What was running PS2 today? - Page 3

Ieyasu · 2012-06-06, 01:57 AM

I know theyll give us some graphics options, but I for one hope they allow us to turn the draw distances up higher than what I have seen so far. Ive seen lots of flora and fauna popping up while people roam around in vehicles.

Xyntech · 2012-06-06, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by Ieyasu

I know theyll give us some graphics options, but I for one hope they allow us to turn the draw distances up higher than what I have seen so far. Ive seen lots of flora and fauna popping up while people roam around in vehicles.

That's probably more to do with the game being in alpha than anything. I noticed the support tower underneath a biolab dome wasn't showing up during part of the E3 live stream at one point as well, and I don't think that would accepted as intentional.

Lazaruz · 2012-06-06, 06:12 AM

I've been eagerly waiting for some sort of official ballpark estimate, on what kind of toasters are required to run this seemingly amazing game. All I could find was some specs on the Game debate site, but who knows what they are based on (if anything). But I guess I will find that out if/when I get into beta, so all in due time...

In other news: I joined the forums, Hello!

Fable · 2012-06-06, 06:14 AM

Originally Posted by Xaine

I'm sorry, could someone please explain to me what the hell all this means for my system. I'm good at a few things, but this really is not one of them. I'm a complete tard when it comes to this.

Could someone tell me, at their best guess how this will fare with PS2:

AMD Phenom II 955 3.2GHz Quad core.
4 gigs of ram.
ATI Radeon 5850 with 2GB onboard.

Running at 1920 x 1080.

If someone could give me a very short reply, and tell me roughly where i stand i'd be very grateful.

Aren't you a hardcore player? I thought hardcore FPS players play on lowest graphics anyway.

EVILoHOMER · 2012-06-06, 06:19 AM

I have

670SLI (I think VRAM Is mirrored though so it'll still only be 2GB of VRAM)
980 I7 (6 core @4ghrz but first gen)
12GB ram (the basic 9-9-9-24 1600mhz the values change though as you OC the CPU)
Asus D2X Sound Card

So I really hope I'll be able to max Planetside 2 because I've only just upgraded the 670s in this thing. I'm not a programmer but I just hope the game tends to use more of the GPU than the CPU like Battlefield 3 cause CPU focused games always seem to fail in the performance department.

EVILoHOMER · 2012-06-06, 06:24 AM

Originally Posted by Fable

Aren't you a hardcore player? I thought hardcore FPS players play on lowest graphics anyway.

Well that's pro gamers not hardcore gamers and that isn't true any more either. Events now that they play at require the top graphical settings to be on to attract people to watch. CS:GO is being made for this reason and the pro scene will have no choice to switch as people aren't interest in the graphics of 1.6 any more. This was only really ever true to get over 100FPS for high refresh rates on CRTs but now PCs can do this easily on both the modded Quake 2 engine of CS and source of CS:S.

SpirosRonto · 2012-06-06, 06:26 AM

oh gawd my E8400 3.6 is gonna die

hypehype · 2012-06-06, 06:38 AM

Should play the game 1st, before any upgrades.

What i want to test is 1998 people in one building, spamming AOE weapons

Xaine · 2012-06-06, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Fable

Aren't you a hardcore player? I thought hardcore FPS players play on lowest graphics anyway.

I'd probably call myself that, yes.

Honesty, graphics dont matter too much to me. As long as I can tell im playing PS2 and not minecraft, then I'm fine.

What I really want to avoid is FPS drops, same as everyone. But I'd still like to play the game on medium at least.

Xaine · 2012-06-06, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by hypehype

Should play the game 1st, before any upgrades.

What i want to test is 1998 people in one building, spamming AOE weapons

Also, this.

I won't be buying anything until very late beta. Possibly just right before launch.

kaffis · 2012-06-06, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by EVILoHOMER

So I really hope I'll be able to max Planetside 2 because I've only just upgraded the 670s in this thing. I'm not a programmer but I just hope the game tends to use more of the GPU than the CPU like Battlefield 3 cause CPU focused games always seem to fail in the performance department.

Lol. CPU-centric games only seem to fail in the performance department because you over-GPU'd your rig and it never gets a workout.

Bags, I don't think you've got cause to sweat. i5 2500k's are great chips, and i7's aren't *that* much better than i5's.

EVILoHOMER · 2012-06-06, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by kaffis

Lol. CPU-centric games only seem to fail in the performance department because you over-GPU'd your rig and it never gets a workout.

Bags, I don't think you've got cause to sweat. i5 2500k's are great chips, and i7's aren't *that* much better than i5's.

What I don't understand is why they cannot shift a lot of the work over to the GPU, I'm not a developer but just don't see why it isn't possible. Surely stuff like Physx is an attempt to move that part from CPU to GPU.

The other thing is you get games that are so CPU heavy and yet they're using like all of cores 1&2 and then barely anything of 3&4 and 5&6 aren't ever touched.

I just don't get why you can have games like BF3 where if you have a dual core you barely see any performance difference to people with quad. All the difference seems to be in the GPU and yet all the bad console ports seem to be so CPU focused to where it doesn't matter what GPU you have and you need a quad core.

Surely shift the work load to the GPU.

**CyclesMcHurtz** · 2012-06-06, 10:41 AM

The GPU is just that - a graphics-focused chip. Some operations are somewhat one-way processes and others are a more back-and-forth process.

The power of a GPU is to churn through a set of complex calculations where you don't need to react (much) to the results. This is why you don't see much talk about moving AI in games to the GPU. The GPU really falls down when it comes to making any kind of logical decision (IF this THEN that). Almost all the silicon in a GPU is geared towards ripping through data in a huge list from start to finish.

The CPU is much better at going back and forth through decisions and accessing any storage or input and output devices.

You can certainly ask the GPU questions, but the turn-around time is like a bad satellite link in terms of latency. It can calculate the weight of an unladen swallow, but actually giving you the answer takes a really long time.

Sent from deep in the bowels of the Oort cloud.

SKYeXile · 2012-06-06, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

You can certainly ask the GPU questions, but the turn-around time is like a bad satellite link in terms of latency. It can calculate the weight of an unladen swallow, but actually giving you the answer takes a really long time.

Sent from deep in the bowels of the Oort cloud.

African or European?

wasdie · 2012-06-06, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by Razicator

I'm more interested in the average pings of the players. The game can be optimized to run on lower hardware, but there's only so much you can do for delay outside of proper netcoding. So long as the average ping is under 80 I'm happy. Under 150 is alright, and under 200 is the limit for me.

I felt that the game was a lot less laggy than the first time they showed it off. That's a very good sign that they have started their optimization phase.

Most of the front-end optimization will come during the beta phase as it's not as important as just getting the game up and running and working.