PC version: why performance so poor?

[Astatine]

But that graphics engine is geared for shooters, and not for CRPGs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True. A graphics engine (not gameplay engine) can be used for anything it seems to me. If they had that graphics engine, or their own graphics engine was built just as robust and powerful, this game would be that much better, let alone not have performance problems while looking much worse than a graphic's engine that does not.

 

I just imagine this game looking as good at that one, and can't help but think how much more awesome this game would be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

any engine can be used for any game.

even Unreal can be turned into kotor if people wanted it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hence Bioware using the Unreal Engine 3 for their secret project

 

The trend until recently was for games development houses to usually write their own engines and so on; as the nitty gritty of games (graphics and sound rendering, physics models, etc) gets more detailed and complicated we're seeing more developers buying in middleware (like the Unreal Engine, Havok physics, etc) to do this for them, so that they can focus on the game content. So the new generation of middleware has to be generic rather than tied down to particular game genres or what have you so the middleware vendors can sell more licenses

[themacman]

But that graphics engine is geared for shooters, and not for CRPGs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True. A graphics engine (not gameplay engine) can be used for anything it seems to me. If they had that graphics engine, or their own graphics engine was built just as robust and powerful, this game would be that much better, let alone not have performance problems while looking much worse than a graphic's engine that does not.

 

I just imagine this game looking as good at that one, and can't help but think how much more awesome this game would be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

any engine can be used for any game.

even Unreal can be turned into kotor if people wanted it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hence Bioware using the Unreal Engine 3 for their secret project

 

The trend until recently was for games development houses to usually write their own engines and so on; as the nitty gritty of games (graphics and sound rendering, physics models, etc) gets more detailed and complicated we're seeing more developers buying in middleware (like the Unreal Engine, Havok physics, etc) to do this for them, so that they can focus on the game content. So the new generation of middleware has to be generic rather than tied down to particular game genres or what have you so the middleware vendors can sell more licenses

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

they are just sick to fix all FX issue's they are having in their own engine's

these high-budget engines are perfectly tested because they are used in more then 1 single game title.

 

like all the Tom Clancy games which all use UT

[Master Dahvernas]

O.o

 

I don't quite follow what you are saying here.  30 FPS is 30 FPS, and I don't know how interlacing would make 30 FPS seem "smoother" on a TV screen than on a PC Monitor.  They are both CRT screens and whatnot.  However, I could see how interlacing would allow for better performance, since they would not need to render every line (if the GPU is designed that way....which I do not think the X-Box's nVidia GPU is).  Also, identical games running on TV and PC Monitor tend to look better on TV, since televisions have a "naturalish" anti-aliasing (perhaps due to the interlacing??).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

A TV screen and a monitor are both CRTs... But a monitor always has more pixels compared to a TV screen. A standard NTSC TV screen has a limited resolution of 640x480 whereas we know CRT monitors can go upwards of 1600x1200 or more.

 

So, actually, if you put your video card output through a TV screen, it will look LESS sharp and blurry -- no matter what you set it to from your PC; it will just get smaller and not crisper -- If you do a side-by-side comparison because TV screens don't have as many lines as a standard CRT monitor like I said above (I'm leaving LCDs out of this discussion because they are irrelevant).

 

The other big difference is that a TV screen has motion blur whereas a PC monitor does not. This is what interlacing essentially is. TV screens redraw every other frame and your mind fills in the ones in-between; PC monitors must draw every single frame at a consistent pace (60+ FPS) and if they don't your mind percieves the "gaps" and the image appears jerky.... Especially, if they drop below 30 which is the bare minimum we percieve as fluid motion.

 

Also...

 

The XBox uses what is called Renderware and an Excalibur integrated video processor (equivalent to a Geforce 2) that is specifically designed for interlaced video (compared to most PC graphics cards) and that is why most console games look much smoother and play better if they are properly coded because they don't have the problem of having to render more than they are capable of (30 FPS). A few console games have tried to up this to 60 FPS to get better resolutions, but as I said, it is a waste of time on TV -- Even HDTVS -- Because of the FPS "cap" that NTCS TVs have in them (PAL is the same way with the refresh rate just bing 59 Hz and not 60 Hz).

[themacman]

and the xbox is allot worse then the PC.

the Xbox is choppy galore.

[Judge Hades]

The X-Box is a underpowered obsolete system.

[adrich81]

Sadly, a whole lot of the posts about not being able to run the game come from people with underpowered obsolete systems. At least performance on the pc version is scalable though.

[Liquid86]

The engine currently lacks the optimization coding to fully take advantage of a given system's capabilities. As such, you are witnessing choopy, sluggish Frame Rates due to the inneficiency of the current engine in the game.

[Judge Hades]

Like I said, I have no problems with performance. On average I get 15 to 20 frames per second and that is good enough for me.

[Master Dahvernas]

Like I said, I have no problems with performance.  On average I get 15 to 20 frames per second and that is good enough for me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You are either lieing... And or just being a troll.

 

Either way, you need to get a life.

[Judge Hades]

Oh, I have a life. They haven't put me in the coffin quite yet and no I am not lying.

[adrich81]

How is he lying? I get 35-45 fps @1280x960 with 4xAA and 16xAF with softshadows and framebuffer effects on. If he's lying about 15-20 fps being playable, remember this is a crpg, not a fisrt person shooter, so that kind of frame rate is more than enough!

[Master Dahvernas]

How is he lying?  I get 35-45 fps @1280x960 with 4xAA and 16xAF with softshadows and framebuffer effects on.  If he's lying about 15-20 fps being playable, remember this is a crpg, not a fisrt person shooter, so that kind of frame rate is more than enough!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It is still jerky any way you slice it from either a technical stand point and just watching the screen and how smooth the motion is (or isn't in this case).

 

30 FPS is the bare minimum for full motion video. 60 is preferred (double the FPS rate) since as I explained earlier in this thread that CRT monitors have to draw EVERY frame and there is no motion blurr/interlacing and that is why you can more readily spot slower performance.

 

Also... Being a gamer for many years who has played all sorts of games from flight sims to first person shooters, to RPGs to RTS...

 

I can personally tell when something looks choppy. Most people can. Again, the reason it appears choppy is because it is pulling less than 30 FPS.

 

Hades claims it looks fine at 15 to 20.

 

To me, it looks like strobe-light show at that level.

 

I called him a liar on that because if he thinks that is "fine" then I'd hate to see what he thinks is "bad" -- 1, 2 FPS perhaps? And I am not just saying this to be an ass.

[Deraldin]

I get seamless performance at 4xAA and 4xAF at 1024 on my 9600Pro except in a few rare instances. If there is any kind of dust/fog/smoke in the air I get some slight slowdown. Not bad enough that the game becomes difficult to control but more midly annoying.

[desultadox]

The game usually runs fine for me, except the obvious exception of Dantooine which most people seem to be having a problem with.

 

What I found odd, however, is that I had to drop my CPU clockspeed to play this game. I WAS running a 2.4C @ ~3.4 w/ 283 FSB. Doom 3, Half-Life 2, UT2K4, etc. run more than fine at this setting. I think KOTOR1 even ran at that setting... but KOTOR2 refuses, within just minutes of running the game, my system crashes. I guess this isn't a big issue, I just dropped my FSB to about 270. Nevertheless, the fact that more powerful game engines work fine with that setting indicates that KOTOR2 has some engine issues.

 

... But I guess that's already obvious

[adrich81]

Which is really wierd 'cause the engine seem to be more or less unchanged.

[Judge Hades]

I simply don't put much emphasis on graphics. Its all useless eye candy to me. If the story was good enough I would gladly play it text based. Ah, the days of Zork abd being eaten by a Grue. Such fond memories.

 

15-20 FPS looks fine to me. It only gets unplayable done 5 to 9 FPS.

[adrich81]

They can go a bit OTT on graphics in some RPGs. My favourite RPG has to be Baldur's Gate 2 - the graphics are really dated but it's an excellent story. Despite what other people on the boards say, I actually think the story in Sith Lords is more original than in KOTOR 1 (albeit about as predictable).

[mkreku]

What I don't understand is why people aren't expecting the same quality of graphics in a RPG as in a FPS? We have the technology, thee are plenty of great artists around and noone gets hurt by having great graphics. So why be happy with just a great story when a game can be so much more?

[adrich81]

I don't think it's about better graphics, it's about different graphics. Graphically the KOTOR engine is limited. Vampire Bloodlines used the source engine and, technical bugs aside, was an entertaining game. Personally my pet rate with RPGs is that the standard of graqphics has deteriorated since they went 3d - the standard of art really took a nose dive.

[jedipodo]

What I don't understand is why people aren't expecting the same quality of graphics in a RPG as in a FPS? We have the technology, thee are plenty of great artists around and noone gets hurt by having great graphics. So why be happy with just a great story when a game can be so much more?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do you realize that this are two big wishes at once?

[LadyCrimson]

How do you see your FPS in this game? A 3rd party program?

 

I have a pretty powerful computer, but an older 64MB GeF4-ti4200 card (yes yes I know...) and in terms of feel, the game runs fine 90% of the time - but with the usual occasional lagginess in certain areas.

 

I'd be curious to see my FPS in those areas.

[Deraldin]

What I don't understand is why people aren't expecting the same quality of graphics in a RPG as in a FPS? We have the technology, thee are plenty of great artists around and noone gets hurt by having great graphics. So why be happy with just a great story when a game can be so much more?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's because generally, based on my experience anyway, that you generally only get one or the other with any one game. If you're playing an RPG with graphics on par with the latest FPS to hit the shelves that's great, however if it comes at the expense of a great or even a good story that is when the balance shifts from graphics being the icing on the cake to the straw that broke the donkey's back.

[Judge Hades]

What I don't understand is why people aren't expecting the same quality of graphics in a RPG as in a FPS? We have the technology, thee are plenty of great artists around and noone gets hurt by having great graphics. So why be happy with just a great story when a game can be so much more?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I rather have them focus on a kickarse story than useless eye candy.

[Rodatam]

i think they can do a game with an extremelly good story AND eye candy graphics

[Judge Hades]

Sure, if they have a 4 to 6 year development time.