Is Optimization Ever Going To Happen?

[bioned 36]

whatever engine dayz uses is horribly optimized..

 

wondering if it would ever happen

Edited January 30, 2014 by bioned

[Zarniwoop 1193]

Optimization usually happens later in development process, not so early as alpha. Probably beta methinks.

[freaqzz 3]

The game is already much more optimized than the mod. a Mid range GPU can run it medium graphics at a stable 40+ FPS

I use a GTX650Ti 1GB which is a $150 card and it runs it as said above, Buying a GTX770 in a few days tho.

[FlamingDefibs 421]

Optimizations already have and will still be made. The Take on Helicopters engine is sometimes hard to work with in these situations, but Rocket and Co will pull through. Coding for zombies will be improved as more are added, causing frame rates to keep at stable and playable levels. It's all just a matter of time.

[agentneo 337]

Have you done any optimisation yourself?

If you are using a multi core i5 for example..have you unparked cores, have you added steam launch options with -cpucores=4, exthreads=7 max memory and so on?
Changed the config file to render ahead 1?
Take off in game v sync and sync with GPU manager instead?

 

Im getting what appears to be a constant 60fps with a few minor drops. Game hasn't crashed either.

[ErichZann 28]

The game is already much more optimized than the mod. a Mid range GPU can run it medium graphics at a stable 40+ FPS

I use a GTX650Ti 1GB which is a $150 card and it runs it as said above, Buying a GTX770 in a few days tho.

 

Dont want to call this a lie, but its close i guess... Specially since it largely depends on the CPU, not that much on GPU (depending on settings). I got a 270x and a Phenom II quad 3.6 GHZ, and in cities I can only dream of 40+ FPS, as can almost everyone. And that is partly because of poor engine design, which renders everything in front of you, even if its blocked by something else.

[terminal_boy 860]

SW development 101:

 

Add Features > Test > Fix Bugs > Add More Features > Test > Fix Bugs > Feature Complete > Test > Fix Bugs > Optimise Performance > Test > Fix Bugs.

[Mos1ey 6301]

SW development 101:

 

Add Features > Test > Fix Bugs > Add More Features > Test > Fix Bugs > Feature Complete > Test > Fix Bugs > Optimise Performance > Test > Fix Bugs.

 

^This.

 

Or you end up with...

 

Add Features > Test > Fix Bugs > Optimise Performance > Test > Fix Bugs > Add More Features > Test > Fix Bugs > Optimise Performance > Test > Fix Bugs > Feature Complete > Test > Fix Bugs > Optimise Performance > Test > Fix Bugs.

 

And everything takes a lot longer.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Mos1ey

[whothehellishe 81]

Making all graph options working is part of the optimasation or we might see that sooner you think?!

[rickenbacker 190]

Probably in beta, that is sometime next winter. 

[s1rGr1nG0 81]

No, the developers have no intentions of optimizing the game. It's going to stay this way forever so that people can come to the forums and continually complain about things that have been addressed over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over...... :rolleyes:

[Mos1ey 6301]

Making all graph options working is part of the optimasation or we might see that sooner you think?!

 

What isn't working in the graphics options? :S

[jbroge 30]

The game is already much more optimized than the mod. a Mid range GPU can run it medium graphics at a stable 40+ FPS

I use a GTX650Ti 1GB which is a $150 card and it runs it as said above, Buying a GTX770 in a few days tho.

[Sinphaltimus 262]

No. The devs have no interest in optimization. *rolls eyes and walks away.*

[Sinphaltimus 262]

No, the developers have no intentions of optimizing the game. It's going to stay this way forever so that people can come to the forums and continually complain about things that have been addressed over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over...... :rolleyes:

I wish I would have seen this before posting my response. Glad we are on the same page.

[ErichZann 28]

Yeah well, even if that sounds sarcastic,  but look what happened to earlier BI games and how they are "optimized" today... Maybe with the success of Dayz some things will change, but they have quite a reputation for not optimizing their games, so please understand people who are sceptical as well...

Edited January 30, 2014 by ErichZann

[whothehellishe 81]

What isn't working in the graphics options? :S

Texture detail, texture filtering, AA, alpha to cov, edge smoothing, hdr. All of these have no impact on fps for me whatever i put.

[irl-calibre 744]

wow, I think the game looks amazing and runs alot smoother than the mod already and i'm playing on an ancient potato now, and I can run everything high at 150% resolution,  I don't even have an ssd and I snipe at like 100 - 120 fps, still really struggle in town's, that new town is awful. This is a highly coustomisable engine, but you can get amazing results if you know what you're at..

Edited January 30, 2014 by Calibre

[Mos1ey 6301]

Texture detail, texture filtering, AA, alpha to cov, edge smoothing, hdr. All of these have no impact on fps for me whatever i put.

 

But they affect the visual fidelity of the game, which is their function.

[irl-calibre 744]

But they affect the visual fidelity of the game, which is their function.

 

Part of what makes me so jelly of all the peeps with high end pc's of today, all I have is a touch of smaa, everything else turned off.  but, I still think the game looks amazing..

 

[monoking 22]

 

Have you done any optimisation yourself?

If you are using a multi core i5 for example..have you unparked cores, have you added steam launch options with -cpucores=4, exthreads=7 max memory and so on?
Changed the config file to render ahead 1?
Take off in game v sync and sync with GPU manager instead?

 

Im getting what appears to be a constant 60fps with a few minor drops. Game hasn't crashed either.

Already tried that. Won't do much since this game engine thread seems to be working only on 1 or 2 cores. 25% usage here, no matter what i do. but 50% with HT off but no impact on FPS. Many games these days suffer from this problem that don't choose to program the engine with parallelism in mind like skyrim.

 

So far i'm heavily cpu limited on my 4770k @ 4.5. Outside cities the fps is good sometimes drop to 50. But it seems settings that increase object details has more impact on the cpu then gpu, and resolution for weird reason as well. I play on 2560x1080 100% but if i lower it the fps skyrockets.

600$ on 780TI and my gpu is just sleeping.

 

I don't think the devs will spend tons of their resources and timeto build the engine from the ground up as it would have to be multithreaded coded. Or some magic has to be done to offer proper parallelism to the main thread.

They could optimize on minor things like zombies. They did already a good job, but what if they increase the zombie count. Maybe the building polygons could be toned down to decrease cpu usage.

Edited January 30, 2014 by monoking

[whothehellishe 81]

But they affect the visual fidelity of the game, which is their function.

 

Some of them change nothing visually from very low to very high, doesnt matter, same thing, and its not "normal" to have the same fps regardless the settings, i mean textures on low look horrible but give the same fps as if you had them on very hight, anyways i was just asking a question which obviously you have no clue whats up, but tried to help anyways, thanx buddy :)

[ErichZann 28]

Some of them change nothing visually from very low to very high, doesnt matter, same thing, and its not "normal" to have the same fps regardless the settings, i mean textures on low look horrible but give the same fps as if you had them on very hight, anyways i was just asking a question which obviously you have no clue whats up, but tried to help anyways, thanx buddy :)

 

Well, some settings are normally really not changing fps noticeable, specially texture detail and texture filtering. As long as you have enough ram om your graphics card, that is usually no problem for modern cards. Some other settings should of course have influence.

 

For me for example, FXAA works on high, but if I set it on very high, it looks the same as off for me... and the AtoC settings are all identical for me, does not work for "only grass" and so on, but that are minor problems now I guess.

Edited January 30, 2014 by ErichZann