FPS problems, runs poor

[ManCannon]

I get so sick of hearing ignorant people pulling "the human eye can't see more than x FPS card".

Anyway, yeah, this game is running like total crap for me and it's only gotten worse as the beta has worn on. I can't even maintain a steady 60 fps at medium settings with a 6970. And at medium settings the game doesn't even look as good as Call of Duty 2 lol.

 

[7-CLOWN-7]

Thanks for all the support - I love you guys. See you on the battlefield and I'll keep playing at my steady 35FPS and pwn as I always have.

I'm also glad I could help some folks out that play in our server and got them running at a steady frame rate and great gaming.

This game is going to rule, sorry not all of you can enjoy it and would rather argue about FPS and the like. Things haven't changed in 30+ years... LOL

 

[Machete234]

but for First Person Shooters 30 is perfectly fine and the norm.

Are you high?
30 FPS totally sucks thats more or less a slideshow, a game should be very well over 60fps to feel completely smooth, like 70FPS.

And at medium settings the game doesn't even look as good as Call of Duty 2 lol.

My game looks worse than cod1 and has 40 fps in cod1 I would get 300 fps

 

[mostevil]

Are you high?
30 FPS totally sucks thats more or less a slideshow, a game should be very well over 60fps to feel completely smooth, like 70FPS.


My game looks worse than cod1 and has 40 fps in cod1 I would get 300 fps

Yeah 30 feels terrible for most of us non crazy troll-folks. But he is a clown after all.
Its not pretty on medium and it doesn't look much better on high. You get more effects but its still pretty ugly for the power its using. From my perspective though, as long as the gameplays good though thats not a disaster... but it'll hurt the mass market.

 

[TheAngelKing]

You go you understand it then. What it tells you is that 30 is normal and good if steady. It's the changes the eye sees not the steady FPS. If you could lock at 60FPS or 30FPS it would look exactly the same to the naked eye.

I know exactly what it says you don't have to tell me I read it and have seen many of the arguments about it over the years and have been gaming for over 30 years. I understand all of it.

Anyway I'm now up to about 100 FPS and let me tell you it's worse than when I was set at 30 steady as the link states - steady is key not the bigger number. It fluctuates too much between 100 and 60 and lags worse than my steady 30.

Anyway you can test all settings for video to see what you'll get by just doing the ~ STAT FPS at your menu screen and changing the settings under VIDEO, but remember it's the SOUND SETTING IN the INI that makes the difference, just keep tweaking until you see what fixes your issues - some make you exit out and go back in but many don't. I've had mine on the menu screen at 160 FPS max thus far and in game about 50-100FPS. Set to HIGH, change SOUND to 8 Channels and you'll all have pretty FPS that you are looking for. I'm going back to my steady 30 on Ultra ran much smoother.

NOTE:
I actually found that setting to Ultra and changing to 16 for Sound makes for a happy medium at about 45 FPS steady. Just tweak to your system specs. Whatever you see in the menu screen for FPS is about half once you enter the actual game to play. So for me at about 111 FPS in Menu as an example gives me 45-55 FPS in game at these settings noted under NOTE:.

Also be aware of the setting for Framerate smoothing. This will then again cut your FPS by half again. The reason the game makers have color coded the FPS meter is because anything above 30FPS is Good when steady. The smoothing click box is so that it can try to determine with your system a happy medium where your game will maintain a particular FPS. So as I mentioned above my fluctuating between 100 and 60 what the game will then do is try setting a steady 60FPS so that you don't have as much fluctuation between the FPS so that you'd then notice the (Graphics Lag).

Tried all of your suggestions, FPS sits at 300 on main menu. 15 in game.

 

[7-CLOWN-7]

Well I'm running at 35FPS steady and it's smooth as silk. Those who play on my server on average are around the same and I've yet to hear any of them complain what so ever.

Go into RO and check your FPS and you'll see that for the last 7 years you've been getting the exact same frame rates. At least I have and it's perfectly fine to me.

My gaming will easily attest to that. Feel free to come join our server and I'll show you how great it runs on my end. As stated I'm on totally Ultra settings and everything checked and 35 is perfect.

I guess when you get to be my age the slower the better...

Here's a classic from the REAL RO players that have a clue. Read the last post and look at it's post date and which game.

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=2955

 

[SQBsam]

Why do people watch FPS? Play the game. I've been playing games for well over 30 years and everyone constantly complains about FPS. Don't watch it unless your game is not running smooth and it's only for comparison stats for hardware comparisons and benchmarking.

The human eye can't see much over 30 fps anyway. Full motion Video is only 24 fps.

I play the game on everything ULTRA and I get 30+ when looking and game runs smooth as silk always. If you even pay attention if the FPS on their gauge stays above 30 it's in the green and changes colors when it dips below. The reason for this because they know as well as anyone else anything about 30 is perfectly fine and won't be noticed.

My system AMD Phenom II 1090T (6 Core) all cores running at 3.7GHZ (Overclocked), 16 Gig of RAM, Graphics card is a Nvidia 480GTX for comparison reasons.

People need to stop worrying about FPS unless your game stutters or has graphics lag. Anything greater than 30 fps etc. is for racing games and flight games only, where the sensation of speed is required.

Heya clown, just a couple of points I deem necessary to make:

The human eye can pick apart fps differences up to around 250fps, above 24(as deemed by disney) the human eye sees motion from a series of frames. Above 50 (according to popular knowledge) the eye sees smooth and responsive motion.

We look at fps because we get stutters and low fps, the frame times can in some cases be above 40 or so ms and this feels unresponsive and odd. We then check against our frames per second and see that yes, our fps is below 20 or so (40ms being around 25fps, so try adding .04 of a second lag between everything you do and what happens in the world around you, added to ~50ms of ping) and so we try and turn down the graphics until the responsiveness is back again. If we can't, or we deem the graphics too low per fps, we complain, and we ask for optimization or fixes.

And to actually address OPs point, yes, he is whinging a wee bit, 40fps is damn fine, I would kill for 40fps. I get 90 fps INSIDE but it drops to 15 outside and stutters like hell, on an ATI Radeion 6870!!! Hence I think something is wrong (with the new maps, station, spartaaaa! and pavlovs house, the old ones are *okay*) and needs to be addressed.

Anyway, hope that helps a little. Cheers!

-Sam

 

[LuckyOne]

AS much as you don't believe CLOWN that the FPS is not that big of a deal as long as it is above 30 he has a point... Reducing the sound channels works for me in fixing sudden arty frame drops, and also improves overall FPS.

 

[Prof]

Are you high?
30 FPS totally sucks thats more or less a slideshow, a game should be very well over 60fps to feel completely smooth, like 70FPS.


My game looks worse than cod1 and has 40 fps in cod1 I would get 300 fps

Do you know that the human eye can only perceive around 16-18 pictures per second and anything above that makes no difference to it at all?

Modern movies only show 30 fps...are they a slideshow to you, too?

 

[7-CLOWN-7]

As far as arguing FPS, what an eye can see and what not, this has been argued since the days of Windows for Workgroups and not by me, by any means, because honestly if you haven't gotten the point, FPS means nothing to me, as long as my game is running smooth as silk which it is. This is at on average a STEADY 35 FPS on Ultra with everything enabled. I would have never even checked if it weren't for threads like this. If I set everything to HIGH then that jumps to about 60 FPS STEADY.

I agree with everyone that if you have below 30 FPS then yes you have issues. 30+ is the norm and if STEADY the key. I mean even the game makers themselves know this fact thus the FPS stats will be in green for everything above 30 and they even have a setting for framerate smoothing which is to find everyone's STEADY factor for general terms and then tries to set or lock that FPS.

I did not throw my original response to those with real issues. It's the FPS fan boys who expect 75+ FPS at all times in all games because they have 4 Video cards, SLI, the best Video card in the gaming world etc.

Then throw in the mix a 64 player full server with poor latency and now you have total disaster, now FPS is a 1/3 of your issues.

How do you think it is for folks like myself playing a game like this when a bunch of people are on LOW settings and I'm on Ultra - well guess what they have no foliage, many other things are now non existent to them but yet on my screen they are totally obscure and hidden.

This was similar to cheating in the RO days with what is called 16 Bitters. Now with many of these issues we've all been talking about it's now going to be the norm as well.

 

[Malteserr]

Do you know that the human eye can only perceive around 16-18 pictures per second and anything above that makes no difference to it at all?

Modern movies only show 30 fps...are they a slideshow to you, too?

Don't go there. Don't even go to the whole "eye can see" blah blah argument. When playing a game, anything below 60fps (let's say 50 and below) is NOT SMOOTH AND CAN BE NOTICED BY ANYONE. Try it yourself. Anything above 60 is pretty good. High end gaming rigs that give you 100fps on games are excellent because you are assured that even in the biggest gunfights and artillery barrages, your FPS won't go below 60, giving you an advantage compared to other players (and enemies) that will start lagging and lose concentration for a second or two.

That's how all games work. Especially first person shooters. If you're going to argue about FPS and what your eye can see, you clearly never played games or you're just trolling.

 

[Tarkin]

Do you know that the human eye can only perceive around 16-18 pictures per second and anything above that makes no difference to it at all?

Modern movies only show 30 fps...are they a slideshow to you, too?

The human eye does not work in such a streamlined fashion where you can say "This is the framerate you need, for EVERYTHING"

Movies run at 24.997 frames per second because back in the early 1900's film was expensive and they set that to be the standard rate at which a smooth picture could be made, without wasting excess film. It's pretty pointless in the digital era but we still do it.
24.997 frames per second work when the image is SHOT at 24.997 frames per second and that the image is stationary. Next time you are at the movie theater, try and watch the film out of your peripheral vision instead of directly. You will absolutely see a "slideshow" and a flickering image. I can't tell you entirely why as this is as far from my area of expertise as possible but I have done a little reading on the subject.

Movies aren't very often shot from the first person perspective either, nor do they have rapid panning of the image all over the place. Often times the camera is mostly stationary and the objects on screen are what is in motion.
We notice poor framerate when the whole image moves, not the objects within it.
Try playing the game in an incredibly poor performing area (where you get 10-20fps) and stop moving. Don't move the camera. Watch the actors and objects on screen... It'll be pretty smooth, then try to move the camera. A jerky mess.

That 60 frames per second nonsense that people came up with back in the counterstrike days about the "most the eye can perceive" is a load of nonsense too. The reason 60 is the magic number is because refresh rates on CRTs was 60. Vsync would keep page tearing down at 60. You would never see more than 60 with that on.
The human eye can see well beyond 60 IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
Which is mainly fast moving images. The more frames you can shove in an scene, the smoother it will be. There is no magic number that the eye can perceive, as everyone is different, however if I were to guess and put a number on it, it would probably in the 300+ range, and only in certain circumstances.

If you could put two monitors side by side and frame cap them, you'd be able to see this pretty clearly. one locked at 20fps and the other locked at 300, in a standing scene, they would look damn near identical. however if you start moving that camera around the 20fps one would be vastly inadequate.

 

[realninja]

i get playable framrate(30+) if i uncheck everything ,move all sliders to the lowest setting, except textures on high .. aa off .. and lighting on medium ..
i have a 3ghz quadcore, ati 5770(1gb) .. and 4gb ram

 

[DarkHunt3r]

All these arguments over what the human eye can see are pointless. To many people, me included the game is choppy, and a gaming session will induce a headache.

The frame rates are very very low for a gaming title of this nature. There is nothing in this game that dictate the frame should be so slow except poor optimization and coding. Maybe the final release tomorrow (God I am worried about it) will be a lot smoother, I certainly hope so.

You have to remember this is a directx 9.0c game, modern graphics cards should be sucking this in and spitting out and shouting "Next" The maps are not excessively large, in fact most of them are quite small. there is very little decoration or interactive objects in the environment, and the character models are some where between CoD 2 and CoD:W@W

Directx 9.0 has been around since 2002, directx 9.0c has been around since 2004, for it to run so badly on today's computer architecture makes no sense whats so ever. Other than 1 major reason, that is the Unreal Engine 3, which although claims to be a cross platform engine, was designed with the Xbox in mind.

Think about it logically, people can run far more taxing maps and character models perfectly fine yet this title runs very badly indeed, games like S.T.A.L.K.E.R running on Directx 10 runs far smoother, with far larger maps, Crysis 2, Directx 11, runs far smoother, the lever of detail in Crysis is vastly larger to this title. BF:BC2, MoH, using the Frostbyte engine run larger maps, far more detail, and run smoother

I believe Tripwire will sort the issues out, it will never run as smoothly as other titles, just as RO1 always looked clunky with drab levels, it was still a great game though.

This will be a great game, I think the vast majority recognize that, and most of the frustration is created by people being desperate to play it smoothly and being unable too, must be very frustrating for those with high end rigs, especially when people like me with mid (probably low now) range ones van run the game fairly smoothly

Have a little faith though, the jump from the clan beta to the latest beta was huge, the clan beta was terribly bugged, unplayable at times, and then the release of this beta was a huge step forward, hopefully the final release tomorrow will have the same huge step forward. If not stay away from these forums for a while it will be haters hating on a mega scale

 

[realninja]

AS much as you don't believe CLOWN that the FPS is not that big of a deal as long as it is above 30 he has a point... Reducing the sound channels works for me in fixing sudden arty frame drops, and also improves overall FPS.

where do u do that? i have insane problems with arty framedrops .. the game lags to death when a mortar barage is on

 

[Srinidhalaya]

FPS matters big time. Not so much the number, but the consistency of it. Sure you can't see 90fps, but if you running a solid 90, then u get a drop to 35 for a second, then back to 90, you see it, and it makes a huge difference in gameplay.

BTW, 120hz monitors kick butt!

 

[THD]

Do you know that the human eye can only perceive around 16-18 pictures per second and anything above that makes no difference to it at all?

Modern movies only show 30 fps...are they a slideshow to you, too?

I think we have a winner here, this so far is the lowest frame rate someone has claimed our poor useless eyes to be unable to see past.

Can you please tell where you are getting that info from? Because that book/page/film needs to be reported to the FBI as deliberately mis-informative and causing mass idiocy.

Or maybe you are just pulling things out of your arse, in which case I strongly recommend you to do some research before posting.

 

[Prof]

I think we have a winner here, this so far is the lowest frame rate someone has claimed our poor useless eyes to be unable to see past.

Can you please tell where you are getting that info from? Because that book/page/film needs to be reported to the FBI as deliberately mis-informative and causing mass idiocy.

Or maybe you are just pulling things out of your arse, in which case I strongly recommend you to do some research before posting.

1. We learned that in school a few years ago and I wouldn't call my former teachers idiots.

2. Pick up a scientific book about your anatomy and read it.

3. 16-24 fps are what a human perceives as a fluid image, which is why movies use 24-30 fps...do they look like a slidesho to you?

4. The so called "Flimmerverschmelzungsfrequenz" (flicker fusion frequency) states that for a human the flickering of a light with 10 or more Hertz fuses into one light.

Now tell me your sources on your superior organs please.

And please do your homework before trying to call people idiots the next time.

 

[Pectus]

Go into any game in which you can set the maximum fps to whatever you want, then set it to lets say 25. After that set it to 120. If you do that and still come back saying that you cant recognize the diffrence, i'd suggest that you go and see a doctor, so he can give you a white stick and a pair of shades.

 

[Natas]

What a useless thread, i dont know if some peoples are there to justify the game bad performance or they are simply ignorant.

Again you are not watching a movie with a fixed camera, you are playing a video game where you have direct input control of the camera and character movement.