167 replies to this topic

[Blue Footed Booby]

Gremlich Johns, on 21 April 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

I checked out some work showing 15/30/60 fps comparisons. There is an ever so slightly smoother flow in the 60 over the 30, but not enough for me to really be concerned. As someone who does not have a vid card or system that permits me to have 60fps or higher (normally 30-50) on high, I am content. I appreciate your points, all the same. Thanx

What framerate was the video running?

The point of fusion (the framerate required for your brain to think you're seeing smooth motion) is different depending on many factors, including the brightness of the image relative to surroundings and how fast objects are moving on screen.

That second one is important. At 30 frames a second a lumbering mech will look fine, but it's entirely possible the fastest light mechs may not. You're certainly not going to get smooth motion out of the projectiles, but you personally may or may not notice. 30 is plenty for games like Dark Souls, which incidentally is locked at 30. :V

The larger issue than looking smooth is playing smooth. A more fast paced game may well become much more difficult at framerates significantly below 60. You'll have a harder time putting rounds on target, even if you aren't conciously aware of why.

More importantly, if your framerate is 25 or 30 on average then sudden decreases are going to take you into slideshow territory, and you're going to be dipping a lot, both of which will dramatically impede effectiveness (unless you're really, really bad, but I'm giving you some credit here).

What this game really needs, I think, isn't a lower tier of settings but much more control over individual features. There are lots of individual effects that can have disproproprtionate effect on framerate, and more importantly there are effects that some people care less about. For example I don't like the fake motion blur used by pretty much all games. I disable it whenever I have the option, even if I can run at a constant 60fps. Lots of games these days only have a few very broad options to adjust, like effects, geometry, post processing, anti aliasing, and that's it. It drives me nuts. At least have the advanced settings actually be advanced.

[PirateLincoln]

What's been bugging me is how random my framerate has been. Back when I first started playing my performance was crap, but as long as I avoided ballistic weapons I could do alright...unless I was in a fight with more than one other 'mech. So I waited a month or so until a patch that specifically mentioned FPS issues, fired it up, and whaddya know, a good three months of actual playable framerate (high twenties). Then wham, down to completely unplayable levels for a couple months, then a month of patches that were okay! And now, it's been about two months, and I eagerly await every new patch...and my framerate is still single-digit. It's just annoying when the game has been VERY playable before.

[ROJ]

The game occasionally becomes choppy at times regardless the GFX settings. It always puzzled me because I can run on different settings and the same issue still happens so I am certain its not the GPU..

The FPS drops to catastrophic levels on occasions making the game annoying, I find that yes it got worse after the last few patches....

Basically I am complaining of the same thing many people are saying here, at least I know I am not the only one now..

Another thing is that the mech lab makes the game very slow and put alot of strain on my computer for some reason?

Edited by ROJ, 19 May 2013 - 04:59 AM.

[Ralgas]

The aim is 5yo systems will be able to play fine, it has also been stated performance passes are on the "to do" list. That said bugs and other upcoming matters (missile balancing and ui 2.0) have been a priority instead and are going to affect the outcome anyway.

[Koniving]

Well, it'd be nice if you can play this on any rig. But... sooner or later you have to get out of the dark ages.

I will use Battlefield 3 -- which was my baine and demon for my older computer (which wasn't even two years old at the time) -- as my example for this identical scenario as what lower end computers are suffering here.

The problem: My computer wasn't quite considered to even be minimum specs. BF3 was playable, yes, but the graphics were so dumbed down that things were barely recognizable at any discernable distance. My sniper rifle went with only short range scopes. For the longest time my bolt-action went without any sight at all. The framerate kept to about 40 to 60 frames. It wasn't bad, but if a target wasn't within 30 meters then I had to stare at the invisible figure whose gun flare is flashing for close to 20 seconds before a figure would even appear.

The game was playable, but at a severe cost to my fun factor due to invisible players, short draw distance, inability to effectively use some aspects of the game, virtual requirement to either camp with a sniper rifle, use a noob tube or drive a tank for anything less was not a fair fight.

Battlefield 3 had the optimizations to allow for high FPS while playing below it's minimum listed specs. But it was so optimized that I was at a severe disadvantage compared to other players!

Spoiler

My first time was mostly fun because it was brand new.

Later, I learned I had to find games with fewer than 8 people in order to even have a chance of a fair fight in soldier versus soldier combat. ...It wasn't bad, but it wasn't as fun as I'd like it to have been. I got it for the PC to play 64 players. Not to feel like some chump on an xbox.

In this final video I absolutely had it. 16 players maximum. I was doing great until it filled out and then it felt like a one sided rofl-stomp session even my squad moving together. I couldn't take it anymore. I bought a new computer.

The solution: I saved some money and got a better computer.

Edited by Koniving, 19 May 2013 - 06:40 AM.

[ROJ]

My system is almost two years old.. The game can be run in low, medium or ultra settings on it just fine. Though regardless what the GFX settings I set, the game still experiences low fps, chopping for some reason.. Especially when you are in a batlle, where probably plenty of mechs are in the same area.. Lately, after the last patch, i believe, the mech lab slows down and starts chopping as-well and the cpu fan goes on full blast..

Since it is a work in progress thing, I guess I will have to wait and see how it goes..

[Chavette]

Thomas Covenant, on 20 April 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

I think "yes" and "for people who need it" should be combined as to not separate the votes.
Though it boggles my mind would vote no on allowing more people the ability to play.

I did, got a problem with it?

[Thomas Covenant]

Chavette, on 19 May 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

Thomas Covenant, on 20 April 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

I think "yes" and "for people who need it" should be combined as to not separate the votes.
Though it boggles my mind would vote no on allowing more people the ability to play.

I did, got a problem with it?

No problem with it. Also no closer to understanding your perspective on this issue. You have failed to get under my skin or express your opinion and add to the conversation. Have a petty cookie. (:: )

[Thomas Covenant]

I think mechwarrior is a fun game. Pushing the envelope graphically is impressive, but I feel this a vote of friends over fashion. I would rather be more confident I can invite a friend to play, and they can successfully do so in a smooth and enjoyable frame rate, rather than confidence I will blow the minds of my wealthier friends. Ego vs heart brah, tell me I'm wrong..

[Lord of All]

<redacted>

Edited by Lord of All, 19 May 2013 - 01:43 PM.

[carbonknight]

there should always be support for legacy hardware in all future games. The players should be able to remove any feature and degrade gfx to a point where 60 fps is possible. Regardless of their hardware.

In many of these games gpu and cpu and ram is wasted on eye candy that is annoying and non-functional, Many times players stop playing games for such ******** bs, as sun glare, bloom and excessive lighting, and memory leaks. excessive shader use, excessive particle use. alpha layers sillouetteing outlines etc...aren't needed at all. Complete waste of code.

Model details must have an ability to be reduced or increased...

draw distances...not only reduced but diferent rendering methods supported...so that the player can find what plays best vs what is needed to be seen etc,

If a player doesn't wish to use directx in any form....opengl should be available. and reverse compatable down to any previous version.

Nobody should be required to upgrade their hardware at all to play new games...everything should be there ready to use if and when it can be done. Until then the games should accomodate a minimum playable state. Player base shouldn't suffer for useless eyecandy that takes away from the gaming experience instead of improving it.

[carbonknight]

Also the people with super fast system should not be restricted in reduceing the gfx anymore then people with less...Even if i had a great systm i would want to reduce all settings as much as possible to ensure maximum frame rate and minimal ping. I don' max the resolution or gfx settings any any game ever...Except for maybe draw distances in some games that place fog and other stupid nerfs in the players field of view....fog is a cloud...it moves...it is not persistant...that is one of the most annoying things ever placed n a video game...

[Chavette]

Thomas Covenant, on 19 May 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

No problem with it. Also no closer to understanding your perspective on this issue. You have failed to get under my skin or express your opinion and add to the conversation. Have a petty cookie. (:: )

Looking at it again, people who run on some really bad res are just fodder and food for my stats(not that I care about them) so I'm pretty cool with it overall.

[Thomas Covenant]

Chavette, on 19 May 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Looking at it again, people who run on some really bad res are just fodder and food for my stats(not that I care about them) so I'm pretty cool with it overall.

You say you don't care about your stats, but say that its pretty cool... implying this is why you vote no?

[Thomas Covenant]

I think, for me by voting yes I am voting for:

Mechwarrior Online to not be balanced by graphics.

For example, weather effects. If this is part of the balance on a map, then it tightens the belt on what machines should be playing, because too low of settings would actually give an advantage. You side step this issue by not relying on graphical effects as a balance mechanic. The more you give it up, the more you are liberated to make a game that appeals to the very high graphics and very low graphics.

[badkilik]

I'm playing this game at 50-60 FPS on my OC'ed q9650 @ 4.2ghz with a GTX670 on my p45 Maximus 2 Formula board using 800mhz corsair ram. I think if anyone is complaining about FPS then its because their computer is too old for CryEngine3. Just my 2 cents.edit: I'm also running VIsta 32 bit Home Premium with everything on max

Edited by badkilik, 19 May 2013 - 04:30 PM.

[Flying Judgement]

i can play any new game quet smoothly mid till high settings with this one my best performance was 15 fps in low settings and now i get just 9-5 fps max so almost completly unplayable wisualy well its not the most beautifull game what i ever seen... nor the bigest maps its a strong midlle.
its may do to the engine or its just simply not balanced i dont know but i dont think it sould b this demanding compare what its gives in its present stage.
i hope its will b mutch less demanding or more demanding but with 40 players on massive maps and destructable enviroment.
i need to upgrade my pc sooner or latter any way

[Thomas Covenant]

Others have posted how they can play the game easily, how anyone should be wealthy enough to get a machine to play this game smoothly. I can only speak for myself. I run the game on low settings, with poor framerate. My friends have the same problem. I believe my computer to be good for what I can afford (windows 7 native, not upgraded). Though I do not judge you for being wealthier, my opinion is different about what is affordable. Maybe it is where I live. I live in Washington. I have lived in Oregon. For me, and my local community, what is considered a decent laptop to play most mmos, doesn't play this one very well. I think, more than any other genre, its important to design the game to facilitate a wide audience in a 'massively multiplayer online game'.

Edited by Thomas Covenant, 19 May 2013 - 05:20 PM.

[badkilik]

Thomas Covenant, on 19 May 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

You could rename this topic Craigslist vs Best Buy

it would be a good idea to shop for good used parts at a bargain.

[Catamount]

Thomas Covenant, on 19 May 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

You could rename this topic Craigslist vs Best Buy

I prefer something more along the lines of "Oh god, it's still going"