Well i´am just imagining it is a lot more difficult to first of all develop optimizations for a moving train and it´s more difficult to track down issues when we do not have a stable beginning place where we could easily add or remove features to see the effects they have on the product. Projects often require working on multiple things at the same time, but lets take microsoft for example. They have a process model with core principle of always having a working stable version of the software so its easy to see if the new module they are adding to it works properly. Having multiple crews working on a project in real time is also difficult to manage especially as the work somewhat overlaps quite a lot. Bear in mind that i only speak on a general level and do not know anything about this particular project so who knows; Maybe they can do it.
ive got the same problem since GU4 here .From ~45 fps to ~20fps... Intel I7 3770K @3,5 GHZ Geforce GTX 660 8GB RAM Win 7
I actually do this first thing after a patch, and today was pretty normal on my first test machine - I'm still going through the other machines. P.S. In one pass, I surprisingly made it from the NC warpgate, to the VS warpgate, and was just passing the TR warpgate before they got my reaver.
Anyone else seeing a direct correlation between number of players in your proximity and a drop in FPS corresponding to about x2's the effect it used to have.
i5 3.2 Gb 16 gb Ram GTX 670 Terrible performance went worse with each patch. down to 10 fps in battles with more than 30-40 people. This is the core issue of the game, it doesn't matter how much the devs love the game, or how open and friendly the are, if you don't fix the core issue people will leave. I love you game, sank a lot of money into it, supported your business. But it's impossible for me to understand how can you address so much irrelevant stuff but not take care of the real issue, I don't even want to go into battle flow, weapon shake and other REAL issues. FIrst of all we have to be able to play. Here's an idea if my computer is CPU capped give me a damn button in my settings that optimizes setup for CPU. Low/Medium/High is ok for a game that doesn't require so much tinkering, this one does. Most people who have frames issues have it because of the CPU requirements allow us to disable all that stresses the CPU and keep only bare necessities, if you don't have the people and time to take care of the code.
Same issue. I run everything on the lowest setting. Shadows and flora are completely disabled trough the INI file. After the update I can barely run the game anymore. Getting 30-40 FPS in "normal" fights and 30 FPS and even lower in bigger fights. I'm CPU bottlenecked 100% of the time. Not really surprised tbh. After all these patches, including the ones during the beta my performance has only gone down. As it stands I'm getting about 1/3 of the performance I used to get when the beta started even though I only had a HD 6950 then. So SOE... Is an i5 2500k at 4800 MHz the new minimum requirement? Because a few less FPS than what I'm getting is simply unplayable. I wonder how messed up it'll be by the time we reach GU10. After all the optimizations claims this is really starting to become laughable. Best programmers in the industry huh? I'd say most incompetent.
Come to think of it, just facing a biolab at far distance on Ceres produced alot lower fps than usual ... my bet is something is up with bases and drawdistance of infantry.
wow unplayable, does soe understand that this is top of the line in gaming development they will prolly need high end game devs, old and new. I understand they are trying to attempt to move fps into the next generation of gameing but they keep proving that they dont have the knowledge or the technology to create this amazing game at this point in time. hire more game devs with degrees? edit. noticble lower fps in fights tr brought huge armor coulm to crown and i was getting 5-10 fps this never happend b4.
Again it got worse. FPS drops made it unplayable, even on low settings. CPU: i7 860 @ 3,66GHz RAM: 8GB GFX: GTX 670 OC @ 314.07 driver WIN 7 64 2 more of the "optimization patches" and half the players cant run the game anymore.
Not really noticed anything game breaking, maybe a tiny drop but still just fine so far. Setup: Phenom II 965 BE @ 3.9 GHz Radeon 6870 @ 920/1065 GPU/Mem 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 256GB OCZ Vertex 4 (@ ludicrous speed) Win7 64 CPU is definitely limiting factor, need to pull the trigger on an FX one of these days but meh.
Same, deleted useroptions.ini, played with settings, nothing other than going to Amerish and NOT fighting made it like it was yesterday. UNPLAYABLE @ 20fps
I7 950@ 4ghz 2x 6970 6gb ram Win 7 64 Used to have 90-120 fps in the warpgate and now I am down to 40-60. No changes to the .INI seems to work Ingame changes barely affects anything except for shadows My fps remains the same no mather what settings I have.
The game is CPU-bound, not GPU-bound. Increasing some settings, particularly model and terrain quality, might actually increase performance. I assume high model quality prevents aggressive LOD and allows for more instantiation of the same models, but that's just a guess. The worst part is Intel is slacking. My usual solution to games running slow was to throw more money at the problem and get better hardware. When that didn't work, I threw money at cooling and overclocked it. At this point the game is running like a three-legged horse* and I'm out of ways to improve performance, and clock-per-clock Haswell looks very depressing. *It's inching forward and gives the impression it's about to fall over into a ditch and die any moment
The problem for me atleast is the sheer number of players on the server. Rendering 60 Tanks in 1 go is going to kill FPS.
Low-End-System here: Performance did drop in medium battles down from 12-15 to 5-7... this is the mighty hell of NO performance at all... Please take all of your Million-Dollar-Budget and get every person into performance optimizations - even art creators
