Unreal 2 bench

[sep]

IS THERE A DEMO?

 

[kylebisme]

no, they don't want you to know it runs like crap before you give them your money.

 

[BoomAM]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
no, they don't want you to know it runs like crap before you give them your money.

lol
Its not that bad.

 

[kylebisme]

yes it is, look at this shot:

runs like crap, it is that bad!!!

 

[BFG10K]

lol BFG10K, i find it funny that you look to fututre hardware for your solution

And why would that be? Hardware upgrades are about the only thing I have control over to guarantee better performance (aside from tweaking of course). Better drivers and game patches are nice but they're also out of my hands.

and compleatly overlock the absurdity of released a game that can't sustain over 30fps on even some of the fastest systems and at the lowest quality.

Well yes and no.

I do agree that it sucks because it's slow but at the same time you don't really know if the problem is the engine or if the game is simply demanding. When there are no enemies around you can yield almost a linear speed gain in the game by dropping your resolution, which leads me to suspect that the maps are pretty demanding in terms of geometry, polygons, particle effects and all of the other eye candy they employ. And the slowdowns during battles could well be the AI and the physics slowing it down.

I'd probably suspect a combination of both a demanding game and an engine that isn't quite optimal. However the fact is, that kind of eye candy just doesn't come for free regardless of how optimal the engine is.

i will tell you for sure that an r350 will get you next to nothing in this cpu limited game

It most certainly will as there are heaps of the places where the game is GPU bound and dropping from 1600 x 1200 to 1152 x 864 yields a very large performance increase. I do agree though, the game is primarily CPU bound but a faster video card will still make a large difference.

my only hope is that this was a simple mistake and the guys at epic/legend have some code laying around that will make it into a pach which will make this game run reasonably well all the way though.

That's certainly a valid possibility and I hope this happens too.

BTW have you tried the Catalyst 3.1s from ATi? The game runs a little smoother with them, as does UT2003. It's not a massive difference but it is noticeable.

 

[kylebisme]

sure enough, new drivers are very nice but the game still chugs bigtime.

also, i have been thinking; it is ironic that we had a 3 day discusion about framerate and claimed 30fps is just fine and you claimed it was horable, then comes a game that crushes our systems and i am the one truning everything way down to try to get a few more fps.

 

[swanky]

Originally posted by: sep
IS THERE A DEMO?

Nope, they decided against it. But there might be one, I read that they were considering it.

Not a wise choice...

swanky

 

[BFG10K]

then comes a game that crushes our systems and i am the one truning everything way down to try to get a few more fps.

I'm not happy with the game's performance either and I'm turning down the detail levels as well, just like you are.

The low framerate has prevented me from enjoying the game as much as I could have and it's partly the reason why I think the game so far has been a little underwhelming. It's hard to get into into it when everytime you see an enemy your framerate drops to ridiculously low levels.

 

[YBS1]

Is everyone in here running the game with EAX enabled? I ask because that was the huge framerate killer for me with the game. For example, the beginning of the map (outside) where the world is covered by that organism...EAX enabled - roughly 12-22fps, EAX disabled - roughly 50-80. I'm on an XP1900+ and 9700Pro and am running 1280x960x32 with 4xAA and 8x performance aniso, all display options are set to maximum in game except shadows which I have set to medium. I may have been running only 2xAA during the number posted above but can't remember for sure, 4xAA seems to have nearly no performance hit over 2xAA though as I seem to be almost entirely CPU limited in this game with only a 1900+.

I agree the game could run better, but I'm fairly satisfied considering the visual details I'm running and the fact my cpu is over a year old. I wouldn't be happy with the framerate I'm getting if this was a faster paced and/or multiplayer game, but with the pace the game moves I'm fairly happy with ~40-80fps. I do get dips down to around 30fps on occasion though in certain spots.

 

[BFG10K]

Is everyone in here running the game with EAX enabled?

No but now that you mention it I will doublecheck the setting when I get home, just in case.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: swanky

Originally posted by: sep
IS THERE A DEMO?

Nope, they decided against it. But there might be one, I read that they were considering it.

Not a wise choice...

swanky

Yeah I read on their website that there isn't a demo and won't be for a long time (if ever) since they didn't allocate any resources or developers to making one. Instead, they focused on the retail version exclusively :| . Check out Epic's website for more info, or maybe unreal2.com or unrealtournament2003.com .

 

[kylebisme]

YBS1, i aprecate you trying to be helpful but eax is off, as is absoulity everthing else that can be turned off and everything down that goes down but the skill level, game options as well as the dirver options. also to make it clear, i too see framerate in the 50-80 range in many parts of the game even at high detal, if the who game ran that well i would be very pleased. as it stands it is like driveing a lamborghini with a blown cylender.

 

[dayg]

can someone tell me how to enable the bench in Unreal2. Thanks.

 

[BFG10K]

Yes, EAX is definitely off. No matter how much you tweak this game some parts are still very CPU limited and will still run slow.

can someone tell me how to enable the bench in Unreal2.

~
timedemo 1

That'll give you a realtime framerate display.

 

[Curley]

There is an EAX patch.

Also, open the Unreal2.ini for in C:\Unreal2\System and edit, [Engine.GameEngine], CacheMegSize from default 8 to 128 or 256.

The edit the, [D3DDrv.D3DRenderDevice], AvoidHitches= from default false to True.

This took care of all my hitching and the no cd patch helped the load time and reduced the system resources considerably by not always checking for the cd-rom.

Hope this helps!!

 

[kylebisme]

there are a lot of tweeks to make it run 'better' yet no of that acutaly got the thing to run what i would call 'good'.

here is a good example thread of people with the same complaints and a developers responce:

unreal2 forums

as it stands it looks like i unftunalty don't have to consern myself with legend games anymore.

 

[CheapTOFU]

Well, it seems that Mark @legendsoft doesn't know what he's talking about.
U2 requires so much CPU power.
Getting a better video card does not help at all..

 

[kylebisme]

yet according to in-stat/mdr, when they awarded the gefocefx their "breakaway award" for the best commercially available graphics chip of 2002; "Gamers eager to realize the full potential of titles such as Doom III and Unreal II... will plunk down the big bucks for these boards right away." so that settles it, the experts have made it clear that nvidia will get rich off of us buying their high dollar videocards to run a cpu limited game which the developers fail to acknowledge any issues with at all and which a faster videocard is not going to help either. note that i am just stateing facts here, but i am curious as to others openions of the situation?