The Future: GW2 in 4K

Recently, I upgraded to a machine capable of steady 60+ FPS at 4K.

CPU: i7-8700Motherboard: ASUS ROG Strix Z370-E GamingVideo: MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GRAM: Team T-Force Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4-24001st Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB2nd Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB3rd Drive: WD Black 2 TB 7200Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G3 850WDisplays: (2) LG 27"" 4K UHD IPS screensOS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

I've gone through a collection of around 30 titles, testing them to see how they perform. You can see the detailed results on my Google Sheet. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pfb_Guw5DfJ0KuhgawzmAPPCpxcPZtpqnmtagTiGDiw/edit

GW2's results for the sake of brevity.

• Installed Drive: Primary SDD
• Resolution: 3840 x 2160
• Avg FPS: 33
• Graphics Quality: High
• Anti-Aliasing: FXAA
• Post Processing: High
• Shadows: High
• Shaders: High
• Character Model Quality: High
• Texture Quality: High
• Animations: High
• Environments: High
• LOD Distance: High
• Reflections: All
• Render Sampling: Native

The most disappointing was Guild Wars 2. Out of the group, this one had the worse performances from a prominent developer like ArenaNet. I saw extreme framerate shifts occurring in Lion's Arch whenever I opened and closed the inventory. The framerate would jump up to 42 from 33 and then down to 33 when closed.

I'm on a high-speed Fiber Optic connection. On average, ping times are 3-5 ms; 95-97 Mbps upload and download speeds. Noting this to eliminate the Internet as the potential cause for framerate issues. Also, I installed GW2 on the primary SSD, so that eliminates drive read/write lag. The problem appears to stem from lousy net-code or poorly optimized graphics in the game itself. Maybe both.

Eventually 4K gaming is going to be the norm for many. You want your game to be 4K ready.

This is 6 year old game on 12 year old engine. Reality check required.

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:This is 6 year old game on 12 year old engine. Reality check required.

No reality check needed. WOW runs very well at 4K with decent, steady framerates. That game is as old as GW2's engine. Perhaps older considering Blizzard began working on WOW back in the late-90's. I'm saying Arenanet should not be neglecting their engine with 4K gaming soon to be a thing.

Bro! Do you even 4k?!

I would love the 4k but will it bring the higher pings? I am having average 300 pings on good days, 1976 pings on bad days and seem like I've been having more bad days for the past 4 months. My highest record is over 4000 pings.

@Korval.3751 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:This is 6 year old game on 12 year old engine. Reality check required.

WoW also got engine overhaul multiple times, while GW2 is stuck in the early 2000s with its mentality and design choices. It's not going to change.

Gameplay > Graphics

@VanWilder.6923 said:I would love the 4k but will it bring the higher pings? I am having average 300 pings on good days, 1976 pings on bad days and seem like I've been having more bad days for the past 4 months. My highest record is over 4000 pings.

Ping has nothing to do with processing graphics. It's a measure of how fast your internet connection is communicating with the servers. Graphics are all processed within your own computer.

Lower your shadow setting. It does not perform well on nVidia cards. No matter how powerful.

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@Korval.3751 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:This is 6 year old game on 12 year old engine. Reality check required.

Then that's ArenaNet's problem. Small iterative improvements over time are better than ignoring 4K until it becomes a thing.

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:Gameplay > Graphics

Not when the technology exists to do both well.

@TheQuickFox.3826 said:Lower your shadow setting. It does not perform well on nVidia cards. No matter how powerful.

For as long as I can remember, Nvidia has owned most of the video card market. So for ArenaNet not to focus on Nvidia cards for GW2 is foolish.The bottom line is the performance issue isn't because it is a Nvidia card. The performance issue is coming from the game's inability to handle graphics at ultra-high resolutions because their engine is just old. A problem like this would be present in any video game that cannot do 4K well. Case in point, Assassin's Creed Black Flag and Unity were ported to PC from consoles during a time when those consoles didn't have support for 4K. Neither runs well on my new machine.

I'm putting ArenaNet on notice that their game at 4K isn't up to the standards gamers expect. They can either do something about it now or ignore it at their peril.

I've said my piece.

@"Korval.3751" said:The most disappointing was Guild Wars 2. Out of the group, this one had the worse performances from a prominent developer like ArenaNet. I saw extreme framerate shifts occurring in Lion's Arch whenever I opened and closed the inventory. The framerate would jump up to 42 from 33 and then down to 33 when closed.I'm on a high-speed Fiber Optic connection. On average, ping times are 3-5 ms; 95-97 Mbps upload and download speeds. Noting this to eliminate the Internet as the potential cause for framerate issues. Also, I installed GW2 on the primary SSD, so that eliminates drive read/write lag. The problem appears to stem from lousy net-code or poorly optimized graphics in the game itself. Maybe both.Typically I'd say, "the Guild Wars engine requires significant single-thread performance..." and "the processor is bottle-necking the pipeline." ...While these things are usually true, they are also completely irrelevant since this thread is lodging a complaint, instead of asking a question. So I add them here only as a statement of my experience, instead of an attempt at answering a query.

The net-code is fine. "Graphics" optimization is too imprecise a descriptor to quantify here, imo. Video cards are utilized effectively ...when they are given information to process. What you (still) have is an engine that micro-manages too many of its processes from the primary thread. This isn't even news -they know about it- and they have had success improving multi-thread support, but R&D is expensive. It is what it is.

! Also, every one of those games you listed -save for American Truck Simulator- renders those 4K resolutions with the benefit of DirectX11. We are still riding the DX9 wave. Now, the workload of drawing more pixels is the domain of the video card, and remains DirectX agnostic. Just the same, none of the current-gen process-efficient technology can be utilized by the GW2 client. No TXAA, no tesselation, no HBAO+, no PCSS, no crepuscular rays, no volumetric lighting. You have a 1080Ti but it doesn't matter, can't use NVDOF, frustum traced shadows, or HairWorks either....Really, it makes what they have achieved all the more impressive. ArenaNet has been iterating on this software for more than a decade, and in the process designed some damn creative effects and workarounds in the absence of DX11 libraries.

^{I get where you're coming from though. I wish some things worked better than they do, and better is better. (For lack of a better word.)}

I would be extremely surprised if a large enough chunk of a relatively casual audience which make up gw2 (and many mmos) either care or are able to support 4k in a timeframe that would force anet to make a decision for a change. Mmos date in terms of look very quickly versus other games which would have a lifespan measured in weeks or months. I remain unconvinced 4k is a concern for gw2.

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:This is 6 year old game on 12 year old engine. Reality check required.

Why are you snarky towards him for aNet using an outdated engine? If a game is active and still gets updates in the second half of 2018 then I'd also expect it to be maintained accordingly.

Also, yet again, I also don't know where your logic comes from. The older the engine, the older the game. So these engines usually don't have the visual eye-candy that you would except from top-notch state of the art games that are released in 2018, right? So shouldn't it, according to your logic, running even faster?

Every game runs faster becasue they are old. E.g. UT99 ran okay on our VooDoo2 and AMD K6-2 (350 MHz) in 1999. With 30-40fps in 1024x768.Now UT99 runs with 100+fps on every integrated GPU in 1080p. I played UT99 on my Surface 3 in 4K with no FPS issues. According to your logic, "it's an 18-year old engine, it must run sluggish".

THAT is a reality check - for your logic. Not the other way around: "Old engine is getting slower per se".

Excelsior.

@Zedek.8932 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:This is 6 year old game on 12 year old engine. Reality check required.

The graphics quality in GW1 and 2 look the same to you?

@Randulf.7614 said:I would be extremely surprised if a large enough chunk of a relatively casual audience which make up gw2 (and many mmos) either care or are able to support 4k in a timeframe that would force anet to make a decision for a change.

Do you have any stats to back up that statement, or are you making that up because that's what you believe?

When both the PS4 PRO and Xbox One X release with native 4K support and PC is capable of it now as well, 4K is coming. How long do you suppose it's going to be before 4K becomes the average all gamers expect on both PC and consoles? With technology evolving and costs lowering, I see it happening in 2-3 years from now. ArenaNet is going to need to do something otherwise the engine's age is going to create a situation where Guild Wars 2 performs at sub-optimal performance on modern hardware. ArenaNet does not want that.

I'm not attacking the game or ArenaNet. I'm actually warning them now so they can take action.

@"Tabasco.1743" said:Typically I'd say, "the Guild Wars engine requires significant single-thread performance..." and "the processor is bottle-necking the pipeline." ...While these things are usually true, they are also completely irrelevant since this thread is lodging a complaint, instead of asking a question. So I add them here only as a statement of my experience, instead of an attempt at answering a query.

This is a general problem with people. You read what I wrote as a complaint, when in fact it is a warning to a business I patronize (yes, I buy gems almost every month, so I am a paying customer of ArenaNet). I care about ArenaNet and Guild Wars 2 and I want to let them know that their game needs work to run well at 4K.

@Korval.3751 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:I would be extremely surprised if a large enough chunk of a relatively casual audience which make up gw2 (and many mmos) either care or are able to support 4k in a timeframe that would force anet to make a decision for a change.

Mine was a belief based on what I've seen with the community in this and many other mmos. Regardless, I certainly don't see 4k impacting mmo gaming in the next few years, if ever. At least with this generation.

Whether I'm right or wrong though. I doubt Anet needs the warning or heads up. They will be in a much, much better position to make that judgement than us.

@Zedek.8932 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:This is 6 year old game on 12 year old engine. Reality check required.

Precisely. I genuinely thought on my new computer, GW2 would be amazingly fast with framerates in the 80s, 90s, maybe even 100s. That was my expectation for a game like Guild Wars 2 with constant updates. I was not prepared for an abysmal 33. Even more so, wasn't prepared for apparent framerate instabilities. This surprise told me ArenaNet hasn't made any improvements to their engine to keep it current with modern hardware. They should look into upgrading to DirectX 12. I will continue to buy gems almost every month to do my part to help make that happen! :)

I disagree the future of gaming is solid 3D holograms and Anet should not waste time making the game 4K or VR compatible and start working on a southsun kasmeer 3D hologram.

“Magnets.” - Colonel Jack O’Neill.

@"Korval.3751" said:Recently, I upgraded to a machine capable of steady 60+ FPS at 4K.

CPU: i7-8700Motherboard: ASUS ROG Strix Z370-E GamingVideo: MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GRAM: Team T-Force Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4-24001st Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB2nd Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB3rd Drive: WD Black 2 TB 7200Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G3 850WDisplays: (2) LG 27"" 4K UHD IPS screensOS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

I've gone through a collection of around 30 titles, testing them to see how they perform. You can see the detailed results on my Google Sheet. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pfb_Guw5DfJ0KuhgawzmAPPCpxcPZtpqnmtagTiGDiw/edit

GW2's results for the sake of brevity.

• Installed Drive: Primary SDD
• Resolution: 3840 x 2160
• Avg FPS: 33
• Graphics Quality: High
• Anti-Aliasing: FXAA
• Post Processing: High
• Shadows: High
• Shaders: High
• Character Model Quality: High
• Texture Quality: High
• Animations: High
• Environments: High
• LOD Distance: High
• Reflections: All
• Render Sampling: Native

The most disappointing was Guild Wars 2. Out of the group, this one had the worse performances from a prominent developer like ArenaNet. I saw extreme framerate shifts occurring in Lion's Arch whenever I opened and closed the inventory. The framerate would jump up to 42 from 33 and then down to 33 when closed.

I'm on a high-speed Fiber Optic connection. On average, ping times are 3-5 ms; 95-97 Mbps upload and download speeds. Noting this to eliminate the Internet as the potential cause for framerate issues. Also, I installed GW2 on the primary SSD, so that eliminates drive read/write lag. The problem appears to stem from lousy net-code or poorly optimized graphics in the game itself. Maybe both.

Eventually 4K gaming is going to be the norm for many. You want your game to be 4K ready.

4k is useless for a monitor of that size. Now if you go 40+ then it would warrant 4k. 2k is perfect for that size monitor and also makes the framerate way better. I myself will probably transition to 4k when the new 1100 series comes out and be playing on my living room tv.

@"Korval.3751" said:

Do you have any stats to back up that statement, or are you making that up because that's what you believe?

If you look at the stats that Steam gathers (which covers a good percentage of Pc gamers - https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam?platform=pc) you will see that those running at 4k account for 1.24% and with 90% of people running at 1080p or less. Those good enough stats for you?

Your estimate on the adoption of 4K is way off, there has been a very slow uptake of 4k and for the size of monitor that most have space for or want to game on then 4k adds very little but does increase costs considerably.

I don't see a major engine update happening. GW2's game engine is very dated and the dev responses over the years suggest that it is too difficult to work with in terms of updating it. Which I can see considering GW2 is still on the same engine it launched with and much of the old content has been left alone. They've done what they can in terms of increasing the polygon counts and textures in the newer content, but they are still limited. I would expect a new title with a new engine instead of an overhaul of GW2.

@"Korval.3751" said:Recently, I upgraded to a machine capable of steady 60+ FPS at 4K.

CPU: i7-8700Motherboard: ASUS ROG Strix Z370-E GamingVideo: MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GRAM: Team T-Force Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4-24001st Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB2nd Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB3rd Drive: WD Black 2 TB 7200Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G3 850WDisplays: (2) LG 27"" 4K UHD IPS screensOS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

I've gone through a collection of around 30 titles, testing them to see how they perform. You can see the detailed results on my Google Sheet. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pfb_Guw5DfJ0KuhgawzmAPPCpxcPZtpqnmtagTiGDiw/edit

GW2's results for the sake of brevity.

• Installed Drive: Primary SDD
• Resolution: 3840 x 2160
• Avg FPS: 33
• Graphics Quality: High
• Anti-Aliasing: FXAA
• Post Processing: High
• Shadows: High
• Shaders: High
• Character Model Quality: High
• Texture Quality: High
• Animations: High
• Environments: High
• LOD Distance: High
• Reflections: All
• Render Sampling: Native

The most disappointing was Guild Wars 2. Out of the group, this one had the worse performances from a prominent developer like ArenaNet. I saw extreme framerate shifts occurring in Lion's Arch whenever I opened and closed the inventory. The framerate would jump up to 42 from 33 and then down to 33 when closed.

I'm on a high-speed Fiber Optic connection. On average, ping times are 3-5 ms; 95-97 Mbps upload and download speeds. Noting this to eliminate the Internet as the potential cause for framerate issues. Also, I installed GW2 on the primary SSD, so that eliminates drive read/write lag. The problem appears to stem from lousy net-code or poorly optimized graphics in the game itself. Maybe both.

Eventually 4K gaming is going to be the norm for many. You want your game to be 4K ready.

GW2 is CPU based, not GPU, so your CPU is doing most of the work and the GPU is barely helping at all...that's the way the engine is designed and that's what allows it to run on older machines...don't get your hopes up for a complete overhaul of the engine...not going to happen. Also, it will stay DX9 based for the exact same reason, so it can run on a multitude of computers, not just souped up gaming rigs...that is why it can run on potatoes.

P.S. - I run on an Alienware Aurora R6, and average 65 - 80 FPS will all graphic settings on High...and that's on and HDD, been to lazy to install my SSD(s) yet.

@Korval.3751 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:I would be extremely surprised if a large enough chunk of a relatively casual audience which make up gw2 (and many mmos) either care or are able to support 4k in a timeframe that would force anet to make a decision for a change.

Ok, first off consoles are still basically capped at 30fps @4k resolutions. The hardware in the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is already a few years old by development standards. It will be the next gen consoles that would be truly capable of 4k over 30fps as it stands right now.Also considering 1080p has been around for over 10 years with it finally gaining traction as the norm within the last 5-6 years, how long do you think it will actually be before 4k is the norm? Honestly, 2k gaming is the great middle ground right now. Gaming on an ultrawide or a good 1440p monitor right now is the sweet spot with great graphical fidelity and fast framerates.

Edit: I forgot to add, your video card will be a big factor also in being able to run games @4k over 30fps. If you look at the market right now, the current top end cards from Nvidia and AMD will do that. I will also assume that most gamers are not using $2000+ systems for gaming , let alone dumping $500+ on a video card alone.