultra settings.. but dips down to high 40s or mid 50s in extremely large battles. I should be getting better frames, but unfortunately the game is optimized for Nvidia.. hence the Nvidia PhysX ability in the game. With the game coming to the PS4 which is an AMD multi-core (8 cores) processor and it having a ATI video card then hopefully they will roll out better optimization for AMD/ATI users.

The crappy part to me is I get lower frames the lower my settings are set. I have to be at least on High for it to start using my video card more than my CPU. Custom settings with some things on high and ultra has netted the best results with things like Fog Shadow =off, Flora=off. There is more to finding the right settings that using the presets.

I'm using ATi HD 6870 and each and every time my framerate dips to miserable levels, the game shows [CPU] as the hog...

I also have 8GB (2x4GB) Kingston HyperX something something RAM @ 1600Mhz

[ChipMHazard]

Where are my manners. The least I can do after asking for this video so many times is thank you. So thanks for this, Murda:p

[ItZMuRdA]

Where are my manners. The least I can do after asking for this video so many times is thank you. So thanks for this, Murda:p

lol, thank you good sir.

[Dragonskin]

I'm using ATi HD 6870 and each and every time my framerate dips to miserable levels, the game shows [CPU] as the hog...

I also have 8GB (2x4GB) Kingston HyperX something something RAM @ 1600Mhz

Try using higher graphic settings and see if you get better frames. Some settings will force your video card to do more work. Motion Blur and Ambient Occlusion seem to make the game start to use my GPU more.

My in game settings are..
Overall Quality: Custom
Graphics Quality: High
Texture Quality: Ultra
Lighting Quality: High
Shadow Quality: Off
Fog: unchecked (off)
Effects Quality: High
Terrain Quality: High
Flora Quality: Off
Model Quality: High
Particles: High
Motion Blur: checked (on)
Ambient Occlusion: checked (on)

Try some of those and see what happens. Tweak some of them if you need to. The game still tells me I am CPU bottlenecked.. but those settings seem to net me the best results so far.

[Phreec]

Thks for the vid but I used exactly your setting and nothing happened on my end. Maybe it has something to do with other settings as well.

I believe you also need UseLod0a=1

[blashyrk]

Try using higher graphic settings and see if you get better frames. Some settings will force your video card to do more work. Motion Blur and Ambient Occlusion seem to make the game start to use my GPU more.

My in game settings are..
Overall Quality: Custom
Graphics Quality: High
Texture Quality: Ultra
Lighting Quality: High
Shadow Quality: Off
Fog: unchecked (off)
Effects Quality: High
Terrain Quality: High
Flora Quality: Off
Model Quality: High
Particles: High
Motion Blur: checked (on)
Ambient Occlusion: checked (on)

Try some of those and see what happens. Tweak some of them if you need to. The game still tells me I am CPU bottlenecked.. but those settings seem to net me the best results so far.

I tried maxing the game out (other than shadows and flora) like you suggested, and again, everything is well until I get stuck in a massive biolab/techplant fight, where I get 20-25FPS.

Perhaps it has something to do with me running Windows 8 x64? I vaguely remember someone somewhere saying that the game runs worse on Windows 8 for some reason... I'd appreciate if someone could confirm or disprove this.

[Dragonskin]

I tried maxing the game out (other than shadows and flora) like you suggested, and again, everything is well until I get stuck in a massive biolab/techplant fight, where I get 20-25FPS.

Perhaps it has something to do with me running Windows 8 x64? I vaguely remember someone somewhere saying that the game runs worse on Windows 8 for some reason... I'd appreciate if someone could confirm or disprove this.

I seem to remember Higby saying that Windows 8 wasn't a focus at the time (back in beta).. but that could have changed. I've heard that Windows 8 isn't well support in general because of some choices Microsoft made when the new operating system. Largly having to do with the app/game store that is part of Windows 8 that attempts to cut out other online digital stores like Origin, Steam, Google Play and Uplay. Again, that is what I have heard... not sure how true that is either. If anyone can correct me then it would be appreciated.

[Rolfski]

Window 8 app store = (touch) metro environment only. Has nothing to do with this game. PS2 is desktop environment which won't go anywhere soon, so there's no reason for SOE not to optimize it for Windows 8, that will be on most people's gaming rigs the coming years.

[Dragonskin]

Window 8 app store = (touch) metro environment only. Has nothing to do with this game. PS2 is desktop environment which won't go anywhere soon, so there's no reason for SOE not to optimize it for Windows 8, that will be on most people's gaming rigs the coming years.

Windows 8 Is Not Good For Gamers

For the past several days, I've been playing with a very nice laptop that has Windows 8 Professional installed on it. Many others, like our sibling site Gizmodo, have looked at Windows 8's usability for professional environments, or for everyday home computing. I've been exploring its potential specifically for gaming, trying out play-related features both old and new. It's taken me half a week to learn to use it, but after beginning the long process of adapting, I feel that I can safely say:

Gabe Newell might be right.

Newell, head of Valve, has infamously stated that Windows 8 is "a catastrophe" for games development. Plenty of others have echoed the concerns, if in less strong language, including Blizzard, Stardock, and Markus "Notch" Persson of Minecraft fame. Valve, as a result, is hedging their bets for the future by trying to expand into Linux, and bringing more gaming there. After my frustrating days with Windows 8, that looks like a good idea.


http://kotaku.com/5936535/windows-8-is-not-good-for-gamers

I know that Kutaku isn't the best for real information, but this is what kinda started it all. That and as I said.. other publishers have stated that they dislike the Windows 8 store because it directly competes with their stores.

Will Windows 8 get better optimization over time? Probably, but it seems like the vast majority of developers aren't worying about it for now.

Actually to further expand on this. Microsoft is known for making crap operating systems occasionally. If you go back in time you see Windows 95.. when a lot of games started coming out. Windows 98 was supported well with games after. Then Windows ME came out... do you remember anyone getting that system? Not many and games didn't function well for that system. Then XP came out and once again gamers rejoiced. Everyone praised XP for how great it was... then Vista came out... yea, Vista... terrible. I personally don't know anyone that got Vista and games ran poorly on it. Then Windows 7... tons of support and games made for it. Now Windows 8 is out... games haven't been doing well on it. There was a Windows 8 exclusive game that is now being pushed to other operating systems because it did so terrible that they didn't want to stay exclusive. People complain about Windows 8... publishers and developers dislike Windows 8... so it could very well go down like ME and Vista.

[Rolfski]

I'm running PS2 on Windows 8.1 preview. It runs smooth like butter and does away with many of the UI issues desktop users have with Windows 8 (I'm not one of them btw). And as said, the issues some developers have with the closed shop is not relevant for this game or any desktop gaming. They're just afraid of being totally cut out in a possible future OS version, which I won't see happen honestly. MS is not stupid enough to screw over its own desktop developer eco system.

So if you're not having any issues with the new UI, there's not really a reason not to play PS2 on Windows 8. Having said that, performance wise there's not much reason to install it (http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/3412/4/gaming-in-windows-8-vs-windows-7-whats-the-difference-in-performance-conclusion) either.
The only reason from a gaming perspective is DirectX 11.1 (some features in Win7 (http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/windows_7_will_receive_some_directx_111_features_a fter_all)) and 11.2 (Win8.1 and Xbox One only (http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/160076-directx-11-2-will-be-a-windows-8-1-and-xbox-one-exclusive-microsoft-dangles-the-upgrade-carrot)), but for this game that doesn't matter at all.