Ummmm.... Lets not get carried away
Apollonius999
Join Date: 2009-09-09 Member: 68725Members
Join Date: 2009-09-09 Member: 68725Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Playable or Unplayable</div>Is it really playable? Fps is higher, completely unstable and causes jittery. Server side code is either flunk or can't handle the entities unless its like 8 max players. Also is the the server single threaded or multi-threaded? One core was getting blasted while memory was being eaten till no tomorrow.
The game turns to a slide show with multiple entities in view in multiplayer even with low player counts.
I'm running a hexacore with a 3.7GHZ oc
4 gigs ram
w7
and an hd 5970
All i'm reading is the game is great....BUTTTTT "connection issues", "server crashes", and the list goes on.... Being creative with updates and releases is one thing. Games like any other thing, food, ect... Comes down to this.
1 bad experience spreads to 25 sets of ears. 1 good experiences might possibly hit 5-8.
I give credit for getting this far. But while the game is more playable, not even completely or close to fully playable. Steps before leaps and bounds.
The game turns to a slide show with multiple entities in view in multiplayer even with low player counts.
I'm running a hexacore with a 3.7GHZ oc
4 gigs ram
w7
and an hd 5970
All i'm reading is the game is great....BUTTTTT "connection issues", "server crashes", and the list goes on.... Being creative with updates and releases is one thing. Games like any other thing, food, ect... Comes down to this.
1 bad experience spreads to 25 sets of ears. 1 good experiences might possibly hit 5-8.
I give credit for getting this far. But while the game is more playable, not even completely or close to fully playable. Steps before leaps and bounds.
Comments
I run a dual core 2.6ghz with a 8800gts 512mb and 6 gigs of ram on my rig. I am averaging about 25-35 FPS at 1600X900 medium detail. I only notice the game becoming unplayable when to many buildings are built...like mass Hydra spam or turret spam. Otherwise with up to 8 players the game is running smoothly. Obviously more optimization and work on the server stability needs to be done before we can see a 32 person server. But as of right now in it's current form I would call it a success.
Grats UWE for getting this far, I have high hopes the game is only going to get better with each patch. The fade is looking great and from my own experience the game is running smooth enough for now to give us some intense 4v4 action.
Or, ummmmmmm did I miss the news announcement saying the game was going to be released for retail tomorrow?
EDIT: I just re-read it, you're expressing concern over UWE's use of the word <b>playable</b>.
That fine sir, As i see it (in regards to alpha/beta or any non-retail product), is a matter of opinion. It could also 'possibly' be a problem with the server you were connected to.
"beta" NS2 is certainly not playable the same way most of the alpha games I'm playing are.
This will go the way of that western game , Lead and Gold ... good initial response followed by game sucks I cant play it whine floods, by this stage then the slide downhill will be unstoppable.
I say it needs more tweaks and stabilisation before more players get introduced to it or the impressions will kill the game before it even makes the launch day.
The major difference between a buggy modification and a buggy title is that players are willing to forgive and try out a modification, but wont be as forgiving if they actually forked out some cash for a title... so yes NS 1 was initially laggy and buggy, but it was a <b>free</b> modification.
Dont get me wrong, the game is going the right way and is definetly improving build by build but it is still too buggy for the masses... even a closed beta will drown us in the whine :P
I jumped online at home last night and had 3 very smooth, completely fun and very playable games in a row, on 3 different servers, with around 8 people. Running fullscreen with high quality settings on a 2 year old computer.
Then I jumped on another server, with only 5 people, and the lag was horrible. So, unfortunately, as with most online PC games, the playability can vary dramatically, based on the players computer, specific settings, the server, and a whole host of other things. But a lot of people seem to assume that because the game is not playable for them, that it means its not playable for anyone, which is not true at all.
--Cory
I did get a couple of decent rounds in where I could play as Fade.
Too much fun as a Fade, should be a crime. :D
Lag issues are all over the place, and multiple sentries firing at once creates some ugly instability on the server. However, until that inevitable turret farm, my experience has been very playable. I had FUN.
Did I have to spend a few minutes finding a server I could get into? Yep. Once that was over, and with a little bit of patience, the game is playable.
I'm still worried about the engine ever performing well with all of those dynamic lights.
The whole point of pc is making a generic middle ground for base specs. Not a program that works for "some" people. With the majority of whats being posted and the people who say it's playable. You have a very negative vibe that towers high over the "playable" experience.
Not saying the good experience are always the underdog. But in this scenario and playing on multiple servers. The negative experience is definitely there for a huge part of the community. Which gets less people attracted to the game.
If i can't play it, but some of my friends can. If someone asks me about the game, how do i tell them "you might be able to play it." Especially after mentioning my computer specs that should be overpowered for the game.
There is no way i can suggest them to buy in and join the party. It's like having a kegger with no beer. The party isn't there. You say playable, but only for a amount of the community. I'm assuming all of these people are using r_stats and other commands monitoring fps and what is actually going on. Not going by the fact of a megapub standards where it's normal for someone to stutter or lag around.
If you want more people buffing your game and bringing people in. It can't be playable only for some people. So it's "beta" for some people, but "alpha" for everyone else?
Ok and its hard to join a server if a lot ppl are playing... everything is full... (if your firewall settings are right, your game cache integrity too, and the server got space... there is rarly a problem at all - but it seems playercount in the server list is sometimes wrong, or there is another issue...)
1080p Q6600@3Ghz GTX275 Win7 x64 with VerticalSync, tripplebuffering + Settings on high...
Just hit the 24h total time played in Steam. :) (~4h alone patch 155)
Let's not debate the meaning of "playable". It isn't one or the other. Some are having fun. Some can't get it to run. We don't have to boil that down to a single term.
There may also be a slight reporting bias occuring... Either way, compare B151 and B155 and it is night and day. Can't wait to hit B156 and thereafter ;)
Quad core Phenom 9500 OC'd to 2.4GHz, TLB Patch force disabled for max performance, a 2GB GTX 460 and the damn thing chugs on high.
"Playable" is not equal to "quality." ~20fps is not "Playable," sorry.
Sound has endless looping, constant connection issues, endless lag...
The Doom 3 Alpha's engine was not only more efficient, and had less bugs, but was far more playable, even on crappy hardware. If you hit the console key Carmack gave that build a version number of 0.02.
NS2 isn't in beta at all. It's still an alpha. And I think the community should be treated to more mature releases instead of having a rushed alpha, that we payed for, given to us.
Quad core Phenom 9500 OC'd to 2.4GHz, TLB Patch force disabled for max performance, a 2GB GTX 460 and the damn thing chugs on high.
"Playable" is not equal to "quality." ~20fps is not "Playable," sorry.
Sound has endless looping, constant connection issues, endless lag...
The Doom 3 Alpha's engine was not only more efficient, and had less bugs, but was far more playable, even on crappy hardware. If you hit the console key Carmack gave that build a version number of 0.02.
NS2 isn't in beta at all. It's still an alpha. And I think the community should be treated to more mature releases instead of having a rushed alpha, that we payed for, given to us.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
comparing id software to UWE isn't gonna get you very far man. think about what you're saying for a minute.
also, quick fix to boost fps some: turn shadows off. r_shadows false in the console.
I jumped online at home last night and had 3 very smooth, completely fun and very playable games in a row, on 3 different servers, with around 8 people. Running fullscreen with high quality settings on a 2 year old computer.
Then I jumped on another server, with only 5 people, and the lag was horrible. So, unfortunately, as with most online PC games, the playability can vary dramatically, based on the players computer, specific settings, the server, and a whole host of other things. But a lot of people seem to assume that because the game is not playable for them, that it means its not playable for anyone, which is not true at all.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As true as all that may be, it won't matter a thing when people that are used to beta's like MoH/BC2 buy NS2 and end up with such a buggy mess.
Heck even the keybindings still don't really work, there is still no way to bind the flashlight to any key so people that play with an ESDF setup run around turning their flashlight on/off all the time (i'm one of them). And that's just one of the many many things that scream "by far not finished" as soon as you startup the game which has nothing to do with individual computer specs. Releasing this as an beta is an really bad move imho...
I have yet to play a succesfull round and by that i mean a real round where something happens besides the IP/Hive dying. But this isn't really about me complaining that i can't play, i don't care about that i'm an patient guy. It's more that i fear for the future of the game when you slap a beta tag on it, put it on gametrailers and sell it while it's in no state at all to be enjoyed by an average random guy that never heard about NS before.
im not expecting anything great on my current hardware, but i have higher system specs than the min and if UWE wants to deliver a playable experience on the specs they list, they have a LONG road ahead of them. and frankly, i think theyre gonna have to end up readjusting those min specs even after the beta is done
NS2 from the beginning, I happily donated, not expecting much of a playable game, and thats fine.
But NOW the game is publicized, its a beta, people are watching the videos and thinking about buying it.
What happens when someone buys this and find it largely UNPLAYABLE, the typical gamer,
you think he'll tell his friends he wasted his money? Damn right he will.
Im going to donate pretty soon...
We need this to be SMOOTH pretty quick, before the people start talking about it.
also, quick fix to boost fps some: turn shadows off. r_shadows false in the console.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Um, yeah, it will. Version 0.02 of another commercial product was not only more playable, but had more content, a more refined engine, and a fraction of the bugs we see here.
id Software is a great comparison. They, like UWE, have a relatively small team. Unlike UWE, id Software is a crap studio that needs to ride on it's former glory to stay afloat.
I've always had high regards for UWE because from a design perspective, NS1 was the second most impressive game I've ever seen and the sixth best I've ever played. Only FreeSpace 2 was more impressive design wise. And only the original Unreal Tournament was superior as far as online play goes.
In other words, NS1 was a freaking amazing game.
So is it any wonder I feel burned by these unplayable builds?
You can see that even on one server - there's a nice example in the first part of the NS2HD video on the playtest; NS2HD says at one point something along the lines of "it's fine there's almost no lag at all", while SgtBarlow and another are talking in-game to the effect of "laaaaggg", I don't know if that was just coincidence or not as that was the only point in the video I saw complaints of lag in the chat.
Personally I still think the minimum system requirements should be tempered - even if just by saying "we are targeting minimum requirements of:" but it's still in development. Comments on it running on a 9800 GT are very welcome, but that's still a lot newer than the weakest dx9 cards (are many weaker than say the fx5200?) etc
Glad to hear it is making more progress than had been previously, or at least that the progress is more obvious.
Growing up gaming, I've had the chance to play quite a few alphas and betas, and this is by far acceptable to be tagged a beta-game.
A beta is supposed to be buggy, not some glorified demo.