TheScruffyBandit

Ever notice how streamers and lets players are some of the worst 3pp abusers?

No, stupid idea.

You meet or exceed the Requirements OP. You may find you have to play with fairly low settings, though.

I don't Mind the people who have better computers than me having better framerates at the same setting, what gets frustrating is the people with slower systems. Currently running: 955BE c2 ~ 3.6Ghz. 8gb of DDR3-1333 in dual channel. Asus M4A785TD-EVO motherboard. MSI Radeon r9 270 GAMING 2gb. I play at 1680x1050 ingame settings texture details: high texture filtering: high objects: Low (This setting seems to be the only one that effects my framerates in towns) terrain: High clouds: High shadows: High aa: Low alpha to coverage: All edge smoothing: SMAA low hdr quality: low ambient occlusion: disabled postprocessing quality: Low bloom: Slider all the way down. rotation blur: Slider all the way down. 20-30fps in towns, 50-60 (or higher) in the wilds. I know my CPU is somewhat dated, but I'm never even close to 100% useage on any core. Frustrating game.

Experimental currently has less stable framerates and lag than stable.

Hacker.

Then kindly bugger off and practice your "epic trollage" somewhere else.

Don't advise people to use third person. You may aswell tell them to go and download a wallhack.

Anyone voting less than 20 hours shouldn't be playing this game in the first place. There are better PvP focused shooters out there, if all you want to do is grab a gun and start popping caps in peoples virtual backsides, a multiplayer survival simulator isn't for you. You don't have any intitlement to a fully pristine and modified M4 or long range scoped mosin. This is a survival game, if you find a nackered old shotgun in a barn, a handful of shells and a bag of only slightly moldy rice, you should be dancing through the streets of electro, because you're doing fine. The elements of the playerbase who feel the need to be fully geared within an hour or two, so they can get back to shooting up anything that moves need to be purged. I'm obviously not talking about removing PvP of course, that's a valid survival stratergy too, but the kids who are ONLY interested in rapidly fully geared so they can get back to DM Cherno? Those people don't belong in DayZ.

We're all very much aware that the engine dayZ is based on is rather dated and while it's certainly capable of producing a very pretty game has some issues getting the most out of modern hardware. Obviously, nearly everyone is aware of the current object related performance issues causing poor framerates and Dean has aleady made it clear that the team is working on them, however, in a world where the vast majority of PCs being used for gaming have 4 or more CPU cores and more than 4096mb of addressable memory, I think a it should also be a key concern to improve multithreading and also converting the games code to utilize 64 bit systems. While I'm aware how time consuming both of these issues are to address. Partically the conversion of code from 32 to 64bit for something as complex as a videogame engine however I feel it's extremely important given the amount of ideas and concepts that we've been told are to be implimented including things like every item having physics and increased numbers of zombies, I find it hard to believe that DayZ standalone will be able to provide reliable, smooth gameplay on even high end systems while only fully utilizing one CPU core and 4096Mb of memory, especially when you consider that most modern GPUs themselves have 2048Mb of memory, if not more. I would be very suprised if with all those additional fuctions and concepts if DayZ will ever truely run WELL in 32bit, simply due to lack of usable memory. I would asume improved multithreading on the client side is already on the cards at somepoint in the future, given how CPU bound the engine can It wouldn't make much sense to barely use more than 1 core, give that this would likely limit the potential customer base to those users with heavily overclocked i5/i7 cpus and even then, provide somewhat limited framerates, but I would like to see this addressed sooner rather than later if possible as currently, even brand new CPUs are stock speeds are not providing what I'd consider comfortable framerates.

I don't really care what engine they use so long as they get it running right sooner rather than later.

Your logic doesn't add up. You may also note the system never gets close to 100% CPU usage in that video, if the towns are causing GPU usage drop due to requiring less rendering performance that still wouldn't explain the drop in framerates without an increase in CPU usage. :rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ssjr36NKTE GPU usage drops in cities. Granted, it shouldn't be and I believe they're trying to fix that... but it still does.

There aren't any x86 cpus that meet the minimum requirement for this game, I don't see legacy support as an issue here.

There is some multithreading, but it's rather limited and not particually effective. It's fairly obvious if you watch your CPU usage across all cores while playing.

It exists to counter people relooting their bodies after death, something which would obviously not be an issue in real life since they'd be.. you know.. dead. Yes, the current implimentation is unrealistic, but so is someone coming back to life to recover their loot. Given how easily you can find basic gear in DayZ, I don't see what you're complaining about OP.

nice 3pp abuse.

Does ANYONE believe this?

60fps at times isn't really that helpful. Really what we need from you is your highest and lowest FPS in and out of cities.

Phenom II Deneb 955BE c2 stepping @ 3.6Ghz. 8192Mb DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24, dual channel. MSI Radeon r9-270 gaming, 2Gb. 500Gb Western digital 7200rpm platter hard disk. Settings: 1680x1050 x 60, Vsync enabled. Interface: 1680x1050. Video Memory: 2047 set with launch command. Texture detail: High. Texture filtering: High. Objects: Low. Terrain: HIgh. Clouds: Low. Shadows: Low. FSAA - Normal. Alpha to: All trees and grass. Edge smoothing: SMAA Normal. HDR quality: Low. Ambient occlusion: Disabled. Post processing: Low. FPS: 45-60 in fields and woodland, 20 to 32ish in towns. Objects seems to be the major FPS killer or me, alot of the settings could be set higher without a substantial loss in frame rate, but increasing objects tends to kill my FPS badly, which is in keeping with Rockets comments on poor FPS if i'm not mistaken.

I played fine at low-ish settings in 1680x1050 on a system close to recomended specs, 20ish to 30ish fps in cities and 50-60 in the woods. (955BE @ stock, 4gb and gtx275) Since upgraded my GPU to an r9 270, and overclocked to 3.6 (CPU is a c2 and doesn't overclock well) & 8gb of ram. My framerates are basically the same, the game just looks nicer now, framerates are also pretty much identical to my friends 2500k and gtx760... so, anyway... recomended spec can deliver a decent gameplay experience. Minimum is almost certainly a slideshow though.

Not even close to fast enough. No.

Currently on experimental zombies seem to respawn randomly around towns, which is a great improvement over not respawning at all, however it's far from idea. I recall Rocket mentioning liking the idea of including large herds of roaming zombies at some point and, with that in mind an idea dawned on me: Spawn all zombies in herds. Sounds stupid right? but stick with me. If all zombies spawned in huge 500+ strong herds, roaming in from the edges of the map along the west and east side of the map I feel it would help greatly in adding risk to certain key high value areas like NW, NE and Balota airfields. Going there with the intention of gearing up and PvPing would still be possible, but the risk of a huge mass of zombies roaming through at any given moment would help balance the risk/reward ratio and increase the tension around these areas. Unlike the current respawn system, It would allow groups of players to team up and create safe zones, clearing out a town of the undead and so long as they defend it from swams of roaming undead & rival groups of players, it would stay safe. It would also solve the immersion killing issue of zombies that just appear without any explanation, we'd all know where they came from. As the zombies move south and east have small groups break off from the main herd in and around towns, distributing zombies around the map till the few remaining reach the coastal towns where most of the player spawns are. This would also mean new players are less likely to be thrown into the thick of it right from the first moment they spawn and as they work their way inland toward higher value, less player populated areas it would insure that the difficulty ramps up in sync with the rewards. It would also mean that players raiding high value areas such as the airfields would from time to time be forced to team up or call a truce at least for a short time just to survive the huge tide of zombies as it crashes through the area looking for fresh meat. Obviously this idea isn't properly fleshed out and would require quite a lot more AI coding than the existing system, but regardless, I was curious what people thought of it.

Considering we're running "mostly" on one CPU core currently, if they get multi-threading working properly and optimized, there's alot more they could do I'd imagine, even on fairly modest quad core cpus.