Lol at Bioware claiming only 5% of people get low fps in Warzones/Fleet

[Mannic]

You greatly overestimate the amount of bandwidth required for this information. It's minuscule, even when multiplied by the number of players (as it doesn't have to be passed around to anyone else, greatly reducing scaling), and especially in comparison to other elements.

 

Fact is, their metrics are a longstanding known fact - and the oft-cited reason behind a lot of development decisions. It's a core part of how this game was developed.

 

They aren't monitoring your game play the way you think they are. They are accumulating database information that is going to occur anyway and parsing that data with analytic software. FPS is not a database transaction. It isn't time-stamped. Vendor transactions, combat log information, gear equips/unequips, experience point gains, story choices-- those are all database transactions. FPS is not a database transaction.

 

Bandwidth is never miniscule from the perspective of the server. Information might only require the client to upload 1K per second, but when you have thousands of clients all connected to the same server, the bandwidth becomes significant. Database transactions that can be parsed require no additional bandwidth for either the server or the client. They simply have a parsing system that analyzes the existing database. Because of this, it might be possible for Bioware to tell you what the average DPS of an Assassin is at level 50, but not what the average FPS of a player is.

[Evilidea]

This just blows my mind, all these high end machines that suck.

 

Core 2 Duo E6750 - Ancient by gaming standards

4GB Ram - meh good enough

GTX 460 - low/med end card by todays standards

10k rpm HDD - well it's not ssd so meh whatever

 

 

I get 70-90 fps in normal game areas

I get 45-65 fps in Imp/rep fleet area

I get 30-40 fps in warzones

 

Yes warzones drops to slightly annoying levels but I understand my cpu bottleneck.

 

How in the hell though am I out performing all these high end rigs that claim fps so low

that the game is broken and unplayable. I do not think these people are lying

I am just very confused as to why I perform so much better.

[lollie]

Wondering what these people who say their fps is "fine" on fleet actually think is fine.

 

For me, dropping below 60fps (even briefly) is not fine.

Edited January 14, 2012 by lollie

[carrylot]

I actually think it might be alot less than 5% I only know of 2 people having issues and they both need pc upgrades.

 

Troll post of the day award goes to.......

[carrylot]

This just blows my mind, all these high end machines that suck.

 

Core 2 Duo E6750 - Ancient by gaming standards

4GB Ram - meh good enough

GTX 460 - low/med end card by todays standards

10k rpm HDD - well it's not ssd so meh whatever

 

 

I get 70-90 fps in normal game areas

I get 45-65 fps in Imp/rep fleet area

I get 30-40 fps in warzones

 

Yes warzones drops to slightly annoying levels but I understand my cpu bottleneck.

 

How in the hell though am I out performing all these high end rigs that claim fps so low

that the game is broken and unplayable. I do not think these people are lying

I am just very confused as to why I perform so much better.

 

Exactly my PC beats you in every area you posted as your specs. I get 20-30ish fps in Warzones and 25-45 fps in fleet. All my drivers are up to date so that is not the issue. I have tried every tweak out there also. My 3d Mark Vantage score was over 14k

[Clova]

Wondering what these people who say their fps is "fine" on fleet actually think is fine.

 

For me, dropping below 60fps is not fine.

 

If i can run without stop and starting, or i dont need to have to make a gigantic circle or backup to make a turn, it's fine.

 

Right now, i can turn on a dime and its almost too fast for my mind to comprehend without getting dizzy!

Edited January 14, 2012 by Clova

[TheUnNamedHero]

Troll post of the day award goes to.......

 

God I love the blatant lies coming from Bioware. My system rating is over 7 on every piece of hardware I have. I can run Crysis 2/Dues Ex/Battlefield 3 all on ultra/high settings smooth without issues and yet this game runs mediocre/choppy in Warzones/Fleet. Ya Bioware 5 % , nice job pulling a random number out of your rear end.

 

Congratulations!!!!!

[Mannic]

What hardware are we talking here? I'm seriously just asking since most seem to take offense to most everything said on these forums. I mostly posted since I have seen someone post close to the exact same specs as mine in another thread and speak of issues. I am aware about the different configurations being less likely to have issues, and I am also aware that my system isn't that brand new.

 

The specifics haven't been ironed out. In fact, what's really known is that there's no apparent rhyme or reason to the systems having problem. One person may report he's playing flawlessly on a laptop. Another person with a system twice as powerful as the recommended specs might find warzones unplayable. Another person with almost exactly the same system states he has no problems whatsoever. Then a person with a more average system says he's having problems, then another person with an average system says he's having no problems at all.

 

All of this points squarely to issues with certain drivers or hardware configurations that have little or nothing to do with a system's relative power and everything to do with conflicts, either with drivers, software, or bios versions, memory leaks with certain certain configurations-- something like that. But it can't be chalked up to "people with sub-par systems" the way Ohlen does in his comments.

Edited January 14, 2012 by Mannic

[lollie]

If i can run without stop and starting, or i have to make a gigantic circle or backup to make a turn, it's fine.

 

You have extremely low expectations, and would be happy with any old bone.

 

You can't call "running without stop-starting" fine - it's barely playable if you're on edge of worrying about that.

[JonnySiniwali]

This...

 

If bioware was a car manufacturer selling sports cars and 5% or 20k of them were not running as they should. Those owners could get a brand new car/ money under the lemon law.

 

Obviously the number is greater than 5% so bioware has a serious problem. The game must be optimized SOON. As in this month... Or subs will drop off.

 

This isn't some product that will kill people. The vast majority are not having problems, and are enjoying playing. Asking to shut down for all of us just because you can't be bothered to turn down your settings is ridiculous. The world doesn't revolve around you, grow up.

[DarthBiz]

I get about 50 FPS out questing and 30 or so when in heavily populated areas, in 1920x1080.

 

More than smooth enough for me.

[Rheatosa]

Because of this, it might be possible for Bioware to tell you what the average DPS of an Assassin is at level 50, but not what the average FPS of a player is.

 

I do not work at Bioware. I do, however, work elsewhere, where we gather FPS, ping time, location, and assorted other similar metrics every minute. We have a good idea of places that cause issues, what sort of hardware they cause issues on, etc. We know the average, minimum and maximum FPS for every graphics card anyone has ever used. We don't have it on a per-user basis; we also don't need it.

 

I can entirely believe (and, indeed, assume) that Bioware does the same.

[Clova]

You have extremely low expectations, and would be happy with any old bone.

 

You can't call "running without stop-starting" fine - it's barely playable if you're on edge of worrying about that.

 

I personally think its better than having absurdly high expectations. I've also deduced the reason for that being soley my internet connection, as when i got back to my apt my laptop was fine. Not as fast as my deskptop but no laptop is.

 

I dont see the problem in just being happy if something works smoothly, even if its 20 fps below what you think is "bearable". Thus, I'm not gonna yell about FPS problems if i can play smooth.

Edited January 14, 2012 by Clova

[VarKoE]

They aren't monitoring your game play the way you think they are. They are accumulating database information that is going to occur anyway and parsing that data with analytic software. FPS is not a database transaction. It isn't time-stamped. Vendor transactions, combat log information, gear equips/unequips, experience point gains, story choices-- those are all database transactions. FPS is not a database transaction.

 

Bandwidth is never miniscule from the perspective of the server. Information might only require the client to upload 1K per second, but when you have thousands of clients all connected to the same server, the bandwidth becomes significant. Database transactions that can be parsed require no additional bandwidth for either the server or the client. They simply have a parsing system that analyzes the existing database. Because of this, it might be possible for Bioware to tell you what the average DPS of an Assassin is at level 50, but not what the average FPS of a player is.

 

Instance areas are easily monitored, and it is actually pretty insignificant for the client to sum up some experience data and load it back to a data collection server on exit. There most assuredly server side code which monitors instance data ins and outs.

 

That said, if Bioware says it is 5% (I have not read that but assume its true) then within the broad contact of the player base, that is probably right. The question is is that talking about only warzones, or all instances spaces. Also there is two types of lag, client lag would not always be their problem. So they could be excluding issues beyond their control.

 

Anyone here that thinks bioware is running this from the seat of their pants without solid metrics on a broad range of variables just does not understand big dollar business. None of that of course, helps those that are experiencing it.

Edited January 14, 2012 by VarKoE

[LDSkinny]

Wrong......They wanted to acknowledge that people are having issues because obviously with 2000+ pages of horrid FPS posts people obviously/blatantly are having problems. They wanted to keep a very safe number to try and make it seem like this is normal for every MMORPG and that it is nothing new. If anyone truly believes the number is even 15% or lower needs a serious "MC FLY ANYBODY HOME?" tap tap tap on there forehead. "THINK MC FLY THINK!"

 

Your logic would be like going to a town hall where 2000 people have met to discussing how a small section of town isn't getting electricity, then making the declaration that a huge amount of people in town are not getting electricity, and that anyone saying otherwise is clearly believing lies. You see, these are forums. Most people go to forums to find out news about upcoming game changes, find out new strategies about the game, or complain about things not working.

 

If you go to the forums of a game and judge the size of a thread complaining as representative of the size of the problem, you are a complete fool. Bioware has metrics that analyze the performance of every player playing. The 5% are people with unique system combinations that cause the issue. Yes, people having the issue are loud. People who are not having problems don't run around screaming "YEAH! THE GAME IS RUNNING GREAT!" The point is it's a glitch, they're trying to fix it.

 

Honestly, people like you who concoct and/or perpetuate these massive conspiracy theories need a critical thinking class or something. The people complaining in game and the threads on the forum would lead me to believe it is a minor isolated issue, where people with certain computers are having trouble regardless of how potent the machine is. Guess what, that's what BW said is happening. 5% seems much more believable than 15%.

[Shillen]

I do not work at Bioware. I do, however, work elsewhere, where we gather FPS, ping time, location, and assorted other similar metrics every minute. We have a good idea of places that cause issues, what sort of hardware they cause issues on, etc. We know the average, minimum and maximum FPS for every graphics card anyone has ever used. We don't have it on a per-user basis; we also don't need it.

 

I can entirely believe (and, indeed, assume) that Bioware does the same.

 

So you're collecting that information for 1 million + people? It would be stupid for SWTOR to track this stuff. It would massively bog the servers down if they were gathering FPS data from every user.

[Mannic]

I do not work at Bioware. I do, however, work elsewhere, where we gather FPS, ping time, location, and assorted other similar metrics every minute. We have a good idea of places that cause issues, what sort of hardware they cause issues on, etc. We know the average, minimum and maximum FPS for every graphics card anyone has ever used. We don't have it on a per-user basis; we also don't need it.

 

I can entirely believe (and, indeed, assume) that Bioware does the same.

 

I said in an earlier post that Bioware may very well poll for FPS information, but that's not the same as receiving constant FPS numbers for every client out there. Problem being, as I said before, that if you poll my computer, it will tell you I'm at 60 FPS (vsynch enabled) 80% of the time. And since I intentionally avoid areas or move away from areas where I'm getting bad FPS, my own behavior would make it appear that my system has great FPS more than it actually does. And if I'm having steady FPS issues that can only be fixed with a re-start, I re-start, I don't sit there playing at 27 FPS so that Bioware can catch me having bad FPS next time they poll it.

Edited January 14, 2012 by Mannic

[Twaggy]

I've gotta ask the people who say they are lying, how do you know it's more than 5%? How many people would 5% of 350,000 be? Last I check it's 17,500, so that's 17,500 people having performance issues... I'm sorry but that makes perfect sense. I'd say on the forums maybe 700 people tops have complained, and maybe 3x that have made a ticket at least. So when they say 5% of people are having problems. It makes perfect sense to me, flame me if you want. Call me a fanboi, or whatever you call it.

 

But that's how I see it, and anyone who calls Bioware a liar for it... well, I'm sorry you see differently. But I don't see you with any figures to disprove their statement. Atleast back it up with real evidence and not speculation (yes it is speculation before the next person tells me it ain't. You have no proof and only a guess from skim-reading all the threads/posts, that is speculation and not proof.)

 

That's my part said, feel free to get back to being silly and shouting LIARS!

[Rheatosa]

And since I intentionally avoid areas or move away from areas where I'm getting bad FPS, my own behavior would make it appear that my system has great FPS more than it actually does.

 

And that's why we can filter by location.

 

And yes, we collect it for plenty of people. Collecting the data does not mean we have to have a synchronous store into a database, or that we need to keep all of it, or that we have to keep it indefinitely.

Edited January 14, 2012 by Rheatosa

[eadnams]

I actually think it might be alot less than 5% I only know of 2 people having issues and they both need pc upgrades.

 

Yeah, when I did a poll in my guild and in game at the fleet, about 5% or lower came back with fps being 'unplayable'. It's not scientific, but generally I only see fps in fleet complaints on the forum, a lot of them the same people too.

 

Personally, fps on my MacBook Pro drops from 60 (v-sync on/70-100 v-sync off)) in normal play to around 30-50 in fleet, so yes, there is a performance hit (which BW has said they are working on), but its not remotely unplayable on this machine.

 

Thats with Bloom off, and everything else on high, and forcing 2x EQAA+Edge Detect, 1400x852 (not quite full resolution) and LOD bias at -1. I get around 60 fps if I turn off AA, and turn down texture filtering.

 

As many would be eager to point out, a 15 inch MacBook Pro is pretty average for a laptop. This is a quad core i7 with 4 gigs of ram and AMD Radeon HD 6750M w/1024 MB Vram.

 

Nothing special, but it plays the game quite well. Unless you can think of a reason this MacBook Pro would be outperforming equivalently priced systems.

 

Edit: Oh yeah, warzones play as well as PvE gameplay on here.

Edited January 14, 2012 by eadnams

[carrylot]

I do not work at Bioware. I do, however, work elsewhere, where we gather FPS, ping time, location, and assorted other similar metrics every minute. We have a good idea of places that cause issues, what sort of hardware they cause issues on, etc. We know the average, minimum and maximum FPS for every graphics card anyone has ever used. We don't have it on a per-user basis; we also don't need it.

 

I can entirely believe (and, indeed, assume) that Bioware does the same.

 

Ok then tell me why a Radeon HD 6850 1 gig overclocked card can only get 20-30 fps in a warzone. Sorry I don't believe the game is to demanding that my card can't get 40+ fps with settings on low and no shadows/bloom with my resolution lowered. I also have 8 gigs DDR 3 ram, i 5 3.0, Windows 7 64 bit clean install. All drivers up to date and I can run BF3/Deus Ex/Crysis 2/Batman Arkham city all on high perfectly smooth.

[lollie]

I dont see the problem in just being happy

 

The problem is the engine isn't performing up to standard.

 

If everyone just lies there and takes it like a good little slave, then service standards would fall to the worst they can possibly get away with while returning a profit. Something BW has already shown signs of leaning towards.

Edited January 14, 2012 by lollie

[JonnySiniwali]

The specifics haven't been ironed out. In fact, what's really known is that there's no apparent rhyme or reason to the systems having problem.

 

I think it is pretty obvious what most of the problems are. People think their rigs can handle more than they actually can. They also think a game that came out under a month ago is going to be fully optimized for every system configuration out there. Here is a hint: if it isn't running well, turn down your settings. This isn't some great unknown secret lost in the annals of history. Its common freaking sense.

[WarheartZero]

No issues, so I guess i'm in the 95%

[carrylot]

Yeah, when I did a poll in my guild and in game at the fleet, about 5% or lower came back with fps being 'unplayable'. It's not scientific, but generally I only see fps in fleet complaints on the forum, a lot of them the same people too.

 

Personally, fps on my MacBook Pro drops from 60 (v-sync on/70-100 v-sync off)) in normal play to around 30-50 in fleet, so yes, there is a performance hit (which BW has said they are working on), but its not remotely unplayable on this machine.

 

Thats with Bloom off, and everything else on high, and forcing 2x EQAA+Edge Detect, 1400x852 (not quite full resolution) and LOD bias at -1. I get around 60 fps if I turn off AA, and turn down texture filtering.

 

As many would be eager to point out, a 15 inch MacBook Pro is pretty average for a laptop. This is a quad core i7 with 4 gigs of ram and AMD Radeon HD 6750M w/1024 MB Vram.

 

Nothing special, but it plays the game quite well. Unless you can think of a reason this MacBook Pro would be outperforming equivalently priced systems.

 

Ok so I did a poll in my guild and 35 out of 48 people online said the FPS in Warzones/Fleet was not acceptable for the system they were running. Congrats being in a guild with lucky players getting "acceptable" fps. You could of pulled the number out of your rear end also.