So, I was looking to see how high of a resolution I could get EQ in, the highest resolution that was a "valid" one (as in 720p, 1080p, 2k, 4k, 8k, etc, etc) was 8k resolution. 16k resolution, which is the next step up I believe, would only client crash, dunno why . Devs plz fix! Wish to go higher! Ignore the UI since only took a SS to see at various high resolutions , didn't re-arrange anything! Since even as JPG's these images are big file size I've linked them rather then embed, heh 4K (4.2mb image) : http://eqresource.com/misc/4keq.jpg 8K (11.5mb image) : http://eqresource.com/misc/8keq.jpg PS: The 4k image size as default bmp SS = 31.6mb, the 8k image size as default bmp SS = 126mb PPS: Yes, those are old models, they were also taken on different days! I'm thinking I can set up a chat box of every filter by itself and still not dent that real estate on screen though, heh
Old models rule! If mounts worked with the old models, I'd have them on all the time. I have a 2650x1440 27" display that sits right behind my keyboard. At that range, EQ is too big for me in full-screen as I have to shift my eyes around too much to study both sides of the screen. Maybe if my UI were L shaped, or all at the bottom of the screen, it might work, but I doubt it. I currently run EQ in a 1600x1200 window. This not only allows me to take in the whole screen without shifting my focus too much, but also allows me to have an almost-full-sized browser window open next to it. In my opinion, high resolutions don't really make EQ look better, but rather sufficient resolution with lots of anti-aliasing, anistropic filtering, and in-game options turned on is what looks best to me.
Yea, I wish EQ had more built in things like AA and that, the jaggies will cut your eyeballs I was just mainly wondering "How high can you go" hehe, appears it is potentially somewhere between 8k and 16k!
Both Nvidia and ATI can force AA settings and that works. Intel's on-chip graphics processors don't seem to offer the software to do it, though.
Mine is a 39 inch tv at 1920x1080 pixels. I love it. GeForce G100 video card. The tv sits about 5 inches back of my keyboard.
My experience was a bit different. In 2009 I went from a 720p monitor to a 1080p one, and EQ looked dramatically sharper. Beyond 1080p, I would agree with you that the returns are (likely) minimal. The #1 thing EQ needs from a graphics standpoint is in game AA. It dramatically improves the game's graphics. I remember back in the day I would watch expansion trailers and think thought there would be no way I could make my EQ look that good. Now it's the opposite; I watch the trailers and think my EQ looks better, since SOE's own videos are covered in jaggies. The problem with forcing AA through graphic card software is that it produces some bugs in game. Specifically, there are white outlines around faded plane clipped buildings, and I've also had some problems with the water in waterfalls not displaying correctly. And most importantly, not everyone knows how to force AA or will make the effort to do it. Additionally, first impressions matter, and if someone downloads the F2P EQ client they should be getting AA from the getgo. The gameplay videos posted on youtube for EQ's anniversary were covered in jaggies, and comments saying how horrible the game looks. ========================= When I went from 720p to 1080p, I noticed a big drop in performance. This was before I knew how to put EQ on multiple cores. Regardless, I have a hard time seeing people getting 60fps@4k on raids with any hardware, even in the future.
The textures in Everquest are usually low polygon so going to a higher resolution won't make the game look any better. I run 1920X1080 on both my laptop 17" and a 27" monitor. The 17" laptop, the text is so small I have to use a different font which is too big for some of the windows it's in.
I play EQ across two screens with a viewport for my gaming area - my UI goes around the play screen now - I am upgrading to a 29" UltraWide 21:9 display and plan on placing a larger viewport on that display - so yes I want to see EQ use higher rez please. BTW the 21:9 display is only $379 -- woot My birthday gift to myself
You shouldn't have an issue, EQ can already run at 4k and 8k resolutions . I don't think 8k resolutions are really out yet at least in single displays, and 16k is prob a bit away itself hehe
What was the performance like? I've done 4x supersampling + MSAA with a minimal performance hit, to accomplish pretty much the same thing. It made my video card consume a lot more power, so I don't play with SS, but for those who don't care I think SSAA+MSAA could be practical. On modern systems, CPU is the bottleneck for EQ. My hypothesis is that downsampling would significantly increase both CPU and GPU usage with EQ while supersampling would primarily be an increase in GPU usage.
In the Guild Lobby with 101 people on /who count: At 8k resolution I am able to hold about 25 FPS looking at everyone, increasing up to 70 FPS as less people are on screen (no one on the screen for 70 FPS basically). At 720p, it's 45 FPS to 200 (think this is the highest Fraps / Dxtory will display ) in the same way, looking at everyone vs no one. GPU usage went to 1.2 gig vram (vs ~250mb at 720p), hitting 70-99% load (wondering if this is why it is crashing trying 16k ), it doesn't seem to come close to say what EQ Landmark requires (in terms of how hot it forces the GPU to run and such) CPU usage was only 35% across all 4 cores (using -1 option in eqclient, of course EQ isn't only thing up but the rest is basically idle and should be almost no usage) Regular Ram usage stays the same (700mb in GL) Using an i5-3570k (Base speed, not overclocked) and an nVidia 660 (2 gig vram total) 25 FPS with 101 people on screen in the by far laggiest zone in game, should be "good enough" to play in a raid setting though I imagine, it's basically towards the lowest end of FPS you can have for 'smooth'-ish animation in gameplay, heh.
That's a lot better than I would have guessed. It seems like downsampling similar hit as supersampling. Do you have any visual oddities with UI elements on your screen? Specifically, does the downsampled UI look basically the same as the UI at native? As for CPU usage, EQ still primarily runs on 1 core. I would imagine core 0 (which is the primary core when running -1) would be at 90-99% in lobby, with the remaining 10-20% (overall) usage would be spread among the other cores.
Yea, when double down sampled (to 4k then 1080p) the ui is super super tiny, it basically looks the same as the 'scaled' version of the image if you just looked at it without enlarging to full size in browser, there are no visual problems with it though, but you do have to blow it up to extreme amounts vs if you were straight playing at 8k resolution itself, and the mouse seems off vs where you have to click (it's off by a lot in 8k, but not super bad in 4k, this might be due to the way it's being done though)
