question to dev's about game engine
Is this the reason my hardware never struggles but the game never has a good framerate? cpu goes to like 55 degrees c and the cpu to 65-70, but the framerate can be at 20-50 when running around the map, turning down all the graphics barely makes it any better.
yeah and why would anyone play a game that makes they system work so hard for no reason.
Because this is ridiculos a 5 or 4 year old game that runs on a engine that cant be played by the rigs of nowadays is lame im sorry but thats the cold turth i allways loved to play WvW but having all the fps breaks lag on the current day’s it aint good.
CPUs hit a limitation, so instead of becoming more powerful, they’re adding more cores. Today’s 8+ core CPUs are actually weaker than CPUs from 5+ years ago. They’re only better at multitasking and only a few games are actually optimized to use that many cores.
GW2 is using DX9, which makes it limited to waiting on a single core. It doesn’t matter what your total CPU usage is because only that 1 core running the primary thread matters. GW2 is already optimized for what it is and will never see any major improvements outside of a complete engine remake, which simply isn’t going to happen until maybe GW3.
so this is what i want to know is anet going to optimize the engine for the multi-core high-mid-low end rig’s?
Because this is ridiculos a 5 or 4 year old game that runs on a engine that cant be played by the rigs of nowadays is lame im sorry but thats the cold turth i allways loved to play WvW but having all the fps breaks lag on the current day’s it aint good.
this is the frist time i see a game that isnt optmized for the current need for the demand of people as it also seems that we are not getting any interest by anet at all.
game good gameplay good story good but whats is that good for if people can play it decently nor on high end rigs or low rigs.
if the engine will not be optmize some dev’s do please reply to the post because if you anet wont change it im better up selling the acount to someone whos willing to play badly…
best regards
Warning to anyone purchasing a used account: The account will be terminated, with no way to recoup your loss. Thus, beware.
so this is what i want to know is anet going to optimize the engine for the multi-core high-mid-low end rig’s?
Because this is ridiculos a 5 or 4 year old game that runs on a engine that cant be played by the rigs of nowadays is lame im sorry but thats the cold turth i allways loved to play WvW but having all the fps breaks lag on the current day’s it aint good.
What engine do you propose? There isnt that many off the shelf engines for MMORPG.
RSI is having problem with their netcode RSI.
this is the frist time i see a game that isnt optmized for the current need for the demand of people as it also seems that we are not getting any interest by anet at all.
game good gameplay good story good but whats is that good for if people can play it decently nor on high end rigs or low rigs.
Many games already limits scope in their design. Look at bioshock infinite. Despite being in a cloud city, I got the feeling of clusterphobia
GW2 is using DX9, which makes it limited to waiting on a single core. It doesn’t matter what your total CPU usage is because only that 1 core running the primary thread matters. GW2 is already optimized for what it is and will never see any major improvements outside of a complete engine remake, which simply isn’t going to happen until maybe GW3.
rendering is rarely the bottleneck according Johan. The problem is elsewhere.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/3ajnso/bad_optimalization_in_gw2/csdnn3n/
I am guessing Anet made some terrible design but cool/fun decisions with game rules in the core of Gw2. They cant fix it unless they make a new game and break the existing game. I think Anet might completely change their condition system etc. I wonder which core component of the game is bottlenecking gw2.
(edited by loseridoit.2756)
CPUs hit a limitation, so instead of becoming more powerful, they’re adding more cores. Today’s 8+ core CPUs are actually weaker than CPUs from 5+ years ago. They’re only better at multitasking and only a few games are actually optimized to use that many cores.
This is utterly wrong. First off you’re not specifying which processors, but in general it’s wrong.
To the topic at hand. My question is could the game be moved to a newer engine while retaining all the items. I’m not sure of the complications of this, but that seems like a big hurdle in order to keep player retention up.
This is utterly wrong. First off you’re not specifying which processors, but in general it’s wrong.
For gaming, single threaded performance is what matters. The more cores a CPU has, the weaker they are individually. People who don’t know what they’re doing may think the latest and greatest is better, but they can actually end up being weaker than a much older model. The new 10-core i9 CPUs for example are weaker than last year’s equivalent i7 4-core models. Its power is in the extra cores, which has no impact on gaming.
Personally, I have a ~7 year old i7 2600k OCd to around 5 GHz that failed about a year ago. When I went to look for an upgrade at the time, it was very disappointing to see that the most optimal CPU for GW2 (i7 4790k) at stock was actually a downgrade and was only 30% better when comparing both stocks. I didn’t bother upgrading and instead worked around the problem, so now I’m running a 3-core slightly underclocked 2600k and am still managing ~80 FPS normally and ~25 FPS at world bosses, which for comparison is down ~20-40 FPS.
My question is could the game be moved to a newer engine while retaining all the items.
It’s possible, but it’ll never happen. It’d take several years to accomplish, so unless they’re planning on releasing expansions for at least 10 more years, they’re far more likely to start from scratch with GW3.
This is utterly wrong. First off you’re not specifying which processors, but in general it’s wrong.
For gaming, single threaded performance is what matters. The more cores a CPU has, the weaker they are individually. People who don’t know what they’re doing may think the latest and greatest is better, but they can actually end up being weaker than a much older model. The new 10-core i9 CPUs for example are weaker than last year’s equivalent i7 4-core models. Its power is in the extra cores, which has no impact on gaming.
Personally, I have a ~7 year old i7 2600k OCd to around 5 GHz that failed about a year ago. When I went to look for an upgrade at the time, it was very disappointing to see that the most optimal CPU for GW2 (i7 4790k) at stock was actually a downgrade and was only 30% better when comparing both stocks. I didn’t bother upgrading and instead worked around the problem, so now I’m running a 3-core slightly underclocked 2600k and am still managing ~80 FPS normally and ~25 FPS at world bosses, which for comparison is down ~20-40 FPS.
Errr…. why are you comparing an OC cpu to a stock one.
Intel never regressed performance when comparing OC to OC cpus.
The new 10-core i9 CPUs for example are weaker than last year’s equivalent i7 4-core models. Its power is in the extra cores, which has no impact on gaming.
Those 10 core cpu are not marketed for gaming. They are marketed to those who use avx instructions and workstations.
(edited by loseridoit.2756)
Errr…. why are you comparing an OC cpu to a stock one.
The point was that it was disappointment. After 7 years, comparing both at stock speeds, the top single threaded benchmarks were only 30% better than what I was using. For comparison, 7 years ago was when I last upgraded, which was around a 600% increase. Single threaded performance hit a limitation, so until DX12 and the usage of at least 4 cores becomes common, there was simply no point in upgrading, especially when I could still manage 80 FPS in GW2. Most people are also not going to OC, so I was also showing that a 7 year old CPU was just as good.
Those 10 core cpu are not marketed for gaming. They are marketed to those who use avx instructions and workstations.
People who don’t know what they’re doing may think the latest and greatest is better, but they can actually end up being weaker than a much older model.
The point was that it was disappointment. After 7 years, comparing both at stock speeds, the top single threaded benchmarks were only 30% better than what I was using. For comparison, 7 years ago was when I last upgraded, which was around a 600% increase. Single threaded performance hit a limitation, so until DX12 and the usage of at least 4 cores becomes common, there was simply no point in upgrading, especially when I could still manage 80 FPS in GW2. Most people are also not going to OC, so I was also showing that a 7 year old CPU was just as good.
Then prepare to be disappointed for the rest of your life. The future of cpu core is no longer in the tradition pipeline but specialize instructions. Look at the new Xbox One X ( pointlessly confusing name ). There are special instructions to speed up DX12. Dennard scaling is broken and dark silicon is getting worse. CPU designers will have to look at perf/watt in addition to transistor usage.
http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~ngouldin/papers/taylor-aspdac-final-2012.pdf
Enjoy the future. Old applications will less likely become faster unless we either have the source to recompile to use new instructions or applications are dynamic link to libraries that has proper cpu dispatching.