So what is the excuse for the poor performance now?

[Rick1633 136]

Let me ask you one question: Where is the SERVER in there?

 

I simply can't understand why people would even bring this up from a persons point of view who has worked with this. If you simply think about how the server acts in any BIS game you will easy enough figure out that it has always been dependant on serverside-performance. Not only do you not run 90% of the functions and the code of DayZ when in the Editor because you aren't even loading it up - you also would not even be able to execute the code, because the editor technically is not a server.

 

Even if the serverside code would be included in the version you're running on your machine in the editor - it would still not be a server and most of the code would simply be ignored.

 

You can not just take the map and say: "Look at it - it's alright!" and thus go back and say the engine is flawed, as there's no way for you to understand how it even works.

 

 

Of course it's all down to the code implemented by the DayZ dev team, as that is what is changing the game. They are working hard enough to implement the features and it has been like that in the mod already as well. They are adding new stuff and only with 1.8 they have taken what they had and completely reworked it and look at it:

 

It's running flawlessly on a normal server with 50-60 FPS even in big coastal cities.

 

The performance will change significantly as soon as they start working on optimising, but they're doing enough adding new things, because people are screming for them, that they are busy with that.

People are "screaming" for new items in the game like stupid spray cans and not zombies who don't glitch through walls, deaths by hackers, or horrible controls?   You are out of your mind.

[wickedlikegames 2]

The difference is, that the older the console, the more experienced they are with what they can do. That's why the graphics become better and better over the years while the performance is still somewhat acceptable. You can't really compare consolegames to a pure PC MMO that is in Alpha-State. What do you expect to come out of that? They are working on it and they are looking to improve.

 

Not to mention that consoles are extremely streamlined and always use the same components and that's the only thing you have to work with, whereas computers can have a HUGE variety of components, different brands of components, different clocks. What do you expect?

 

No wonder GTA V looks better than ARMA 2, because it's from 2013, while ARMA 2 is already 4-5 years old. Why do you even start comparing those? It hardly makes sense.

 

 

 

 

Yes - they have a report from ATI and NVidia and they have gotten feedback from them they can work with. It has always been like that with BIS games ,though.

 

Just out of curiosity - do you own an AMD-CPU and -GPU? Do you have ARMA 3? What's your MP performance on there?

 

If you really want to complain, complain about the performance of ARMA 3, as that is actually a full price title that has already been launched, whereas DayZ isn't.

Sorry for OT.

 

Just noticed your signature about bragging of internett speed.

I see that you location is Germany, but the speedtest is from America.

uhhhhm?

[kichilron 8550]

Sorry for OT.

 

Just noticed your signature about bragging of internett speed.

I see that you location is Germany, but the speedtest is from America.

uhhhhm?

 

 

Well spotted. "Just" a server I get to work with everyday. ;) My homeconnection-speed is "only" 100 MBps.

[wickedlikegames 2]

Well spotted. "Just" a server I get to work with everyday. ;) My homeconnection-speed is "only" 100 MBps.

Okay =D Ich understand =D

And i think you mean 100Mbit and not 100MByte, that would be crazy =D Gief those speeds.

Im at 60/60 and that should be enough for a few more years ;)

Edited February 10, 2014 by wickedlikegames

[plation 0]

Was the Titanic really raised?

no:-) 

[JackinatorLP 21]

With the mod it was how ARMA 2 wasn't designed for what Dayz was trying to do, apparently Zombies were a major cause of poor performance. However the SA has apparently been redone, a lot of it from the ground up, the zombies aren't even there, there is barely any loot around and the player count is tiny compared to a lot of custom servers for the mod. Yet for some reason the performance is worse than the mod, this is something that has been reflected by my mates too, now I dunno if modders are just doing a better job with custom maps or whatever, but performance on Chernarus + at least is terrible. AO is a major source of a performance drop, so I naturally have this off, but still as soon as I got to one of the major towns, my FPS drops to 20. It has nothing to do with my GPU either because my friend who has a 560 gets better performance than my 670 and my friend who has a 780ti gets worse performance as well.  I'm so sick of people blaming other peoples hardware, when it is clearly not the case...

 

What is causing the problem? It is obvious that there is more on screen at once, but GTA V runs the online on consoles that are like 8 years old at this point and they perform better and lets be honest, GTA V even looks a lot better than ARMA 2 does as well. So I have a hard time believing it is down to it being more packed with buildings, there is never anything going on, it cannot be all the loot, it cannot be zombies... clearly.

 

Has any one working on the game actually looked to see if something is glitched and using up way more resources than it should be? Like a wall with several layers of textures that has been copied and pasted a lot or something?

 

I just don't get how performance was one of the key issues, there was a year to work on it, stuff got reworked from the ground up and yet there were no gains.

 

Time to mod someone else's engine guys?

No. And GTAV looks better than arma 2? No need to be honest here. Arma 2 is grandpa compared to GTAV. Nevertheless, in my opinion Arma2 has the more convincing world design... <---- my opinion.

[svisketyggeren 662]

I pray every night that they will be able to achieve a solid 30 fps across the board ..but you know..at the back of mind i just don't think it is ever going to happen. You just never know though, weirder things have happened. Moses parted the seas, Madonna shaved her armpits and the Titanic was raised..there is hope.

 

It follows naturally that the next step would be to get either Moses, Madonna or the raise titanic crew on the Dayz dev team...I think we are on to something here.

Edited February 10, 2014 by svisketyggeren

[JackinatorLP 21]

Same crap that happened with The Witcher 1. No matter how strong PC you had it still stuttered. Gamebryo was one awful engine and there was nothing that could redeem it.

Yeah i remember when i bought the early access alpha version of the witcher. The devs tried hard to make updates and get the game polished until final beta stage, but it didn't work out. I left two months before release, donating my copy to a beggar on the steam forums.