These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Team Avatar and the future of our prototype

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2261 - 2013-09-30 15:13:43 UTC
As an aside, happened to be reading SC forums earlier and they call Eve a "toxic paradigm that attracts griefers" .. was pretty funny and kinda true. Pirate
This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.  Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2262 - 2013-09-30 15:14:38 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
Teinyhr wrote:
I really don't know what was up with Incarna's resource hogging. CCP at least used to be known for making sure EVE could be played with fairly low end hardware, I remember playing EVE on computer with a 166Mhz Pentium MMX -CPU that had an integrated graphics card and 32Mb of RAM. This was back in 2005 or somewhere abouts, when far more powerful computers were available. CCP's insistence on low resource usage is one of the main reasons we don't have DX11 support yet, that, and that supposedly a whole lot of players even still run Windows XP. Mind you the community IIRC flipped their **** when CCP dropped the support for Windows 98 and ME.

Anyway, the lack of optimization for Incarna really surprised me because of that.

Thers was no lack of optimization.

Think abouf it. A badly coded program runs slow and doesn't really challenge the hardware,
which is easily noteable by lack of noise and heat.
The CQ though stressed hardware so much, it was literally burning out gfx cards.

That's no lack of optimization, they simply used up too much ressources in an efficient enough way
to kill off (probably overclocked) hardware.


The performance issue with Incarna went beyond simply burning out OC'd hardware, if even. At the time my system was right in the middle of hardware performance. Decent video card, decent processor. Certainly, it could not be characterized as meeting only the minimum system requirements of the game and yet CQ performance was horrendous. I've been building computers since, well, over 20 years, so I like to think I know at least how to spec out a system to my needs.

I recently rebuilt my system, new GPU included. Again, not to top of the line performance, I shoot for the most bang for the buck that I can while edging just over the line of mediocrity. I've found this to be a comfortable place. Given that we're now 2 years past Incarna's release one would think new generations of hardware would more than overcome performance requirements for Incarna. I was quite disappointed that it was still taxing my system, overly utilizing the GPU, fans complaining with their whirling as they attempted to keep my GPU cool. While I was in the +30fps arena with Incarna, it still suffered from laggy input and character control.

No, Incarna if optimized, is just poor code. If not optimized, is just poor coding. Either way you look at Incarna its bad. That CCP dropped it like a hot potato means there's nothing redeeming about it. Otherwise, customer complaints withstanding, CCP would not have abandoned it entirely. It was an investment. Or, just an alpha for WoD. Who knows. I'm sure half of what the community thinks they know isn't nearly what is reality within the iron curtain of CCP.

Don't ban me, bro!
Teinyhr
Ourumur
#2263 - 2013-09-30 15:29:58 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:

Thers was no lack of optimization.

Think abouf it. A badly coded program runs slow and doesn't really challenge the hardware,
which is easily noteable by lack of noise and heat.
The CQ though stressed hardware so much, it was literally burning out gfx cards.

That's no lack of optimization, they simply used up too much ressources in an efficient enough way
to kill off (probably overclocked) hardware.


Granted I don't know a whole lot about game graphics design, but there has gotta be some reason why CQ graphics make GPU's run hot even though the graphics are on the lower upper end of current game graphics. I run about the same heat on Witcher 2 on high with shadow's off and CQ is no Witcher 2.
Again, I don't know how graphics engines manage resource usage, but one would think somekind of optimization to the graphics engine does the trick.

Also, now that I think about it, didn't Incarna for some reason set on other computers the presentation interval to "immediate" whereas it's normally interval 1 or 2? So far I have no idea what that setting is supposed to do but make graphics cards belt black smoke when set to immediate, even in normal space environment.
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#2264 - 2013-09-30 15:32:36 UTC
J3ssica Alba wrote:
I'd say that's a good thing, forces the people playing spectrum ZXs to come out of the electronic stone age and properly upgrade their systems once every couple of years as it should be.

Especially funny, because there are actual EVE players there, agreeing to that notion... but yea, SC will not hurt EVE in the least... no sir. Blink

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#2265 - 2013-09-30 16:01:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Arduemont
Mr Kidd wrote:

The performance issue with Incarna went beyond simply burning out OC'd hardware, if even. At the time my system was right in the middle of hardware performance. Decent video card, decent processor. Certainly, it could not be characterized as meeting only the minimum system requirements of the game and yet CQ performance was horrendous. I've been building computers since, well, over 20 years, so I like to think I know at least how to spec out a system to my needs.

I recently rebuilt my system, new GPU included. Again, not to top of the line performance, I shoot for the most bang for the buck that I can while edging just over the line of mediocrity. I've found this to be a comfortable place. Given that we're now 2 years past Incarna's release one would think new generations of hardware would more than overcome performance requirements for Incarna. I was quite disappointed that it was still taxing my system, overly utilizing the GPU, fans complaining with their whirling as they attempted to keep my GPU cool. While I was in the +30fps arena with Incarna, it still suffered from laggy input and character control.

No, Incarna if optimized, is just poor code. If not optimized, is just poor coding. Either way you look at Incarna its bad. That CCP dropped it like a hot potato means there's nothing redeeming about it. Otherwise, customer complaints withstanding, CCP would not have abandoned it entirely. It was an investment. Or, just an alpha for WoD. Who knows. I'm sure half of what the community thinks they know isn't nearly what is reality within the iron curtain of CCP.


I was running CQ on a two year old £1600 XPS laptop when it was released and it HATED it. It jumped and froze and took forever to load. The performance issues with CQ were, I believe, an important part of the summer of rage. Although they cleared the performance up significantly with their fixes in Crucible, it was too little too late.

Since then I have only built my own systems, and my most recent computer runs three CQs simultaneously with 70 FPS. But then I have always 'erred' on the side of powerful or expensive tech. Mind you, a perfectly cheap GTX 460 in my last build ran two CQs at 50 FPS. Which is perfectly acceptable I think.

All the above said, I can't say it runs well just because it runs well for me and my recent hardware. A lot of people have had serious problems with it, which is probably because CCP have terrible testing procedures and rushed it horribly. CCP still need to put some effort into optimizing the CQ, because there are some obvious memory leaks associated with loading the CQ each time. Just open your task manager and watch the memory usage continuously rise (and never go back down again) each time you load a CQ anew.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Gel Musana
LOL a Sticky Situation
#2266 - 2013-09-30 16:02:34 UTC
OK, this post is 1 year old now. Can you show this to us now? Or was this just smoke? Pirate

Ideology  s-h-i-t  list https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Gel%20Musana
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#2267 - 2013-09-30 17:44:24 UTC
Their is also a calculator on the game client, CCP should immediately upgrade it, we need a scientific calculator, and later on, we need some tool like Matlab in EvE, just to expand the universe.

The Tears Must Flow
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#2268 - 2013-09-30 17:54:49 UTC
Vaju Enki wrote:
Their is also a calculator on the game client, CCP should immediately upgrade it, we need a scientific calculator, and later on, we need some tool like Matlab in EvE, just to expand the universe.

Shhh gankadin... you gotta be quiet when adults talk. Blink

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Crasniya
The Aussienauts
#2269 - 2013-09-30 18:37:52 UTC
Rhes wrote:
Shalua Rui wrote:
No matter... pretty soon EVE will be the only (successful) spaceship game that is JUST about spaceships... hope all you intelligent players will be happy then.

...vision is scary. Blink


We are already happy and we're also excited about CCP's vision for the future of Eve. I feel bad for people who are too narrow-minded to see that vision even if it lacks dance emotes and bathrobes.


You're the one too narrow-minded to see the vision that CCP actually has, and has promoted. You're so afraid of change, you can't handle it. EVE has to grow and evolve.

Soraya Xel - Council of Planetary Management 1 - soraya@biomassed.net
Crasniya
The Aussienauts
#2270 - 2013-09-30 18:41:46 UTC
WiS itself was in no way to blame for Incarna being a misfire. You had two specific problems:

1. Macro-transaction pricing was ridiculous.
2. The hangar was removed for no good reason.

Both problems have since been remedied. It's time to iterate.

Soraya Xel - Council of Planetary Management 1 - soraya@biomassed.net
Baby ChuChu
Ice Cream Asylum
#2271 - 2013-09-30 18:42:48 UTC
Why do 99% of these freakin anti-WiS posts have to have some sort of asinine, snide remark attached to it?...

Christ.
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#2272 - 2013-09-30 19:09:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Shalua Rui
Crasniya wrote:
You're the one too narrow-minded to see the vision that CCP actually has, and has promoted. You're so afraid of change, you can't handle it. EVE has to grow and evolve.

Calling people that actually want the game to expand and grow, narrow minded is... interesting, to say the least. Blink ...but yea, the fear of change in this community is really all too evident...

...then again, it fits the personality of the core player base, as does the inability to have objective discussions. Roll

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
ian papabearr
No Regard.
#2273 - 2013-09-30 19:30:51 UTC
walter white dies in the end of breaking bad
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#2274 - 2013-09-30 19:32:19 UTC
Eve still a prototype... That's a new one.. I guess after over 10 years Beta is overused.
Taiwanistan
#2275 - 2013-09-30 19:36:19 UTC
Baby ChuChu wrote:
Why do 99% of these freakin anti-WiS posts have to have some sort of asinine, snide remark attached to it?...

Christ.

what's more asinine than a bunch of dudes dressing up emoting each other in a room?

TA on wis: "when we have a feature that is its own functional ecosystem of gameplay then hooks into the greater ecosystem of EVE as a whole, and it provides good replayability."
Sir Jack Falstaff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2276 - 2013-09-30 20:12:27 UTC
Taiwanistan wrote:
Baby ChuChu wrote:
Why do 99% of these freakin anti-WiS posts have to have some sort of asinine, snide remark attached to it?...

Christ.

what's more asinine than a bunch of dudes dressing up emoting each other in a room?

Dude, we're all playing a game in which we pretend to be starship pilots flying around through space and shooting each other with our pew pew laser guns. Take a good look at yourself. You're already playing dress-up.

Banish plump Jack, and banish all the world.
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#2277 - 2013-09-30 20:23:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Shalua Rui
Sir Jack Falstaff wrote:
Dude, we're all playing a game in which we pretend to be starship pilots flying around through space and shooting each other with our pew pew laser guns. Take a good look at yourself. You're already playing dress-up.

Not quite... atleast not in "their" heads... the game could be about my little ponies with laser guns for all "they" care, as long as "they" can pawn others and show off "their" incredible skillz! Blink

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2278 - 2013-09-30 20:24:51 UTC
Gel Musana wrote:
OK, this post is 1 year old now. Can you show this to us now? Or was this just smoke? Pirate


Team Avatar doesn't even exist anymore. CCP has wisely decided to honor their promise to focus on real Eve content.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2279 - 2013-09-30 20:26:40 UTC
Baby ChuChu wrote:
Why do 99% of these freakin anti-WiS posts have to have some sort of asinine, snide remark attached to it?...

Christ.


Probably because it's difficult to respect people who want to ruin a perfectly fine spaceship game with wizard robes and dance emotes.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#2280 - 2013-09-30 20:30:05 UTC
Shalua Rui wrote:
Crasniya wrote:
You're the one too narrow-minded to see the vision that CCP actually has, and has promoted. You're so afraid of change, you can't handle it. EVE has to grow and evolve.

Calling people that actually want the game to expand and grow, narrow minded is... interesting, to say the least. Blink ...but yea, the fear of change in this community is really all too evident...

...then again, it fits the personality of the core player base, as does the inability to have objective discussions. Roll


It is quite interesting how they claim to be thrilled about getting more of the same (go there, conquer it, lose it, conquer it again, rinse and repeat) and yet fail to understand or respect what other players ask from CCP.

Rather than do something daring and new, CCP just aims to replay the "success" of the existing content. Who could be thrilled by more of the same as the game loses the ability to draw new blood? EVE-lovers or EVE-fanatics?

It's incredibly stupid. Time ago, I pictured hisec like a entry hall with revolving doors, where people got in, walked around for a while and eventually went away without ever finding a way to the depths of the building, because that requries luck and a very niche mindset.

Now, instead of making the hall better and interesting so new players stay in game because of it, CCP has chosen to build an even deeper end to the building, some nullsec-beyond-nullsec which will be used by even less players than nullsec itself... and simultaneously, CCP plans to wreck the hall.

When CCP Seagull was appointed as Senior Producer under CCP Unifex's wing, I asked her publicly to not leave behind the "lurkers". But now the "Hallelujah plan" is all about "enablers" and "instigators", and we the humble, silent, neglected lurkers have been left behind. Wether this is a smart move or the second point in which historians will look back at the demise of EVE and say "that was the second fatal blow", time will tell.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you