Jump to content

Photo

The lack of optimizasion is rediculous...

wtf performance issues ram textures optimized optimization weak lacking poor

19 replies to this topic

#1
killmoff187

killmoff187

    Journeyman

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 44 posts

I really need some insight to this, cuz I am not getting the gist apparently... My laptop is dated and I get that. What I don't is get is the fact I could run FO3 and FONV on my current rig (albeit, dated) Just fine with 100+ mods, all intensifying graphics and realism and it performed great without a hitch. This game(FO4) as it is, out of box is (or would be) a great overall game besides the obvious; WTF is wrong with the rendering/graphics/optimization/animations/detail in general?? Why, when based on a well used and consistant engine is it so F****** difficult to produce better looking interaction/immersion/graphics?? Matter of fact, it's not more immersive or graphically intensive at all compared to previous releases(or the mods that accompanied them, I Should say). I love the Fallout series and was very much looking forword to this release, however the sheer neglect of these things almost make the 8+ solid days spent playing feel almost hollow. I know I can't be the only one this dissappointed in a game that has amazing potential, but my only question is why? The hieght? The lack of indoor world space? The poor worldspace definately does NOT equate to piss-poor lack of performance on what might be concidered "low end" machines. Anyway, Any realistic answer to this would be more than welcome...

 



#2
Moraelin

Moraelin

    Negotiator Gladiarius

  • Premium Member
  • 5,293 posts

Actually, it's not the same engine as FO3 and NV at all. It's more like the based on the Skyrim engine.

 

The game also uses much higher texture resolutions most of the time, whereas in FO3 and NV you had to download some overhaul to get 2k textures. It also uses a lot more shaders, as well as effects like subsurface scattering for skin, which FO3 and NV just didn't have. It also has higher resolution shadows than even Skyrim ever had, so you don't get pixelated shadows like in the other games. Plus god-rays, rain occlusion, and a bunch of other realistic effects that even Skyrim never really had.

 

It also has stuff like destructible environments. It's easy to overlook, because it's so natural, you tend to take it for granted. But just fire a minigun at some of those uneven plank fences, and watch the planks break or get knocked out of place. Hell, even a lot of wooden crates can actually be destroyed.

 

So all that extra geometry isn't just there for cosmetic reasons, but to allow an extra layer of realism.

 

Additionally, you can actually shoot through those broken walls, or snipe someone through a window without having to go through the door first like in FO3 or NV. That extended worldspace is again there for a reason. And some of us make good use of it.

 

And it works both ways too. You start shooting up a raider settlement, and all those guys will start shooting at you from the windows, taking cover on balconies, etc. Which I find very realistic.

 

Basically, I feel your pain, but it seems to me like all that isn't there just to vex you, nor just as lack of optimization. It actually does something. Whether or not that's worth the price in extra hardware requirements, well, that's for everyone to decide for themselves. But it's there for a reason.



#3
killmoff187

killmoff187

    Journeyman

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 44 posts

I appreciate the response so quick and understand (I did however fail in my description or statement, as it were), but I do recognize the destructive environment and how it might effect performance, Also, You're right agian, and the sublteties are nice but the lack of realism still seems to enunciate itself when it comes to traveling or day-to-day interaction. I simply am suggesting they'd use better implemementation and execution of said engines at their disposal.



#4
KimberJ

KimberJ

    Bipolar Gemini

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 917 posts

a 500 series card as a minimum spec, in this case a 560ti is no joke.  For example a 570 will run Skyrim with a nice ENB but only at low draw distances an only with medium sized DXT compressed textures.  A benchmark reserved for 600-700 series cards, you know if not the current tech.  In my case I had a card that would just barely run Skyrim with a nice ENB.  Then with FO4 I can run a high performance ENB at twice the framerate of Skyrim with increased spawns, in testing 20 dogs in combat or 10 raiders without a performance drop.

 

Tell us about the system an we might could help you get it running.



#5
Moraelin

Moraelin

    Negotiator Gladiarius

  • Premium Member
  • 5,293 posts

Well, some of the stuff does affect the day-to-day game, so to speak. In Fallout 3 for example, everything was grey and brown, for example (well, after you removed the green haze,) whereas here there are a lot more texture. When you look at the much denser city in the distance, you have a lot more textures and a lot more models. Which is going to take quite a chunk of graphics card memory and BANDWIDTH, no matter how they optimize it.



#6
KimberJ

KimberJ

    Bipolar Gemini

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 917 posts

yah, 28Gb unpacked of meshes/textures/materials.  I still think it's apples an oranges though, you just can't compare Bethesda games made before Skyrim an Creation engine to games made after.  Even for the modders nearly everything changed.  At least as benchmark speak of optimization you would run Skyrim an compare it in my opinion.



#7
Moraelin

Moraelin

    Negotiator Gladiarius

  • Premium Member
  • 5,293 posts

To some extent. As you noted, the amount of unpacked textures is vastly different between the two.

 

And Skyrim wasn't anywhere near as densely packed, nor as mixed up. In Skyrim, things were more like grouped by theme, so to speak. Whiterun had a certain graphics style, and Riften had another. Which means a much smaller set of textures are needed in memory to draw the whole town, than when you have a stone house, a blue skyscraper, and some wood buildings right next to each other.



#8
KimberJ

KimberJ

    Bipolar Gemini

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 917 posts

In the modding info it was mentioned that someone saw multibound groups set up for asset sharing, but I mean we don't know much about it, I believe that was the person or one of them developing nifscope, but offtopic, the OP just didn't reply on the optimization issue, which is somewhat untrue.  Gamers hit the wall with old computers in the PC gaming world, when that happens, it's time to build or buy a new system.  I saved up for over a year to build this computer an if I had advise for a PC gamer it would be to always be saving money up to replace the last terminal, not a bad idea.  Then it's on YouTube where a person built an actual gaming rig for $300 just to play FO4 on, making the OP feel a little uncomfortable I hope.  Just because I hate the jerks that play games on laptops.  Yeah okay maybe if they used a xbox or playstation controller to do it I would validate it as a proper way to play PC games, but most of them don't, it's super annoying for me to deal with them, because we are not having the same experience in the game we talk about.  Pretty big difference.  :P



#9
Moraelin

Moraelin

    Negotiator Gladiarius

  • Premium Member
  • 5,293 posts

I dunno, man, some some laptops are powerful enough to be basically desktop replacements. I'm playing on a desktop with a 30" screen, but I also have a 1 year old or so 17" laptop that has a quad-core 4'th gen i7, 16 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD, and a Geforce 860M with dedicated video memory. You know, for when I have to play Plague Inc on a train ;) Battery goes down faster than the fusion core on an X-01, but eh, that's the price to pay.

 

I'm pretty sure it could run Fallout 4 just fine, and TBH I don't see why the experience would be any different.



#10
KimberJ

KimberJ

    Bipolar Gemini

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 917 posts

Maybe it's just the gamers on laptops I met, that basically play on their mom's laptop.  Like you said an the OP was talking about, FO4 can be played on a $300 gaming rig.  I mean in testing at least there were way too many NPC's attacking via increased spawns, an the game didn't struggle.  Then it being designed for PS4 an Xbox One, not all that powerful, but good at rendering stuff.  I guess it just supports the OP's old old laptop being outdated theory.  "Mom, you need a new computer!"   Just Kidding   LOL





Reply to this topic



  



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: wtf, performance, issues, ram, textures, optimized, optimization, weak, lacking, poor

Page loaded in: 1.116 seconds