it was a bad idea to go with DX9. for some reason they wanted to stick with DX9 to not exclude winXP people (who are still a massive percentage of the PC players) and then they made the system requirements out of the reach of winXP. e.g. 4gigs of ram when i would imagine the majority of XP users are using 2gigs of ram. the problem with DX9 is that a lot of the functions are reliant on other functions and so can be sent to another core. so you get massive loads on one core. if this game had been made for winVista and up it would be a completely different experience for the players. its not a new story TBH. a lot of publishers like Sony will not spend money on developing a new engine but just keep pushing the tech they have till it cant go any further. look at Star wars the old republic. that game is completely broken. the reason is because they used the engine from the single players games and just re-worked it to be a MMORPG. and it just couldn't do large play areas with large groups of players. they must have realised this during early testing but could not get the funds to buy or write a new engine and so pushed the tech too far and the result was a disaster. they lost so much money. its hard to find actual numbers but that game cost at least 150million (some have estimated it at 300million) dollars to make and it went F2P within months of release. i think when the next wave of consoles comes out this will change as all the publishers are gonna need new DX11 tech. and so we should see a bunch of new engines which should all be DX11. and this will then mean we tech that uses are GFX cards and cores more efficiently. which will be nice
I get what you are saying about PS2, and the way they released it really made no sense. They release it on DX9 and make the system requirements above anything that anyone running winXP would even have... As for the the engine comment about SWTOR I am a little confused. The engine they used for the MMO was not the engine used for the single player games. The engine that runs SWTOR is decent, but its' rendering process operates on a single thread which limits it immensely. My main problem with the Forgelight engine is that it promises way more than it delivers. They tried to make the engine seem 10x better than it actually is. Not much you can do after spending years trying to perfect it though. They can either stick with their product or look stupid for wasting so much money on a flawed game engine. DX11 would have been nice, but it is too late now. This is why a lot of us have pretty much said "**** it" when it comes to playing this game. I don't feel like trying to upgrade my CPU either when I'm seeing people with 6 or 8 core CPUs running this game poorly.
you are correct m8. i thought i had read they used the SP engine for SWTOR. did you play it. it ran worse for me then PS2. luckily i up-graded my pc anyway. but if i was still using XinXP i wouldnt be playing PS2. they did make a huge error there.
The SWTOR engine is certainly not "decent." What EA did was licensing an engine that was far from completion at that time. That ment that the studio responsible for SWTOR had to hack in the missing features and cull the bugs by themselves. Understandably, that resulted in a mess. SWTOR is a horrible game, both from a technical and a gameplay perspective. The forgelight engine can deliver what it promises, but if they turn all of these features on you won't have a happy shooting time. Forgelight is ment to be SOE's engine for their next games, probably well into the 2020s. There are no differences of note between DX9, 10 and 11. 10 was basically a marketing ploy and the few additional features in DX11 don't really help with performance. As it currently stands, there probably won't be a DX12, ever. Plus, not all graphics hardware out there is able to do DX11. Completely preventing a big chunk of your audience from playing your game for a handful of FPS more at best is hardly a good idea.
Five months later and the game still has fairly poor performance. For some like myself, the performance has nose dived recently, unstable FPS fluctuating nearly at random between 50 and 15 in it's current state the game is unplayable for me. Which is an absolute shame as the game used to perform a good deal better. I am sure making the game work well on all systems is not easy, but it is getting ridiculous now as the last patches have degraded performance somewhat. I guess I better be realistic about this, if Planetside has seen little improvement after so long I doubt it will ever get better, unsure if I should keep checking after each major patch or just uninstall the game altogether.
SWTOR ran pretty well for me. PvP never seemed to lag either. Just a lot of other annoying bugs. What? DX11 would have been exactly what us with AMD processors needed(Multithreaded Rendering). They went with DX9 so they could make more money. It's frustrating to have spent money on a game that USE to work for me. The facts are all there. People with high-end PCs are struggling to run this game. Just poor optimization; it's been said a thousand times. PS1 had pretty decent optimizing. I used to play it on low graphics and I was able to participate in big fights. Now there is such a focus on graphics that the actual performance is barely dealt with. I guess they feel they lose money by optimizing more. Doesn't make sense to me.
So the continued silence about this can only mean they cant deliver ... the entire thread was just a method of calming people down and have them hoping. Just be honest about this and remove it so that new players are not mislead and dont spend cash on something they can never really enjoy.
No. The game is heavily CPU bound, multithreaded GPU rendering won't change a thing. I can run this game with a 5 year old GFX and max out on FPS. The only way to increase FPS is a stronger CPU.
well I don't know about other people with high end machines, but this person(myself) isn't struggling at all (plays quit well actually) so I don't know were you got your facts. also those people complaining and such probably say they have a high end machine(and complain about optimization) which in fact they don't....
With the recent patches any place that has a tower runs at 30-40 FPS when it is empty (no players). And it shows GPU constraint!!!! At LOW SETTINGS!!! If there are 2 squads fighting, then this drops to 20-30 and shows CPU, on top of this, gameplay becomes jerky, every few seconds FPS drops into the 10s. This engine is one of the worst that is used for gaming these days. I can play all recent games at or above 60 FPS, the only game that does not run at a high FPS is PS2. I could understand low FPS when there is a zerg battle going on, but performance is also poor in empty and low population areas. Any larger battle obviously is a slideshow. I am playing less and less: poor performance, constant server maintenance and unable to log on during primetime. We will just have to wait until some other company can make a decent MMO FPS, because it is pretty obvious SOE cannot fix their engine.
They couldnt fix the PS1 engine either and had almost the exact same problems as PS2 ... goes without saying im not playing PS3 if its done by SOE
I want to make this crystal clear. We're 2 quarters past release, and the game still isn't optimized. Your team of guys is ****, and you should find a new one.
Its just a marketing ploy to make people stay ... ton of optimizations eh? So many they cant even be mentioned in the release notes ... utter bs
I taking it this is a result of the new patch, the low fps? My GTX 66Ti was getting 40fps in battles and 50 in unpopulated zones with high settings, fog shadows, motion blur and ambient occlusion on, along with render distance on full and GPU physics activated. Since the new patch, however, it gets 16-19 in upopulated zones and a maximum of about 11 in even small firefights.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Read the thread before you post. The main problems have come down to AMD CPUs. Your CPU is perfect for this game, as is the rest of your specs. Basically, your set-up with a high-end AMD processor would get you probably 15-25 less FPS on average. We shouldn't have to buy an Intel processor to play the damn game.
Is there any word on optimization for the next patches? I tried playing today after I downloaded the latest patch and I'm still CPU bound at 15 to 25 FPS in big battles.
on the note of how high ppls frame rate is, i play this game on a dinosaur of a rig, i have great peripherals but the actual TOWER is prehistoric, in large fights i get like 1 fps on the lowest settings, this has forced me to play a sniper class (NC), but none the less im gonna stick with this game cause even though i can hardly hit ppl, i still pull off headshots lol, so stop complaining about 25 fps in large fights or 15 fps in large fights, i would give my left nut for that many frames, but i still play none the less...good job SOE, you have created an amazing game
If you can keep that 1 fps in large fights and not go any higher, the people who gets 25 will feel alot better .. please do not tweak anything in case that gives you more. Think of the 25fps people, thank you! Good work
You're half right. If you take a closer look, you will notice something almost everyone who gets reasonable framerates has in common. Thier CPU is clocked past 4GHz. (i've seen people with AMD say the game plays better for them too when you do this) Now i think we can agree that AMD screwed up with thier CPUs recently, they've been playing catch up since Intel released Sandybridge, but this doesn't make it SOEs fault, it is the buyers fault for not researching before buying 2nd best. Also, your telling someone to "read the thread" is somewhat of a pointless request, this thread is getting a little old now and spans the lifetime of atleast 4 GU release, so the older remarks are not relevent.
