Config: notebook VAIO F sery bought in March 2010 Windows 7 64bits Windows performance index 5.9 CPU I7 Q720 1.6ghz RAM 6go Nvidia Geforce GT 33M 1024mb Desktop diwplay 1920x1080
------------------------------------------------------------ In game settings medium: Details medium Display 1360x768 (full screen)
FPS: main menu: 45fps create menu: 30fps ready room: 40fps looking at hive: 20fps as commander (alien): 29fps rest of map: 25fps ------------------------------------------------------------ In game settings hight: Details hight Display 1900x1080
FPS: in game: 15fps looking at hive: 9fps ------------------------------------------------------------ Ingame settings low: Details rediculously awful Display 1280x720
FPS: in game: 30fps looking at hive: 20fps as commander: 30fps ------------------------------------------------------------
and i play alone, so not added with a server lag for me it is beautifull but still unplayable with any configurations
I just hope FPS will get priority its obvious tons of people are having this problem, so this should be looked at before ANYTHING else..
I am at around 30 (on low resolution), until build bots, hydra's, players, buildings etc are added, then it seems to drop very fast. The biggest drop I notice as commander, as a marine you get the biggest drop when you walk into a room with 4-5 hydra's, but as a com you seem to get all the lag from all the rooms at once..
<!--quoteo(post=1787923:date=Jul 28 2010, 08:43 PM:name=PoNeH)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PoNeH @ Jul 28 2010, 08:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787923"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know this is Alpha and all, but is the abysmal FPS representative of what to expect in the release version? The reason why i ask is because I get 40+ FPS on High settings in Crysis, and I don't get more than 5 FPS in NS2. I have visual detail all the way down.
GT335M: This is totaly the cause of your very low FPS. This graphics chip is very poor compaired to desktop chips. The 335M is worse than the 4 year old 8800GTS, or compaired to current gen is likly to be between HD5550 and HD5450.
The current build of NS2 seems to rape the GPU while not realy tax the CPU. This is why your FPS is down.
<!--quoteo(post=1788440:date=Jul 29 2010, 11:33 AM:name=Mutant1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mutant1 @ Jul 29 2010, 11:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1788440"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->GT335M: This is totaly the cause of your very low FPS. This graphics chip is very poor compaired to desktop chips. The 335M is worse than the 4 year old 8800GTS, or compaired to current gen is likly to be between HD5550 and HD5450.
The current build of NS2 seems to rape the GPU while not realy tax the CPU. This is why your FPS is down.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Was basically what I was saying, tho I didn't realize the CPU was different in the revised version.
Also it performs at around the 9500GT/9600GS level. Which is brilliant for a laptop. But looking at resource usage, the game is moreso GPU limited than CPU.
Definitely sticky what you said Cory. At least make a sticky of Q&A's with all these common questions/complaints.
Do you people really always need a developer to tell you the obvious and be a ###### if someone else tells it in a not so mature way (because you basically ask for it everytime) don't be such a hipocrit please.
I don't think a FAQ4whiners will help at all, those people don't even read the news or use the search function or know what FAQ means ...
"The definition of madness is doing the exact same thing and expecting a different result" :) So the OP asked something obvious but didn't expect to be trolled, thats just pathetic or mad.
How is it a problem? What is there to confirm that isn't already blatantly obvious? Its an alpha. It's to be expected. It is the natural path that EVERY game takes. For the exception that UWE are letting us participate in it.
We were not promised polished, complete gameplay. We were promised to be able to participate as the game is developed.
<!--quoteo(post=1788478:date=Jul 29 2010, 07:29 AM:name=1mannARMEE)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1mannARMEE @ Jul 29 2010, 07:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1788478"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't think a FAQ4whiners will help at all, those people don't even read the news or use the search function or know what FAQ means ...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"read the news" ... wait what? FAQ is normally a webbed thread, hard to miss that one, though there should be more colours/hightlights on this forum.
<!--quoteo(post=1788511:date=Jul 29 2010, 03:41 PM:name=Macpersil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Macpersil @ Jul 29 2010, 03:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1788511"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think a ReportClient build in the alpha is a very important thing for an alpha. Can someone tell me if its included? I couldn't try the alpha yet :/<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is one, sort of. It's a direct link in the game to "getsatisfaction".
<!--quoteo(post=1788198:date=Jul 29 2010, 02:35 AM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Jul 29 2010, 02:35 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1788198"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->We are going to be continuing to optimize this game all the way up until release. And that is the same at any game company. Early ALPHA versions of games rarely run at the targeted fFPS (and yes I can speak from experience having worked on 4 titles previously), and even at the end it's still a mad dash on the programming side to bring the frame rate up.
There is always stuff you can optimize. It's just a matter of how much time you can afford to spend on it, and how many visual, and in some cases gameplay, compromises you want to make.
As far as people concerned that the game doesn't play noticeably better then the engine test -- the engine test was not the game. It was the basic framework of the graphics engine, to test compatibility on other machines. But it had very little to do with the actual game. It wasn't running most of the game code, there were a fraction of the models/detail/effects and gameplay in it, all of which slows down performance. Not to mention all of the server lag issues that are going on with the actual game. If we included the same stripped down engine test with this alpha, everyone would notice a significant improvement in frame rate running around on it.
And, we don't have the luxury of optimizing the game for 1 console system, like an 360 or PS3. We have to deal with a ton of different systems and specs and graphics cards, all with their own little quirks. Some people are actually getting surprisingly good FPS on low end systems, and some other people with high end systems are getting bad FPS in the alpha. That is what the alpha is for, to give us the information so we can try and make adjustments and optimizations to get the game working at a decent FPS on as many different systems as possible.
So, relax, give us time, and if the final release of the game doesn't run any better for you then it does now, then maybe there is something to worry about.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
someone PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE STICKY THIS ... maybe then we can get back to talking about the game instead of constant repeated threads from people who clearly cant read basic instructions to report problems
<!--quoteo(post=1796208:date=Aug 25 2010, 10:15 AM:name=Papayas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Papayas @ Aug 25 2010, 10:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1796208"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So, has the FPS been optimized yet or will it come out in future patches? (I haven't played it for a while because I can't find a server with people)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> i believe a facepalm is in order
<!--quoteo(post=1787923:date=Jul 28 2010, 02:43 PM:name=PoNeH)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PoNeH @ Jul 28 2010, 02:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787923"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know this is Alpha and all, but is the abysmal FPS representative of what to expect in the release version? The reason why i ask is because I get 40+ FPS on High settings in Crysis, and I don't get more than 5 FPS in NS2. I have visual detail all the way down.
Theres a reason why no other company out there would not allow the general public into an alpha build...its because of stupid ###### questions like this....
They keep on improving everything but not the FPS. They'd have more testers to find bugs if they fixed the FPS problem I am sure. Now people just join and don't bother playing or finding bugs simply because FPS is horrible. I know it's alpha, I'm just saying the truth.
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
<!--quoteo(post=1787952:date=Jul 28 2010, 02:09 PM:name=PoNeH)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PoNeH @ Jul 28 2010, 02:09 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787952"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's what I'm concerned about. Performance can only be improved so much. The source engine is what handles most of the fluidity of a game. (snip)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> NS2 does not use the Source engine. It is a custom engine called Spark. It is not optimized to work with every configuration out there yet.
This is an Alpha. There's a reason many companies do not release public alphas, and one of the reasons that the original NS did not have one. Do <b>not</b> expect an Alpha to be a finished product. Hell, don't expect an Alpha to even be *playable*, in most cases.
People are spoiled by the number of companies offering up open Beta, which tends to be a final bugfix, balance and polish. An Alpha is not a Beta. Get this out of your mind. An Alpha is significantly rougher, with far more problems and bugs to fix. If the FPS is still this much a problem when NS2 goes into Beta phase, feel justified in complaining. Until then, enjoy the wonderment that is early playtesting.
Comments
Config: notebook VAIO F sery bought in March 2010
Windows 7 64bits
Windows performance index 5.9
CPU I7 Q720 1.6ghz
RAM 6go
Nvidia Geforce GT 33M 1024mb
Desktop diwplay 1920x1080
------------------------------------------------------------
In game settings medium:
Details medium
Display 1360x768 (full screen)
FPS:
main menu: 45fps
create menu: 30fps
ready room: 40fps
looking at hive: 20fps
as commander (alien): 29fps
rest of map: 25fps
------------------------------------------------------------
In game settings hight:
Details hight
Display 1900x1080
FPS:
in game: 15fps
looking at hive: 9fps
------------------------------------------------------------
Ingame settings low:
Details rediculously awful
Display 1280x720
FPS:
in game: 30fps
looking at hive: 20fps
as commander: 30fps
------------------------------------------------------------
and i play alone, so not added with a server lag
for me it is beautifull but still unplayable with any configurations
I am at around 30 (on low resolution), until build bots, hydra's, players, buildings etc are added, then it seems to drop very fast. The biggest drop I notice as commander, as a marine you get the biggest drop when you walk into a room with 4-5 hydra's, but as a com you seem to get all the lag from all the rooms at once..
M11x: Core i7, 4GB DDR RAM, 256GB SSD, 1GB Nvidia GT335M w/ Optimus.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
GT335M: This is totaly the cause of your very low FPS. This graphics chip is very poor compaired to desktop chips.
The 335M is worse than the 4 year old 8800GTS, or compaired to current gen is likly to be between HD5550 and HD5450.
The current build of NS2 seems to rape the GPU while not realy tax the CPU. This is why your FPS is down.
The 335M is worse than the 4 year old 8800GTS, or compaired to current gen is likly to be between HD5550 and HD5450.
The current build of NS2 seems to rape the GPU while not realy tax the CPU. This is why your FPS is down.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Was basically what I was saying, tho I didn't realize the CPU was different in the revised version.
Also it performs at around the 9500GT/9600GS level. Which is brilliant for a laptop. But looking at resource usage, the game is moreso GPU limited than CPU.
Definitely sticky what you said Cory. At least make a sticky of Q&A's with all these common questions/complaints.
I don't think a FAQ4whiners will help at all, those people don't even read the news or use the search function or know what FAQ means ...
"The definition of madness is doing the exact same thing and expecting a different result" :) So the OP asked something obvious but didn't expect to be trolled, thats just pathetic or mad.
How is it a problem? What is there to confirm that isn't already blatantly obvious? Its an alpha. It's to be expected. It is the natural path that EVERY game takes. For the exception that UWE are letting us participate in it.
We were not promised polished, complete gameplay. We were promised to be able to participate as the game is developed.
"read the news" ... wait what? FAQ is normally a webbed thread, hard to miss that one, though there should be more colours/hightlights on this forum.
Can someone tell me if its included? I couldn't try the alpha yet :/
Can someone tell me if its included? I couldn't try the alpha yet :/<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is one, sort of.
It's a direct link in the game to "getsatisfaction".
There is always stuff you can optimize. It's just a matter of how much time you can afford to spend on it, and how many visual, and in some cases gameplay, compromises you want to make.
As far as people concerned that the game doesn't play noticeably better then the engine test -- the engine test was not the game. It was the basic framework of the graphics engine, to test compatibility on other machines. But it had very little to do with the actual game. It wasn't running most of the game code, there were a fraction of the models/detail/effects and gameplay in it, all of which slows down performance. Not to mention all of the server lag issues that are going on with the actual game. If we included the same stripped down engine test with this alpha, everyone would notice a significant improvement in frame rate running around on it.
And, we don't have the luxury of optimizing the game for 1 console system, like an 360 or PS3. We have to deal with a ton of different systems and specs and graphics cards, all with their own little quirks. Some people are actually getting surprisingly good FPS on low end systems, and some other people with high end systems are getting bad FPS in the alpha. That is what the alpha is for, to give us the information so we can try and make adjustments and optimizations to get the game working at a decent FPS on as many different systems as possible.
So, relax, give us time, and if the final release of the game doesn't run any better for you then it does now, then maybe there is something to worry about.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
someone PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE STICKY THIS ... maybe then we can get back to talking about the game instead of constant repeated threads from people who clearly cant read basic instructions to report problems
i believe a facepalm is in order
Indeed, cant wait until they release the alpha - oh wait.
M11x: Core i7, 4GB DDR RAM, 256GB SSD, 1GB Nvidia GT335M w/ Optimus.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Theres a reason why no other company out there would not allow the general public into an alpha build...its because of stupid ###### questions like this....
(snip)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS2 does not use the Source engine. It is a custom engine called Spark. It is not optimized to work with every configuration out there yet.
This is an Alpha. There's a reason many companies do not release public alphas, and one of the reasons that the original NS did not have one. Do <b>not</b> expect an Alpha to be a finished product. Hell, don't expect an Alpha to even be *playable*, in most cases.
People are spoiled by the number of companies offering up open Beta, which tends to be a final bugfix, balance and polish.
An Alpha is not a Beta. Get this out of your mind. An Alpha is significantly rougher, with far more problems and bugs to fix. If the FPS is still this much a problem when NS2 goes into Beta phase, feel justified in complaining. Until then, enjoy the wonderment that is early playtesting.
I believe we're done here.
<!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro--><b>*LOCKED.*</b><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->