15 replies to this topic

[A DRUNK GUY]

I was just wondering why we get no love as far as graphical options. I feel like they keep making things look/run worse with each patch. Was just wondering if they might make it more scaleable for high-end pcs.

[Goose]

[JSmith7784]

Seems to me there have been little improvements with each patch. I think it looks better than ever.

[Besterino]

I don't understand what you really want. MORE graphic blingbling? I run a I7-3770k, 2x680GTX, 32GB RAM and SSDs (low post processing though because I hate the foggy/film grain thing). So, I'd say that still counts as a somewhat high endish system. Nevertheless, depending on the map and action I sometimes dip below 60fps...so... If I can't get a constant 60fps as is, they should please focus on other stuff than on stressing systems more with stuff that just looks cool (but unfortunately results in a lower framerate or significant more dips below what I want).

Edited by Besterino, 18 December 2013 - 09:53 AM.

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

The current game is being run on an older version of CryEngine (3 versions old) and using DX9c, when the updated engine and D11 are implemented we or the higher end system users should see additional improvement. If the new graphics are updated to "turn-on" some of the new features that were not available in the older versions, and the actual design of these items is updated there are quite a few chances we should see with out hindering the FPS.

I look forward to being able to constantly run in 60 plus FPS when the engine is updated.

The use of multi-monitors and enabling SLI would be one of the items I also look forward to. Currently the CPU is being using way too much, and we need the graphics to be handed off to the GPU's for better game play and just plain better visuals. (and we should see a performance jump with that) And I want to see the improvements of "tessellation, bump mapping" and all the new options that should be in any current tech game.
[with options to reduce the load for lower end systems, not eliminate it, as we don't need any "visual cheat" low end setting mode.]

Now all this improvement comes at a cost of design work, nearly every in game asset will need to be "looked at again", unless they already have the high end items designed and we are just using the base end elements.(Dx9c versions) There are future "damage" models for most items that will need to be implemented, collision models for nearly everything including the Mech's. Environmental effects and as of yet unused "water dynamics" on movement, ballistics and heat. With the introduction of the Turret systems and real defensive base's we may start to see some new and improved art work. I really getting tired of the look of some of the low end "in game art", the Crimson Strait map was a refreshing look at some new model items. (and the last patch made additional improvements)

I hope with the introduction of UI2.0, new Engine, DX11 we will start to see some of the potential of this CryEngine driven game. There is so much potential from the back story of this franchise, we just need it to be built.

9erRed

[Chocolater]

I think the game looks great (the mechs at least). I too am excited to get DX11 so I can stretch the legs on my PC a little more. I just wish I could fast forward to this time next year, as that seems to be when everything DX 11, UI 2.0, CW will all be rolling full steam!

[Peter2k]

I guess the ones commenting that it looks great actually don't know how it used to look

Once I saw high res textures on my flame, from my cockpit view, now they are washed out
Snow had a glitter effect , now it's bland
Textures are more low res than they used to be

I think that visual quality came down a little bit with every performance optimization; even in very high (go figure)

It's still looking nice, but it used to be better

Here's hoping that they can figure out how to improve visuals again for the users who have a better rig, but I don't think that will happen way after dx11

Remember as was posted, dx11 is only a different render path for PGI at the moment that hopefully improves performance for some users
No added visual effects have been mentioned that I can recall(e.g. Detail textures, HDR n stuff)

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

Yes you are correct in that at one time we did have finer and more detailed graphics, back in the days of collision and knockdown, real early alpha/beta stage. But there were way too many code related issues and overuse of resources, the PGI engineers and Crytek people were still working on the two engines and the CryEngine was only a Beta version. Many problems ensued.

The PGI team refined some of the code and "dialed back" some of the settings to ease the load on users machines.

Now the CryEngine is too old and needs the 3 or more updates to bring in all the "fixed" problems, and new features, that were in this starting Beta engine design. You are also correct that just installing the DX11 update will do nothing for graphics improvements, the actual art elements will need a complete pass to enhance all the new elements that both of these upgrades bring with them.
[again I'm hoping that most elements were done at the high end and just the lower texture version was used for what we have now.]
And I am really sick of the "as you said" washed out images and colours we have now. I spend Mc on colours ad patterns and show up on the Caustic map only to see everything in a green tint. What ever happened to the spectacular images as we saw in "Crisis", now that would be something. Check out some of the gameplay video's for "TitanFall", now there's some eye popping gameplay.

9erRed

[AppleEater01]

I don't want processing stress to go onto my cpu. My CPU is alot more better than my GPU

[Peter2k]

It's not like more detailed textures would increase the load of you're CPU.
And PGI never said performance would increase using dx11, it's something we just assume, hoping that our high end graphic cards can unload something from the CPU.
But using dx11 in bioshock enabled more graphical fidelity, better water effects n such, it didn't bump speed up by 50%.
Actually I think it ran a bit worse on dx11 than dx9, but that probably was because of more hungrier effects.

And I know they dialed back on the graphics for performance reasons, but I still wonder sometimes why I can't have those performance hungry features when I so choose, settings to very high.

Ya it's a bit disappointing seeing camo in the way it is now.

The Ilya camo was quite detailed with high res resolution

It's funny because vanity items are supposed to fund this game, so they better look good right ? ;-)

[BSK]

As a freelance programmer in big data I need computers with lots of GPU power and buy every year a new PC, most times from Alienware. The one I am using for games now is 4 years old because most of the games are not able to use more than 1 core of my newest hexacore CPU, making my cooling run at 100% otherwise this one core would toast ..

[Goose]

BSK, on 18 December 2013 - 10:57 PM, said:

The one I am using for games now is 4 years old because most of the games are not able to use more than 1 core of my newest hexacore CPU, making my cooling run at 100% otherwise this one core would toast ..

By Don Woligroski Of Tom's Hardware, February 11, 2013 9:00 PM& said:

The Pentium isn't bad, to be sure. In fact, for $70, it still does really well against the FX chips we tested that cost $125 and up, use quite a bit of power, and generate significantly more heat. Nevertheless, we see the trend toward more threaded titles continuing, compelling us to start distancing ourselves from dual-core non-Hyper-Threaded CPUs in 2013. At least for the time being, whatever quad-core Athlon II and Phenom II processors that are still available seem like smart buys.

[Peter2k]

BSK, on 18 December 2013 - 10:57 PM, said:

As a freelance programmer in big data I need computers with lots of GPU power and buy every year a new PC, most times from Alienware. The one I am using for games now is 4 years old because most of the games are not able to use more than 1 core of my newest hexacore CPU, making my cooling run at 100% otherwise this one core would toast ..

Maybe u did something wrong or you're cooling is broken

There's is literally no more game on the market (think new title) that doesn't make use of at least dual core(and is written on the box as recomandation as well)

You might have to remember that many modern title are cross platform

And no matter the differences, all Pc's of quite some time (even P4 had threading) and consoles use more than one core

MWO makes a well balanced use of my i5's cores,contrary to all AMD folks in these forums claiming no real usage of more than one core with MWO

So does every Bioshock, Starcraft 2, Half Life and Episodes
And u know quite plenty actually

Even in worst cases, at least that one core can run the game and the rest my antivirus, teamspeak n other stuff in the background (thank god for SSD's these days and low RAM prices)

[Budor]

Game runs like sh**, ive been playing on a i5 @ 4.5ghz with 2x gtx570, exchanged those cards for a gtx780 and now every other new game sees a huge improvement (bf4,wildstar,ac4 aso.) but mwo manages to dip below 60 and thats with everything high, shadows med, pp low...

[Barbaric Soul]

Heh, I'm running a GTX780ti with a 4.5ghz Sandy Bridge i7 and I never dip below 60 fps at very high settings, AT 1600P.

My actual system specs-

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2odVJ

[ApolloKaras]

9erRed, on 18 December 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

Greetings all,

The current game is being run on an older version of CryEngine (3 versions old) and using DX9c, when the updated engine and D11 are implemented we or the higher end system users should see additional improvement. If the new graphics are updated to "turn-on" some of the new features that were not available in the older versions, and the actual design of these items is updated there are quite a few chances we should see with out hindering the FPS.

I look forward to being able to constantly run in 60 plus FPS when the engine is updated.

The use of multi-monitors and enabling SLI would be one of the items I also look forward to. Currently the CPU is being using way too much, and we need the graphics to be handed off to the GPU's for better game play and just plain better visuals. (and we should see a performance jump with that) And I want to see the improvements of "tessellation, bump mapping" and all the new options that should be in any current tech game.
[with options to reduce the load for lower end systems, not eliminate it, as we don't need any "visual cheat" low end setting mode.]

Now all this improvement comes at a cost of design work, nearly every in game asset will need to be "looked at again", unless they already have the high end items designed and we are just using the base end elements.(Dx9c versions) There are future "damage" models for most items that will need to be implemented, collision models for nearly everything including the Mech's. Environmental effects and as of yet unused "water dynamics" on movement, ballistics and heat. With the introduction of the Turret systems and real defensive base's we may start to see some new and improved art work. I really getting tired of the look of some of the low end "in game art", the Crimson Strait map was a refreshing look at some new model items. (and the last patch made additional improvements)

I hope with the introduction of UI2.0, new Engine, DX11 we will start to see some of the potential of this CryEngine driven game. There is so much potential from the back story of this franchise, we just need it to be built.

9erRed

Sorry but when I did the DX11 test I wasn't seeing any more stability in FPS than I do now. Maybe a little higher. 120FPS at the start of the drop and can drop below 30FPS in some cases lol. Core i7 2600k @4.0ghz, GTX 670 @ 1200 on the core and 1500 on the Memory - and an SSD for good measure