54 replies to this topic

[Mister Glitchdragon]

razenWing, on 20 April 2017 - 08:08 AM, said:

Reporting both of you guys for spamming...

[Skipmagnet]

A lot of pro/comp/ultra tier players run some settings on low to gain a visual advantage, I think? I'm almost positive that there's a few videos out there explaining why, but I don't pretend to understand it.

[Tordin]

I guess objects like rocks, parts of hills are not seen at greater distances on low settings, however enemy mechs do. As far as I have experienced.

[Humpday]

Oh damn, nevermind...I was about to drop like 3k on a gaming laptop just to play this game and maybe total war...

Nevermind. I thought my current gen hardware was the problem, this is the second thread I've seen where the game is running poorly on even bleeding edge hardware.

That stinks.

[Athom83]

razenWing, on 20 April 2017 - 08:08 AM, said:

How the fok did optimization turn into this? Reporting both of you guys for spamming...

The definition of Spamming is to repeatedly sending the same message. I only sent it once. You are technically breaking the rules for "False Reporting". I could be described as bringing the topic off track, but there are so many of this same topic over and over, it doesn't really matter. Technically, the OP could be reported for spamming as there are dozens of this topic scattered all over the forums.

And how it got to that; You were describing that the advancing game made you depressed with each release. Glitchdragon pointed out the Marxist theory that advancement and innovation inversely effect average levels of happyness, directly equating your post to a RL theory. I simply made a comment on that pointing out how silly Communist theory/philosophy can be when looked at a certain way. As such, they are on topic and valid comments/posts for the thread.

Edited by Athom83, 20 April 2017 - 08:51 AM.

[Napoleon_Blownapart]

in beta i tried to find any reference to MWO on the cryengine site (crickets).i always believed the game was built on an unsupported freeware verion of cryengine. i could be wrong but i feel right.)

[Vxheous]

Humpday, on 20 April 2017 - 08:43 AM, said:

Oh damn, nevermind...I was about to drop like 3k on a gaming laptop just to play this game and maybe total war...

Nevermind. I thought my current gen hardware was the problem, this is the second thread I've seen where the game is running poorly on even bleeding edge hardware.

That stinks.

This game runs poorly on pretty much everyday except overclocked (4.4Ghz+) Intel processors and 3.9ghz AMD Ryzen's. If you have a stock processor, prepare to have framedrops into the 30s-40's

[Athom83]

Gorantir, on 20 April 2017 - 10:24 AM, said:

in beta i tried to find any reference to MWO on the cryengine site (crickets).i always believed the game was built on an unsupported freeware verion of cryengine. i could be wrong but i feel right.)

Cryengine is designed as freeware...

[Drenath]

i7-6700k w/ GTX960
Normal gameplay capped at 60fps
Missile to cockpit = 5fps
Autocannon point blank into the snow = 5fps

Edited by Drenath, 20 April 2017 - 11:18 AM.

[Tibbnak]

cazidin, on 19 April 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

Apparently, somehow, MW:O is designed without multi-core usage in mind and I'm not even sure why a game developed post 08 would even do that. Also, frankencode leads to poor optimization on an engine that itself is poorly optimized. This game would look totally different if PGI had just chosen Unreal at the start.

The version of cryengine that MWO is currently running on fully supports multicore. Cryengine is just weird about favouring idle cycles.

[Vxheous]

Grisbane, on 20 April 2017 - 10:47 AM, said:

have you cracked your laptop case and cleaned it out recently. I just got a new rig but i Used to have similar problems on my Lenovo Y-50.. finally cracked it open, cleaned the bugger out of the dust and crap that built up in it.. the stupid thing ran this game fine after for a while (until we got a cat and well.. that ended that)




I have a i5 7500, 16gb ddr4 2133 kingston ram and a MSI RX 480 on this thing, i pull about 65-70fps on ultra at 1080p. the 7500 is only a 3.4ghz locked. something's fishy 'bout yer statement.

I bet when lrms are flying, or if/when you play FW, you will get drops into the 40s. There are many people that run way faster computers than yours (me included) that can show stock Intel clock speeds giving much lower minimum fps while overclocked Intels will bring the minimum fps number way up.

There's a reason why many players run this game with particles set to low

Edited by Vxheous Kerensky, 20 April 2017 - 01:47 PM.

[Humpday]

i7 6700HQ with nvidia 690M, its a laptop, but should be powerful enough to at least sustain 60fps.

When we're just stomping around i'll get 60-100fps vsync off, but if I twist real fast or missiles come in, my framerate drops into the 20s and you get pretty bad stuttering. Its not all the time, but happens enough for me to have though of buying an actual gaming rig....now...not so much...man I would have been pissed spending all that money.

This is with gfx on low.

[Revis Volek]

OP,

When was the last time you cleaned all the dust out of your laptop?


I had a similar issues and it was all due to heat throttling on my CPU in that laptop. I cleaned it out real good and i kid you not things were like new.

Just a thought...dont mean to patronize.


FYI, i have a i7 4790k with a Asus 1070GTX and 16GB of ram and i get 60 FPS no prob, some maps i get 200fps. Its is poorly optimized that is for sure but i dont see these issues others see and im still running Haswell Refresh.

I can run my setting all High if i want to and i see little to no dip other then from Particles once and a while.

Edited by Revis Volek, 20 April 2017 - 02:50 PM.

[B0oN]

El Bandito, on 19 April 2017 - 05:00 AM, said:

I agree with OP. I had less issues with FPS drops and stuttering a year ago. And I had no performance related issues back when 8v8 was a thing.

Desynch/running ahead of hitbox ahead of model was ugly to look at and even weirder to learn, but it was a static function of mechspeed, not the random shenaniganery called HSR we´ve got now .
You´ve been in CB, we both saw what was what .

That tidbit of nostalgia aside : optimization for this game is HORRIBRU .
i5-3570K @4.3GHz @ 24 GB DDR3 @ BenQ XL2420 @ 1920x1080 @120 Hz @ NV GTX 1070 OC ... gives me from a 188(120+) FPS to a whopping 35 FPS (you can safely ignore the 188 FPS, they are only happening on the loading/teamscreen...GRMBLFJX !!!!!!!!) .

Thats not kewl, Russ .
And its about time you and yer crew did sumthing ´bout it, brah, ´cause you´ve got a nicely-looking game here on a 2011 (?, pulled out of nose, correct if wrong, please !!!!!!!!!!!!) engine that eats 2017 highclass rigs ?
C´mon, thats just a NO-GO !

Your boy, Russ, ( your reference for that 3rd person drone-thingy) wouldnt wanna play this game with performance fluctuating hardcore like that(if you taught him at least a minimal bit about gaming and PC´s ) .
C´moooon, even ArmA3 in MP boasts the same performance ... and as a long-time user of that game I can tell you that your game is nowhere near the complexity, depth or enormity of playable landscape to warrant SUCH BAD PERFORMANCE .

C´mon,Russ, big boy, it´s really about time you and your company invested some time, lovin and tears into optimizing this game to make it run less "hitchy" .
You owe US and YOURSELF that much, and I, for one, think that you and your team could make this happen without neglecting thoughtful advancement on your two running IP´s (yes, I´ve taken the liberty of dividing MW:O and MW:5 into separate IP´s, I know that it isn´t correct technically, but Im slightly inebriated and not really giving too much thought to it right now ) to have them both bringing in a good stream of revenue to keep that PGI house of yours safe and us BT nerds playing.

[Revis Volek]

Well its in the best interest I would say of any game company to use an Engine well enough to code in their sleep. Not one that has been rewritten and is so far away from the original product that even the creators cannot give you any help with this spaghetti monster you have created.

So they went away from Crytek with Mw5 but it leaves me a little salty that MWO will just die on the vine here in this sad excuse of an engine.


And i agree, time to put your big boy pants on and PORT this pig over so you can make a better game with all the hard work you have put in already here. It wont happen ever I imagine though probably better to just make MWO2 on Unreal and call it a day.

Edited by Revis Volek, 20 April 2017 - 03:16 PM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Great Problem by mWO is the serverbased calculation (most other games clientbased)...every Animation,Hit ,Effect is calculatetd by Server, seeing the Slideshow by start and flying Dropships..and never think to win by a Formel 1 with a 1969 Mustang

[Peter2k]

Grisbane, on 20 April 2017 - 10:47 AM, said:

I have a i5 7500, 16gb ddr4 2133 kingston ram and a MSI RX 480 on this thing, i pull about 65-70fps on ultra at 1080p. the 7500 is only a 3.4ghz locked. something's fishy 'bout yer statement.

look we have like hundreds of comments like that
put particles on very high, take a mech with lasers into the testing grounds, facehug a wall and fire you're lasers
if you have the fps counter on you should see how fps drops by a good margin
I remember a time when being close to overheating and walking backwards made my fps come to a crawl, easily going down to 15fps, because the steam was so heavy on particles (PGI actually kinda fixed this)

we're not talking about high or average fps here, those don't mean anything
it's about the minimum fps, the dips in combat when particles are flying all around
when you actually want high fps

I have easily 120fps max fps on my 7600k @5.2Ghz and a GTX 1060

but MWO sure dips, like it always has
for me the dips are only into 70ish fps, which is quite playable

but for some (nost) it dips into a fps range that is kinda unnacaptle
and not everyone is prepared to try and bin an Intel CPU for really high clocks for a f2p title

edit:
also you should try to get that RAM to a higher speed
mine is rated for 2133 as well, but is quite happily running at 3200
which does make a difference in MWO (well it does on my machine) as well as in more modern titles
7th generation Intel chips have a better memory controller (than skylake; 6th generation) and can reach higher ratings with ease usually

and

you're CPU has a turbo boost of 3.8 Ghz
on some high quality boards maybe even past that (Asus enhancement), except if you have it switched off specifically in the bios

Edited by Peter2k, 20 April 2017 - 07:40 PM.

[LordNothing]

antique unsupported game engine. replace it or continue to decay, there is no optimize option.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

LordNothing, on 20 April 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

antique unsupported game engine. replace it or continue to decay, there is no optimize option.

many Games runs perfect with this Engine...and the most games have clientbased Calculations .

[LordNothing]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 22 April 2017 - 01:29 AM, said:

many Games runs perfect with this Engine...and the most games have clientbased Calculations .

you mean newer versions of this engine dont you. this is the stunted offshoot dead end branch of the cryengine.