Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
  1. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by Khelendros View Post
    I'm not saying its not an issue cause it is (everyone at Trion knows it to, the folks there for community day talked about it). But man, its really really difficult to go to multicore if the game isn't made for it. You guys don't understand how much work that is for a very very small developer. This isn't Blizzard. Trion doesn't have the kind of manpower to throw 20 hardcore code engineers at this problem and have it cracked in 6 months. I think it will come in sometime during 3.0 but its not gonna be in before then. Shadow optimization is in now, and is working really well. So I imagine they are on to multicore support but all they have is two guys working on it. Its highly specialized work.
    Trion is not a very small developer. Hello Games is a small developer. Goblin Entertainment is a small developer. Trion is a multi-million dollar developer/publisher. Sure, they're nowhere near the size of the big guys like Activision, Ubisoft, or EA, but they're not some small time outfit. They fit pretty squarely in the AA level. Hell, Rift reportedly earned around $36M alone last year. Sure, there are many MMO's that earned more, but that's a very solid haul for a smallish dev team (note: smallish, not small or very small).

    I get that it may be very complicated and difficult. But I really don't care. Not only should this not have been an issue in the first place (who in their right mind would launch a MMO in the 2010's without multi-core support?) but it's the kind of issue that's going to drive a lot of folks away. Nobody likes to play a game that runs like crap, and nobody is going to want to take their kitted out rig (or at least fairly powerful rig) and have to drop down everything to very low settings to prevent the game from shitting itself should more than a few dozen people appear on their screen.

  2. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by Slipmat View Post
    Consoles like the PS3 and Xbox360 are locked to 30 FPS, you don't hear them complain about bad FPS, then again consoles are primarily played on TV screens which would have FPS below 30Hz depending if American NTSC or European SECAM which is ~25 FPS.
    I am pretty sure a ton of articles have been written about sub-60 FPS games on consoles. Very recently too. To the point of studio heads needing to address the issue and other development houses by turn defending or explaining their limitations.

    Console FPS is a big issue in gaming as a source of many complaints and concerns.

  3. #163
    Herald of the Titans Slipmat's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    2,894
    If you're really into gaming, you're not going to be running around trying to run AAA MMO's on the equivalent of Mom's Facebook surfing Dell and expect to be getting 80+ FPS on it, i have zero sympathy for those people who insist on using aged PC's and demanding that Game Studios cater to them.

    I have posted plenty of screen shots here that show me getting 90-110 FPS in Open World and the lowest i drop to is ~15-20 FPS with 400+ players all clashing at the Eye in Conquest and my PC certainly isn't cutting edge.

  4. #164
    The Unstoppable Force Kelimbror's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bear Taco, Left Hand of Death
    Posts
    21,280
    Quote Originally Posted by Slipmat View Post
    If you're really into gaming, you're not going to be running around trying to run AAA MMO's on the equivalent of Mom's Facebook surfing Dell and expect to be getting 80+ FPS on it, i have zero sympathy for those people who insist on using aged PC's and demanding that Game Studios cater to them
    It's all cool to like the game, cool to have good performance on a good machine, but completely fallacious, bordering on lies, to claim that you have to use a computer from the stone age to get poor performance in Rift. It's also both rude and tacky to then insult people for leveling that criticism. Fact: Rift's performance is often terrible on many mid range and higher machines. Their focus on large scale events outside of instances only serves to magnify this effect.
    BAD WOLF

  5. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by Slipmat View Post
    If you're really into gaming, you're not going to be running around trying to run AAA MMO's on the equivalent of Mom's Facebook surfing Dell and expect to be getting 80+ FPS on it, i have zero sympathy for those people who insist on using aged PC's and demanding that Game Studios cater to them.
    Well, this is a bit of an exaggeration. Many players with PCs above the min spec have performance issues. Seems a bit ridiculous and combative, to be honest.

    I don't have a lot of sympathy for users of out dated hardware either. But critique of Rift's inconsistent performance is just as often leveraged by those with capable machines as those playing on "Mom's Facebook surfing Dell".

    I am capable of running Rift at fairly high settings w/ good FPS. Though I also see wild variance in performance from one desktop to the other and from my decently equipped laptops. All of which run games more demanding than Rift; FF14, ESO, Wildstar, Guild Wars 2, Planetside 2, et cetera.

    Optimization of Rift is on the poorer end of MMOs. That does not mean Rift is incapable of outputting high fidelity performance at acceptable frame rates.
    Last edited by Fencers; 2014-08-26 at 02:00 PM.

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Slipmat View Post
    If you're really into gaming, you're not going to be running around trying to run AAA MMO's on the equivalent of Mom's Facebook surfing Dell and expect to be getting 80+ FPS on it, i have zero sympathy for those people who insist on using aged PC's and demanding that Game Studios cater to them.
    Holy hell, are you being serious now? Why are you reaching so far to defend something like this?

    Yes, I don't have a top of the line computer with brand new parts from the past year or two.

    No, I don't have a potato computer.

    I've got a pretty solid computer that, while a bit old, has zero problems running most modern MMO's and games at a stable framerate at mid-high settings at the very least, and usually at high settings. Tera? Not a problem. SWTOR? No sweat (at least now). FFXIV? Piece of cake. WildStar? Gravy. ESO? Solid. Rift? Yeah...about that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slipmat View Post
    I have posted plenty of screen shots here that show me getting 90-110 FPS in Open World and the lowest i drop to is ~15-20 FPS with 400+ players all clashing at the Eye in Conquest and my PC certainly isn't cutting edge.
    Cool, that's about as valid of an argument of all the randoms during SWTOR launch saying those complaining of poor performance just had bad computers...when the issue was the HE that BioWare was using was horribly optimized and was getting horrible performance on a variety of rigs, incluing top end systems.

    Each time I do Volan there are at least 50-80 people on my screen (nowhere near 400). I'm lucky if I'm getting more than 15fps.

  7. #167
    Deleted
    I pretty much stopped playing rift for awhile now, I stayed subbed even when it went free to play, however the constant performance issues are a pain.

    And I constantly tweaked the settings as much as I could, and I used the 20 man raids as the standard bar as its the most controlled situation you can get.

    And my system at the time was a I5 3570 k clocked at 4.4 GHZ with 8 GB of 1600 mhz ram and a 7970 GHZ card, and the performance tanked to my liking, anything below 60 FPS to me is outright failure with my rig, and my current gpu is a Nvidia 780 now, it will still tank on that.

    My system alone is far more powerful then most peoples out there and it still dropped below 60 FPS for most of the time, I really cant count open world performance, its too random to consider it, I need in combat FPS readings in order to get a measure of it.
    Dont get me wrong, in wow in 25 man raids it still drops under 60 fps in combat, and we still give it a damn well critique, but its excuse it has is its a 10 + plus year old engine at its core.

    Now FF14, in 24 man raids, crystal tower or sycrus tower, in combat, I never dropped below 60 FPS, and I have it capped at 60, and FF14 at max settings looks better then rift and has far flashier effects.

    I like rift, would play it again, it needs to be fixed, content is meaningless to me if it cant run well.

  8. #168
    Herald of the Titans Slipmat's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    2,894
    The Infinity Gate has once more appeared hovering over Shimmersand, turned on by accident after today's hotfix? or is something brewing. Managed to grab this screenshot as a Plane of Water invasion was happening, adds to the atmosphere



  9. #169
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorianrage View Post
    I pretty much stopped playing rift for awhile now, I stayed subbed even when it went free to play, however the constant performance issues are a pain.

    And I constantly tweaked the settings as much as I could, and I used the 20 man raids as the standard bar as its the most controlled situation you can get.

    And my system at the time was a I5 3570 k clocked at 4.4 GHZ with 8 GB of 1600 mhz ram and a 7970 GHZ card, and the performance tanked to my liking, anything below 60 FPS to me is outright failure with my rig, and my current gpu is a Nvidia 780 now, it will still tank on that.

    My system alone is far more powerful then most peoples out there and it still dropped below 60 FPS for most of the time, I really cant count open world performance, its too random to consider it, I need in combat FPS readings in order to get a measure of it.
    Dont get me wrong, in wow in 25 man raids it still drops under 60 fps in combat, and we still give it a damn well critique, but its excuse it has is its a 10 + plus year old engine at its core.

    Now FF14, in 24 man raids, crystal tower or sycrus tower, in combat, I never dropped below 60 FPS, and I have it capped at 60, and FF14 at max settings looks better then rift and has far flashier effects.

    I like rift, would play it again, it needs to be fixed, content is meaningless to me if it cant run well.

    doesnt matter what rig you have. rift playes with bad FPS anyway.. you can play at 800x600 and change to 2560x1440 and you won't lose 1 single dps, or the otherway around, gain 1 single fps.

    you can do 4-5 stuff in .cfg but it still isnt enough to always have 60+ fps. i agree with you. it is really a turnoff

  10. #170
    While I do love Rift, and I do have some frustrations with it too. Which is natural for any game. The performance issues (multi-thread) is one of the bigger complaints. I was impressed at being able to turn shadows on again with 2.8. Still, it's going to take 30 FPS in TB with shadows on to relieve that frustration.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by Iamcute View Post
    doesnt matter what rig you have. rift playes with bad FPS anyway.. you can play at 800x600 and change to 2560x1440 and you won't lose 1 single dps, or the otherway around, gain 1 single fps.

    you can do 4-5 stuff in .cfg but it still isnt enough to always have 60+ fps. i agree with you. it is really a turnoff
    I get 75 fps in Sanctum/Meridian with everything maxed and antialiasing on. And my rig was under 1500....so yeah...

    Could it be better? Heck yea, it throttles down to half that (still more than acceptable) when I am doing Conquest or a large zone event. But its not like you can't make it perform better if you have a better system.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •