Just wondering why the graphics in this game are so demanding.Crysis Wars runs better on my machine than this.That doesn't make any sense.I mean,the graphics are good but not really spectacular or anything.Is it the nvidia drivers?Is it the game being poorly optimized?What's the deal?It's really strange to me because when I turn everything on high there really isn't that much of a visual difference,it just makes the game run like crap.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
graphics
Collapse
X
-
Twitter: @CptainCrunch
Battlelog/Origin: CptainCrunch
Comment
-
Re: graphics
Originally posted by johnrondotJust wondering why the graphics in this game are so demanding.Crysis Wars runs better on my machine than this.That doesn't make any sense.I mean,the graphics are good but not really spectacular or anything.Is it the nvidia drivers?Is it the game being poorly optimized?What's the deal?It's really strange to me because when I turn everything on high there really isn't that much of a visual difference,it just makes the game run like crap.
Comment
-
Re: graphics
Originally posted by johnrondotJust wondering why the graphics in this game are so demanding.Crysis Wars runs better on my machine than this.That doesn't make any sense.I mean,the graphics are good but not really spectacular or anything.Is it the nvidia drivers?Is it the game being poorly optimized?What's the deal?It's really strange to me because when I turn everything on high there really isn't that much of a visual difference,it just makes the game run like crap.
This is what i was complaining about from the beggining.. i can run farcry2 on the max, ultra high or super high or smth, and this game i have to run in medium.(DX9) .. i think it is because of all the things that are going on on the server/battlefield because ur pc has to process it all. BUT that would only be accepted if the destruction was actually destruction physics, (ur pc had to prossess all the destruction virtual molecules?XD) and theyr just some scripted holes, but anyway...
Comment
-
Re: graphics
Yup, it is demanding.
Destruction 2.0 hogs CPU usage and GPU usage.
I have a AMD 965 3.4 GHZ and a XFX 5850 DDR5 1GB + 4 GB DDR3 Ripjaw RAM.
But it's what makes me play this game Nothing like going from room to room with a 40 mm making my own doors.
I have 100 fps on average on 1280 x 1024 maxed out
Comment
-
Re: graphics
While crysis has very detailed destruction none of it was actually in multi player from what I remember, can't even remember trees falling. However most of the buildings had zero destruction.
Also I have to say the graphics are spectacular, and some stuff looks better then crysis, some stuff maybe slightly worse. DX11 of course crysis doesn't have, but when your comparing crysis wars specifically its a little unfair. They made crysis wars more smooth after even people with good rigs couldn't really run the oriingal game smoothly in multiplayer with out turning down the graphics a fair bit. Even then for my self, the whole game play set up for crysis wasn't executed well, and while it was a amazing single player game, it fell apart in multiplayer, even in crysis wars.
While it might be tougher to run, hopefully with time it'll get more optimized by dice. And if you have a ATI 5800 series card, you already got some extra performance from the newer beta drivers. I'm waiting until those drivers are official to try them my self, but look athe 10.3b catalyst beta drivers to see for your self.
it's a new game, and new on PC, with a lot of high end features, to expect it to run well optimized even a month after release is very unrealistic, I know patience isn't something gamers seem to have in quantity, however if these kinds of things get under your skin a console is just a better way to go.
Comment
-
Re: graphics
I don't really think the destruction and "there is a lot going on" really have anything to do with it.I will be in a part of a map where there is no one, and nothing going on, and I am still lagging.Im wondering if it is mostly network lag at this point.
On a side note,the new rush version of Laguna Presa is amazing.It is truly a battlefield sandbox experience.I don't really care about conquest anymore,in this game anyway.If Dice makes more Huge rush maps like this and Arica, I will be a happy camper.
Comment
-
Re: graphics
Originally posted by johnrondoti don't really think the destruction and "there is a lot going on" really have anything to do with it.i will be in a part of a map where there is no one, and nothing going on, and i am still lagging.im wondering if it is mostly network lag at this point.
On a side note,the new rush version of laguna presa is amazing.it is truly a battlefield sandbox experience.i don't really care about conquest anymore,in this game anyway.if dice makes more huge rush maps like this and arica, i will be a happy camper.
Comment
-
Re: graphics
Originally posted by johnrondotYeah that would have been great.As it is I don't even play conquest because all the maps are too small.
Comment
-
Re: graphics
I think it's a combination of both GPU & CPU that makes the game run good or bad. Think about it. The sound is mixed and uses the processor, not the sound card. The GPU is used for particle effects, shadows, lighting, destruction. I'm sure the destruction takes up cpu power as well. Add all that plus vehicles & bigger maps.
**Off topic: Check this game out - Breach. Uses full destruction and it looks like they emphasise military tactics. This is what the next bf game should have( Full Destruction) **Watch Both Videos
Comment
Comment