Graphics have nothing to do with CPU lag. If you want 60 fps, you have a free planetside 1 account for 6 months. Pretty sure you can get it on there. Enjoy the bullet mechanics.
Did you really just compare WoW to PS2? WoW doesn't have to calculate thousands of bullets and hit detection in seconds
No, no it doesnt ... it calculates what its advertised to do with decent fram rate under the conditions its advertised to support.
So it has been like what, 7 months since the creation of this thread.. It is really sad to see that there has been no evident improvement on performance, many suggesting that it has been declining. I really don't think optimisation is going to happen now, at least between now and when it is launched on the PS4. If they don't do something serious before it comes out on the PS4, the console is going to blow up and take out the owners living room when trying to run it. Seriously though, the most terrifying issue about this is the fact that optimisation is clearly the most economically viable thing to aim for right now, to get more people to play, but it would seem there is no effort from SOE to comment on optimisation or implement optimisation patches. It would seem that there is no way to optimise this game and I am giving up hope that it will ever run well. They are avoiding to comment on anything to do with long term optimisation, which is a little suspicious. It is almost as if they cannot improve performance, but don't want to break it to us or lie. I did quit for a few months due to poor performance on my mid/high teir machine and came back and have been back for about a month now, though nothing has changed in terms of performance. Will probably have to quit again, but I really do not think we will ever see a drastic improvement on this current engine.
At first everyone thought the developers were favoring a certain faction; first the NC, then TR, and, now, VS. From what I've read on the forums, it's evident the developers are letting the game go to waste. Hit detection is horrible, significant imbalances with weaponry and vehicles, over-population on all servers with no real benefit to under-populated factions, and problems with Physics (mainly effecting hit-detection and virtualization). The ideas and visualizations for the game are magnificent, but the skills and competence to carry it out is lacking. Good move on the Free-2-Play ploy; it certainly gave Sony Corp a quick boost on the stock exchange. But what is Sony going to do once they lose more than half of the clientele? They certainly will not be raking in $$. I expect longer queues and more restrictions on non-premium members. It'll still be 'F2P', but with conditions. As far as PS4, Sony will be disappointed. People have already pre-ordered X-Box consoles; people that have long ago gave up on Playstation. If you ignore all the 'Sponsored' reviews online and actually see the differences between the two consoles, X-Box will stand out as the better choice. X-Box One is the first console I have ordered and bought. I've played both consoles previous and current models. The least SOE can do is keep up with Planetside 1 maintenance and exploit removals. But I doubt SOE will have any consideration for the loyal players.
??? PS4 is beating the new Xbox all across the board. Honestly it's almost as if Microsoft doesn't want to sell Xboxes. You made a poor decision buying an Xbox, friend. As far as optimization goes, if SOE says "optimization for PS4!!" they have a lot to do to make use of those eight cores, otherwise this whole buzz is moot. Then they can take that eight core optimization and give it to me, because I need it.
They just threw another bone at us. Don't believe them - they didn't make any progress the past 6 months and they won't in the future. All they want is milking you and buying some time with lies. Smedley, CodeForge and Highby statements regarding optimization are all the same. Big words of liers.
I think the tone in OP:s post was very revealing of this threads true purpose .. funny how being skeptic is often the right state of mind. Why hasnt Codeforge kept us updated on progress of optimization in this thread? And why hasnt Smedley explained why there was no big performance patch in january as planned? Its all very crystal clear ..
Bah! Thanks for making me log in jus to write this post. All you doomsayers are just garbage. Do you honestly think all SOE is doing is just sitting around all day counting the $$$? I for one have noticed improvement with the performance, and quite alot aswell. If you don't trust the company providing you with the game you're playing then just ****, we don't need you here. If you on the other hand are experiancing alot of trouble with the game but still have respect for SOE as a company and games developer I think its good that you voice your concerns. But all this trash talking and bad-assery is just rediculous. Get a hobby people.
After today's update SOE managed to optimize the game so well I have an additional minus 20 FPS Now I can finally enjoy Zergrushes in Biolabs at 25FPS Thanks Obama Are you kidding me? I was in Beta and had better performance than I do now.
No sorry your wrong sir, in order to have a valid point there either needs to be proof to back it up or it needs to be fact. In this case you have none of that. Bottom line the game runs like crap and keeps getting worse. Devs have said or done nothing to address the issue and continue to release content unimportant to the game while performance takes a back seat. Maybe we will see some increase when the ps4 version is released but if I were to go off the last six months Im more than skeptical. Its okay though they are only hurting themselves and the player base. In the long run it probably doesnt matter to them because they are more concerned with the new console they have coming out and its sales.
don't worry, as soon as engine codebase move to AVX2 things little polished himself. whichs eventual, cuz SSEx support left by both vendors "for compatibility only" and this mean Dramatically lower speed for non-AVX2 code on AVX-CPU's[Haswell, Vishera and etc]. basically engine[both client-side and server-side]lack of scalability. too much hot spots, that couldn't be parallelised efficiently in present state, so they run on 2013 CPU's like on 2003 CPU. SOE should borrow/lease some software engineers from HPC or stock strading to educate coders and engineers about message-passing and etc. for example. same was apply to GPGPU portions of engine - they become MAJOR part of all Four major engines, including GFX itself and scalability skyrocketing thus. way less proprietary API's artificial restrictions in that case[DC subset of DX way superior in that case, same apply to OCL], way less proprietary HW stuff imperfections impact[Sli/CFX]. and etc and etc.
Have 2 rigs fit for PS2. The old one is the 4 year old beauty, got about 60FPS on that for PST on full settings My new rig (specs below) i get 30 ish fps atm, used to be 90 fps..... but after some or another patch to optimise the game it dropped 60 fps.... Anywho, still plays fine so I aint botherd. Old rig is win7 pro 64 New rig is win 8 pro 64 - yeah i know, win 8 aint meant for gaming, but it runs mighty quick ... well it might have to do with my pci-e 1500mb/s ssd card... but w/e Intel I7 3.2ghz 6core (betting PS2 only uses 1...) 16 gigs of pc 1800 ram As said an PCI-e ssd with 1500/1000 MB (that be mega byte not bit..) per second speed and 2 x AMD rad hd7900 gpx cards Board I dun remember, some gigabyte thing i think, but I cba to look it up atm and it dont matter TO much.. Anyway, getting anything over 60FPS is useless since your refresh rate wont go higher (well maybe 70..) but anyway 60 is the mark to hit for. but that should be the bussy end of the gaming bit. OH a bud of mine has a similar rig only difrences from mine to his : He has 1 gpx card, he has 12 Gigs mem, had an I5 2.8mhz, and a 500mbps ssd He runs at 50-60 fps.... Yep, lesser rig better results.. Reason: Win 7 as oposed to win 8. Did test that with his HD in my rig. and yeah the fps did shoot up about 2.3 times, so win 7 is much more finetuned then win 8 is. Heres to hopin you got something usefull outa that info.
After walking away from the game for a good long while, I came back and picked it up again to see what (if any) improvements have been made. The short answer is none, as it seems. I upgraded a few bits of my system to boot, adding in a new video card and a new set of disk drives. My specs are now: Dell Precision T7400 Workstation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2x Intel Xeon E5450 3.0Ghz Quad Core (12M L2 cache on each chip) 16GB DDR2 FBDIMM PC-5300 nVidia GeForce 660ti 2GB Dell PERC 5i SAS RAID (with 512MB battery backed cache) 4x 146GB Seagate Cheetah 15K RPM SAS disks in RAID10 (Suck it, Western Digital! And your crappy Raptors too! ) Windows 8 Professional x64 (from Windows 7 Ultimate x64) FPS at the warp gate was an initial improvement at about 40-50fps. But as soon as I get into any kind of battle, the FPS tanks to below 20. The "Alt-F-O-Meter" says [CPU] in brackets, so I imagine the game is whining about my processor. Or processors I should say, but task manager really only shows the game using one core significantly. Out of the eight total ACTUAL cores I have, as there is no HyperThreading for these series of Xeon processors. I've run the gamut of making sure all the drivers and stuff are up to date, and I've tinkered endlessly with the graphic settings again, both in game and using various INI file hacks. Nothing seems to change it. I'm REALLY trying to be patient here, and I REALLY want to believe the OP, but it's looking more and more like PS2 is a lost cause in relation to my system. And I am not willing to scrap the entire box and dump a couple grand into building a bleeding edge system for the sake of PS2. I use this system for much more than just PS2, and I need the processing power for the forays into 3D animation and video stuff I work on. For now, the game goes off the system I suppose. Maybe someday in the distant future, PS2 might actually be playable. Either when we all have the equivalent desktop computational power of current, datacenter sized supercomputers under our desks, or when the PS2 dev team actually writes the optimizations into the game that the OP claims are being worked on. Whichever comes first. And I'm beginning to think that the deskside supercomputer is gonna come first...
PS2 and other modern multiplayer games prefer high performance/core not more cores with lower performance. Your CPU is a Xeon equivalent of the Core 2 Quad Q9650, which was a very good CPU 5 years ago, but has significantly lower performance/core then Sandy Bridge (or better) Intel CPUs, and is on par with the AMD Athlon X4-s, so your problem is not low CPU power (you have 8 cores, 2 CPU) but low CPU power/core. You will be better of upgrading to a i7-2600(or i7-3700, i7-4700), you will get the same overall workstation performance (4 real and 4 virtual CPU core), but way better gaming experience with a lower noise and power consumption. Your other components are up to the task.
Normally I would tend to agree, but since the system I have pretty much slays any other multiplayer game I have, including a few other MMO games, I am not inclined to sink thousands into replacing it for the sake of PS2. Even my Passmark scores put the processors into close competition with the I7-3770. And PS2 being written to only take full advantage of a single core when I have 8 total? It's cheaper to uninstall and move on right now. And I say thousands of dollars because any replacement system I will consider is going to be another dual processor platform.The desktop chips won't do what I need them to as well as the Xeon line.
There are no other game like PS2, BF3 is the closest one but only with 64 players/map and it's very CPU intensive too. PS2 is using all the 8 cores, but some processes can't be split up between CPU cores. Your CPU is outdated for gaming and for work too.
