Hrm, nothing will run this game max?

[Pyrophori]

<p>I used to play about 2+ years ago and quit due to general bugs/low population on my server. </p><p>Recently, I was offered a trial to see if I wanted to resubscribe. In general, I was more curious to see how this game ran on my system then anything else, although I was interesting in returning. However, I was shocked to see that it ran like garbage and looked the same. All settings max, I am getting about 10FPS. Shadows off and distances low I get about 15-20ish FPS. </p><p>My rig, </p><p>E8400 Wolfdale (OC'ed to 4.0GHz)</p><p>8Gb DDR 2 800 G.Skill Ram (4x2) (OC'ed to 1066 5-5-5-15)</p><p>4870 X2</p><p>2x 500Gb Seagate drivers in Raid 0</p><p>Creative XtremeGamer Pro</p><p>Corsair 1000w PSU</p><p>Vista Ultimate 64</p><p>I wouldn't be shocked if the game actually looked great but it looks so bland ... such a lack of detail. Then I play something like Crysis maxed @ 1920x1080 DX10 and get 35+FPS!</p><p>Load up AoC and max everything to get 60+ FPS and far more detail.</p><p>Is there something I am missing here?</p>

[Brook]

<cite>Pyrophorics wrote:</cite> <blockquote><p>I wouldn't be shocked if the game actually looked great but it looks so bland ... such a lack of detail. Then I play something like Crysis maxed @ 1920x1080 DX10 and get 35+FPS!</p><p>Load up AoC and max everything to get 60+ FPS and far more detail.</p><p>Is there something I am missing here?</p></blockquote><p>First, this is not Crysis or AOC. It is what it is and 10 years from now you will still get the same performance you get now with EQ2. It has improved a little but not much.</p><p>As for detail in EQ2 I think maybe you need a new monitor or a trip to the eye doctor. EQ2 has some wonderful detail (its one of the things they did get right) but like so many other things like artwork some can see beauty where others see a mess of lines. </p><p>Its all a perspective of what each of us deems acceptable.</p>

[Pyrophori]

<p>But how does that statement make sense. 10 years from now technology should have greatly improved and if that technology cannot run this game smoothly there has to be a reason...</p><p>True, I shouldn't say this game looks like garbage but comparatively ... it does.</p><p><a href="http://eq2vault.ign.com/images/guides/PeformanceEval/EQ2_000071.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://eq2vault.ign.com/images/guid.../EQ2_000071.jpg</a></p><p>vs</p><p><a href="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y115/baalzebub/AoCShadows3.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y1...AoCShadows3.jpg</a></p><p>I am not trying to say this should look like AoC, Crysis or any other game out there. However I am simply amazed that this runs as poorly as it does for the level of detail (or again, the lack there of).</p><p>I was hoping you or someone would post some kind of magic answer or something like ... turn off x option because there is a known bug. However it seems you don't dispute the performance, so I could only take it as this game is running as it is supposed to... which isn't saying much.</p>

[deathtoyou5]

Way off topic but.. that aoc screenshot is pretty nice..

[dirtymeat80]

If/When the game is made for running multiple threads on dual/quad core processors, as well as putting some extra load on the vid card rather than more proc/ram, I imagine you'll see some major performance upgrades.Of course AoC & Crysis look better and run better.  They're utilizing all the technology that has come out since EQ2 release.  The games were made with today's video cards & dual/quad core in mind.  It'd require a complete re-do of the EQ2 coding.

[Pyrophori]

<cite>dirtymeat80 wrote:</cite><blockquote>If/When the game is made for running multiple threads on dual/quad core processors, as well as putting some extra load on the vid card rather than more proc/ram, I imagine you'll see some major performance upgrades.Of course AoC & Crysis look better and run better.  They're utilizing all the technology that has come out since EQ2 release.  The games were made with today's video cards & dual/quad core in mind.  It'd require a complete re-do of the EQ2 coding.</blockquote><p>While that makes sense, they did release this game saying that it was designed to be future proof so that tomorrows technology could take advantage of new features. </p><p>So what future were they looking at to run this game? There has never been technology that could run this game at max and it sounds like there never will be because it has changed too much. </p><p>Crysis was designed the same way however it does get better with improved technology.</p>

[Pyrophori]

<cite>deathtoyou5 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Way off topic but.. that aoc screenshot is pretty nice.. </blockquote><p>Yeah, tell me about it. Thats actually how it looks on this rig at 60+ fps if not a little better. </p><p>The bad part about AoC though are the massive amount of bugs. Things might get better in time but I am looking for something else to play in the mean time. Thats one of the reasons I decided to go with this trial. </p>

[Brook]

<p>After a bit of reflection on what I posted I may have come off as a bit of an (explicative) and that wasnt my intention.</p><p>Check out some of the screens from EQ2 in this thread. <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=345&topic_id=344003" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=344003</a></p><p>Personally I cant run my system this high but there are some out there who can.</p><p>As for EQ2 being futureproof, if the industry had kept with the way they were going at the time the game was made it would have been.. the industry changed and went dualcore and that kinda blew away the futureproof aspect of the original game design.</p>

[Aurumn]

<cite>Pyrophorics wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>dirtymeat80 wrote:</cite><blockquote>If/When the game is made for running multiple threads on dual/quad core processors, as well as putting some extra load on the vid card rather than more proc/ram, I imagine you'll see some major performance upgrades.Of course AoC & Crysis look better and run better.  They're utilizing all the technology that has come out since EQ2 release.  The games were made with today's video cards & dual/quad core in mind.  It'd require a complete re-do of the EQ2 coding.</blockquote><p>While that makes sense, they did release this game saying that it was designed to be future proof so that tomorrows technology could take advantage of new features. </p><p><b>So what future were they looking at to run this game?</b> There has never been technology that could run this game at max and it sounds like there never will be because it has changed too much. </p><p>Crysis was designed the same way however it does get better with improved technology.</p></blockquote><p>They were banking on the future CPUs going the way of higher and higher clockspeed single cores. In reality the industry came up with multi-cores with equal or lesser single core clock speeds. Since EQ2 looks basically at one core, the new technology can at times be a downgrade. They bet on the wrong horse, plain and simple. </p><p>Now why you can overclock your CPU and get what seem to find inferior graphics, I dunno what to tell ya. I'm running at extreme or high quality, haven't bothered to turn off shadows or anything special and my fps varies between the 30's (crowded zone, lots going on) to 70+ in a bare/small zone (small instance/ room, low # NPCs, not fighting, etc). When I'm running about questing I'm usually hovering around the mid to low 50's. The graphics I've seen on Extreme Quality are absolutely gorgeous, especially after a year and a half of playing at or below balanced. I can actually run around Neriak without crashing now. *lol* I'd link some pics but Photobucket is being a PITA at the moment. </p>

[Pyrophori]

<cite>Brook wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>After a bit of reflection on what I posted I may have come off as a bit of an (explicative) and that wasnt my intention.</p><p>Check out some of the screens from EQ2 in this thread. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=345&topic_id=344003" target="_blank">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=344003</a></p><p>Personally I cant run my system this high but there are some out there who can.</p><p>As for EQ2 being futureproof, if the industry had kept with the way they were going at the time the game was made it would have been.. the industry changed and went dualcore and that kinda blew away the futureproof aspect of the original game design.</p></blockquote><p>Yeah, thats true. </p><p>Like I said, I guess I was just hoping for a magic fix. Not that its a fair comparison but...</p><p>I also recently tried to go back and play one of my favorites (at the time) FFVII. Unfortunately, I have become spoiled and didnt last longer than it took to render the block hands on the characters. </p><p>Guess it's the same here, I had so much fun back in the day here when it was top dog. I have been spoiled by the new technology and was initially disappointed when I realized my computer cant run this game at max. </p><p>Btw, those pictures do look nice. I guess I was hoping for more world detail as far as grass/terrain textures.</p>

[Pyrophori]

<cite>Mezzmyrelda@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Pyrophorics wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>dirtymeat80 wrote:</cite><blockquote>If/When the game is made for running multiple threads on dual/quad core processors, as well as putting some extra load on the vid card rather than more proc/ram, I imagine you'll see some major performance upgrades.Of course AoC & Crysis look better and run better.  They're utilizing all the technology that has come out since EQ2 release.  The games were made with today's video cards & dual/quad core in mind.  It'd require a complete re-do of the EQ2 coding.</blockquote><p>While that makes sense, they did release this game saying that it was designed to be future proof so that tomorrows technology could take advantage of new features. </p><p><b>So what future were they looking at to run this game?</b> There has never been technology that could run this game at max and it sounds like there never will be because it has changed too much. </p><p>Crysis was designed the same way however it does get better with improved technology.</p></blockquote><p>They were banking on the future CPUs going the way of higher and higher clockspeed single cores. In reality the industry came up with multi-cores with equal or lesser single core clock speeds. Since EQ2 looks basically at one core, the new technology can at times be a downgrade. They bet on the wrong horse, plain and simple. </p><p>Now why you can overclock your CPU and get what seem to find inferior graphics, I dunno what to tell ya. I'm running at extreme or high quality, haven't bothered to turn off shadows or anything special and my fps varies between the 30's (crowded zone, lots going on) to 70+ in a bare/small zone (small instance/ room, low # NPCs, not fighting, etc). When I'm running about questing I'm usually hovering around the mid to low 50's. The graphics I've seen on Extreme Quality are absolutely gorgeous, especially after a year and a half of playing at or below balanced. I can actually run around Neriak without crashing now. *lol* I'd link some pics but Photobucket is being a PITA at the moment. </p></blockquote><p>Well, one problem is I am running at 1920x1080. Another problem is that I maxed everything... EVERYTHING. If there is a slider to move it was maxed. I only spent a few min with it before I got off, the initial disappointment got to me.</p><p>Will tweak with it tonight, have 13 days left so nothing to lose.</p>

[Brook]

<p>I doubt NASA could run this beast with all the features turned to max.</p><p>At 20-30fps the game plays pretty smooth and if you start the setting at max performance and work your way up one thing at a time you can find the sweet spot for your system (and anything that makes your system puke).</p><p>I prefer Specular lighting and cloth simulation then adjust everything from there... as long as those two things are on everything else is gravy for me. Some like high particle effects, more lighting, bloom etc... each will have their own preference as to what they like. </p><p>After you find the best combo of settings to make it look acceptable, then tweak for framerate. Your specs seem like they can handle a good bit.   You probably wont get 60fps, but you really dont need that to play a smooth game.</p>

[Pyrophori]

<cite>Brook wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I doubt NASA could run this beast with all the features turned to max.</p><p>At 20-30fps the game plays pretty smooth and if you start the setting at max performance and work your way up one thing at a time you can find the sweet spot for your system (and anything that makes your system puke).</p><p>I prefer Specular lighting and cloth simulation then adjust everything from there... as long as those two things are on everything else is gravy for me. Some like high particle effects, more lighting, bloom etc... each will have their own preference as to what they like. </p><p>After you find the best combo of settings to make it look acceptable, then tweak for framerate. Your specs seem like they can handle a good bit.   You probably wont get 60fps, but you really dont need that to play a smooth game.</p></blockquote><p>Actually, I think I just found my magic button ... however it isnt the one I was hoping for... <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>Turned off flora and everything is fine at 70+ fps. :/ If I turn off flora displacement it helps but not as much as completely turning it off. Ironic though, I was calling this game bland because of the terrain and to find the one option that helps my FPS the most is flora. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Smirk]

im running this with everything on max without shadows, no flora displacement in groups with 20+ fps in most cases, some zones in rok drops the fps down to 15ish though, guess i should tweak it a bit more <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Nail]

I run the game on Extreme with shadows turned off , everything else at their defaults for extreme. I get on average 35fps , up to the 60's in smaller areas. FPS for mmo's are different than for a shooter or action game. Generally speaking anything over 30fps in an mmo is fine , now a shooter of course your gona want around 60.e8400 (default 3ghz speed)4gig DDR2 667mhzHD2900XTSoundblaster Audigy (using Creative Alchemey to re-enable EAX)Vista Home Premium 64bit 

[JohnD212]

Try using Alternate models for all the characters...I love the new look and if you select them in yoru settings all the NPC's have the alternate look.