Mouse sensitivity is lowered by low FPS!
hunterw
Join Date: 2011-04-26 Member: 95828Members
Join Date: 2011-04-26 Member: 95828Members
Noticed this today with high sensitivity...when I was scrolling around I noticed my sensitivity is lowered drastically when I have low FPS.
This is a huge handicap for poor computers. In every other game it seems like mouse sensitivity is independent of FPS, but not so in NS2.
Any suggestions on how to fix? Or is this a Spark-related programmatic issue of not registering mouse movement during low FPS?
My computer is an overclocked Core2Duo 3ghz, 4gb ram with Nvidia Geforce 8800GTS 640mb just for reference.
This is a huge handicap for poor computers. In every other game it seems like mouse sensitivity is independent of FPS, but not so in NS2.
Any suggestions on how to fix? Or is this a Spark-related programmatic issue of not registering mouse movement during low FPS?
My computer is an overclocked Core2Duo 3ghz, 4gb ram with Nvidia Geforce 8800GTS 640mb just for reference.
Comments
The reason you haven't seen this with other games is because they are optimized and designed to run well on slower CPU's and on more cores.
The only real way to get better performance with this game at the moment is to upgrade your computer to what is currently acceptable. NS is a new game and thus requires a new computer.
If you want to see smoothness I recommend getting a 460 and above series nvidia card. Also look into a CPU that is 4.5-5 ghz. The game will run silky smooth.
I went back to play it a couple years ago, and with my fast PC at the time, things were building in like half a second and units on the map moved around at crazy speed.
AFAIK, you can't buy CPUs that are 4.5-5 GHz STOCK. The new trend for processors is lower clock speed, more cores. This means you are telling him that no matter what he buys, he needs to overclock it to run NS2 acceptably.
Not critiquing ADHD so much as I am pointing out how ridiculous that statement itself is. You cannot force your customers into a niche of those willing to risk their hardware just to play your game. This is why UWE needs to make performance improvement an absolute priority (and props to them, their recent post seems like they are doing so).
But for our part, us forum-dwellers need to stop telling people that "Unless you have a maxed out CPU you can't run this game, it's so CPU intensive". Instead, we need to remind people to be patient until it hits release, and then see where they stand.
Worst comes to worst my friend, if performance is not enough for you, take a break from the Beta. Go dedicate the next few months to work or a girlfriend :P. Then you will come back and either have better peformance, or more money to upgrade your pc!
I went back to play it a couple years ago, and with my fast PC at the time, things were building in like half a second and units on the map moved around at crazy speed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Try playing 8 player SupCom on a large map with 1000 units/player allowed.
Enjoy
watching
those
seconds
in
the
timer
go
so
slowly.
Edit: as for the topic at hand, I haven't actually noticed this during framerate dips or anything. Have you tried it on a different system to see if the problem exists there as well?
my computer is decent: core i5 2500, HD 58580 1GB and 8GB DDR3. I still struggle to play the game at a decent framerate. This close to game release it's scary to think just how much the game can possibly be improved in that short amount of time.
LUA is still a newer and little used language and takes more power to compute. It's a lot more versatile and with time, and advances with computer hardware, I think we could be seeing this type of technology taking a lead in the future of gaming.
I believe in the developers and that they will pinch every ounce of performance that is possible (Which can be a lot), but it's time to wakeup and realize that upgrading your computer is something that is inevitable in todays games. This game may not be the biggest drain on your graphics card but it's running a code that is advanced for it's time. The developers know and have already stated that this game is CPU bound. There is obvious optimizations that will be made but you cannot get around this fact. It's also a known fact that on faster CPU's this game get's much better performance... in fact it get's the type of performance that everyone with their aging budget computers wish they had.
This game is new technology which needs new hardware. You don't need 4.5 - 5 ghz to run this game smoothly. That is just ideal. I have seen great performance even on 3.6 to 3.8 ghz.
Yes, I think that is true. Mouse movement feels very choppy with low fps so it becomes consideribly harder to hit anything.
<!--quoteo(post=1928674:date=Apr 23 2012, 04:30 AM:name=.ADHd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (.ADHd @ Apr 23 2012, 04:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1928674"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The NS2 developers are creating a new technology BVKnight. Remember Crysis? It was far ahead of its time and they marketed their game that way as well stating this, "You will need top of the line hardware to play crysis... and even then you wont be able to run max settings as cards are not able to handle them yet".
LUA is still a newer and little used language and takes more power to compute. It's a lot more versatile and with time, and advances with computer hardware, I think we could be seeing this type of technology taking a lead in the future of gaming.
I believe in the developers and that they will pinch every ounce of performance that is possible (Which can be a lot), but it's time to wakeup and realize that upgrading your computer is something that is inevitable in todays games. This game may not be the biggest drain on your graphics card but it's running a code that is advanced for it's time. The developers know and have already stated that this game is CPU bound. There is obvious optimizations that will be made but you cannot get around this fact. It's also a known fact that on faster CPU's this game get's much better performance... in fact it get's the type of performance that everyone with their aging budget computers wish they had.
This game is new technology which needs new hardware. You don't need 4.5 - 5 ghz to run this game smoothly. That is just ideal. I have seen great performance even on 3.6 to 3.8 ghz.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First, at most the approch is new. Writing the majority of a large game like this is "new". There are small games and engines written in intrepeted languages, but nothing on this scale as far as I aware, that's all that is new about it.
The technology isn't that new, lua isn't new. Interpreted languages are not new. The problem is, and always will be, that languages interpreted at run time as opposed to languages which are compiled are slower. When you say it's ahead of the time, the only point you can make is that today's processors are not powerful enough to run a large application heavily relying on lua yet, despite being very fast. However, this game is supposed to release today or to be more specific this summer. If you want good press and sales, it should run on today's hardware.
Anyway, lua isn't little either and it has been used as scripting interface in a lot of games so far.
Also, there is absolutly no reason to upgrade hardware for a single game whereas the same hardware runs every other game to my knowlege. Here are few recent ones that run (much) better:
Metro 2033
Battlefield 3
Mass Effect 3
Counter-Strike: Global Offense
In addition, NS2 doesn't even make use of all the available resources. Using 37% CPU of my QuadCore. As much as I keep saying it, but improved threading & scaleability should yield large improvements aswell.
It's nice to beleive in something, but as long they don't actually improve the performance massivly the release will be troublesome. Sure, they can just go ahead, but it will get bad reviews and feedback based on the performance.
Again, you can make some excuses, but at the end of the day, the excuse doesn't matter when the performance still sucks. So let's hope they pull off some serious improvements in the next 4-5 months before release for the sake of NS2.
Also keep in mind that those other games have developer teams that are many times larger than NS. They can have a whole teams worth of dev's just working on optimizations. Not to mention those games are coded completely differently, and run largely on a client - server based system. I wish the NS2 developers would start moving more in that way... it streamlines the netcode a lot.
There are limitations on the "current" cpu's. The solution? Upgrade your archaic PC. There are a ridiculous amount of calculations that have to be synced with the server constantly. I think this is a major factor in performance drops... the netcode is really making this game suffer at the moment. I am excited to see what clever tricks the developers have up their sleeves and if whether they will start transitioning more prediction and events to be client side only.
Also keep in mind that those other games have developer teams that are many times larger than NS. They can have a whole teams worth of dev's just working on optimizations. Not to mention those games are coded completely differently, and run largely on a client - server based system. I wish the NS2 developers would start moving more in that way... it streamlines the netcode a lot.
There are limitations on the "current" cpu's. The solution? Upgrade your archaic PC. There are a ridiculous amount of calculations that have to be synced with the server constantly. I think this is a major factor in performance drops... the netcode is really making this game suffer at the moment. I am excited to see what clever tricks the developers have up their sleeves and if whether they will start transitioning more prediction and events to be client side only.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Archaic". When most people can run every game BUT a single one at a great rate, AND the actual gameplay itself could be created on something else. That being said, however, the problem isn't the FPS. You can play plenty of games with low FPS and still have good mouse movement. NS2 however, compounds its ###### atrocious FPS with mouse lag that creates an environment in which the only way to have a remote chance of playing is to spend 2000 dollars on a new computer for a game that doesn't even look as good as half the market out there.
P.S. Putting the devs on a pedestal for "innovation" is a pretty redundant idea when the "innovation" doesn't ###### work. Remember the power glove? Innovative? Oh yeah. Did it work? Not for ######. Just cause something is "innovative" doesn't make it good or even intelligent. Trying to do something like that with a small team is a foolish decision and its effects show.
Not critiquing ADHD so much as I am pointing out how ridiculous that statement itself is. You cannot force your customers into a niche of those willing to risk their hardware just to play your game. This is why UWE needs to make performance improvement an absolute priority (and props to them, their recent post seems like they are doing so).
But for our part, us forum-dwellers need to stop telling people that "Unless you have a maxed out CPU you can't run this game, it's so CPU intensive". Instead, we need to remind people to be patient until it hits release, and then see where they stand.
Worst comes to worst my friend, if performance is not enough for you, take a break from the Beta. Go dedicate the next few months to work or a girlfriend :P. Then you will come back and either have better peformance, or more money to upgrade your pc!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah I checked today. Very few CPUs above 3.5 GHz, let alone above 3.8.
Probably won't be an issue if you don't drop below 50fps.
You have an update step and a render step. The keyboard and mouse input is received and processed during the update step, and is "constantly" polled for new entries. When your frame rate drops, the computer isn't doing less work, its doing more work, more work that it can handle. Because of this, every process occurring takes a hit, including network calculations, physics, and even peripheral input.
Typically the computer will receive a signal stating that the mouse moved from point A to point B. If the input processing time is cut in half due to high load, the computer may only receive a signal that the mouse moved half way to B, thus decreasing the amount of on screen turn, and effectively reducing the sensitivity.
I'm not entirely sure why, but this kind of side effect will only be felt at incredibly low frame rates (>20 I would say). I'm assuming this is because peripheral input is generally controlled by the operating system, and thus has a higher priority over all other processes. Because of this priority, losing X amount of time in the render step will only manifest as X/10 time lost in the input processing step. When the time lost in the render step becomes large enough however, it can affect the input processing step quite badly.
My FPS often drops to a point where I can no longer drop bile bombs, because my clicks simply aren't being picked up.
Naw I was referring to the original poster... not you.
Also, upon further reflection I have come to the conclusion that in order to enjoy this game you will need a computer that costs more than a thousand dollars to build.
I have, however, seen this game perform pretty well on those monster PC's I am talking about (4-5 ghz). I am being an optimistic pessimist on this thread because I believe it's time for most people to upgrade if they want to play this game seriously.
After playing today's latest build I have had a wakeup call. I usually play commander 90% of the time so I haven't noticed the dwindelling performance issues. Today I decided not to comm and play regularly all day. I did pretty well until the server had about 13 people or more. After than the game became not a game.... it became a slideshow.
I would be embarrassed to show this game to somebody. I wanted to get my friend to buy it but after I showed him it he said it looked horrible (in reference to performance).
I don't think it's about how much hardware you can throw in at the moment; it's more about happening to have the right architecture.