34 replies to this topic

[chill1ray]

Well I just hope my envidia 9500gt 1gig ram 533mhz will do the job?

I am also using a core2 duo 2.8mhz 3 gig ram 533mhz.

Motherboard is 533mhz front side bus.

so with my 533 system I hope to get even 30fps!

[Sug]

Harrow I guess the main point i'm not in agreement with is that a slow computer can cause the appearance of network lag.

Personally, I've never experienced it. I associate a screenwide choppiness, almost like a slideshow effect with slow hardware, and glitches such as people warping from place to place or the game slowing down then going twice as fast for a few seconds with internet lag. It's two completely separate types of lag in my mind.

As an example, I'm sorry to say the last online game I played was WoW so i have to use it...

Until a month ago I was running an old 3.2 athlon 64 and an HD3850 gpu. Both from around 2006 or 7 I think.

While playing WoW, in pvp, if other players were warping around, I'd check my Ping/Latency and it would be around 900-1500+, almost a full second or more.

However if there was a lot happening on the screen, such as a raid boss, or several people AoEing my entire screen would slow down and become choppy. My frames per second would drop, usually below 30. In my mind, that is what is caused by my slow hardware.




Ah and I meant hardcore as in information/knowledge not hardware. You can have a 10,000$ pc and not know a single component in it

[Durant Carlyle]

Axxon, on 29 January 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

@12
I suggested an -OPTIONABLE- AI, which monitors graphical needs. Turn it off, and you have the legacy setting-options.

And i suggested interference with the LOWEST-end of settings. I dont care about the highest.

And to you i suggest: read before you reply!

I don't see anything in the OP about turning this auto-adjust feature off. You do say something about "NO LOWEST LIMITS" but then you also say "Adjust it to each PC system. REAL-TIME." I don't want any kind of auto-adjust in the game, whether for low or high graphics. I want control of how the game plays on my system. That shouldn't be up to the publisher or the creator of the graphics engine.

Like any real PC game, there should be Minimum System Requirements. These should be easily passed by any system with a discrete graphics card that is three years old or less. If you're trying to play a modern game on a system that doesn't have a discrete graphics card, it will probably play like crap -- and that's the way it should be. There should also be a set of Recommended System Requirements where if you meet them you can have most, if not all, of the graphics settings maxed out and get good playable frame rates.

[Treffies]

chill1ray, on 29 January 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:

Well I just hope my envidia 9500gt 1gig ram 533mhz will do the job?

I am also using a core2 duo 2.8mhz 3 gig ram 533mhz.

Motherboard is 533mhz front side bus.

so with my 533 system I hope to get even 30fps!

Those specs are baby steps behind mine. I know my comp is 5 years old but I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaly don't want to buy anything (except mechs)

[Sug]

Treffies, on 29 January 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Those specs are baby steps behind mine. I know my comp is 5 years old but I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaly don't want to buy anything (except mechs)

Too bad!

[Axxon]

@24
I am sorry i havent expressed myself thoroughly enough. Let me do so now.

" At "graphics level" settings, it should not be the usual options which dominate, but an algorithm, that constantly adjusts visuals during playing " - i have written. This means:

You have your usual graphical options. Plus, an option to turn on/off this AI, which monitors and resets graph needs/settings on the fly. Obviously, an AI like this, only can set those options, which do not require a restart. But that still, is a wide variety. For example, the lower polygon-count meshes can be stored in system memory. Today a 2G of system ram CAN be considered a basic... OR the lower graphical textures CAN be stored in todays vgas rams, of which a 1G is a commonplace nowadays...

AntiAliasing and AnisotropicFiltering - i never use them.. I recall they cant even be reset on the fly, so its your bad.. BUT texture depth and model detail, they very much can!

And this should be the basic philosophy behind every graphical engine. Thus, the upper limits of the usefulness of the engine could be more farer stretched! Well, yea, in the expense of the visual quality. But since many players (including me) define "quality" as <SMOOTHNESS>.. Thats the primary concern. I am glad to hear that you have a state of the art PC. I am really glad of it. But until ME, I can have one exactly like that, i will continue to harass developers with the things like that.

Point again is: Even your system CAN be sent to the ground, very likely in battles, WHEN A LOT OF THINGS ARE HAPPENING on the screen, and you wont be able to respond quickly enough if your computers threshold is reached. .

This is just 100% sure, that in time YOUR system will also fail. Might be a <BIG> big map, the lots of players, or anything, for which the developers werent be able to prepare. Even a stress-test is not a guarantee, it is just a collection of the most power-demanding features together.. But who can guarantee, that YOU, the player could not provide an even worse situation during an actual gameplay..? Think of grinder type strategy games, or todays MMOs. WoW, Rift, etc.

Think about it. Can you control how many players roam around you simultaneously? And what do they do..? But when in the middle of some giant PvP battle, you cant allow to lose -any- millisec of monitoring the situation. Thats where an AI like this can come in handy.

1 more important: The AI must be pre-customizable, to set, what to set back. IN WHICH ORDER at <threshold reached>..Example. To 1st lower textures and THEN , if still not enough fps, lower poly-counts, etc etc. Failing of customizability WILL result in project death. Because people might not like what the AI does to their visuals. But with their consent via a customizable method... Its all vill be all right!

[chill1ray]

Omg I dont want to be in the middle of a big battle and suddenly my fps drops to 5,

and I suddenly am playing mechwarriors the stick figure edition online thanks to auto-fixing!!

[Axxon]

chill1ray, on 30 January 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

Omg I dont want to be in the middle of a big battle and suddenly my fps drops to 5,

and I suddenly am playing mechwarriors the stick figure edition online thanks to auto-fixing!!

hey at least you have perfect awareness of all those stick-figures.. well, wouldnt you love this...

[Aegis Kleais]

chill1ray, on 29 January 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:

Well I just hope my envidia 9500gt 1gig ram 533mhz will do the job?

I am also using a core2 duo 2.8mhz 3 gig ram 533mhz.

Motherboard is 533mhz front side bus.

so with my 533 system I hope to get even 30fps!

With that kind of rig, I think you'll be able to drop settings enough in the engine to get playable framerates. You just might have to do so without much eye candy. But since we don't have official system requirements yet, it's not definitive.

[MaddMaxx]

If your PC does not have PCI-E slots? Time for an MB upgrade...

And while doing that, might as well get a new CPU and GPU too. lol

Edited by MaddMaxx, 30 January 2012 - 11:55 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

This is why we have open beta testing - we can find out exactly how our rigs perform in realistic conditions as much as find game faults. I still think for many people it will be connection, netcode etc which will determine things.I'm quite happy to turn all the pretty extra's down if necessary to get a good FPS. I would imaging that if you can play MWLL OK then MWO's Cry3, which is supposed to have better coding should not be a problem. Picking up a cheap copy of Crysis 2 and DL the mod is a cheap way of checking out your system.

[EDMW CSN]

I wager as long your rig can run Crysis 3 with DX 11, HDR textures or Battlefield 3 on ultra with 64 player maps, I guess your PC is set. And I am pretty confident since I can play BF3 multplayer pretty fine even on 48 to 64 players.

[Durant Carlyle]

You can easily find out if your system can handle MW:O ... buy Crysis 2 and try it out. It uses CryENGINE 3 like MW:O does, so the requirements should be similar. MW:O may not use all the super-high-end options, but they are there in the engine if they want to enable them.

Chill: I looked at reviews of the 9500GT card. Guru3D had one with similar system specs (Core 2 Duo 3GHz with 1333MHz FSB, 2GB 1066MHz RAM, 9500GT, Vista 32-bit) and the original Crysis (using CryENGINE 2) was only playable at the lowest image quality settings. Crysis 2 uses the more advanced CryENGINE 3 and would likely be even worse, so may not be playable at all on your system.

I'm thinking you're going to need to upgrade to play MW:O dude. Sorry...

Edited by Durant Carlyle, 30 January 2012 - 11:19 PM.

[TheUncle]

Durant Carlyle, on 30 January 2012 - 11:17 PM, said:

You can easily find out if your system can handle MW:O ... buy Crysis 2 and try it out.

Crysis 2 is 10 bucks at amazon regularly. Definetely worth checking out, the 9500 GT should be able to run with around 30 FPS given your screen resolution is not very high.

Durant Carlyle, on 30 January 2012 - 11:17 PM, said:

Chill: I looked at reviews of the 9500GT card. Guru3D had one with similar system specs (Core 2 Duo 3GHz with 1333MHz FSB, 2GB 1066MHz RAM, 9500GT, Vista 32-bit) and the original Crysis (using CryENGINE 2) was only playable at the lowest image quality settings. Crysis 2 uses the more advanced CryENGINE 3 and would likely be even worse, so may not be playable at all on your system.

I'm thinking you're going to need to upgrade to play MW:O dude. Sorry...

Crysis 2 runs a whole lot better than Crysis 1, at least on Dx9 hardware. If you have Dx11 of course you can push it sky high.
Crysis 2 ran with 40 FPS on "Extreme" on my Ati 4850 512mb, while Crysis 1 barely hits 25. On "lower" Settings Crysis 2 runs as smooth as it gets.
But of course Crysis 2 was made by Crytek, so there is no guarantee that Piranha Games can master the Engine as good as its inventors do.


On the main topic
As I said earlier, CryEngine 3 runs quite good if appropriately used.
However, on the fly optimization is not really easy and while some games use it, I don't think it is viable for Mechwarrior Online.
The map's are limited and there should not be areas where we suddenly get the triple of Draw Calls etc. Also there is a premade number of player's interacting with the world.
Really the only time Frame Rates should drop is during fire fights with a lot of particles and lighting everywhere.
So the main problem lays in the "optimization AI" as you call it, only having to react to these kind of influences, which do impact performance a lot, but are of short duration.
Many games who actually use this technique seem to adjust the visuals very delayed, because after all - should the framerates be adjusted when there is a microsecond of lagg? No. But often they do.

As an example I want to give "Rage" by idSoftware. The game is optimized for consoles by drastically reducing horizontal resolution when the danger of FPS drops occurs. But anyone who really looked at this technique finds that it most often takes effect when virtually nothing happens - or 2 seconds after a fight begun.
Conclusion: Does not return enough value for the recources which would have to be put in.

So I'd suggest an integrated small Benchmark run(with some good fighting and fx) which one could start directly from the options menu to get a feeling how the game actually performs.

Edited by TheUncle, 31 January 2012 - 10:41 AM.

[Durant Carlyle]

TheUncle, on 31 January 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

Crysis 2 runs a whole lot better than Crysis 1, at least on Dx9 hardware. If you have Dx11 of course you can push it sky high.
Crysis 2 ran with 40 FPS on "Extreme" on my Ati 4850 512mb, while Crysis 1 barely hits 25. On "lower" Settings Crysis 2 runs as smooth as it gets.

I didn't know that Crysis 2 actually runs better than the original Crysis. Never would have guessed, in fact. Learn something new every day...

Still, I wouldn't expect much from Chill's system, as the 9500GT is several big steps down in performance from the ATI 4850 in your system. I wouldn't expect the improvement from Crysis 1 to Crysis 2 to be as big as you experienced.

-----

Chill -- try out Crysis 2 and see how your system handles it. That's your best bet for gauging how MW:O will run.