I want to make this crystal clear. We aren't done optimizing. We have tons of optimizations in the works, and a team of guys working on them. We meet about them every day, sometimes multiple times a day. We review what you're saying. As long as the frame rate is low, none of us are going to rest easy. I personally have a system that I play on that is only getting 25fps in fights, and I refuse to upgrade the hardware... so this effects MY personal K/D ratio. So any rumor that we don't care about a particular type of hardware, or aren't optimizing... squish it. There is no conspiracy, and no rest. We simply have a lot of work to do. If you hear someone saying it's easy, have them show you their game with hundreds of people and dozens of vehicles within a single 100 meter firefight. I'd happily accept their advice. *grin* Tell them to ask someone who was in the original tech test how frame rate has advanced since then. That was a few months ago. If frame rates are just too low, check back later. We'll still be kickin and frame rate will be higher. For the rest of you, thanks as always for your patience and Keep the Faith.
I appreciate hearing this, Glad you guys are working on it But no matter how low the fps is, I'll still be here for the epic massive scaled battles in PS2! (I do want an increase though, just saying i'll stick with PS2 forever no matter what happens )
Wow thanks for posting this. I was worried so much that I was going to have to purchase a new card right now. Do you think after optimization it will run smooth during battles with these specs? AMD Radeon 6870 AMD Athlon II X4 645 processor 6 GB of ram
apreciate your statement im getting 30-35 frames in battles..........pathetic my specs: windows 7 64 bit home premium msi p55 gd55 platform thermalright archon artic silver 5 TIM i5 750 at 4ghz and qpi at 3.6 8gb kingstone hyper x running almost at 2133 msi gtx 560 ti 448 cores at 950 core and 2200 memo sandisk extreme 240ssd with still 80gb free corsair HX650w haf 912 with plenty of airflow im using a 1080p philips 32 led tv with 6ms response
I appreciate ALL the work you guys have done. When I first started playing the beta.... my frame rate was only around 8-10 in large battles.... Now I get around 25-30 ... sometimes lower depending on the scale of it.
As much as I LOVE seeing a post about this, I feel the need to slightly nitpick on just one simple quote on this one. " If you hear someone saying it's easy, have them show you their game with hundreds of people and dozens of vehicles within a single 100 meter firefight. I'd happily accept their advice. *grin* " Joint-Ops, MAG, and BF3 to name a few. JUST SAYING. But THANK YOU for the update!
The quote said 'hundreds of people plus dozens of vehicles'. none of those games have that lol take bf3, multiply it by four, triple the vehicles, and thats what they're constructively dealing with. just on one part of the map. on one of the continents.
i dont know about the others but bf3 doesnt even have hundreds of players in a server let alone in a 100 meter radius
How about multiple MMO's such as WoW and such? Hundreds of people, there are vehicles, and large battles, and those were just SOME of the games. Don't sit there and claim to be the only one that does a game mode like this.
Tech test was awful... I usually cried myself to sleep each night. My current rig back then was still good (older i7, 12GB RAM, 580GTX..) But now if you check my signature for current new specs, i get like 30-40fps on large fights and 60-70 everywhere else.. It should be atleast 60-70 in large fights and 100+ everywhere else with my current rig.
WoW does not support 2000 players in their battlefield.. At best their battleground supports 80 ppl (40 from each side) and their graphics is mediocre compared to any other current game. Knowing their code, **** get laggy when everyone clashes, even on a good PC..
thank you for letting us in on this. Im enjoying the game as it is...at 20-30 fps in big battles and 50 everywhere else. Once you guys get framerate to where it should be then this game will be 10x better
Yeah I'm making no excuses here. It IS better with a higher frame rate. One of my main focuses near the end of beta was getting the LOW end up.. so the game was less "hitchy"... which I'm also confident that people who were in the early beta could attest to. Low frame rate may harm a game, but a "hitchy" FPS is even worse. Oh and as far as the CPU usage thing... yeah we're improving that, but it's not as simple as "Just use 100% of my CPU". We have dozens of threads running, but in the end they have to make a "frame" out of it.. so somebody ends up waiting on someone. We continue to optimize this, but the goal is much more about getting a higher frame rate than it is about pegging a single CPU.
Fantastic news! I'll continue my silly little covert ops missions of reclaiming mostly untouched bases to gain certs while I wait for further optimization. Gotta do something, right?
What are the odds of reducing the vid card req anytime in the relatively near future? Ex wife took the good PC and I'm stuck with a laptop for the next year or so and definitely don't want to have to wait THAT long to play something I've looked forward to immensely... Sadly, current is: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650... Of most of the new games on the market I've purchased recently, I have had zero problems with any until now and am a bit surprised... Given the low cost and barely live status, I'm certainly not upset, just curious...
The physX stuff is disabled because the team is not happy with the performance hit for the effects it gives and it can cause crashes so its disabled.
psshh take away the best forum meta-game why don't you I approve of this message. Put in a ticket requesting wireframe mode.
