My Only Problem with TOR (but it's a breaker)

[amnie]

that whole 'has to be plugged in' seems pretty normal to me. I had to do that on my laptop for LOTRO and FFXIV aswell (the only other MMOs I tried with it)

 

it's pretty much a no-brainer for me. why would I run a game on batteries to begin with? I don't want to play for 10 minutes

[Syylara]

WoW is like 8 YEARS OLD! It gets some graphics updates with expansions but it's still an 8-year-old game. Why is it so inconceivable that your computer could run WoW and not TOR?

 

WoW has the option of utilizing DirectX 11.

 

TOR uses DirectX 9 only.

 

WoW allows you to display the high-resolution textures in normal gameplay.

 

TOR only allows you to see high-resolution textures in cut-scenes with players not in your group removed from view.

 

So the real question is why does an 8 YEAR OLD (as you put it) game have higher graphics options and better performance?

 

I played WoW for about 2 years but that was a good 3-4 years ago, so no I'm not interested in going back. I just think this is a very relevant question to ask.

[sinsur]

Well, after restoring her computer to factory settings, running nothing but TOR, with all settings optimized for it, it still runs like crap.

 

Good game.

 

Bad engine.

And the Specs of that Laptop are? It barely meets the requirements and you wonder it runs like crap?

If you want a laptop thats good with games you have to put that money on the table or you will have a portable office.

 

 

Do not compare games. If one game runs well...great...does not automaticaly run another one great.

 

Make sure your system is clean, dust free.

No illegal software with virus cracks and tojan stuff if you are not sure because your a torrentuser do reinstall windows and start from scratch befor you ask.

 

Are you an overclocker or did you tweak your hardware in any way? This is not what developers test with. Bring your system to standard settings.

Did you ever tweak arround with forcing aa or anisotropic filtering in the drivers? Undo that.

Do not expect great performance on a machine that runs World of Warcraft with 30-40 fps.

[aeterno]

I have 2PCs.

 

One is a i52500k/560ti/8BG that runs the game like a dream.

 

The other is a e6400/hd4850/3GB that runs it, but takes a beating in certain scenarios. I don't PvP or do raids on that rig cos FPS constantly flirts with teens in those scenarios and it just isnt fun. Ran WoW on ultra tho.

 

Used to have only 2gb ram and it was horrible, slapped in another gig I had laying around and it immediately improved somewhat.

 

I'm not surprised nor irked about it personally. No offense, but if you don't see the differences that make TOR graphically more demanding than WoW then you're a medical miracle cos you're gaming while blind as a bat.

 

Thats the nature of the world. Hardware power increases, software follows. WoW is an old game and like TOR the engine foundations were even older. It's no hardware benchmark, not in a long shot.

 

I also call serious shenanigans that a laptop having major issues with TOR would run Skyrim and Witcher 2 on max settings well.

Edited January 23, 2012 by aeterno

[sinsur]

WoW has the option of utilizing DirectX 11.

 

 

 

Heres your DX11 Water with maxed out Grafics in WoW.

 

TOR uses DirectX 9 only.

The DX Number does not say the lower number will run better.

Actualy 9/10 people cant say the differences between dx9 and 10.

The truth is DX 9 was revolution. 10 and 11 bin nothing special.

 

 

WoW allows you to display the high-resolution textures in normal gameplay.

TOR only allows you to see high-resolution textures in cut-scenes with players not in your group removed from view.

 

Dev Answer on this was: They cant controll the number of players outside of cutscenes and thats why the details are lower outside of cutscenes.

 

Also the Highres in WoW is the Lowres of SWTOR but nvm.

 

So the real question is why does an 8 YEAR OLD (as you put it) game have higher graphics options and better performance?

 

WoW does not have higher details and better performance. I mean look at it one character in SWTOR has as mutch polygones as a whole city in World of Warcraft.

[Aisar]

Regardless of what the minimum requirements say on the box I have found you need quite a nice system to run the game with everything maxed and still get 60 or more FPS everywhere. I don't know exactly what is good enough for this because I can't get my hands on components that nice.

 

However I did just upgrade from a 2 core to a i5 2500 and from 6mb ddr2 ram to 8mb dd3. the motherboard is new, replaced my power with a 700 watt supply, greatly increased the cooling efficiency over what i had before..and i have my radeon 5770 overclocked.

 

here is a quick list of that

 

Intel i5-2500K 3.30GHz (4 CPUs)

8192MB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 5700 overclocked to 850/1200 MHz

at 1600x900 resolution

 

That is my new system, the important bits anyway. so with that in mind, I get about 30-60 FPS on the Fleet with everything maxed but shadows off and AA on low. It varies depending on time of day, how many people are around, and where exactly I am on the fleet. On planets it is a lot better, I can have everything completely maxed and turned on and get 40-60 FPS. I usually keep shadows off all the time though, regardless of where I am at. I just don't think the FPS loss is worth it.

 

So..keeping everything I have said in mind, I am assuming (yep dumb I know) that the OP must either have a dual-core like system, with the kind of hardware and capabilities that the typical dual-core system may have. Or he does not have his hardware (mainly his graphical type settings) optimized correctly.

 

Now, if the OP has a 4 core with something like my Radeon HD 5770 (which is a medium performance card, nowhere near great at all but it does the job) and the OP has at least 6MB DD3 RAM and he is STILL having problems, then I think we might have a discussion.

 

But we can't get any farther at this point because we don't know enough about the OP's situation.

Edited January 23, 2012 by Aisar

[Aisar]

Keep in mind I only posted that for comparison purposes. Personally I upgraded for this game and the fact that I still have insane FPS loss at random times and always at certain places or just constant lower than expected FPS on Fleet is quite..yeah.

 

This topic has been one of my obsessions for a couple weeks now.

[calranthe]

I feel sorry for those who for whatever reason can not get this to work, not like the op hates the game or anyhing he just wants to be able to play without these performance issues.

 

But..

 

I run this game on three pc's, like you I play it with my other half (wife), you can not compare wow to this engine or even skyrim as most people have said, it is impossible and makes you look dumb and for the record I hated wow's graphics find these alot better.

 

Now my pc

I5 2500k, asus mb, windows 7, ATI 6980, 2tb hd, 8gb ram, nothing overclocked simply because it does not need it yet, no noticable stuttering or lag anywhere in game either fleet or planets, spent last night roleplaying in the cantina on Naashadaa 20 people in the room, no stutter no lag

(1920*1080 resolution every setting maxed)

Wifes pc about the same but an nvidia 560Ti no problems for her either.

 

Media pc is a q6600 intel, asus mb 4gb ram and a 470gtx (vista) slight and I do mean slight stuttering in really crowded places.

 

In any thread like this you will be called a troll if you refuse to post a pc's spec's you may say that is not the point of the thread but it allows people to corelate with there system.

 

I trully believe this is a config or hardware issue because otherwise it would affect everyone, some driver or hardware config or a few is just causing massive problems for some people, posting your complete specs helps people.

 

Yes the engine is not the best but there is alot of people in game playing on everything from AMD to old Q6600's and getting none of your issues.

[Ignotis]

30-55 fps in the open world with my 9800 GTX and overclocked amd dual core

 

10-15 fps in a small 15 vs 15 enclosed warzone...

 

Saying this game is poorly optimized is a understatement. It's garbage.

 

It's a shame too, because I enjoy the game but the engine is keeping me from enjoying it.

[trublmaker]

Macpro here, works fine all on high.

 

Same...

 

I'm using a 4-year-old Mac Pro and it works fine with everything on high.

[RocNessMonster]

My 386 machine runs the game at .25 fps. I don't complain.

[DukeP]

This engine is REALLY bad for laptops due to its single threaded approach.

 

THis engine needs an old but high GHz CPU.

 

Laptops usually have low GHz cpu's with more cores and more threads, since this reduces heat as well as power.

 

 

Basically: This engine really sucks, as is.

 

~~DukeP~~

[jarjarloves]

WoW has the option of utilizing DirectX 11.

 

TOR uses DirectX 9 only.

 

WoW allows you to display the high-resolution textures in normal gameplay.

 

TOR only allows you to see high-resolution textures in cut-scenes with players not in your group removed from view.

 

So the real question is why does an 8 YEAR OLD (as you put it) game have higher graphics options and better performance?

 

I played WoW for about 2 years but that was a good 3-4 years ago, so no I'm not interested in going back. I just think this is a very relevant question to ask.

 

that's easy. That's because for the past 8 years it has been refined. When WoW launched it was in horrilbe shape and had worse bugs then SWTOR.

 

However Bioware has been doing an excellent job with fixing the bugs so far and addressing the issues people have had.

[Dharst]

I hear SWTOR will only use DX9.0; while most of the MMOs today can DX11 compatible.

 

Makes a huge difference.

[Dharst]

that's easy. That's because for the past 8 years it has been refined. When WoW launched it was in horrilbe shape and had worse bugs then SWTOR.

 

However Bioware has been doing an excellent job with fixing the bugs so far and addressing the issues people have had.

 

Great Point- however I'm not going to stick around for years waiting for SWTOR to update their code to today's standards. DX9 is... pathetically old for a game who 'thinks' it can contend with Wow.

[Anagnostis]

BioWare's trying to cover it up. They admit it exists but they only say that 1 in 20 people suffer the issue, it's more like almost 1/2 of the playerbase. I get it too.

[_Flin_]

She isnt overclocking, we checked her energy settings - she keeps it plugged in and has the settings to high usage. She is running a cooler board, so it stays chill. Our drivers are up-to-date.

 

Have you tried running it in windowed mode? Helps with some people.

 

I am actually rather disappointed with the performance as well, I run a 12 GB 1333 ddr3 RAM i5-750 with an ok graphics card (gtx260 similar benchmarks), and even on low settings I get lags of 4 fps on fleet. Windowed mode helped me with a few things, like being able to load a planet in the background.

 

However, I run 1920x1080. Which is high. Might work better on lower resolution.

Edited January 23, 2012 by _Flin_

[daddymoofle]

My computer is HARDLY top of the line...

 

 

• Processor: AMD Phenom II X2 560 3.30GHz
  
• RAM: 8.00 GB
  
• O/S: 64-Bit Windows 7 Home Premium
  
• Video: ATI Radeon HD 5700 1GB
  
• HDD: Western Digital WD5000 7200RPM
  

 

 

I run everything on full, and only dip below 40FPS in PVP (and on the fleet when there's 100 people standing at the PVP terminal at the same time); and when the game decides to spike latency up over 45000MS for a few seconds, randomly. Only issue I have is the occasional 3-5 minute load screen when entering a new planet, or coming back from PVP to a place other than the fleet.

Edited January 23, 2012 by daddymoofle

[Syylara]

Heres your DX11 Water with maxed out Grafics in WoW.

 

Thanks for pointing out the added fact that you can't swim in this game, nor is there realy much in the way of water more than a foot and a half deep at all.

 

The DX Number does not say the lower number will run better.

Actualy 9/10 people cant say the differences between dx9 and 10.

The truth is DX 9 was revolution. 10 and 11 bin nothing special.

 

While I agree the visual increases have been rather incremental, the major benefit of DX10/11 have been in efficiency and performance.

 

Dev Answer on this was: They cant controll the number of players outside of cutscenes and thats why the details are lower outside of cutscenes.

 

Yes, I'm aware of the developer's non-sequitur "response" to this issue. So those of us who have machines that *are* capable of handling the load have our option to engage it taken away.

 

Also the Highres in WoW is the Lowres of SWTOR but nvm.

 

WoW does not have higher details and better performance. I mean look at it one character in SWTOR has as mutch polygones as a whole city in World of Warcraft.

 

Polygons and texture resolution are two entirely different issues, thanks for conflating them.

 

The detail level of the textures available in WoW gameplay (where the same supposed "issue" of "not being able to control the number of players on screen" exists) is every bit as sharp as those in TOR cutscenes.

 

People act like they've never seen a level of detail slider or an engine that automatically scales back detail level at different ranges or under heavy loads.

 

They cut corners, that's the long and short of it. I'm not saying I quit, I'm not asking for anyone to be fired, I'm not saying it is the end of the world.

 

Now, can you be just as fair and admit that there is some room here for valid criticism?

[daddymoofle]

I just don't get what the big deal is. Is it that you can't turn Mako in to virutal **** because she has too many jaggies on her shoulders... or...?

[Elyons]

So, I played The Old Republic in beta, and when the game was released, we bought two copies - one for myself and one for my girlfriend. My computer is slightly higher end than her laptop, but both meet the requirements for the game handily. Both our PC and laptop will easily play other MMO games on the highest settings. My PC handles Skyrim on the highest settings quite nicely.

 

This game, however, runs them both into the ground. On my computer, I can get the game to run with only minor occasional video lag if I turn the shadows off and turn the game down to medium on all settings but character model, which I can leave set to high.

 

Her laptop, however, despite easily over-meeting the requirements, just sucks with this game. She has it set to all low settings, and suffers horrible video lag, sometimes including complete freezing for minutes at a time, and some level of video lag at all times, even when she is alone in an instance. Just now, she joined her first ever group, only to have her game freeze, and to miss a storyline component. She is so frustrated and upset at this point by this that we're BOTH wishing we hadn't bought the game, because we can't play together.

 

She constantly also plays World of Warcraft (I dont play it, she does) on this same laptop with all the settings turned up and in areas with 50+ people running around. She raids on it, again, running tons of mods and with settings turned up - with no issues.

 

So, while she sits and curses and keeps trying to play (because she loves the game itself and was really looking forward to playing it with me) and gets frustrated almost to the point of tears, I thought I'd take a minute to ask here if anyone knows WHY this game eats resources like a hog. It doesn't look much better than most MMOs out there, and it certainly doesn't look as good as some of the higher end games available that both of our computers run just fine.

 

So why can't I run it on top settings? Why can't she play it effectively AT ALL on a laptop that runs every other game we've tried on it just fine? Why do about half the people I know have these same problems?

 

Either Bioware needs to fix something, or they need to change the system requirements for the game to be MUCH, much higher than they currently are. Right now my girlfriend is feeling like she wasted $60 - we aren't rich. And feeling even more letdown that her and I won't be able to play together if something doesn't change, soon.

 

We both love the game, don't get me wrong. But this is a dealbreaker for her, and for me through her. We've been following the game since it was announced, and were both terribly excited. In beta, I didn't have many problems. Still couldn't run EVERYTHING on high, which is ridiculous considering how good my machine is, but it was ok. But this? Just stupid.

 

 

To be honest BW minimum requirements are screwed. You need a very powerful laptop to run this game smoothly, why I do not know, but you do.

[Hauvarn]

BioWare's trying to cover it up. They admit it exists but they only say that 1 in 20 people suffer the issue, it's more like almost 1/2 of the playerbase. I get it too.

 

It's actually 3/4 you, the op, and ops girlfriend!!!!!

[ZETHRA]

My 386 machine runs the game at .25 fps. I don't complain.

 

lol

 

From DxDiag:

 

Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

System Manufacturer: ASUSTeK Computer Inc.

System Model: G73Jh

BIOS: BIOS Date: 10/30/09 15:13:23 Ver: 08.00.10

Processor: Intel® Core i7 CPU Q 740 @ 1.73GHz (8 CPUs), ~1.7GHz

Memory: 8192MB RAM

 

Card name: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5870

Manufacturer: ATI Technologies Inc.

DAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz)

Display Memory: 4079 MB

Dedicated Memory: 1012 MB

Shared Memory: 3067 MB

Current Mode: 1600 x 900 (32 bit) (60Hz)

 

No issues except lag when initially loading a heavy populated zone, but once loaded no problems. Did have to turn off vertsync, but all other settings are on max.

 

Typical:

30-60 fps

20-50 lat

Edited January 23, 2012 by ZETHRA

[Drewser]

Because I don't want to take the focus off of the problem and have it redirected onto our machines. I have told you what they run just fine, and that they meet the requirements for this game as set out by Bioware. They are better than the requirements listed, easily.

 

If it's a problem with our machines, it's still Bioware's problem, because -they- listed the requirements, they made the game the way it is where it eats peoples' machines alive even if they meet or exceed those requirements.

 

There is NO way this game should require more to run than numerous other MMOs with equal or superior graphics. There is no way this game should require more from the video card than Skyrim.

 

I've seen enough of the forums to know how MANY people here handle criticism directed at this game, and I'm not having it here. The issue isn't my machine, nor hers. If it was, we wouldn't be able to play HALF of what we play on both of them with zero issues.

 

So if the issue is not your machines, why do so many other people, including myself, run it with no issues at all?

[urborror]

Don't know why no one's saying it, since it's the single most effective thing Bioware could do:

 

If the engine coding is whacked and low-framerate-y beyond easy repair, how hard is it to implement 640 resolution?

 

I played Mass Effect 2, Fallout 3, Skyrim and Call of Duty in 640 resolution (not exactly unheard of for a AAA game to offer it in 2012)--and those games run 30% smoother--at least--than they would at 800x600.