Shiar@Antonia Bayle wrote: The issue is most likely the polygon count. The smoother and more detailed you make the model, the more polygons you have to use. This directly effects the performance because the faces in EQ2 are fully rendered, rather than slapping a face texture onto a smooth surface ala Warcraft style. They probably started off with that nice smooth face you saw in the alpha video, used a bajillion polygons, realized it crashed any self-respecting system at the time, and then went to do several passes to see how far they could take it before settling down into the reality that they were going to have to settle with what we currently have.
Fayle@Mistmoore wrote: I can understand that. They could probly do a graphics upgrade though. PC now are able to do more. I'm sure at one point they will though. They did in eq2 after a while they gave the character models a slight upgrade from the original. Its possible they will do it again with eq2. If anything i would like more clothing options!
kela wrote: Yet you conveniently skipped over my example about Vanguard also running better than EQ2. gg.
Riliszkas@Splitpaw wrote: Vanguard is/was a newer game and used a modified Stock engine(Unreal 2 I think), unlike EQ2 so it has fewer compatablity issues, as there is a company who has a team who's only perpose is to make sure the engine runs with as few compatablity issues as possable...remember the Unreal games are really just glorified Tech Demos, they make thier real money from Licencing the engine. I didn't skip over it anyway. People with FAR LESS POWERFUL rigs then you have don't have issues running at acceptable framerates at a Modified High Quality setting or better(including with shaddows both GPU and CPU), and people with Similar rigs to yours also are reporting being able to at high frame rates in most siduations with most setting turned up. Troubleshooting 101, If the issue is only being seen in One place, it is a good Idea to check that place FIRST as that is likly where the problem is. For exsample if the Phone on Joe's Desk(your computer) can't answer calls(get a good frame rate), you don't start with replacing the phone system(revamping the entire game engine), you start with trying to figure out what is wrong with Joe's Phone(your computer). It is very possable there is a conflict somewhere between your Drivers, Memory managment, Firewall, Anti-Virus Suite, specific brand Video Card, etc. and The EQ2 engine... granted they could possably adjust the engine to remove the conflict on thier end, but that could cause even more conflicts with other computers, its better to find out what is having issues with EQ2 on your end, and fix it there. BTW, I have a Intel Core 2 6400 @ 2.13Ghz, an Nvidia 7950 video card, with 2GB of RAM and WinXP Pro:SP3 and I usually get around 30FPS in most siduations, usually with CPU shaddows on...I don't use GPU shaddows yet because there is a ghosting bug that I get that they are working on.
kela wrote: Btw, that comment about games running better in beta is BS. Anyway, my performance with EQ2 is thusly: I run fine in the old-world zones. Commonlands, antonica, freeport, qeynos... I consistently get over 100fps in these kinds of places. But in Kunark, DoF, and basically anything after original EQ2, my performance just nose-dives.
The game's engine isn't as efficient as it could be. This is understood. That is why Imago is working on it within his capabilities. New games will always run better on newer hardware. It was built for that hardware, and it better utilizes that hardware. Games like Vanguard and AION will run better (and do run better) in some situations on that hardware, yes. This is expected, though they also run on industry standard engines like the CryEngine and Unreal, which, when done appropriately, can do just that. EQ2 wasn't built when these engines were really a solution. Transitioning to them would be impossible. However, EQ2's engine, dated as it is, does look very good, and is bound to look better with some of the updates that are coming down the pipe. I'm not sure as to why it lags so bad on your system. The client does not perform as well as say some other games' clients, true, but it shouldn't completely and totally devastate your performance by turning on shadows. As far as the armor is concerned? Why doesn't it work? It's fit for a non-existant human skeleton, and would probably be a pain in the rear-end to put onto all the other skeletons, especially some of the more... erm... odd ones. Iksar? Trolls? Ogres? It's been the cause of dozens of armor pieces not making it down the pipe, and i'm sure it's the same here. Solution? Unibody skeleton. But that's a lot of manpower. Doubt it would ever happen. The new armor pieces that I saw at fan faire look increadible, however, and one can hope that we start to see more of them trickle down in the new updates.
kela wrote: Yeah, I'm calling you a liar. I've played both Vanguard and AoC beta, and neither ran better in beta than they did in release. Quite the opposite, actually. And Aion's beta? Crowded as heck.
I don't think that she's lying. Again, EQ2's engine has always struggled with things like lots of models being rendered. Most of her examples are in the same boat. AOC? Whew.... especially so. So when you're in a beta test and nobody's around? Performs great. When it's live and the clunky engine has to actually work for its dollar? Performs terribly. Vanguard performed awfully in beta, and awfully at launch. It performs much better now. Regression toward the mean. Bad could only get better. And it has gotten better. Some newer games like AION, however, indeed, have stronger engines. And I can profess, being in the beta myself, that it runs just fine with dozens of people on my screen. But again, it's apples to oranges. Brand new engine? Engine that is dated and needs work. Ehhhh... At least it's getting work, you know? Imago is doing a great job with the tools that he has available.
