Do you have something that lets you view individual cores on your CPU? I notice that when my frames go down to ~30 (honestly, this is fine by me in big fights), I'm being CPU limited. While my whole processor isn't taxed, one of the cores is really up there. When it switches from being CPU limited, the GPUs kick in and my frame rate jumps up to 60 (vsync limited by choice). When you're in game, in the event you don't know this, hit alt-f to bring up the FPS counter. It will tell you your frame rate as well as what is limiting it.
I hope you're still watching this thread codeForge because I would really like to get your thoughts on the following post. Has Fugly discovered the issue at hand or it there something else at play?
100% behind you: you guys did an amazing job in Beta and as a software developer myself I'm in awe of how well you've optimized such an ambitious game. Keep it up and I'll keep paying/playing.
Thanks codeForge for being so honest. Many of us can't upgrade due to financials and it's much appreciated you are taking us into consideration too.
I wasn't even really looking for it to get fixed tomorrow or anything, I was really just looking for public acknowledgement that something was wrong. Thanks for this!
We've been working on optimizing the game for many months now, with a large team of coders. We also have engineers from Intel, AMD, and nVidia all working on it with us. We all want the game working better. And yes, we do utilize multiple CPUs, and no we do not always use 100% of a particular core, or 100% of all cores. It just isn't that simple, and if you try a bunch of games you'll see similar behavior. Particularly if the game is heavy on physics, as is PS2. I appreciate you guys sharing information, and your personal findings, and such. Understand that we're looking down every avenue and have very, very experienced coders on the problem.
If you have an Intel try turning off Hyper Threading. I have gone from min 25fps (CPU bound) to min 40 FPS(GPU bound) in a zerg at amp station. All setting on high and 100% render quality. i7 920@ 4GHz 2X6970 12G ram
Well I'm frustrated with my performance, I'm well above specs like a lot of people, i52500, x2 6870, 16 GB ram, SSD, and I'm getting like 40s fps in big fights, and have my fps capped at 71 eveywhere else. Still though it's a pretty bad-*** experience! This post makes me feel better, and I'm just gonna make the best of it for now and keep playing. The hitchy players, and the players warping are the worst part really. I can live with 45 fps in a big gun fight as long as it's a smooth 45, without all these little "hiccups" of FPS in the 20s.
While I'm glad the devs are looking into this, I think it might have been wise for them to optimise everything before leaving beta. Seriously, though, when a decent piece of hardware such as my own can't manage 10fps in a firefight with every single graphics option on the bare minimum, it's probably not ready for general release...
More than FPS, the main problem I see is culling - trying to snipe around the edges of a big battle is a PITA when the enemy draw distance shrinks and they just poof out of existence.
You don't actually have a decent piece of hardware if you're getting 10FPS, sorry. Just because you can play games running on 5-year-old engines at a high FPS doesn't mean that you should expect the same framerate out of something more modern and ambitious.
Please keep us updated on the optimizations ... i got used to the daily patching in beta made you certain that work was being done, and what work was being done
id say the game is doing pretty well tbh it taxes both of my gtx 580's too 90% during big fights then im cpu limited but I still have 40 frames. i7 @ 4.5ghx ivybridge 16gig ram sli gtx 580's latest NVidia beta drivers p.s all details are set too ultra also.
Sir codeForge, please, for the love of Vanu let us just toggle FXAA off. That's all many of us want, we will happily eat all the jagged lines in the world to enjoy the gameplay. Its ugly and it uses resources. I don't care how infinitely small this resource cost is or is not, it uses them and produces bad results People will use third party modifications to remove it otherwise, and I would hate to see people banned for trying to make their game perform adequately.
| CPU :Boxed Intel Core i7-3820 | MBO :Asus Sabertooth X79 | RAM : Corsair Vengeance - 16GB 1866MHz | HDD :OCZ Agility 3 SSD 60GB | GPU : ASUS GeForce ENGTX560 Ti DCII/2DI/1GD5- 1GB im getting like 15 to 40 fps on max and on lower settings its sometimes even wors dunno why hope it will be better cuz i did spend some cash on it not much anyway ;p
I wonder how PS1 handled this but it worked far better Though I'm so happy to hear you're still optimizing I was loosing hope, yay!
Let me know when frame rate is flawless on i5 machines with GPU from the last generations ( 6870-7870, 670-680 ) with reasonably high graphical settings. Then we can talk. Right now this game brings back the memories of another MMOFPS game called Darkfall. There frame rate went down the drain as soon as you had a hundred of players in the same area. I love the scale of PS2 and team oriented features. I can suffer the ****** art style ( camos, colours and optics style straight out of 1960's superhero comics ), but the game performance HAS to follow some logic and scale properly. Right now it's a mess. I see people running similar set ups and getting totally different frame rates, I see people with Intel i5-i7 machines with amazing graphic cards ( 670 ) and getting 45 FPS in combat. That's the best hardware available on the market right now. I doubt many of us have it. Something is really wrong here and I HOPE IT IS as I haven't seen optimisation of any game which would boost FPS by more then 10-15. That won't be nowhere enough to keep PS2 afloat.
