Originally posted by SnarkRitter Funny because the game ran like a total ass at it's first launch, and if you're impressed if your game's still running smoothly with 10 people fighting beside you I guess the only other MMORPG you've played is SWTOR.
I am happy to hear that it at least runs smooth at all. The original game just couldn't, period, staring at the ground had performance issues. But I know what you mean, When you compare what Rift can do with 60 people all blowing the hell out of a 200 foot tall Rift event in a huge open world at 85 FPS, then ya its not that impressive.
I promise you, this game beats the hell out of Rift in performance optimization. No other MMO even comes close to this game.
this
rift good engine? Are u kidding me? LOL rift has 1 of the worst engines ever
Sounds like maybe your due for a computer upgrade.
Doesn't matter, Gamebryo which Rift uses is the worst POS engine on the market for MMO's, even HeroEngine is better these days.
My boyfriend who has a 7 year old computer can run this with no lag or skipping, yet TSW, GW2, and numerous other titles give him a bit of lag.
In fact he can even play this game on high settings and doesn't experience that much difficulties when in other games he is forced to turn every little setting to the lowest. TC is right, this game is really optimized well, It amazed me as well.
Everything has it's price, from what I've read the world feels quite a a bit corridor-ish, and bodies of water are just for show because you can't swim. Still that's a significant improvement over 1.0 that deserve quite a bit of credits.
As for GW2, the number of things that GW2 has to track is far higher than the standard the MMORPG: for examples, projectiles are proper projectiles that can be blocked if there's something between it and the target, instead of simply homing in the target after the situation's been calculated, not to mention environmental skills that change the surrounding environment that can be combined with other skills, also GW2 has to track dynamic events chain and adjust them according to the number of players. Also the bodies of water in GW2 are very large, very detailed and fully interactible, the only invisible walls you'll find in GW2 is at the edges the zone. And from what I've seen, GW2's animation is far more fluid than FF XIV ARR, and I mean fluid, not just look good.
As for RIFT and TSW, RIFT's engine was just bad and TSW was made by funcom, I don't think I need to say anything more about that.
Again, it appears you are basing your info off 1.0
Even in this thread, some of the beta-testers feel the same.
Those 'testers' are spouting rubbish. ARR is no more linear than GW2 with large open regions connected by short loading screens. A lot of people have a vendetta against the game for some reason and constantly spout trash talk based on 1.0 to try and put people off trying ARR. Learn to filter the crap, or better yet try it yourself when it goes into open beta.
ARR is not a new version of 1.0, it is a completely remade game, not a single thing remains unchanged from the original launch.
Those 'testers' are spouting rubbish. ARR is no more linear than GW2 with large open regions connected by short loading screens. A lot of people have a vendetta against the game for some reason and constantly spout trash talk based on 1.0 to try and put people off trying ARR. Learn to filter the crap, or better yet try it yourself when it goes into open beta.
ARR is not a new version of 1.0, it is a completely remade game, not a single thing remains unchanged from the original launch.
No, not all of those testers were haters, and I do watch footages of ARR and the game seem corridor-ish to me while GW2's footages have never given me that feeling. And even the most die-hard GW2 haters have never said anything about GW2 being corridor-ish even thought GW2 is a sequel to GW1, a very corridor-ish game.
I of course will try the game when it goes open-beta.
The game does have beautiful atmosphere and design, it does look great graphically. GW2 and Rift have that blurry, messy look while this game looks crisp.
Then again graphics was not the problem this game had anyway since the beginning.
Originally posted by saurus123becouse maps are small with narrow linear paths everywherethis kind of games dont req great pc to run its a open world but with narrow linear and small maps
There's a reason why it's not an amazing open world like WoW.
PS3 memory limitations. It's not an excuse, it's just a technical fact. I'm certain if it wasn't for the console version (not taking a jab at console players), we'd have a lot less loading screens.
SE has stated they're keeping it in-house, but expressed that other developers have expressed huge interest in it.
Originally posted by saurus123becouse maps are small with narrow linear paths everywherethis kind of games dont req great pc to run its a open world but with narrow linear and small maps
There's a reason why it's not an amazing open world like WoW.
PS3 memory limitations. It's not an excuse, it's just a technical fact. I'm certain if it wasn't for the console version (not taking a jab at console players), we'd have a lot less loading screens.
SE has stated they're keeping it in-house, but expressed that other developers have expressed huge interest in it.
[quote]Originally posted by rykim86 [b][quote] Originally posted by Foomerang [b][quote]Originally posted by rykim86[/b]
Originally posted by saurus123becouse maps are small with narrow linear paths everywherethis kind of games dont req great pc to run its a open world but with narrow linear and small maps
There's a reason why it's not an amazing open world like WoW.PS3 memory limitations. It's not an excuse, it's just a technical fact. I'm certain if it wasn't for the console version (not taking a jab at console players), we'd have a lot less loading screens.SE has stated they're keeping it in-house, but expressed that other developers have expressed huge interest in it.That is simply not true.[/quote]The memory limitation aspect?
You should really explain the truth then.[/b][/quote]
You gave wow as an example. WoW can run on a ten year old pc. PS3/360 is multiple times more powerful than a ten year old pc.
Wow, you really are clueless. You don't even have a simple handle on the technical differences between the x86 architecture and the cell the PS3 uses.
Originally posted by rykim86 Wow, you really are clueless. You don't even have a simple handle on the technical differences between the x86 architecture and the cell the PS3 uses. Please just stop.
so first it was the memory and now its the processor? ok
and are you really saying that a PS3 is incapable of running World of Warcraft without having to add loading screens?
How about the fact that I can run across the entire map of Red Dead Redemption without a single loading screen or pause and it is about the same size as Rift's original continent.
so first it was the memory and now its the processor? ok
and are you really saying that a PS3 is incapable of running World of Warcraft without having to add loading screens?
How about the fact that I can run across the entire map of Red Dead Redemption without a single loading screen or pause and it is about the same size as Rift's original continent.
You have absolutely no clue about what you are talking about , don't you? Are you aware that MMORPGs, unlike single player games, require far more calculating-load than single player games(have to account in other players actions which are more complex than AI, plus sending and receiving information packets)? Having a MMORPG with cutting edge graphic while also having a giant seamless world is no longer possible on the PS3,have you ever wondered why SOE didn't port Planetside 2 on the PS3 but the PS4?
Originally posted by SnarkRitter Originally posted by Foomerangso first it was the memory and now its the processor? okand are you really saying that a PS3 is incapable of running World of Warcraft without having to add loading screens? How about the fact that I can run across the entire map of Red Dead Redemption without a single loading screen or pause and it is about the same size as Rift's original continent.
You have absolutely no clue about what you are talking about , don't you? Are you aware that MMORPGs, unlike single player games, require far more calculating-load than single player games(have to account in other players actions which are more complex than AI, plus sending and receiving information packets)? Having a MMORPG with cutting edge graphic while also having a giant seamless world is no longer possible on the PS3,have you ever wondered why SOE didn't port Planetside 2 on the PS3 but the PS4?
And yet Defiance and Dust 514 are on PS3. Final Fantasy XI was on PS2 a decade ago, and Phantasy Star Online was on the Dreamcast when you were 9.
And yet Defiance and Dust 514 are on PS3. Final Fantasy XI was on PS2 a decade ago, and Phantasy Star Online was on the Dreamcast when you were 9.
If you're thinking any of those games are more complex than XIV, you're definitely wrong. Both those games are esentially just a FPS with a few more systems tossed in. That frees up a lot of memory from the processing and graphics bank.
And yes, I'm sure WoW can run on the PS3. But they're are going to have to heavily modify, as in reduce, a lot of aspects. One key aspect they would most certainly lose, which is a staple for that game, is their add-ons. I think by the time I ended up quitting WoW my add=ons alone were running over 150MBs. Definitely more than what the PS3 can spare while running a game.
Originally posted by rykim86 Originally posted by FoomerangAnd yet Defiance and Dust 514 are on PS3. Final Fantasy XI was on PS2 a decade ago, and Phantasy Star Online was on the Dreamcast when you were 9.
If you're thinking any of those games are more complex than XIV, you're definitely wrong. Both those games are esentially just a FPS with a few more systems tossed in. That frees up a lot of memory from the processing and graphics bank.
the "graphics bank"? lol now I know you're trolling me.
And yet Defiance and Dust 514 are on PS3. Final Fantasy XI was on PS2 a decade ago, and Phantasy Star Online was on the Dreamcast when you were 9.
And have you actually played Defiance?Noticed anything? Yeah, small world and the graphic is at best, mediocre. And Dust 514 mapsize is not even in the same league as Planet side 2, at best it's comparable to BF3. FF XI was on PS2 a decade ago, so? FF XI's graphic wasn't cutting edge even by PS2 standard, so was Phantasy Star Online which wasn't a MMO btw.
Originally posted by FoomerangAnd yet Defiance and Dust 514 are on PS3. Final Fantasy XI was on PS2 a decade ago, and Phantasy Star Online was on the Dreamcast when you were 9.
If you're thinking any of those games are more complex than XIV, you're definitely wrong. Both those games are esentially just a FPS with a few more systems tossed in. That frees up a lot of memory from the processing and graphics bank.
the "graphics bank"? lol now I know you're trolling me.
The PS3 has 256MB in its system and 256MB in it's graphic bank...
No, not all of those testers were haters, and I do watch footages of ARR and the game seem corridor-ish to me while GW2's footages have never given me that feeling. And even the most die-hard GW2 haters have never said anything about GW2 being corridor-ish even thought GW2 is a sequel to GW1, a very corridor-ish game.
I of course will try the game when it goes open-beta.
I'll gladly spare a key if you'd like to try it in this beta still.
Also, as an avid GW2 player (and before that WoW, Aion, TERA, GW, TSW, RO, Lineage 2, whatever) I must say that GW2 world's openness is leagues above FFXIV world's one. It is a complete joy for me to wander about in Tyria, exploring and going where the wind takes me (usually chasing dynamic events around like an ADD-ridden kid).
Truth be told, even WoW doesn't give me that feeling anymore when hopping around (despite having flying mounts and larger areas, while on the ground it doesn't feel as explorable for some reason - might be gamer's sickness as I played WoW for 6 years).
I actually am enjoying FFXIV, but I'd be damned if I don't miss decent jumps (ARR jumps feel clunky) and better explorable areas (why can't I just jump into the river, or fall off that bridge? maaaaaaaaan).
Not having unrealistic expectations here since I know the game wasn't made with swimming in mind, and Z-axis movement (jumping, etc) feels like it was glued onto the engine, so I think it's good for what it is.
I don't know what kind of engine, but one thing i know, my computer never ran anything smoother. I have no issues.
And let me tell you i have windows 8, and this shit is the worst, and every game i play LOL, Neverwinter, Gw2, anything, i have issues with, and it crash from time to time. And FF:XIV, in its beta state never crashed, and is running without any hickup
Originally posted by QSatu I am asking b/c I'm incredibly impressed by it. It not only looks amazing but it runs so smooth. Even when i have like 10 players on screen during boss battles with particle effects it runs quite amazing. I don't know how they achieved that but damn Square.. I'm impressed. the only things I don't like are water and sometimes grass/shrubs/plants look very out of place in some areas.
Just want to say that graphic quality of the new version is inferior to the old one.
Lower Load = Increased performance.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I'll gladly spare a key if you'd like to try it in this beta still.
Thank you for your good will but weekend's almost ended and by the time I'm done downloading I'd have only a few hours left so I guess I'll just wait for the next beta.
I don't know what kind of engine, but one thing i know, my computer never ran anything smoother. I have no issues.
And let me tell you i have windows 8, and this shit is the worst, and every game i play LOL, Neverwinter, Gw2, anything, i have issues with, and it crash from time to time. And FF:XIV, in its beta state never crashed, and is running without any hickup
I've been using Windows 8 since RC and I've never had such problems. In fact, so far it's been more stable than every installation of 7 I've done. I don't recall LoL or GW2 crashes since their betas (I still had W7 then), and Neverwinter never crashed for me. So far it's been all good in 4 very different computers, so if you're crashing you should investigate the matter further.
I agree that the engine they're using is very smooth though, and the graphics are enjoyable.
Originally posted by SnarkRitter
Originally posted by srps
I'll gladly spare a key if you'd like to try it in this beta still.
Thank you for your good will but weekend's almost ended and by the time I'm done downloading I'd have only a few hours left so I guess I'll just wait for the next beta.
Ah well, a pity. Should've said so earlier then :P
Keys are still for grabs if people want them though.
Comments
Doesn't matter, Gamebryo which Rift uses is the worst POS engine on the market for MMO's, even HeroEngine is better these days.
corridirish wtf?
Those 'testers' are spouting rubbish. ARR is no more linear than GW2 with large open regions connected by short loading screens. A lot of people have a vendetta against the game for some reason and constantly spout trash talk based on 1.0 to try and put people off trying ARR. Learn to filter the crap, or better yet try it yourself when it goes into open beta.
ARR is not a new version of 1.0, it is a completely remade game, not a single thing remains unchanged from the original launch.
No, not all of those testers were haters, and I do watch footages of ARR and the game seem corridor-ish to me while GW2's footages have never given me that feeling. And even the most die-hard GW2 haters have never said anything about GW2 being corridor-ish even thought GW2 is a sequel to GW1, a very corridor-ish game.
I of course will try the game when it goes open-beta.
The game does have beautiful atmosphere and design, it does look great graphically. GW2 and Rift have that blurry, messy look while this game looks crisp.
Then again graphics was not the problem this game had anyway since the beginning.
That is simply not true.
The memory limitation aspect?
You should really explain the truth then.
You gave wow as an example. WoW can run on a ten year old pc. PS3/360 is multiple times more powerful than a ten year old pc.
Wow, you really are clueless. You don't even have a simple handle on the technical differences between the x86 architecture and the cell the PS3 uses.
Please just stop.
so first it was the memory and now its the processor? ok
and are you really saying that a PS3 is incapable of running World of Warcraft without having to add loading screens?
How about the fact that I can run across the entire map of Red Dead Redemption without a single loading screen or pause and it is about the same size as Rift's original continent.
You have absolutely no clue about what you are talking about , don't you? Are you aware that MMORPGs, unlike single player games, require far more calculating-load than single player games(have to account in other players actions which are more complex than AI, plus sending and receiving information packets)? Having a MMORPG with cutting edge graphic while also having a giant seamless world is no longer possible on the PS3,have you ever wondered why SOE didn't port Planetside 2 on the PS3 but the PS4?
You have absolutely no clue about what you are talking about , don't you? Are you aware that MMORPGs, unlike single player games, require far more calculating-load than single player games(have to account in other players actions which are more complex than AI, plus sending and receiving information packets)? Having a MMORPG with cutting edge graphic while also having a giant seamless world is no longer possible on the PS3,have you ever wondered why SOE didn't port Planetside 2 on the PS3 but the PS4?
And yet Defiance and Dust 514 are on PS3. Final Fantasy XI was on PS2 a decade ago, and Phantasy Star Online was on the Dreamcast when you were 9.
If you're thinking any of those games are more complex than XIV, you're definitely wrong. Both those games are esentially just a FPS with a few more systems tossed in. That frees up a lot of memory from the processing and graphics bank.
And yes, I'm sure WoW can run on the PS3. But they're are going to have to heavily modify, as in reduce, a lot of aspects. One key aspect they would most certainly lose, which is a staple for that game, is their add-ons. I think by the time I ended up quitting WoW my add=ons alone were running over 150MBs. Definitely more than what the PS3 can spare while running a game.
the "graphics bank"? lol now I know you're trolling me.
And have you actually played Defiance?Noticed anything? Yeah, small world and the graphic is at best, mediocre. And Dust 514 mapsize is not even in the same league as Planet side 2, at best it's comparable to BF3. FF XI was on PS2 a decade ago, so? FF XI's graphic wasn't cutting edge even by PS2 standard, so was Phantasy Star Online which wasn't a MMO btw.
The PS3 has 256MB in its system and 256MB in it's graphic bank...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_bank
Please, just read up on some basic technical terms.
I'll gladly spare a key if you'd like to try it in this beta still.
Also, as an avid GW2 player (and before that WoW, Aion, TERA, GW, TSW, RO, Lineage 2, whatever) I must say that GW2 world's openness is leagues above FFXIV world's one. It is a complete joy for me to wander about in Tyria, exploring and going where the wind takes me (usually chasing dynamic events around like an ADD-ridden kid).
Truth be told, even WoW doesn't give me that feeling anymore when hopping around (despite having flying mounts and larger areas, while on the ground it doesn't feel as explorable for some reason - might be gamer's sickness as I played WoW for 6 years).
I actually am enjoying FFXIV, but I'd be damned if I don't miss decent jumps (ARR jumps feel clunky) and better explorable areas (why can't I just jump into the river, or fall off that bridge? maaaaaaaaan).
Not having unrealistic expectations here since I know the game wasn't made with swimming in mind, and Z-axis movement (jumping, etc) feels like it was glued onto the engine, so I think it's good for what it is.
I don't know what kind of engine, but one thing i know, my computer never ran anything smoother. I have no issues.
And let me tell you i have windows 8, and this shit is the worst, and every game i play LOL, Neverwinter, Gw2, anything, i have issues with, and it crash from time to time. And FF:XIV, in its beta state never crashed, and is running without any hickup
Just want to say that graphic quality of the new version is inferior to the old one.
Lower Load = Increased performance.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Thank you for your good will but weekend's almost ended and by the time I'm done downloading I'd have only a few hours left so I guess I'll just wait for the next beta.
I've been using Windows 8 since RC and I've never had such problems. In fact, so far it's been more stable than every installation of 7 I've done. I don't recall LoL or GW2 crashes since their betas (I still had W7 then), and Neverwinter never crashed for me. So far it's been all good in 4 very different computers, so if you're crashing you should investigate the matter further.
I agree that the engine they're using is very smooth though, and the graphics are enjoyable.
Ah well, a pity. Should've said so earlier then :P
Keys are still for grabs if people want them though.