Make it more Low PC friendly

[Aggh]

For all of you saying that my PC can't run everything on Ultra high with good FPS you're wrong. I played Far cry 3 on Ultra with max FPS and no lag at all. My graphic card is a GTX660, Hex Core AMD processor, 8gb of ram. I even run AC3 on Max setting and max FPS. It only cost me 600 dollars to build this PC. The only thing I didn't buy was a hard drive and disc drive which i took apart from my old pc.

Edit: When people say I can run a game on Ultra or High setting. The message I get is you can turn all your setting to high and ultra and still get a smooth gameplay without any form of lag except ping lag if your internet is bad or server is too far away.

Then you have a magical computer because the benchmarks (on machines with a superior cpu to yours) all indicate otherwise.

http://www.tomshardw...ark,3379-6.html

:|

I can't max it either (2500k+gtx 670) but I don't go around saying I'm maxing out games that I'm not maxing either.

AC3 is buggy and poorly optimized, but isn't exactly a resource intensive game :|

Edited February 4, 2013 by Aggh

[DetergentPod]

It says 1920x1080. Mine is only 1280x1024 since my monitor is about 5 - 7 years old. Still using my first monitor.

Edit: Even if I don't get max FPS I still get smooth gameplay. Whats the point of getting max FPS when you already have very smooth gameplay. It's like why buy 4 jackets when all you really need is 2 to stay warm and survive the winter.

Edited February 4, 2013 by ThePieBoy

[Aggh]

It says 1920x1080. Mine is only 1280x1024 since my monitor is about 5 - 7 years old. Still using my first monitor.

Edit: Even if I don't get max FPS I still get smooth gameplay. Whats the point of getting max FPS when you already have very smooth gameplay. It's like why buy 4 jackets when all you really need is 2 to stay warm and survive the winter.

1280x1024 is not ultra :|

Most games don't have max fps. And you can't have smooth gameplay if you can't even match your monitors refresh rate.

The lower your average fps, the lower your overall performance. Major dips in performance are a lot morenoticeable when you can't even match your monitors refresh rate, especially in multiplayer games where milisecond input times can make a difference.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Aggh

[DetergentPod]

1280x1024 is not ultra :|

Most games don't have max fps. And you can't have smooth gameplay if you can't even match your monitors refresh rate.

The lower your average fps, the lower your overall performance. Major dips in performance are a lot morenoticeable when you can't even match your monitors refresh rate, especially in multiplayer games where milisecond input times can make a difference.

It's the highest I can go because of my monitor. I don't plan on switching my monitor anytime soon since I can play just fine with great graphics.

Every game I play I set everything in the graphic option to as high as it can go. Gameplay still smooth.

Edited February 4, 2013 by ThePieBoy

[Hammercannon]

if you cant play crysis 3 multiplayer beta on ultra (which with your rig you cant) you cant run everything on ultra. I run crysis 3 MP beta on the max settings, with 8x MSAA, I7 3770k @ 4.5, GTX 680 @ 1260/7450 2GB, 16gb DDR3 1866 ram, on a SSD. i dont even think amd can run it on medium atm, amd makes good GPU's but does not support them with good drivers.

i get around 48FPS on crysis 3 max settings.

For anyone using SLI/CF and having issues, disable SLI/CF and run it on a single GPU.

Anyone using an AMD CPU, they are sub par, and do not perform like they are supposed to more cores does not = more better, do research before you Purchase.

[Volume]

Sorry, Volume, but that's not going to run games like Far Cry 3 and Arkham City etc.. on Ultra with decent fps. It'll run games like that on medium to high, but not max.

Unless you don't mind 30-40 FPS, which some don't.

Kay. Now max out far cry 3 or any actually demanding game. Oh wait. Not possible on that garbage cpu and a mid range gpu.

It is to me. If you're not getting a stable 60 fps (120 if it's a 120 hz monitor) you're not running it on ultra. You're trying to run it on ultra.

Published on Jan 16, 2013

AMD Bulldozer FX-6100 3.3ghz

Kingston HyperX Blu 4gb(1600mhz)

MSI HD-7850 OC 1gb

played on ultra settings without AA

If you're gonna get on me for the AA, just hop off.

[Zakalwe]

Volume, again, if you're happy with low fps then feel free to run on ultra. But, imo, there's no point buying a gaming PC if you're not locking your fps with your refresh rate, you may as well be playing on a console.

I got what you were saying, but like I said, running on ultra is the same thing as playing on ultra with good fps imo. You're trying to run it on ultra if it isn't at a good fps, and you shouldn't be saying that you play the game on ultra if you aren't getting good fps :|

Haha, no, man, you read it wrong. I was directly quoting the guy when I wrote "running on ultra" and I was saying "running on ultra with good FPS" is not the same as his version of "running on ultra".

I'm agreeing with you, I have been since my first post.

[ToxicDoom]

People this thread's purpose is to ask the developers to make the game copatible with any PC and not to make the players buy new ones,as in some countries better hardware isn't available and ebay or some other marketing websites don't deliver those products to many countries.The point of this thread isn't talking about what can run the game and how much it costs,it only asks the developers for more video options to make the game smoother,and yes I apreciate the updates and new contents they make but with my FPS in the game I can't enjoy it and I guess other players have the same issue.

[Zakalwe]

People this thread's purpose is to ask the developers to make the game copatible with any PC and not to make the players buy new ones,as in some countries better hardware isn't available and ebay or some other marketing websites don't deliver those products to many countries.The point of this thread isn't talking about what can run the game and how much it costs,it only asks the developers for more video options to make the game smoother,and yes I apreciate the updates and new contents they make but with my FPS in the game I can't enjoy it and I guess other players have the same issue.

You need to have realistic expectations for your hardware. No amount of optomisation is going to make it run on a system that's simply too old.

[Aggh]

People this thread's purpose is to ask the developers to make the game copatible with any PC and not to make the players buy new ones,as in some countries better hardware isn't available and ebay or some other marketing websites don't deliver those products to many countries.The point of this thread isn't talking about what can run the game and how much it costs,it only asks the developers for more video options to make the game smoother,and yes I apreciate the updates and new contents they make but with my FPS in the game I can't enjoy it and I guess other players have the same issue.

The problem is that it's pretty much impossible to optimize a game for really old hardware. The OP has a system that was a low end budget system 5 years ago. It's not possible to let a new game run well on that kind of hardware.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Aggh

[Volume]

Volume, again, if you're happy with low fps then feel free to run on ultra. But, imo, there's no point buying a gaming PC if you're not locking your fps with your refresh rate, you may as well be playing on a console.

Haha, no, man, you read it wrong. I was directly quoting the guy when I wrote "running on ultra" and I was saying "running on ultra with good FPS" is not the same as his version of "running on ultra".

I'm agreeing with you, I have been since my first post.

I just meant here's a video of someone running it on Ultra. It's hard to tell how bad the FPS is on youtube.

I play warframe on lowest in a 720p window with the intention of having stable, high framerate.

I play quake 3 on a CRT with 120hz and 125fps constant, and have the game r_picmip'd with brightskins for competitive play.

I know all about refresh rate and FPS, and it is one of the things I cherish above all else.

I'm just saying some guy got it to play on ultra and it seems "acceptable" to "the average" player. I am thankful and respectful that you are not the average player and neither am I. It's not my personal taste to have the game run bad and have good graphics. I'd rather have stable 60 fps and make it look like some N64 reject cartridge than to have Crysis 3 graphics and dip to 12 fps during a fight.

[ToxicDoom]

Well...Anyways the game runs perfectly good since start of this year,so I am really happy and I thank DE for making me able to play this game though I have an old PC.

 

So I think this thread has reached it's goal.

 

Thanks DE :D

[HAR1MAU]

The void is a ruthless beast to run on a low end pc.

[__Kanade__]

My computer is an Intel i3 2.5 Ghz, 4GB RAM with integrated graphics and I play this on medium/high settings, only thing that will slow the game down is turning on shadows.

 

Just upgrade to something with at least 4GB of RAM

 

Besides you don't even a strong computer to play free to play games, you can have a laptop like mine and run everything perfectly fine, just with the low amount of space, you wouldn't be able to keep every game unless you had an external hard drive.

 

Here's an old video of mine, you can see I keep good fps even while recording on a laptop, at the time I had bloom and dynamic lightning turned off, but I've since kept both on since they do nothing to my fps. Can't however, record while playing Planetside 2 ( yes I play that on this computer )

 

Edited August 22, 2013 by __Kanade__

[Divinehero]

This game is AMAZINGLY optimized. I have a friend who can barely even run minecraft, and he runs this at a tolerable framerate.

yea for the quality of the visuals this game is extremely well optimized