Max Payne 3 Next big graphics powerhouse ?

[Grooveriding]

This is ALWYS brougth up about sandbox games(Crysis, ARMA, ARMA 2)...do people have problem understanding the computational requirements of a sandbox?

And what up with the FUBAR attitude?

I mean stuff like "It dosn't run + 60 FPS on my e-peen-rig, the game must be coded horrible!!!"

In the old days we LOVED games that pushed the hardware beyond the "breaking point"...now poeple just whine and complain about the "unnessary" performance hit... :whiste:

Always a ray of sunshine when you defecate in a thread.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Then I don't think you've played GTAIV on consoles. GTA4 runs horribly on consoles it also looks worse than you would think. The only way you could get it to look as bad on PC is to run it at 800x600 with everything turned down.

I played it and when it released on PC as well, it ran better on the console at that time.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Always a ray of sunshine when you defecate in a thread.

Nice way of saying you got nothing

 

[Arzachel]

Nice way of saying you got nothing

What do you call a game that at one point had people resort to using SSDs and RAM-disks to not have abysmal performance in certain places?

A)Unoptimized
B)GLORIOUS SANDBOX COMPUTATIONAL REQUIREMENTS

 

[Lonbjerg]

What do you call a game that at one point had people resort to using SSDs and RAM-disks to not have abysmal performance in certain places?

A)Unoptimized
B)GLORIOUS SANDBOX COMPUTATIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Now we are getting into the religious fallacy country.

You guys claim that (oddly) all sandbox games are Unoptimized.

Prove it.

You can't.

Both because you don't have access to the sourcecode...and because you stance is flawed and only supported by ignorance.

And that you should brind op SSD's is hillarious.

Why do you think Intel made aSSD puush?

Arguments from ignronace is hillarious...and I canot take it seriously...no matter how much you huf, puf and blow.

Put up or shut up!

 

[PrincessFrosty]

Basically no one has ever actually provided good evidence for lack of optimisation.

What people actually mean is that it doesn't run well and their expectations are that it should run well. The problem is that they have no good reason to believe that their expectations are realistic in the first place.

Some functions are just inherently resource intensive, you can replace those functions with ones which are less resource intensive but most of the time you're making a trade off with accuracy/fidelity vs speed, that's NOT what optimization is, to optimise a function is strictly to keep the function the same but improve the speed.

Basically most people throwing around that word have no idea what they're talking about.

 

[Arzachel]

Now we are getting into the religious fallacy country.

You guys claim that (oddly) all sandbox games are Unoptimized.

Prove it.

You can't.

Both because you don't have access to the sourcecode...and because you stance is flawed and only supported by ignorance.

And that you should brind op SSD's is hillarious.

Why do you think Intel made aSSD puush?

Arguments from ignronace is hillarious...and I canot take it seriously...no matter how much you huf, puf and blow.

Put up or shut up!

And here we go, off the bat two strawman in a row. I never said that all sandbox games are unoptimized nor did I say that there should be no gains from a SSD. What's more, no, in many cases you absolutely don't need the source to tell that a game engine is unoptimized in certain situations. If my simple 2d engine was running at 10 fps you sure as hell would be able to tell that it's not what any sane person would call optimized. If your graphically intensive 3d game with complex AI, physics is I/O limited of all things, it doesn't take a profiler to say that the way you stream textures might not be particularly efficient.

Basically no one has ever actually provided good evidence for lack of optimisation.

This is wrong, which invalidates the rest of your post. Skyrim used x87 FP code on release, Crysis 2 had tessellated water present in every map, even if it wasn't used or seen, shadow and reflection maps scaled with resolution in GTA 4. At that's off the top of my head.

 

[Lonbjerg]

And here we go, off the bat two strawman in a row. I never said that all sandbox games are unoptimized nor did I say that there should be no gains from a SSD. What's more, no, in many cases you absolutely don't need the source to tell that a game engine is unoptimized in certain situations. If my simple 2d engine was running at 10 fps you sure as hell would be able to tell that it's not what any sane person would call optimized. If your graphically intensive 3d game with complex AI, physics is I/O limited of all things, it doesn't take a profiler to say that the way you stream textures might not be particularly efficient.

You are boring:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4902/intel-ssd-710-200gb-review

When Intel entered the SSD market one of its declared goals was to bring the technology into the mainstream. The goal was so important to Intel that its consumer drive was branded X25-M, with the M standing for mainstream. Intel's desire for SSD ubiquity wasn't entirely altruistic however. Mechanical storage acted as a potential gate to increasing CPU performance. Eventually, without significant improvements in IO performance, CPU improvements would be less visible to most users. SSDs would help alleviate this bottleneck.
It wouldn't be untrue to say that Intel accomplished its mission. The client SSD market was in a state of disarray before Intel arrived on the scene. Although we still have problems today, there are a number of affordable options for end users and lots of competition. Samsung, Marvell, Indilinx, JMicron and even SanDisk are now vying for control of the market.

Attributing a general I/O problem to game engines...is uninformed...thanks for peroving my point.

This is wrong, which invalidates the rest of your post. Skyrim used x87 FP code on release, Crysis 2 had tessellated water present in every map, even if it wasn't used or seen, shadow and reflection maps scaled with resolution in GTA 4. At that's off the top of my head.

I remeber when all people whined about PhysX using x87 FP and not SSE...talking about "BIG GAINS TO BE HAD!!!"

You care to guess how that played out in reality? :whiste:

 

[blackened23]

Now we are getting into the religious fallacy country.

You guys claim that (oddly) all sandbox games are Unoptimized.

Prove it.

You can't.

Both because you don't have access to the sourcecode...and because you stance is flawed and only supported by ignorance.

And that you should brind op SSD's is hillarious.

Why do you think Intel made aSSD puush?

Arguments from ignronace is hillarious...and I canot take it seriously...no matter how much you huf, puf and blow.

Put up or shut up!

lol

 

[Arzachel]

You are boring:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4902/intel-ssd-710-200gb-review
Attributing a general I/O problem to game engines...is uninformed...thanks for peroving my point.

... You ignore what I've written, decide to post a random review distantly related to the topic at hand and then claim victory. I'm speechless.

I remeber when all people whined about PhysX using x87 FP and not SSE...talking about "BIG GAINS TO BE HAD!!!"

You care to guess how that played out in reality? :whiste:

40% gains in Skyrim and that's with the additional overhead of a hacked library intercepting and replacing calls on the fly.

 

[chimaxi83]

You are boring:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4902/intel-ssd-710-200gb-review



Attributing a general I/O problem to game engines...is uninformed...thanks for peroving my point.




I remeber when all people whined about PhysX using x87 FP and not SSE...talking about "BIG GAINS TO BE HAD!!!"

You care to guess how that played out in reality? :whiste:

Dang bro... are you this much of a "likable, non internet-tough, well mannered nice guy" in real life too?

 

[PrincessFrosty]

This is wrong, which invalidates the rest of your post. Skyrim used x87 FP code on release, Crysis 2 had tessellated water present in every map, even if it wasn't used or seen, shadow and reflection maps scaled with resolution in GTA 4. At that's off the top of my head.

These aren't issues of optimisation, it doesn't mean they're a bad way to allocate the resources of a system but it's nothing specific to optimisation.

 

[Arzachel]

These aren't issues of optimisation, it doesn't mean they're a bad way to allocate the resources of a system but it's nothing specific to optimisation.

English is not my first language, so I might be wrong, but I thought that obivously inefficient code or use of resources is what is meant when talking about optimization or lack of theof. Surely Skyrim using x87 fp code (they're called compiler optimization flags for a reason, right?) and GTA 4, ignoring the fact that PCs have several times more available RAM, using extreme culling fits the bill?

 

[ViRGE]

This is ALWYS brougth up about sandbox games(Crysis, ARMA, ARMA 2)...do people have problem understanding the computational requirements of a sandbox?

It's not necessarily very high, we had GTA3 running on a PS2 after all. Which is what makes these console ports so maddening; somehow GTA4 will run fine on an 8 year old computer (Xbox 360), but not a brand new computer. One would certainly expect a console port done right to run well on current hardware.

 

[MrK6]

It's not necessarily very high, we had GTA3 running on a PS2 after all. Which is what makes these console ports so maddening; somehow GTA4 will run fine on an 8 year old computer (Xbox 360), but not a brand new computer. One would certainly expect a console port done right to run well on current hardware.

Exactly. The problem is the lack of software QA. Hardware has generally stuck to Moore's law, but the software hasn't improved at the same pace. Companies are using the extra processing power to cut back on optimization and QA so they can get games to market faster. I realize it's more difficult to make games look better and better and still keep feasible schedules to make a profit, but it's obvious where companies are cutting corners when games aren't looking better, and are running more poorly and being patched more frequently despite hardware getting much faster.

 

[blackened23]

Who says a sandbox game has to run like crap? Pretty sure Just Cause 2 runs awesome because it was not a halfass port like GTA IV was. Bottom line is that PC hardware is substantially more powerful than an xbox and there's no excuse for GTA IV to been such a piss poor port. It was dreadful when it was released, I question whether some of the people in this thread bought it then. The performance issues were never fixed either.

 

[Grooveriding]

Had a chance to play a little of this game.

There are a ton of graphics options, but it's not impressive looking. It does run well though.

 

[thilanliyan]

It does run well though.

It bloody well better on 2 680s!!

 

[Termie]

Had a chance to play a little of this game.

There are a ton of graphics options, but it's not impressive looking. It does run well though.

While the released stills and trailer for the game made it look pretty amazing, the multiplayer videos of it showed something quite different, and a whole lot like Just Cause 2.

Link: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/max-payne-3/trailers/3342653

So, as to the thread title, no, I don't think it will be the next big graphics powerhouse, but I am hoping it's a pretty good single-player game, as I loved MP1/2. Co-op sounds interesting too, but I have no interest in MP3 multiplayer.

 

[thelastjuju]

What is this nonsense about PCs running GTA4 worse than consoles??

I only had an e8400 and a 4850 when it was released, and I played through the entire game flawlessly. After the second patch was released, it amounted to like an additional 10-15 fps boost too.. but even on day one it was far more playable than my console counterpart.

The performance on my PS3 version was so bad, I refused to play it and waited until the PC version came out. I just can't enjoy such a fast-paced action game with such an erratic framerate.

 

[blackened23]

Had a chance to play a little of this game.

There are a ton of graphics options, but it's not impressive looking. It does run well though.

Agreed, graphics weren't what I hoped for. But the game is actually a ton of fun, I like it a lot.

This game actually runs surprisingly well even on meager hardware - even 560ti/6870 users will be completely fine. Definitely worth picking up.

 

[tornadog]

yes it definitely runs like butter on a 7850. graphics are ok; character models are well detailed but environments are very bland, finally glad to be able to use the mouse to aim!!

 

[cmdrdredd]

I have this game paid for, was gonna get it this afternoon after work but traffic was a nightmare. Pick it up tomorrow so I can play with it after I build my Ivy setup.

 

[RussianSensation]

DX11 Benchmarks using FXAA

DX11 Benchmarks using MSAA

VRAM Usage

CPU Scaling

Source

 

[Skurge]

Snip

Lol a bulldozer doing well against the previous gen CPUs and good to see the game making use of 6 cores.