Frostvein Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) Welcome to the world of PC gamers. They think they HAVE TO have 60 frames on max settings for the game to be playable. And they will make you feel bad for thinking otherwise. If you have 1500 or more invested in a machine within roughly the last 6 months (longer if the price goes up) 30-40 FPS on max settings is not acceptable and I completely agree. People with I7's, 16g's of RAM and high end GFX cards should not be struggling to run this game, yet they are. Edited January 20, 2012 by Frostvein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nighthawked Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 If you have 1500 or more invested in a machine within roughly the last 6 months (longer if the price goes up) 30-40 FPS on max settings is not acceptable and I completely agree. People with I7's, 16g's of RAM and high end GFX cards should not be struggling to run this game, yet they are. I said it before, and I will say it again. It could very well be a driver issue. The same thing happened to me with WoW when I got a brand new computer with ATI 5800 series. I could play pretty much every other game at max, but I had to play WoW on low and still get 15 FPS in some areas. Not to mention, I also received texture-less objects in that game at the same time. Things like tents were just pure green, they had no texture. It was all fixed when AMD released the new drivers. As a developer, dealing with FPS issues can sometimes take MONTHS to fix. You have to get a list of specs, replicate the issue, and be in contact with ATI and nVidia about it. And if they CANNOT replicate it, it could be something else is wrong with that particular system. How is it person A and B have the exact same setup, but only A lags? So is it Norton? Flash (which BTW kills every game's FPS for me)? Something else on that specific system? It takes MONTHS to get everything fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nevetss Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 You know the simplest way for them to fix this fps issue would probably be view distance you cannot change ingame or any other way that I am aware of. Most other mmo's do have this option to change it would be nice to have but I have pretty cheap video card AMD 6450 with an i5 core 4gigs RAM and running 25-50 fps ultra all cept shadows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiennen Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) LOL ignorance isnt good. Yeah thats good for a system like that. Minimum requirements just means it will start it could be 1 fps for all its worth but it starts on it. Its a massive world he is rendering. 30-40 is good. 30-40 is definitely good, especially if it never drops below that. i would say anything below 30 is....not good. that being said, my 4-year old gaming rig runs the game at over 100 fps right now. ive noticed that i got a jump in fps (from 60 to 100) when i turned AA on and set it to high. edit: SPECS: AMD Phenom II X4 8 gigs DDR3 Nvidia GeForce 9800 GTX+ The rig itself is 4 years old, but I've piecemeal'ed upgrades throughout the years. Edited January 20, 2012 by tiennen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegimble Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Hey. it 2500k 3.7 (overlocked) 8g ram Geforce 560ti Yeaah, i get worse FPS on this game than BF3, BUT IF the hero engine lets them churn out raids like a simple google search says it does, its worth it. Just my 2 cents. I ave the same processor and ram amount as you, though i have not over clocked. I use an ATI 6950 2gb which is in the same class as your processor and i have no fps issues have a bit of a drop when in a very acive area but nothing major. It seems that there is a problem with some 560 and 580 cards. I hope nividia sorts it out as for once its not a bioware problem but rather a driver issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthQube Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 But a bioware employee said its only the low end PC's having FPS problems? i'm confused :S i have a decent rig , not a end game thing at all , an di run at average of 45-50 fps in wz and 90 ish in open world.....i dont get it either ( amd Phenom x4 @3.2 , 8g ddr and a HD 5670 1g , win 7 64 bit and all drivers up to date ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerhowse Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I turned shadows to low and on my 2500k with a 5770 I get 90-110 + out of the fleet. In the fleet I get 30-50 fps. In ATI CCC I am forcing x4 aa and x8 AF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXcronicXx Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) It's not worth it. I have an i7 920 @ 4.1 ghz + SSD + SLI 580 GTX x2 + 12 gb DDR3 RAM and I still drop to ~30 fps in warzones, raids and Ilum. Their engine is horrible. sounds allmost like wow... 25 man raids drop to the 30s large scale pvp huge FPS drop soo WZ when about 30 people go at it in one spot you QQ about 30 FPS. how is that any different then WoW 25 man raids ?? or 30+ people PvPing in wow ? i5 2500k @ 4.2 GTX 570 8 gigs ram Edited January 20, 2012 by xXcronicXx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FurQue Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 i7 @ 4.4, 8gigs ram, GTX590 Turned everything down to minimum, still only getting 15 fps in Ilum, 110 everywhere else, except carrick station, where is anywhere between 20 and 110. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fohox Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 There are enough posts about game performance that it should be obvious its a legit issue. If you don't personally have any issues that's geat. But don't insult the intelligence of people who are having issues and just assume their doing something wrong. I have pretty decent rig (i5 2500k, 2x 6850, 8GB Ram, Intel SSD) and can get 100 FPS one second and drop to below 40 FPS the next with no obvious explanation. This is a problem with the game engine. If playing under 40 FPS is OK for you that's fine but a lot of us are use to playing over 60 FPS so anything lower than that feels sluggish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXcronicXx Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I turned shadows to low and on my 2500k with a 5770 I get 90-110 + out of the fleet. In the fleet I get 30-50 fps. In ATI CCC I am forcing x4 aa and x8 AF. in WoW prime time at the AH in SW / ORG i get drops to the 40s... i5 2500k @ 4.2 GTX 570 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrevan Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) On a laptop here with Radeon 6970 and running TOR maxed out (except for AA) in 1080p smooth as a shaved ewok's butt. but yeah, their engine could use some polishing for low to mid machines (and even some high-end configs) cause I was able to run WoW maxed out in 1080p on my older machine (a 5450) while TOR struggled to keep up 30 FPS at 720p with everything set to low Edited January 20, 2012 by Wrevan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulofice Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 LOL ignorance isnt good. Yeah thats good for a system like that. Minimum requirements just means it will start it could be 1 fps for all its worth but it starts on it. Its a massive world he is rendering. 30-40 is good. LOL ignorance is saying min means you can run the game at 1 fps. min req means the base line to play the game at lowest setings. But you can still play you can not play at 1 fps to say it means you can load the game is wrong. No one ever looks at a box and says oh I got min req well I will buy it so I can load it to look at it:eek: that pc is recamended req. I dont have issues but I know for a fact not every one can have a leet rig and dont think its right the box says this but my friends who meet rec req cant play for low fps if you think its ok then you are out of touch with the gameing communtiy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zezel Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 Hey. it 2500k 3.7 (overlocked) 8g ram Geforce 560ti Yeaah, i get worse FPS on this game than BF3, BUT IF the hero engine lets them churn out raids like a simple google search says it does, its worth it. Just my 2 cents. I heard low FPS also doubles time to clear content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts