Rage got patched today

[lavaheadache]

And now it's back to running like poo. It was running so nice for me and now this happens.

Can anybody else confirm?

 

[lavaheadache]

well that was easy to figure out. I had enabled the new video setting "Texture Detail".

Absolute performance breaker.

This is on a 4.4 2600k with a 7970 @ 1125/1575.

The difference is hardly noticable yet it makes what is otherwise a smoothly operating game and turns it into hiccup city

 

[UberNeuman]

yeah, the patch sucks... I played about a hour before the patch - and had the poor texture steaming... Now I still have the poor texture steaming and half second freezes....

\on a Nivida card...

 

[lavaheadache]

I was actually able to fix the texture streaming a while back and the game got quite enjoyable. For whatever reason that Texture Detail settings sucks big time

 

[wuliheron]

You need at least a fast quad core cpu or Nvidia cuda to use to the texture details. Even an overclocked phenom II doesn't seem to be fast enough to run the texture details without stuttering.

The benchmark tool is interesting and shows just how much of a bandwidth pig the engine can be. The highest score I've seen yet is 194 and seems to indicate the more cores and cuda processors you have the better. Theoretically the game might even be able to use up to 24 cpu cores. Anyone have dual xeons?

 

[Sulaco]

I just played for the past hour or so on the system in my sig. Didn't notice anything different. Certainly nothing worse.

 

[lavaheadache]

You need at least a fast quad core cpu or Nvidia cuda to use to the texture details. Even an overclocked phenom II doesn't seem to be fast enough to run the texture details without stuttering.

The benchmark tool is interesting and shows just how much of a bandwidth pig the engine can be. The highest score I've seen yet is 194 and seems to indicate the more cores and cuda processors you have the better. Theoretically the game might even be able to use up to 24 cpu cores. Anyone have dual xeons?

Well, I do have a fast Quad... A 4.4ghz 2600k and the game ran like dung with texture details on. I got 106 in the benchmark.

I just played for the past hour or so on the system in my sig. Didn't notice anything different. Certainly nothing worse.

Did you try the game with "texture detail" on?

 

[RavenSEAL]

LOOL. BethSoft still can't program worth for ****, I'm still surprised how well Skyrim ran.

 

[lavaheadache]

LOOL. BethSoft still can't program worth for ****, I'm still surprised how well Skyrim ran.

Skyrim does run fairly decent but the vanilla graphics are pretty terrible

 

[RavenSEAL]

Skyrim does run fairly decent but the vanilla graphics are pretty terrible

Don't forget it freaks out if you have less than 2GBs of free RAM! Uhhhh, and it can't use moar than 1 1/2 cores natively.

 

[lavaheadache]

Yeah, I was basically stating that performance was tolerable not that it took advantage of a modern system

 

[SLU Aequitas]

LOOL. BethSoft still can't program worth for ****, I'm still surprised how well Skyrim ran.

LOOL. Bethsoft didn't program RAGE.

 

[RavenSEAL]

LOOL. Bethsoft didn't program RAGE.

Ok, fine, so it was iD. That's sad considering their games are very well coded most of the time.

 

[blackened23]

I've said it before but i'm done with id software. That saddens me because i've been playing their games since forever and I put more hours into q1/q2 than any other game.

Rage is a horrible console port, I hope Carmack got a good pay day from it. As for me, thanks but no thanks id software, never again will you get my $.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Don't forget it freaks out if you have less than 2GBs of free RAM! Uhhhh, and it can't use moar than 1 1/2 cores natively.

yeah, skyrim runs well until you run into a city where frames just take an absolute massive dump because of the terribad multithread support

 

[TridenT]

Who actually plays this game? I beat it in less than 8 or 9 hours, IIRC. It's a very short game...

 

[lavaheadache]

8 or 9 hours? I don't know how you did that.

 

[TridenT]

8 or 9 hours? I don't know how you did that.

lol, what do you mean? It's a seriously short game... I'm at 7 hours and 48 minutes before entering the 'capital prime' base or whatever. It didn't take very long after that to get the super short cinematic scene and then the credits rolling. The gun they give you in the end is so massively OP. I was conserving the ammo for that thing so much, but I should have been just spamming the hell out of it instead. You get so much ammo for it when you finally get it... and everything dies to it fast.

 

[Barfo]

LOOL. BethSoft still can't program worth for ****, I'm still surprised how well Skyrim ran.

lulz. Dumbass.

 

[RavenSEAL]

lulz. Dumbass.

Lol, problem?

 

[Barfo]

Lol, problem?

No, but your post was funney

 

[Sulaco]

yeah, skyrim runs well until you run into a city where frames just take an absolute massive dump because of the terribad multithread support

Uh, what? What kind of system are you running?

Not to go OT, but I have absolutely ZERO frame issues/slowdowns in any towns or major holds after ~90 hours of play.

 

[lavaheadache]

Uh, what? What kind of system are you running?

Not to go OT, but I have absolutely ZERO frame issues/slowdowns in any towns or major holds after ~90 hours of play.

I call shens, It is well documented that there are slow downs in some of the cities.

Markarth, Solitude, Whiterun all have areas that bog down any system.

I've tried low resolutions with my 2600k@ 4.4 and 7970 @1125/1575 and it still happens.

You may not call dips into the upper 30's and 40's an issue but I've got a very keen eye for frame rates and a dip into the 30's or 40's from 120fps is about as noticeble as a train pulling up to your front door.

This wouldn't be an issue my cpu and gpu were taxed at the spot of the incident but that isn't so.

 

[lavaheadache]

lol, what do you mean? It's a seriously short game... I'm at 7 hours and 48 minutes before entering the 'capital prime' base or whatever. It didn't take very long after that to get the super short cinematic scene and then the credits rolling. The gun they give you in the end is so massively OP. I was conserving the ammo for that thing so much, but I should have been just spamming the hell out of it instead. You get so much ammo for it when you finally get it... and everything dies to it fast.

I'm almost 20 hours in and still doing stuff in subway town. Maybe it's because I've been doing a lot of races and stuff.

Maybe I'm just playing more of the game doing odd jobs and a lot of the races and you just blew through the main story, which I feel could be really short if you played it that way.

 

[Sulaco]

I call shens, It is well documented that there are slow downs in some of the cities.

Markarth, Solitude, Whiterun all have areas that bog down any system.

K, you can call whatever you want, but I just loaded it up again specifically to run through those cities, and while there are minor hiccups here and there lasting a second or two, saying it's like having a train pull up outside your house is simply ludicrous. There'll be a slight dip here or there (although, in Solitude, there was absolutely nothing), but in response to the previous guy who said:

skyrim runs well until you run into a city where frames just take an absolute massive dump

Just...no. Unless it's terribly noticeable or impacts gameplay that's just utter hyperbole.