Guild Wars 2

There are plenty of games, WoW included, that added DX11 support with their expansions.
Newer shaders will be a massive improvement, Shader Model 5.0 vs Shader Model 3.0 is a really big difference. Not even talking about light and shadow effects or performance.

Ansau.7326:

VaLee.5102:

Max quality with supersample at 1080p:

http://s29.postimg.org/8ildglq6u/gw020.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/qqznrrsc0/gw021.jpg
http://s29.postimg.org/lt98a4gr9/gw022.jpg

Now tell me again how amazing the graphics are.

That’s because dx9 doesn’t support tessellation, which would bump a lot the quality of stone buildings and walls.

The two wall pics has nothing to do with tessellation but simply the texture used not having a high enough resolution relative to the size of the object and how close you can get to it. Dx9 is limited to either 2K or 4K texture resolution depending on which Dx9 level they support. They could have added a bump map so lighting could give an illusion of roughness but at that angle it would still be obvious that the surface is flat.

Displacement mapping on the other hand is a Dx11 feature (I believe) and relies on the tessellation engine for geometry creation which would give the wall a physical appearance that it’s made of individual bricks rather than a flat plane painted to look like it’s made of bricks.

963355_0912 Ambient Occlusion
963365_0672 Increase contrast and detail by applying ambient occlusion.
963312_0530 Light Adaptation
963382_0971 Simulate the way your eye adjusts to light levels.

Throws something from previous datamines that happened last tuesday in, and bounces off.

And whoever believes that turning supersample on means the game will have somehow have 5k resolution textures for every wall prepared for you in advance is just a silly nilly.

Yea, that’s not what supersampling does. It’s like TV’s “zoom and enhance”, you can’t make more detail than you start with.

Hannelore.8153:

Ravenmoon.5318:

^ These issues can be avoided entirely by implementing Dx11/12 renderer. Although when I made a thread asking for it, some guys decided that it’s a genius idea to talk to me about marketing and economics and I’m like whaaaaaa ?!? this game barely works on 50vs50 and that is a real problem and those guys are giving me economics lessons? <o>

No, it can’t. DirectX 11 is thread-safe, but that doesn’t automatically make the game engine fully thread safe from the ground up. It doesn’t mean that the rest of the engine can accomplish tasks asynchronously without sufficient locking.

DirectX 9 in its own thread is about the same performance-wise as DirectX 11/12. And the game already fully offloads DX9 without the -dx9single option passed to it.

Graphics engine =/= game engine.

To put it more simply, imagine that your game code is running on one CPU, and your graphics code is running on another CPU. At some point you have to synchronize with the graphics code so that you can pass the coordinates, animation properties, etc. of each object in the game code (often called “actors”) to that thread.

During this time, both threads freeze if they try to access the same data asynchronously, and only continue when the data access is finished.

Solutions to these problems require the engine to support it from the start. Using a different graphics API just means that you can access the graphics API from all threads safely. That’s useful if you’re trying to render from two or more threads, but your game code is always running on a single CPU due to network synchronization and timing and thus at some point you will always lock on the game data.

A similar response was stated by an ANet programmer on reddit and on the forums, mentioning that from what they got out of DX11 testing and the underlying theory of what’s under the hood, a change here would result in marginal if any performance gains as the code wouldn’t be able to execute any faster.

Thats cause their engine is..kitten

Behellagh.1468:

Ansau.7326:

VaLee.5102:

Max quality with supersample at 1080p:

http://s29.postimg.org/8ildglq6u/gw020.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/qqznrrsc0/gw021.jpg
http://s29.postimg.org/lt98a4gr9/gw022.jpg

Now tell me again how amazing the graphics are.

That’s because dx9 doesn’t support tessellation, which would bump a lot the quality of stone buildings and walls.

The two wall pics has nothing to do with tessellation but simply the texture used not having a high enough resolution relative to the size of the object and how close you can get to it. Dx9 is limited to either 2K or 4K texture resolution depending on which Dx9 level they support. They could have added a bump map so lighting could give an illusion of roughness but at that angle it would still be obvious that the surface is flat.

Displacement mapping on the other hand is a Dx11 feature (I believe) and relies on the tessellation engine for geometry creation which would give the wall a physical appearance that it’s made of individual bricks rather than a flat plane painted to look like it’s made of bricks.

Quote the entire post, because after that I explain why these textures have such low resolution.
Tessellation is an easy way to improve them, but that would require an API upgrade, which devs don’t have interest.

Ansau.7326:

skowcia.8257:

I agree that graphic is outdated, anyone who says otherwise never played anything outside of f2p mmos. But its okay..graphic is not everything. Howered when it perform like a crap with outdated graphic and then you see another mmo with even more effects, really beautiful graphic with little nice details you know something is wrong. And that is a bit sad for AAA game.

You’re comparing a game released in 2012 and started being developed in 2007 with a game still in beta and started in 2010.
Btw, if you played Black Desert (that game) you’d know the crazy and ucceptable popping the game has. You should prefer lower graphics than insane ones near you, but lower than gw2 far from you and a freaking bad popping.
Just look at those screenshots and see the downgrade done in not so far graphics.

VaLee.5102:

Max quality with supersample at 1080p:

http://s29.postimg.org/8ildglq6u/gw020.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/qqznrrsc0/gw021.jpg
http://s29.postimg.org/lt98a4gr9/gw022.jpg

Now tell me again how amazing the graphics are.

That’s because dx9 doesn’t support tessellation, which would bump a lot the quality of stone buildings and walls.
It could also be improved with better textures, but the game already weights +25GB and the new expansion is about 35GB of space. If devs put better textures for all buildings in the game (tons of them), game could easily need +100GB of space.

Hurrakan.4259:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

The game is 3-years old; I expect it to have 2012 graphics, not 2015.

DirectX 11 was released in 2009. I expect a 2012 game (Guild Wars 2) to have at least 2012 graphics :p

There are many DX 11 games that were released years earlier than Guild Wars 2. Here is a small selection, including some other MMOs:

Aliens vs. Predator (2010)
Battlefield Bad Company 2 (2010)
Battle Forge (2009)
Civilization V (2010)
Colin McRae: Dirt 2 (2009)
Dungeons and Dragons Online (released 2006, DX11 support added 2010)
Lord of The Rings Online (released 2007, DX 11 support added 2010)
Star Trek Online (released 2010, DX 11 support added 2012)
The Secret World (2012)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX_11_support

It’s perfectly possible for a DX 11 game to be backwards-compatible and also support DX 9 and/or DX 10.

DX 10 is not much better than DX 9. but DX 11 features a lot of real improvements such as tessellation.

DX12 is amazing because it drastically reduces the amount of draw calls, but it will only work on Windows 10. Although Microsoft are offering Windows 10 for free to current owners of Windows 7.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8962/the-directx-12-performance-preview-amd-nvidia-star-swarm
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9112/exploring-dx12-3dmark-api-overhead-feature-test

Gw2 was released in 2012, but started to be developed in 2007. Back then dx10 was just released, but nearly everyone were running XP. Dx11 came years later and the game was way more developed.
Few months before the release devs were thinking about moving to dx11, but they preferred to stay with dx9, as still a lot of people was running the game in XP (which doesn’t even support dx10).

Very strange statements and English… 100 GB…

my CPU running at 73 degree C during zerg fight, showing how bad the dependence on CPU the game is….

I feel it would be great if after paying 50 bucks for the update we could get directx 12 support on the game. I believe it would be a nice incentive.

I dont know how hard could it be but here I found this link about other MMO implementing directx12 and says the following

“It took two engineers just six weeks to port King of Wushu from DirectX 11 to DX12, and its performance improvements are stunning. "
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/05/01/directx-12-cryengine

They make it sound something really simple if 2 employees are enough to port another mmo in just six weeks. Now Im sure gw2 is more complex, but also has a way bigger staff and budget than this other mmo. Is there any real reason for anet to not give us directx12 support? Are you at least considering it?

That MMO uses cryengine making most of the work already done (by Crytek). GW2 uses a enhanced version of their GW engine requiering them to port their engine first. And porting a engine is not something simple.

Yeah! Yet another DirectX 12/Mantle/Vulkan/the game needs “optimization” thread.

Behellagh.1468:

Yeah! Yet another DirectX 12/Mantle/Vulkan/the game needs “optimization” thread.

Well considering half of the cores on my i7 4790k are sleeping when I play the game, yes, the game needs “optimization”.

AXEL.8362:

Behellagh.1468:

Yeah! Yet another DirectX 12/Mantle/Vulkan/the game needs “optimization” thread.

Well considering half of the cores on my i7 4790k are sleeping when I play the game, yes, the game needs “optimization”.

so true !

AXEL.8362:

Behellagh.1468:

Yeah! Yet another DirectX 12/Mantle/Vulkan/the game needs “optimization” thread.

Well considering half of the cores on my i7 4790k are sleeping when I play the game, yes, the game needs “optimization”.

Well half of your cores aren’t real cores in the first place.

AXEL.8362:

Well considering half of the cores on my i7 4790k are sleeping when I play the game, yes, the game needs “optimization”.

then, awaken your cpu core. unpark them.

http://www.coderbag.com/programming-c/disable-cpu-core-parking-utility

azizul.8469:

AXEL.8362:

Well considering half of the cores on my i7 4790k are sleeping when I play the game, yes, the game needs “optimization”.

then, awaken your cpu core. unpark them.

http://www.coderbag.com/programming-c/disable-cpu-core-parking-utility

you seem to be an expert, kappa.

gw2 is running worse, performance wise, than MMOs and other games released in 2014/2015.
and gw2 is a few years old.

even blizzard is updating their 10 year old game and include newer DX versions.

Blizzard had earned BILLIONS of DOLLARS by that point on WoW subscriptions, they could afford to hire an entire team to recode the engine from scratch if they wanted too including poaching top developers from existing game engine companies. Other companies use the same engine across multiple games so the cost is distributed across those games, see Turbine but they added Dx10 support back when their games were still subscription based.

The GW2 engine was coded in 2007 based on the engine in GW1 which was coded likely in 2002. Once it gets done it’s check off the development list and isn’t revisted as the game is delayed or a new API is released. They decided early on that XP support was necessary so it’s coded to the lowest common denominator, 32-bit XP which is limited to Dx9 and a dual core CPU. A quad core does improve performance over a dual core but that’s simply because various support threads can now run on additional cores rather than interrupt the two main threads.

I don’t know about anybody else, but I get almost zero improvement in performance going from maxed to minimum graphic settings. Just for giggles the other day I dropped down to 720p from 2715×1527 and I didn’t quite gain 10 FPS. I’m pretty sure GW2 is pretty much straight up CPU restricted and would benefit the more from a bunch of multi-threading optimization than porting to directx 12. In a perfect world, they’d do both and release a 64 bit client version, but I’d settle for some real serious multi-threading work.

Performance gain is pretty much reduced to multithreading optimization of the game engine, so themain thread can distribute its work over more cores.
A newer API wouldn’t do anything but allowing newer graphic features, since the game isn’t graphic intensive and draw calls is not an issue in this game.
64bit client would only solve crashing issues, but the performance gain is unnoticeable, 1-2fps.

(Grr, my post got eaten when they merged the thread.)

But you and I Ansau are but mummers to those chanting buzzwords they heard in gaming blogs.

First making the render objects thread safe so the common render code could be structured to be scalable to number of available cores via multithreading. As well as adding the framework to support multiple APIs.

Then maybe adding a 64-bit client to help eliminate OOM errors, assuming 3rd party libraries aren’t a problem.

Then they can look into Dx11/12 support. Sorry Vista, you are less than 1% so no Dx10 for you.

The only change I wanna see (Graphics Wise) is a fix on reflections. Go find a reflective surface in the game and stand your character in front of it. It’s laughable that your reflection is merely a copy of the back of your head, so my character is looking in a mirror and can see the back of his head... Really?

Look Anet, if you can’t do it right then save yourself the embarrassment at a really poor attempt and just take it out of the game until such time that it can be added in correctly.

GW2 is the best looking mmo by far imo, don’t be absurd. Breaking the game for anyone on lower end systems for no good reason won’t help the game. Just use sweetfx.

The graphic options are there for a reason, how would adding support for better shaders or DX break the game for anyone?

VaLee.5102:

Max quality with supersample at 1080p:

http://s29.postimg.org/8ildglq6u/gw020.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/qqznrrsc0/gw021.jpg
http://s29.postimg.org/lt98a4gr9/gw022.jpg

Now tell me again how amazing the graphics are.

Not being funny, but when I’m playing the game I’m not really looking at… Walls… and the floor… and rarely am I looking at the crotches of female characters.

I’m sure they will update the graphics at some point to keep up with the times, but much like EVERY update Anet release, someone will complain about it.

“The game is too large for my hard drive”
“I’m getting major Lag on Top graphic settings, that’s not fair QQ”
“My PC keep crashing cuz my GPU can’t handle the graphics”
“Load times are too long”

etc… etc… I can see it now!

I think Anet are looking after us by not going OTT with graphics, until such a time that Guild Wars graphics is lowest of the low. I feel Anet are fine to continue to spend time working on giving us content/something to do rather than a complete graphics overhaul.

I also agree that we need a new engine not for better graphics but for good performance. An engine that would support 64bit and better directx. Don’t get me wrong, I think that game looks gorgeous (and shader injectors make it look even better) however even the high end PCs aren’t able to run it at stable fps with high/ultra settings. Even the high end systems have problems with fps in wvw or while boss battles.

The thing is that this would require A LOT of work and I don’t think that Anet has the resources for it now. And that saddens me.

imsoenthused.1634:

I don’t know about anybody else, but I get almost zero improvement in performance going from maxed to minimum graphic settings. Just for giggles the other day I dropped down to 720p from 2715×1527 and I didn’t quite gain 10 FPS. I’m pretty sure GW2 is pretty much straight up CPU restricted and would benefit the more from a bunch of multi-threading optimization than porting to directx 12. In a perfect world, they’d do both and release a 64 bit client version, but I’d settle for some real serious multi-threading work.

You do realise that this is what DX 12 does, its spreads out the workload alcross multiple threads/cores so that the CPU becomes less of a bottleneck, please learn what DX12 does before saying stuff against it

azizul.8469:

my CPU running at 73 degree C during zerg fight, showing how bad the dependence on CPU the game is….

But all that DX12 would do is bring your temperature more up, since what people
want is that GW2 uses 100% of your CPU instead of just 70%

Funny how some people think they would have a better performance with less
usage of the CPU.

Also a 64-bit client would not give better performance, it would be maybe even a
little worse. All it will do is help against OOM crashes on systems with extremly
high settings where the client uses more than 3,5 GB memory.

toxicthunder.9106:

You do realise that this is what DX 12 does, its spreads out the workload alcross multiple threads/cores so that the CPU becomes less of a bottleneck, please learn what DX12 does before saying stuff against it

DX12 what does is to distribute the gpu related work over all cores. But it does nothing with the game engine distribution or stuff not involving the gpu. Also it unlocks parallel pipelines in the gpu (multithreading with the gpu).
DX12 is only important and adds big improvements if the game is graphic intensive, since all these graphic work can be done more efficiently and fast.

The thing with gw2 is, it’s a cpu based game. Tons of things are cpu related, and it gets exponentially worse as more things happen in the game (that’s why at a certain point no cpu can handle the work and framerate drops massively).
Gpu stuff is, instead, quite low compared to cpu’s. A 260x or 750ti can already max the graphic at an acceptable framerate. Even a lot of the graphic settings are cpu related.
DX12 would only give you a little more fps in light situations, but any cpu would still struggle at heavy fights.

So, he is right and you are wrong…

A 64 bit client with DX12 would be nice but I am 99.9999% certain that we would never ever get that.
They still havent fixed the Umbra issue since launch and tons of other graphical issues.
I can’t see GW2 ever getting any updates to the engine regarding DX12 as well as a 64 bit client, it just wont happen. I would love both of these things to occur but then again my faith in Anet has plummeted in the last 3 years

VaLee.5102:

The graphic options are there for a reason, how would adding support for better shaders or DX break the game for anyone?

It wouldn’t but the code currently isn’t structured to add additional API support. DirectX 9 limits how complex the shaders can get. So until they can restructure the code for DirectX 11 and beyond. There is a Reddit thread that someone linked to earlier in this thread from the ANet engine dev. I’ll quote the API part here.

As for DX9 and 32bit: Moving off of DX9 wouldn’t buy us a whole lot performance wise, as all interaction with DirectX is happening on the render thread, which is generally not the bottleneck. Moving from 32-bit to 64-bit also does not really buy us a lot performance-wise. There are some optimizations the compiler is able to do with 64-bit that it can’t do otherwise, but the actual FPS gain is minimal at best.

toxicthunder.9106:

imsoenthused.1634:

I don’t know about anybody else, but I get almost zero improvement in performance going from maxed to minimum graphic settings. Just for giggles the other day I dropped down to 720p from 2715×1527 and I didn’t quite gain 10 FPS. I’m pretty sure GW2 is pretty much straight up CPU restricted and would benefit the more from a bunch of multi-threading optimization than porting to directx 12. In a perfect world, they’d do both and release a 64 bit client version, but I’d settle for some real serious multi-threading work.

You do realise that this is what DX 12 does, its spreads out the workload alcross multiple threads/cores so that the CPU becomes less of a bottleneck, please learn what DX12 does before saying stuff against it

Dx12 doesn’t do this automatically, the game renderer first needs to be multithreaded. The key thing that Dx12 is move more code from single threaded portion of the driver to part of the driver that can run on multiple threads. It doesn’t create multiple threads on it’s own, that’s still in the domain of the developer. It’s just that 3rd party game engines already feature multithreaded rendering for Dx11 support. You leverage that for Dx12 and voila.

I would like to see better graphic as well,perhaps Anet could just do something as Skyrim moders done,without much effort improve graphic by alot.Still GW2 does not really need better graphic,its 3 years old game and it looks just fine.We need content here,graphic doesn’t matter much.

For a 3 year old MMO with DX9 are the graphics pretty good.
Far better as any other existing and upcoming MMO this year.
Most of the upcoming MMOs based on an old unreal engine and dont look better. (blade & soul, etc)

The clothes and armors are superb.
There are so much details.
The last winters day weapons, as an example. The snowflakes in the glas spheres of the weapons are extreme sharp real looking sknowflakes. Not only white blurry dots.
But most of the players dont see this.

I dont know what some people playing when they open up such threads. o_O

PS:
GW2 uses ambient occolusion… see screenshots.

PPS:
I will see a MMO with such effects (and amount of players) AND better graphics, without using a NASA Servercenter.
Think about the witcher 3… to play it on maxed out details.
I would say we should be realistic. ^^

And since the last patch there was a noticeable performance boost for zergs and large scale battles.
Guildmembers and myself recognized it in some large scale fights with higher or highest player count settings.

Behellagh.1468:

Well half of your cores aren’t real cores in the first place.

I said cores not thread, the cores on an i7 are cores.

then, awaken your cpu core. unpark them.

Thanks man! that fix for only a handful of well known old cpus and legacy OS (because w8 unparks them by default) really helped me…not.

Why is everyone so defensive when you point up the game is optimized as crap? I have an i7 4790k, kitten (dunno why the system censors the acronym for solid state disks, it even hates good performance on forums) and a well maintained OS, it literally doesn’t get better than this. The game is really cpu bound yet the performance is horrible even having a good cpu.

I understand that making a new engine or giving directx12 support is expensive. But kitten they are charging 50 bucks for the expansion, they could as well include it.

As long as you are aware that an i7-4790K only has four cores, most people would simply listen to marketing hype or count the individual boxes in the performance tab labeled “CPU Usage History” in the task manager and say 8.

According to the ANet Game Engine Dev on reddit, the render thread isn’t the bottleneck so having a fast GPU would mean that thread will use even less of a core’s maximum performance. So I can see it using only two cores. I routinely see anywhere between 45-75% depending on what I’m doing and where I am. Higher percentage when around loads of other players.

Well after reading all of these posts i just wanna say

#TIL lots of things

Here’s hoping a fully optimized GW2 with even superior graphics that will just melt my eyes and cry because of its dazzling beauty (although it already is IMO) fingers crossed. As the MMORPG i find best in any aspect of the game (story/lore, combat, art, other mechanics), its not too bad to think of your fav mmo to be improved to be even better in many areas!

I am not saying they have to do this and that but a simple man can imagine and dream

~enjoys his tea while sitting in a chair on a slightly rainy day with the birds chirping.
~invites everyone for a cup of tea

SilverCrow.8102:

~enjoys his tea while sitting in a chair on a slightly rainy day with the birds chirping.
~invites everyone for a cup of tea

Can i get ice tea? im melting in 39 degrees… and i have 4 hours uni classes infront… #hype

Dunno what kind of engine it might need but something needs tweaking, me or it

I have virtually 2 identical CPUs with 2 differences between them, here are the specs:

• i7 4790k
• 16Gb RAM Corsair Pro 1800
• ASUS Z97 PRO acwi
• PC1 – GTX 970 + 27" Samsung 1920×1080 @ 60Hz refresh LED monitor
• PC1 running Win 10 Clean install, DX 12
• PC2 – R9 390 + 27" BENQ 2560×1440 @ 144Hz refresh LED monitor
• PC2 running Win 10 upgraded from 8.1, DX 12

Here’s the interesting thing with identical in-game graphics settings, all at highest:
*PC1 = 87 FPS
*PC2 = 63 FPS from 56 FPS when running Win 8.1 & DX 11

So, where’s the crazy promised increases with DX12 and why does the PC with the R9 390 card running 30% lower FPS?

I dropped the resolution from 2560 to 1920 on PC2 but no change from 63 FPS, I don’t get it.
If I change rendering on PC2 from Supersample to Subsample then I get an increase to 76 FPS but still…….

Is my R9 390 broken or AMD drivers broken (yup installed the latest)? It should be running like a GTX 980.

/scratches head

EDIT:
Someone over in the AMD.com forums posted that GW2 is poorly optimized for AMD GPUs which now makes sense because none of the above does when you look at the gear.

So, is the game going to be optimized for AMD as well as NVidia or is this going to be a constant case of AMD owners being fully kittened off for the rest of eternity?

Maybe the high cost of the expansion will pay for better code or………. ?

Skrotomo.2568:

So, where’s the crazy promised increases with DX12 […]

GW2 does not use any DX12 features, and graphics vendors are probably not rewriting their already working DX9 drivers.

Skrotomo.2568:

Dunno what kind of engine it might need but something needs tweaking, me or it

I have virtually 2 identical CPUs with 2 differences between them, here are the specs:

• i7 4790k
• 16Gb RAM Corsair Pro 1800
• ASUS Z97 PRO acwi
• PC1 – GTX 970 + 27" Samsung 1920×1080 @ 60Hz refresh LED monitor
• PC1 running Win 10 Clean install, DX 12
• PC2 – R9 390 + 27" BENQ 2560×1440 @ 144Hz refresh LED monitor
• PC2 running Win 10 upgraded from 8.1, DX 12

Here’s the interesting thing with identical in-game graphics settings, all at highest:
*PC1 = 87 FPS
*PC2 = 63 FPS from 56 FPS when running Win 8.1 & DX 11

So, where’s the crazy promised increases with DX12 and why does the PC with the R9 390 card running 30% lower FPS?

I dropped the resolution from 2560 to 1920 on PC2 but no change from 63 FPS, I don’t get it.
If I change rendering on PC2 from Supersample to Subsample then I get an increase to 76 FPS but still…….

Is my R9 390 broken or AMD drivers broken (yup installed the latest)? It should be running like a GTX 980.

/scratches head

Without pics of ingame settings, cpu-z and gpu-z while playing it’s impossible to try to find whats happening.
But probably it might be 2 things:
- Residual things from w8.1 that are affecting the performance.
- Since the game is running at dx9 and it’s quite old now, the benefits from the 390 over 290 doesn’t affect the performance.

Ravenhunt.2735:

For a 3 year old MMO with DX9 are the graphics pretty good.
Far better as any other existing and upcoming MMO this year.
Most of the upcoming MMOs based on an old unreal engine and dont look better. (blade & soul, etc)

The clothes and armors are superb.
There are so much details.
The last winters day weapons, as an example. The snowflakes in the glas spheres of the weapons are extreme sharp real looking sknowflakes. Not only white blurry dots.
But most of the players dont see this. :(

I dont know what some people playing when they open up such threads. o_O

PS:
GW2 uses ambient occolusion… see screenshots.

PPS:
I will see a MMO with such effects (and amount of players) AND better graphics, without using a NASA Servercenter. :D
Think about the witcher 3… to play it on maxed out details.
I would say we should be realistic. ^^

And since the last patch there was a noticeable performance boost for zergs and large scale battles.
Guildmembers and myself recognized it in some large scale fights with higher or highest player count settings.

You’re absolutely right, the clothes and overall design are superb (nice pictures by the way, I especially like the blue Sylvari picture ^_^ ) which is why this game deserves current optimizations. The average gamer is saving up for 2016 hardware (especially Pascal or Arctic Island GPUs) as we speak, and cutting edge gamers on the edge of the resolution arms race have already uploaded 8k gaming footage. Even ISPs have plans for increasing their bandwidth in preparation for 4k and 8k. Better graphics technology would simply refine the already excellent design and bring it more to life, better shines on certain textures, etc.

On a low resolution picture if you zoom in you’ll see terrible pixelization, heck even on 4k somethings look overly pixelated when you zoom in far enough but still stays reasonable.

What are you on to? Gw2 is gorgeous and looks better than most MMOs in the market.
And it plays much much smoother than other games that look worse on my pc, so its not really badly optimized either.

coso.9173:

What are you on to? Gw2 is gorgeous and looks better than most MMOs in the market.
And it plays much much smoother than other games that look worse on my pc, so its not really badly optimized either.

I would argue its the best looking dx9 only game out here. However, its only 32bit client, I feel a lot of the issues people have with performance are because they are using outdated tech, such as a restrictive 32 bit design, and I’m sure there would be massive performance improvements if they migrated to a more modern graphics engine.

It would be really smart of them, and cement their future to start migrating to a 64 bit dx12 client. If they did this I’m sure the game would look exactly the same for the most part, but would give them a lot of possibilities moving forward, both with new content and adding higher resolution textures and effects while maintaining good performance for anyone with a system that isn’t old enough to get a drivers license.

For the few people who refuse to get rid of their pirated windows xp OS its been possible before to give the option to stick with the dated and old 32 bit / dx9 and have a 64 bit dx12 option.

I would really look into this, DX12 is suppose to be super dev friendly, might make future expansions a hell of a lot less “dev resource intensive” and save you money in the long run.

“For the few people who refuse to get rid of their pirated windows xp OS its been possible before to give the option to stick with the dated and old 32 bit / dx9 and have a 64 bit dx12 option.”

Since you bring up XP a good way for Microsoft to practically have a license to print money is offering an XP or 7 GUI because Metro and its overly simplistic color scheme suck.

“I would really look into this, DX12 is suppose to be super dev friendly, might make future expansions a hell of a lot less “dev resource intensive” and save you money in the long run.”

If I were in charge that would be my very first priority for that very reason.

Like the guy who saved black lion chest exclusive skins for when they’d (you know it was going to happen someday) patch the key farm you just have to see far ahead. Anything that improves efficiency and ease of use should be given top priority so the other priorities fall into place much faster and more smoothly. Why is a 2015 Honda better than a 70’s muscle car? Because it is far more fuel efficient and far less expensive especially relative to performance.

Agemnon.4608:

“For the few people who refuse to get rid of their pirated windows xp OS its been possible before to give the option to stick with the dated and old 32 bit / dx9 and have a 64 bit dx12 option.”

Since you bring up XP a good way for Microsoft to practically have a license to print money is offering an XP or 7 GUI because Metro and its overly simplistic color scheme suck.

“I would really look into this, DX12 is suppose to be super dev friendly, might make future expansions a hell of a lot less “dev resource intensive” and save you money in the long run.”

If I were in charge that would be my very first priority for that very reason.

Like the guy who saved black lion chest exclusive skins for when they’d (you know it was going to happen someday) patch the key farm you just have to see far ahead. Anything that improves efficiency and ease of use should be given top priority so the other priorities fall into place much faster and more smoothly. Why is a 2015 Honda better than a 70’s muscle car? Because it is far more fuel efficient and far less expensive especially relative to performance.

GASP

your a really sick person to suggest that a modern bloated Honda is better than any classic muscle car. we should fight in real life over this.

StrangerDanger.3496:

Agemnon.4608:

“For the few people who refuse to get rid of their pirated windows xp OS its been possible before to give the option to stick with the dated and old 32 bit / dx9 and have a 64 bit dx12 option.”

Since you bring up XP a good way for Microsoft to practically have a license to print money is offering an XP or 7 GUI because Metro and its overly simplistic color scheme suck.

“I would really look into this, DX12 is suppose to be super dev friendly, might make future expansions a hell of a lot less “dev resource intensive” and save you money in the long run.”

If I were in charge that would be my very first priority for that very reason.

Like the guy who saved black lion chest exclusive skins for when they’d (you know it was going to happen someday) patch the key farm you just have to see far ahead. Anything that improves efficiency and ease of use should be given top priority so the other priorities fall into place much faster and more smoothly. Why is a 2015 Honda better than a 70’s muscle car? Because it is far more fuel efficient and far less expensive especially relative to performance.

GASP

your a really sick person to suggest that a modern bloated Honda is better than any classic muscle car. we should fight in real life over this.

Compare costs adjusted for inflation and fuel efficiency. Even if both costs the same (adjusted for inflation) you’d save far more money on fuel and have iPod connectivity too. I don’t know if it’s all cars but some the lights come on automatically. In that regard the 70s car would be superior since the driver has control over his lighting. Everywhere else except maybe style the modern car wins.

StrangerDanger.3496:

coso.9173:

What are you on to? Gw2 is gorgeous and looks better than most MMOs in the market.
And it plays much much smoother than other games that look worse on my pc, so its not really badly optimized either.

I would argue its the best looking dx9 only game out here. However, its only 32bit client, I feel a lot of the issues people have with performance are because they are using outdated tech, such as a restrictive 32 bit design, and I’m sure there would be massive performance improvements if they migrated to a more modern graphics engine.

64 bit wouldn’t change anything performance wise .. it would only made people not
crash with all settings maxed at big events, and so in the end only lead to even
worse performance.
So it would be nice for people that have no performance problems and must
play with max players rendered in maxed quality at Tequatl or Karka Queen
all the time.

I agree that ANet should consider some changes to the engine if GW2 is here to stay for the long run, but that does not eliminate the fact that GW2 is the best looking MMORPG in the market, far far far away from anything else.

Btw.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW_JCnNCvQQ

Look at the fantastic 25-35 FPS that Black Desert shows here while riding along in town.
We all can be happy if this sooo much better optimzed game will finally come out ^^