Create lower graphics options if you want better testing and more people playing

Pyromaniac

UWE knows that performance is a priority but they've only taken the approach of trying to optimize as fast as they can. Allowing for lower graphics settings so people can play a smooth game in the meantime doesn't require too much work does it? It's going to need to happen anyway because it doesn't seem like it's ever going to payable at minimum spec. Lower options letting more people run it well will make the community grow and let everyone focus on gameplay. If the devs are afraid of low settings being an advantage I think there is there is a lot of room to expand before it's close to that.

Heroman117

As I recall it isn't GPU inefficiency causing most people's client side lag, its CPU bottlenecks that are slowing down the game primarily, so turning down the graphics wouldn't give much of a performance increase. Although there are already console commands that turn of certain game aspects that give more performance benefits then normally available in the options menu (turning off shadows and bloom among other things i may not be aware of) that gives good client side performance increase, but a lot of the root issues are the way that occlusion culling isn't working properly, things that aren't being seen by the client are drawn anyway.

Even having a 100% smooth client side won't give people that "smooth game in the meantime" because server-side lag is a bigger contributor to a less satisfactory experience, since you could have 60 fps on your own machine by dramatically lowering your graphics, but if the server has a tickrate of 15 or so (which is common on servers that have been up for longs periods of time) your going to be just as laggy as people who are running the game on maximum settings.

Fanda Trotl

Lower graphics would not help at least to me, because I have stable fps with HIGH graphics, with the ridiculously awful setting framerate jumps like crazy.

meb3

I would wager that not many machines unless they were bought within the last year are able to keep 30+ FPS on average in NS2. He is petitioning the devs for a low graphics setting which is actually true to its name; one that removes ANY extra or unnecessary effects that might stump performance and includes every tweak and shortcut possible. If players could get even an extra 10-30 FPS client-side, it would help tremendously in bringing more people in to play the game and rooting out balance issues since people can better aim at things.

Additionally, if server-side lag is really troublesome, why aren't turrets, hydras, macs, and drifters being disabled while they are being examined and fixed by the developer team? There is no reason to balance the game thoroughly before huge game changing elements such as the onos, exoskeletons, and jetpacks finally make their way into the game.

Kouji_San

Client side CPU bottle neck is the culprit mostly, low graphics or medium show the same amount of FPS (I canae use high cause apparently 512Mb on my HD4850 ain't enough and kills NS2 back to desktop every time)

Fen

Radeon 6950 + Phenom x4 9750 and i can barely reach 6 fps every time i try to squeeze the trigger of a lmg

So i'd kind of agree on the cpu-bottleneck theory :cry:

Skie

I get avg. 70+ fps running around Tram on single player; the greatest factor for me is server lag.

Overclocking my i5 2500K from 3,3GHz to 4,5GHz gave almost a linear FPS increase.

ASnogarD

It also has to do with the quality of the server hardware, I mean if I play on some of the EU ones the game stutters and hitches all the time but get on that Frelge (sp ? ) server and it runs smooth even with 16 ( I think ) players all on.

I have said it before and probably repeat it again, UWE needs to set up some official servers on hardware they expect servers to use... least that way we can eliminate the physical server hardware from the performance equations.

RebellionElite

i7 970 Hexacore overclocked to 4.2 Ghz with a 5870 at 1920 X 1200 everything on high.

Frame rate averages anywhere from 50-70 fps with tons of things happening, with the exception of when the tickrate drops to around 5.

Provided the tick rate stays up, the game is very smooth and playable.

For the guy with the Phenom I, get a new CPU ASAP, cause that thing is a disaster paired with a 6950.

Floodinator

<!--quoteo(post=1863886:date=Jul 27 2011, 04:28 PM:name=Fen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fen @ Jul 27 2011, 04:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1863886"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Radeon 6950 + Phenom x4 9750 and i can barely reach 6 fps every time i try to squeeze the trigger of a lmg

So i'd kind of agree on the cpu-bottleneck theory :cry:<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Flash your card to a 6970. Inly difference betwen the 50 and the 70 is the Firmware.

Low=mid=high on my pc.
Average 60 FPS on Full hd. I don't understand why people with better RIGs drop to 6FPS?
That's what I don't understand.

Edit: by OC my pc to 5ghz (only 1 core active) i gain around 15-20 FPS. Maybe I'm gona give it a try as dedicated Server!

Fen

<!--quoteo(post=1863900:date=Jul 27 2011, 05:26 PM:name=RebellionElite)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RebellionElite @ Jul 27 2011, 05:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1863900"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For the guy with the Phenom I, get a new CPU ASAP, cause that thing is a disaster paired with a 6950.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know,but my old 4850 fried itself when the card fan blew up,so i was kind of forced to upgrade sooner than i planned

sherpa

Would be interested if they could do a hardware survey similar to Valve's.

I've got an i750 and a GTX570 but I'm not getting anywhere near to the frame rates of some people here.

RebellionElite

Not all 6950's are flashable, only cards that have the second bios switch (any reference card, which aren't made anymore) as well as the memory they used on many of the 6950's (especially later on) were not the same caliber as what was used on the 6970, so many people ran into clocking problems.

KuBaN

Go to %AppData%\Roaming\Natural Selection 2\

Open options.xml (notepad works fine)

Scroll down to lines 82 and 84 (near the bottom)

Change the x-resolution and y-resolution to whatever you want. I would suggest keeping the aspect ratio similar to what you natively display, to avoid issues.

Works like a charm.

MaGicBush

<!--quoteo(post=1863884:date=Jul 27 2011, 10:23 AM:name=meb3)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (meb3 @ Jul 27 2011, 10:23 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1863884"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I would wager that not many machines unless they were bought within the last year are able to keep 30+ FPS on average in NS2. He is petitioning the devs for a low graphics setting which is actually true to its name; one that removes ANY extra or unnecessary effects that might stump performance and includes every tweak and shortcut possible. If players could get even an extra 10-30 FPS client-side, it would help tremendously in bringing more people in to play the game and rooting out balance issues since people can better aim at things.

Additionally, if server-side lag is really troublesome, why aren't turrets, hydras, macs, and drifters being disabled while they are being examined and fixed by the developer team? There is no reason to balance the game thoroughly before huge game changing elements such as the onos, exoskeletons, and jetpacks finally make their way into the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Mine is about 3 years old and works fine, GTX 260/AMD Phenom II 720 3.0ghz, 4gb ddr2 ram though I did upgrade my CPU just a little over a year ago I use to have a dual-core). I average around 40fps on medium settings, as others stated it's namely server side lag causing issues.. in-game it's hard to tell the difference as when tickrate gets low it starts affecting client-side fps.

ScardyBob

r_shadows false
r_bloom false
r_flash false

Try those commands in console. You may be able to get a few more FPS with them.

Fen

Just as a quick update,i just managed to jump on a server....Well,huge improvements.

Same options,I managed to keep stable around 35-40 fps while walking around,15-20 frames better than last time

Still huge fps drops when i fire any weapon but even there,not as bad as before

\( ° °)/

NurEinMensch

<!--quoteo(post=1863890:date=Jul 27 2011, 05:49 PM:name=ASnogarD)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ASnogarD @ Jul 27 2011, 05:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1863890"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have said it before and probably repeat it again, UWE needs to set up some official servers on hardware they expect servers to use... least that way we can eliminate the physical server hardware from the performance equations.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The game is currently expected to lag on servers they're expecting us to use, because it's not fully optimized yet. The game will run smoothly on your average server once all optimization is done, which will be around the time of release.

mR.Waffles

I have an i5 2500k overclocked to 4.4ghz, so CPU bottleneck is an impossibility. My frame rate is all over the place at 1920x1080 + High graphics. I'm running dual GTX 460se's (the 1 gig models). Anyway, frame rate is fine sometimes and terrible others. I'll have to do a better test later. What's the console command to show frame rate? <EDIT> Found it r_stats.

Racer1

For me turning off spark effects helped some situations. Turning off muzzle flash might help as well. The dynamic light nature of ns2 just kills my fps at some point. Admittedly, I have a somewhat old video card (Radeon 9600GT).

Yes, I know I can turn off all lighting effects in game, but that makes it look horrible.

Obraxis

<!--quoteo(post=1864590:date=Jul 29 2011, 09:02 AM:name=mR.Waffles)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mR.Waffles @ Jul 29 2011, 09:02 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864590"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have an i5 2500k overclocked to 4.4ghz, so CPU bottleneck is an impossibility. My frame rate is all over the place at 1920x1080 + High graphics. I'm running dual GTX 460se's (the 1 gig models). Anyway, frame rate is fine sometimes and terrible others. I'll have to do a better test later. What's the console command to show frame rate? <EDIT> Found it r_stats.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Disabling your SLI will improve your FPS stability, NS2 does not currently support SLI or Crossfire.

plopingo

<!--quoteo(post=1863936:date=Jul 27 2011, 07:06 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Jul 27 2011, 07:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1863936"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->r_shadows false
r_bloom false
r_flash false

Try those commands in console. You may be able to get a few more FPS with them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

How i can find the complete list of R_ commands ?

Thanks ;)

Industry

<!--quoteo(post=1864653:date=Jul 29 2011, 05:06 PM:name=plopingo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (plopingo @ Jul 29 2011, 05:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How i can find the complete list of R_ commands ?

Thanks ;)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/index.php/Console_Commands" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/inde...onsole_Commands</a>

ScardyBob

<!--quoteo(post=1864590:date=Jul 29 2011, 06:02 AM:name=mR.Waffles)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mR.Waffles @ Jul 29 2011, 06:02 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864590"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have an i5 2500k overclocked to 4.4ghz, so CPU bottleneck is an impossibility. My frame rate is all over the place at 1920x1080 + High graphics. I'm running dual GTX 460se's (the 1 gig models). Anyway, frame rate is fine sometimes and terrible others. I'll have to do a better test later. What's the console command to show frame rate? <EDIT> Found it r_stats.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I'm in a similar situation (i5 2500k + HD6950@1920x1080), but my fps generally stays between 40-70fps during gameplay. Sadly, that doesn't mean the CPU isn't the bottleneck (NS2 is a very CPU-intensive game right now). Besides the console commands, the only other surefire method of squeezing out some more fps that I've found is reducing my resolution.

player

<!--quoteo(post=1864610:date=Jul 29 2011, 04:27 PM:name=Obraxis)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Obraxis @ Jul 29 2011, 04:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Disabling your SLI will improve your FPS stability, NS2 does not currently support SLI or Crossfire.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If a game doesn't have an SLI-profile the driver usually just doesn't kick in and it will run on 1 card, I don't think explicitly disabling it for NS2.exe in the control-panel will do anything.

Kouji_San

Weren't there issues with artifacts on shadows when running SLI or something?

player

When I tried it with a SLI-setup it worked fine, just with the performance of 1 card, like you'd expect from a SLI-incapable game.

CrazyFarmer

I find it weird that some people with i7s and HD 6 series cards can't reach 40 FPS...

I have a 4 year old pc with an overclocked E8400 (3.3Ghz dual core), 4GB DDR2 (887Mhz)

The only thing recent about my pc is the GPU which is about a year old (GTX 460)

I get 40-50 FPS mostly

ScardyBob

<!--quoteo(post=1864724:date=Jul 29 2011, 12:41 PM:name=CrazyFarmer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CrazyFarmer @ Jul 29 2011, 12:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864724"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I find it weird that some people with i7s and HD 6 series cards can't reach 40 FPS...

I have a 4 year old pc with an overclocked E8400 (3.3Ghz dual core), 4GB DDR2 (887Mhz)

The only thing recent about my pc is the GPU which is about a year old (GTX 460)

I get 40-50 FPS mostly<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

What resolution are you running? Those of us having trouble with powerful systems are because we are trying to run it at 1920x1080 or some similar high resolution. I could certainly drop my resolution down to 1280x720 to squeeze out 20-30 more fps, but I personally see no reason because my monitor would then be the bottleneck (its 60hz).

CrazyFarmer

My resolution is 1600x1200, it's pretty weird

Obraxis

i7 920 (2.6Ghz @ 3Ghz)
12GB DDR3
GeForce 470

Lowest FPS in Summit: 30fps - Highest 90fps. Avg: 55-60fps

At 1080p.