Optimize, but don't nerf the graphics for ancient comps

[AquaticPenguin]

IT all comes down to some textures that has gone wrong such as korengal when there was a badly placed texture.

I think zimmer here is on the right line, I think it's more likely that the performance problems are down to a dodgy static or recklessly oversized texture. The slightly larger view distances should not be having such a dramatic effect on performance which leads me to believe it is to do with something else - modern graphics cards should be able to handle the small increase in draw calls no problem. Kind of like the glitch on korengal where it was a stupidly big texture causing juddery play.

[Feriluce]

True, but find a 4km vanilla map with high quality textures, 1000m view distance, over 9000 trees and overall more content.

By the game I played 2 days ago I'm not talking about bf2, but PR v0.87.

[Cassius]

Well we will have to see how many people are actually affected. Those who like me have a dated grafic card will just have to set their textures to medium. With more processing power becoming avaiable to the consumer the devs are going to want to have things like Kashan with towns and trees as seen in Silent strike. (silent eagle ? Eagle strike ? I forgot)

After a month or so, if the devs find nothing to fix, maybe a poll for 0.9 is called for to see what settings the community is using. If 60% run on high the rest of us will have to hold out for better grafic cards, if a minority runs on high the devs might consider holding off even more taxing maps in future releases untill more systems are fittet with better grafic cards.

Fermi will be coming out soon. Lets see where the latest Radeons will be headed pricewise then.

Personally I would love it to have an Xbox360 for 200€ where I can hook up a keyboard and mouse and connect it all over a switch to my computer and be done with it, but frankly I doubt an xbox would be able to run games like ARMA II or PR due to memory limitations.

Modern warfare looked awesome but I do not think it had 4X4 KM maps.

[PlaynCool]

I know I sound like an A'hole, but come on! I didn't spend $400 on a video card to run vanilla BF2!
?

Then go and play Crysis, and all the new games, for the old game that Bf2 is, the current PR performance is too much.I for one don't see the reason for the big view distances in maps only with infantry, and Apc's, 3km view distance is too much, you will only see a pixel representing the soldier in the far.The draw distances are just a pain in the a** for older processors.And as it looks like most of the players are having trouble running the new maps including me and i have a 8800Gt which should be more than enough to dominate Bf2.

[Z-trooper]

I can assure you that we optimize everything we can. We are not sloppy with our polys or texture sizes or code. In fact we spend a hell of a lot of time doing this. Time on stuff that will never be seen, only felt.

That being said, we are working to sort out any performance related issues.

[rofflesnlols]

I get 30fps and under on most maps. Gaza is literally unplayable for me, along with Fallujah. I have a reasonable graphics card but my processor is five years old. I always turn anti-aliasing off. I get good connections but lag because of all the above.

You know what, I just don't care - I still play the game I've been playing since .3, I still have brilliant rounds with friends and pubbers. I agree with the OP whole heartedly, don't nerf the graphics for the sake of nubs like me (I'm sure you wont though). Push the bf2 engine to it's limits and then back again.

I'll upgrade when I can no longer play PR because I'm getting 5fps on all maps, my computer starts smoking and my monitor is leaking plasma. For now - It'll do!

[ZZEZ]

I have a geforce 8200, a triple core processor, and 3gb of RAM - and I just spent LITERALLY an hour trying to get onto a game that worked, then I gave up.

Also the game is 5 years old, so a computer bought four years ago should be able to run it.

Sorry buddy, but geforce 8200 is really trash..onboard graphic cards don't fit in to gaming..your amount of ram and cpu cores is useless if your graphic lacks horsepower.
The game is 5 years old correct but all the weapons and models were made in modern standards with far higher view distances and draw ranges then vBF2, its unacceptable to demand that a 4 or 5 years old will run PR perfectly smooth on high graphics when we continue advancing graphically.

I have 3 computers in my house:
1)Q6600[2.6ghz quad core], 4gig ram and 4870 1gig ram.
2)E6300[1.86ghz dual core], 4gig ram and 8800GT 512 ram
3)Laptop - 2ghz dual core, 3gig ram and 8600GS 512 ram

All of them currently run PR fully maxxed out at 1440x900/1280x1024 and its playable on all of them, sure I get frame drops on heavy maps like Gaza and Fallujah to roughly 25-30 but its playable and if it really bothered me I would have reduced the AA to give me more FPS.

Yea currently there are performance issues and the team is trying its best to solve them so calm down

[Herbiie]

but geforce 8200 is really trash..

Yes I know, but if you read my earlier post I spent what little I have on my PC that can just about run PR - and now it can't. How do you think I feel when people just start saying "You need a better PC." and when the game I bought my PC to play is now virtually un-playable?

[sniperrocks]

I agree with the OP (even though I'm one of those with an ancient comp)
If PR always falls back, it wouldn't continue moving forward (graphically)
Plus, visuals add to the realism right?

[XxxGrANdmA]

It just depends on what map. I can play all high on say silent eagle for some reason and i get good fps, but on gaza and fallujah, even on the lowest settings, i get real bad fps when looking towards the center of the map where most of the city is.

[Feriluce]

I agree with the OP (even though I'm one of those with an ancient comp)
If PR always falls back, it wouldn't continue moving forward (graphically)
Plus, visuals add to the realism right?

Thats what PR2 is for imo.

[ZZEZ]

Yes I know, but if you read my earlier post I spent what little I have on my PC that can just about run PR - and now it can't. How do you think I feel when people just start saying "You need a better PC." and when the game I bought my PC to play is now virtually un-playable?

What sort of answer do you want except upgrading your pc?your graphic card is really old and even when it came out it was intended for the lowest segment - most games made in that time were not playable in low/medium/high graphic quality.
Benchmarks: 3D Games - Review Tom's Hardware : AMD and Nvidia Platforms Do Battle

A 8800GT will get you playing at medium/high quality..you can find brand new ones at 150$ here so it should be even cheaper for you.

[Dalek]

I must agrée with some posts saying that this isn't just a hardware issue. When 0.87 ran at 100fps, and 0.9 gets memory lag there is more to it then just upgrading hardware. 0.87 used 1200mo on my system, when 0.9 uses 2400mo (more or less a few megabytes).

The weird fact that would make my humble advice think it's a server side issue is that local coop severs are not crippled by any of the problemes multiplayer servers have.


On the other hand, seeing the amount of work done, the amount of textures, coding, testing, and the awesome result. I think that we should all try and be constructive.

The dev's have'nt let the community down yet so have faith !

and by the way,

Thanks to all the DEV team

Whineing will just kill their motivation so show some support !!

[v1rotate]

I myself have a Core 2 Duo running at 1.86Ghz, 7900GS, and 2GB RAM.
I run the game on medium and low settings at 1280x1024 and achieve
about 30 fps on average on the new maps. It drops down to 20 fps often,
but it is still playable. You guys are making it sound like you're trying to play
a slide show. 20 fps isn't the best but it isn't horrible either. Just sacrifice that
smoothness for lower settings and eventually upgrade when you have money
laying around and enjoy the game.

[mr obrian]

well i get bad lag now on some maps i never got before my pc is 4 years old i have a AMD 64 3400+ 3 gig of ram and 6800 gt card, its funny i am going to get a new pc next week this AMD Phenom II X4 945 3.0ghz AM3 Quad Core with 4 gig of ram and a GTX260 896mb card but this new PC is to play GTA 4 my old Pc should be able to play this mod fine Not everyone is lucky to be able to get a new Pc, a lot of guys are playing this mod because they have a Pc Thats a few years old and they can still play a Great online battle with this mod. please dont take that away from them

[Cpl. Mallard]

If you checked out the template thread you'll notice that a ton of people with pretty good rigs are having these problems, not just people using the computer that helped the Brits break the Enigma code in WWII...

[garcia2100]

I don’t think they should make the draw distance any higher. No point, it’s just going to make the game run laggier than it already is. I understand that we should tone the graphics down for the sake of older computers, but the release obviously has its performance problems. If it didn’t, all these threads about performance issues wouldn’t pop up.

I actually wouldn’t mind if they lower the draw distance or something. Or even better, make the bodies disappear when they die sooner than what it already is. I was playing on a server, and it was running alright, much worse than before, but still playable. Then I turned a corner with a bunch of dead bodies and blown up techs and my game just lagged out, there’s just too much stuff. Not too much stuff as in content, but too much dead bodies and destroyed vehicles that stay on the game for too long. I just stopped playing right there.

The game before the update was running perfect for me. And I had everything on med, now I can’t even play the game. I love all the new content, it’s amazing, especially the maps. But I cant even play it. That new animation that has the player put his weapon down when he is walking, I think that’s causing some issues as well. When I start walking, my weapon starts lagging like hell, but I’m walking perfectly fine.

I really hope this gets fixed soon; I really want to play again.

[Sniperdog]

From now on if your going to complain about the lag don't only post your specs, also post your in game settings. I feel like there are a lot of people who just don't want to compromise their all high or all medium settings...

Jeez people if you lag, lower your settings. If someone says I am still getting lag on all low settings then I will listen to them...

[Doom721]

So I've played PR since ... forever... and I first had a really crappy ATI card from the dinosaur ages and could run the game on lower settings.

So then I upgraded and got a 8800 GTS 640mb a couple years ago, I could now run PR on all high EXCEPT lighting ( I would literally drop to 10fps anywhere with high lighting on )

Then I went from a 1280x1024 to a 1920x1080 monitor

Through the upgrading I still could run any map, anywhere at at a VERY minimum of 35-40 fps and at those times it didn't bother me at all.

So then I learned how to overclock my video card ( Note: Have a 2.4ghz intel quad core, and 4gb ram )

PR .9 rolls around and I know something is wrong, maps I once played without any issues are now becoming a literal slideshow.

Then I checked my GPU temps and performance and it isn't even bottlenecking
The card itself isn't getting to its max load temps with stock cooling.... so
I check my memory and I still have plenty for BF2.exe to gobble up
I check my processor its running normally

Something is different, something is wrong and saying "Just upgrade" isn't an option for a lot of people - its going to take me at least two years to save up on my low salary to buy a computer that is a generation behind.

I'm sorry but when I play maps that .8 played with around 40fps at a min. and then suddenly its dropping to 15-20 looking into the city with some "minor tweaks" to the map theres an issue with SOMETHING.

Though when it all comes down to it, graphics settings for me are mostly about viewdistances, seeing people at the max gameplay range, seeing tanks at the max range WITHOUT THEM DISSAPEARING - have had that issue in PR in my older times with geometry on low. AA tends to be nice because the BF2 engine likes jagged lines A LOT.

PR hasn't been the most graphically demanding or looking mod - I play it for the gameplay obviously, but when you watch your computer chug on something that ran just fine before it is a bit saddening

[Sniperdog]

Jeez people if you lag, lower your settings. If someone says I am still getting lag on all low settings then I will listen to them...

all high EXCEPT lighting

...

1920x1080 monitor

...

PR .9 rolls around and I know something is wrong, maps I once played without any issues are now becoming a literal slideshow.

Really?

Perhaps before throwing down money for a new PC you could give not running on all high except lighting on wide-screen a try?

Unless I missed something of course...