Pan'Theon: Rise' of th'e Fal'Len - #1 Thread in MMO
- Thread starter gogojira_sl
- Start date
goishen
Macho Ma'am
- 3,574
- 14,636
Ahhh, got'cha. Now you're blaming the resolution. Fuck if we put this thing on "lol, a toaster could run this graphics style better". Ya know, just gettin' an idea of where your head's at.
Why aren't you picking up on any of the points that are put out there that are being actively discussed on the Pantheon forums?
- 1
DickTrickle
Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
- 12,993
- 14,899
Even if one player was able to run it great, it's clear that many people had many issues running Vanguard, from good to poor systems. Having it be smooth on one system is not an accomplishment and does not mean it ran well. Having it be smooth for 95%+ of people who had the recommended specs does.
I see this kind of stupid thinking all the time... "my anecdotal experience is closer to reality than thousands of others combined!" It's like that recent Batman game that had a shitty PC port. There were some people who could run it fairly well but many, many people had problems, to the point refunds were allowed. Does that mean all those people just had janky computers and didn't know what they were doing, when plenty of demanding games don't have those kind of systemic issues? Or does it mean the engine was shitty and caused a lot of problems for a lot of hardware configurations?
I see this kind of stupid thinking all the time... "my anecdotal experience is closer to reality than thousands of others combined!" It's like that recent Batman game that had a shitty PC port. There were some people who could run it fairly well but many, many people had problems, to the point refunds were allowed. Does that mean all those people just had janky computers and didn't know what they were doing, when plenty of demanding games don't have those kind of systemic issues? Or does it mean the engine was shitty and caused a lot of problems for a lot of hardware configurations?
Last edited:
- 3
tyen
EQ in a browser wait time: ____
- 4,638
- 5,164
Resolution is one of the biggest determining factors on how peoples PC's play a game. The difference between 1680 and 1920 is huge. I now play at 2560 and it really cost me, not for the screen, but the upgrades needed to run games at this resolution.
Like what? I have never visited that forum. It could be discussed here, and well, if it wasn't for all you stupid cunts.
This is all bullshit. A high end machine would not "suffer" when running the game if you lowered the settings. I ran it ok with everything cranked on a high end machine and it was still ok, but if you lowered some of the settings it ran perfectly well. There was a setting in the game called Balanced which hardly looked any different to the ultra high, but was a lot easier on the hardware, and there were a million other settings you could tweak to improve performance. If you had a high end PC and you chose appropriate settings, it would have run well. You can't crank a game to full and use settings which were designed for future hardware and then whine about fps. Well you can, but you are a retard.
- 1
Identikit
Redneck Pornographer
- 2,170
- 3,707
my max was 1920x1080 on two monitors, I d/c'd one monitor when playing vanguard, and lowered resolution to 1600x900 and still lag. I would tinker with settings, and alter INI files and literally do anything possible to get a good gaming experience, but always within an hour or two of playing vanguard, I would get cache overloads, and multiple graphic issues.
also balanced looked NOTHING like ultra high settings, which had really detailed shadows, huge draw distance, water reflection, animated trees etc.. Also sometimes setting the graphics at low settings would make it run even worse than balanced or high. tuning vanguard for long duration play was literally a clusterfuck, as it was never really optimized for anything but whatever beast PC it was probably created on at the time.
you literally had nearly the same machine as me. But mine was kind of better, and some how your computer ran it fine? If anything thats an indication of how poorly optimized for pcs vanguard really was.
Also resolution didnt really affect much games on my PC, that is, unless I was playing fucking vanguard! So you are wrong about resolution affecting performance, that is unless you are playing the short bus game vanguard!
How can you not understand this dude?
- 2
Identikit
Redneck Pornographer
- 2,170
- 3,707
unity is very robust. But hell, leave it up to brad mcoxy to fuck that up.
- 1
Sevens
Log Wizard
- 5,066
- 15,432
I never followed Brad during the whole Vanguard episode so wasnt really aware of all the drama when I backed Pantheon...the whole thing lost a lot of credibility with me with the whole Fuzzy troll holy rollers bullshit (I hated that cunt on the boards)
but I firmly believe in Monty and Joppa...those two are who I am betting on to bring this game home
Kharzette
Watcher of Overs
- 4,980
- 3,645
It is pretty good, but can be draw call heavy, especially in an mmo setting. There's some new stuff coming soon that will reduce it a bit for people using deferred, but once they get in wearable gear and lots of light sources (from spells etc) it might be a problem. Shroud is struggling with it.
- 1
goishen
Macho Ma'am
- 3,574
- 14,636
Love this. First of all states that we're not discussing Pantheon's advantages enough. Then freely admits to never having visited their boards.
- 2
So? You gotta pay to be involved there, and the posts are noobish and dumb.
Vanguard was for more complicated than Pantheon. They licensed Unreal engine but it wasn't designed for open world gaming, so they spent a fortune modding the engine and I think it ended up being more work and harder than they thought. In the end the game looked open world but there would be a slight pause when loading into new areas and that wasn't meant to happen. Not that it really mattered, but still, it was one of many bugs and issues. They had an agreement with Microsoft to make the game and Microsoft bailed and wanted to do Xbox instead so Vanguard was left unfinished, but SOE released it anyway. It needed 6 more months just to finish the engine and performance, and then another 6 more months on the gameplay itself. It was a mess at release.
Yep
I don't think it was optimized at all. The game needed another year of development.
It did. In a screenshot you would be hard pushed to tell the difference. Yeah you missed out on some stuff but it wasn't that different, and the point is, that is how you were supposed to play the game. They said the game was designed for future hardware, they did that for good reason. So people trying to run the game cranked was asking for failure.
Nah resolution is everything in PC gaming. Especially nowadays, but even back then it was a big deal. I know because I had this same discussion with noobs on other games. People bitching about Arma2 running like shit on their uber PC and me saying it ran great for me, which it did. They said I was fake and gay etc. and to prove it, so I did. The reason was because I played at 1680x1050 and they were playing at 1920x1080. The difference is they had worse PC's than me, and yet were trying to run more than 2 million pixels, a third of a million more than me.
Understand what? There is nothing to understand. The game ran well for me. It didn't for you. Poor you. But the comments about "game ran shit for everyone" is not true.
- 1
goishen
Macho Ma'am
- 3,574
- 14,636
Ahhh, okay. So now you have been there. Before you said you hadn't. So, yah. Hopefully you can see my confusion.
Secondly, WTF do expect to find posts that are positive about a game anyway? On their *own website*? *gasp* Nowai!
Identikit
Redneck Pornographer
- 2,170
- 3,707
you literally just said most people who complained about vanguards performance didnt have a good pc. I posted my specs, and detailed performance issues with a PC that was better than yours.
And yes, for the majority of people that tried vanguard, it ran like fucking shit. The proof would be the fact that vanguard was sunsetted and can no longer be played.
- 1
Dullahan
Golden Knight of the Realm
- 259
- 256
I think it's been established that it was bad for most. I also built a new system to play it and had an 8800gtx, and it ran decently, but I didn't actually start playing until 3 months in following significant stability patches. Even then, there were CTDs, falling thru world and having to /flush all the time.
Think the worst of it was beta thru first few months though.
In other news, how bout Pantheon winning MMORPG.com's Most Anticipated MMO 2017 by a landslide? Not so niche after all, eh?
Player's Choice Awards - Most Wanted MMO of 2017 a Awards at MMORPG.com
