I think you should understand the subject matter before Criticizing others work how would you like it after I got out of a plane you just worked on and told you to tear it all the way back apart because I wanted a extra 100 FT/min RoC 1. its not your job to make the craft perform and above its rated specs ( where in the adverts for the game does it Advertise a consistent 60FPS on your grandmothers Pentium 4 ? ) I run this game on a Phenom II and a 6870 and its 100% playable on high settings I get a solid 50FPS even in the most particle spam-my battles occasionally it will drop to around 40 and sorry to jolt you out of your dream but Programming a video game != making sure the wings don't fall of of someones plane. .... gimme a break reality check kiddo and this game isn't `on the market` its free2play meaning that if you don't like it you are free 2 go play SOMETHING ELSE
How the heck are you running that, im running the same setup (phenom II x4 955) same gfx but down to 12-15 fps in big fights (
lol, umadbro? no one asked for it to preform above its "rated specs". we are asking for it to work as well as it was intended to work, even devs by their own admission have stated its not where they want *** to be. nothing wrong with that in the least. as far as you crying about it not being on the market because its f2p...you must like to fish. you should get that lil nerd rage problem checked out. night night lil guy.
Cycles the optimization many of us are talking about isn't more FPS for midrange systems in the warpgate, but rather more FPS for higher end systems in large battles. My CPU is pretty powerful, but for some reason I am allegedly CPU bottlenecked in large battles despite CPU usage pretty much NEVER going over 40%. Is there any way this can be fixed? Right now this is the single biggest issue in the game for me. If I could upgrade some hardware to get more FPS in large battles I would, but right now my CPU is about as high end as you can get (for gaming, at least).
So is SWEETFX something i can start using, or are you guys going to randomly start banning for it. I have decent FPS in game, occasionally dipping below acceptable like in massive tank columns traveling, but really want to use it to remove the haze effect, game looks great without it. Anyway...when can we check the physics option...at least for those of us with overkill systems? Ive seen beta footage comparing the two and its fantastic and would be willing to dip down FPS to use it. I realize that 20 FPS and 30-40 FPS is the same to your brain unlike a lot of posters who think 30-40 isnt acceptable....ahh remember the days when getting quake to run 20 FPS was the goal, people seemed more smart about things and less whiny back then. So basically is SWEETFX a go or possibly bannable? And when can you let me use physics?
What the hell have you been smoking, anything under 60 fps is unplayable but that might be the gaming enthusiast part of my speaking
It's different per person. anything lower than 29 I have problems with. 45 or higher is preferred. Being an enthusiast and demanding no less than 60 are two different things
Im sitting on an i7 950 and all I ever see is the CPU text in the lower left corner. From what I understand this means my cpu is limiting the fps. Should an i7 950 really be such a limiting factor in this game? I see, in the bigger fights, just around 30 fps give or take a few. I have a 580 to go with that. All settings on high, cept for shadows on medium, with ambient occlusion on. Personally I would have expected my 580 to be a limiting factor if anything. Oh and one thing I find interesting is how little video memory the game seems to use. With my settings (even when I tried with shadows on high) I have yet to see it go over 500mb, Don't know if this would increase significantly were the settings put on Ultra. What givès?
Your brain cant notice anything over 20ish FPS. You can pretend all you want however. And i say this as a game enthusiast with an oc'ed i5 ivybridge and a gtx 680.
here we go again http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html yeah, go play quake3 with 20 or even 30, you will get rolled everytime by guys popping in with well over 60fps every mind is different in how it interprets motion, just because YOU cant doesnt mean others cant
Funny cause you can check my stats and I really notice a difference between even 40 and 60 fps. If it drops to 30FPS I really see stuttering.
Hate to say it mate but im i think your abit slow in the head, nothing enthusiast if you think 20fps same as 60. http://imgur.com/1rkK4
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_frames_per_second_can_your_eyes_see Stop panicking? Not that i care, i only get 40-50 fps when im in a massive tank column out in the open, when it matters i get 60 (vsync locked) If getting high FPS determines how well you do stick to old school CS.
If you haven't noticed yet, your eyes don't sync with the screen nor with the game. It can be very well that your eye skips a frame that is being updated because at 30FPS it takes too long where as with 60 fps it just got caught. Check out monitor refresh rates. You can even see the difference between 60 fps and 400fps (aka 60hz and 400 ghz tv screens). It just updates way smoother. The "your eyes can only see 24 frames per second" is bull when it comes to FPS in games and monitor refresh rates.
its about how smooth the game responded to mouse movements with better fps you can respond faster, why old quake player used to play at 120 fps. Why anything under 60 is unplayable for a gaming enthusiast
My advice, wait 1 year b4 comiting to a yearly sub, in 1 year alot of things will change and the game will just be bedding in. What becomes of that year you may not like, in which case you've wasted money.
The point was when your calm the brain runs around 20 FPS, when your under a panicking it ramps up its speed. I do just fine at 30-40 when i get those FPS in game, whenever im in tight quarters with the enemy ive never seen my FPS go lower than the vsync cap. However, im a game enthusiast, i have proper computer equipment. Perhaps its a skill i have where i can adjust to the fractional FPS difference between 50FPS and 400FPS or whatever you kids need to accurately shoot people. Figure after 30 FPS its your gun spread that should be the largest factor on hitting or missing, guess thats just me though. Basically doesnt matter your FPS really when your expecting that guy with 10k FPS to come in that door and you have the shot lined up already. I can manage with a lowly 20 FPS in those situations. Again when my FPS drops low its because im in a 50 man tank column with a couple hundred infantry...doesnt matter at that point because its an unstoppable zerg. And again if your that bad under 60 FPS, and you feel this is some esport game that it isnt, and need every advantage to enjoy...go play oldschool CS...by now you should get 120 FPS with an oldschool tv monitor and be unstoppable because FPS = skill apparently.
So is the dev's have a low or a mid-range system how the heck can they not see the mistake they made by releasing it before optimizations were in place. I understand the massive undertaking they took in creating such a massive game but they have essentially marketed to a niche group that can actually run this game efficiently. I know I won't spend any money on this game until they figure out how to make this run better.
under 50 fps is shoddy gameplay ... 60 and up is the only real playable state, i agree (and there is a difference ffs, or are people equipped with different brain/eye connectivity?
