pls no more dps killer maps for JW

[quake.9023]

such as amnytas......unplayable. even with a new computer......i dnt care what u put on it, if the fps drops from standing still and no one there, dont release it. really bad exp. verdant brink looks better and looks more saturated thn soto maps.....so i know u can make good looking maps without killing the fps. 

[Randulf.7614]

I don't necs disagree with toning down some detail/effects for map design and making them more like PoF, but I've never found it unplayable and my PC is 4 years old. Are you playing on the highest settings?

[Gehenna.3625]

Ahh you mean FPS killer maps.

Well, that all depends on your PC/laptop specs, I suppose. Some might share your plight but many others won't. I don't see this being an issue for most players, particularly because SoTO has been out for a year and there's not been many complaints about it as far as I can remember.

[Zebulous.2934]

Eh it all depends on how many players Anet thinks they will lose if the update can't run on low-grade setups.  A customer who can't spare $500 on a new rig may be able to spend $50 on an expansion and another $20 on cosmetics.  If players find out that their current machine can't run the expansion then they may not spend a dime.  If a player does save up for a new rig, who is to say that player won't see something else to spend that money on instead? Some other game, or a canoe, but not a new computer so definitely not the expansion.

Keeping the game playable for low-end computers should see more player funds going toward Gw2 rather than to a computer parts manufacturer. 

Surely the number of players who can budget to spare $50 vastly outnumber players who can set aside $500 or $1000?  I don't really know how wealthy the average Gw2 player is, or if this game even has whales.

Edited July 30 by Zebulous.2934

[Dreamonology.8362]

3 hours ago, Zebulous.2934 said:

Eh it all depends on how many players Anet thinks they will lose if the update can't run on low-grade setups.  A customer who can't spare $500 on a new rig may be able to spend $50 on an expansion and another $20 on cosmetics.  If players find out that their current machine can't run the expansion then they may not spend a dime.  If a player does save up for a new rig, who is to say that player won't see something else to spend that money on instead? Some other game, or a canoe, but not a new computer so definitely not the expansion.

Keeping the game playable for low-end computers should see more player funds going toward Gw2 rather than to a computer parts manufacturer. 

Surely the number of players who can budget to spare $50 vastly outnumber players who can set aside $500 or $1000?  I don't really know how wealthy the average Gw2 player is, or if this game even has whales.

yep, accessibility software release 101, one thing world of warcraft does really well, can play all versions of wow on a toaster.

[Cherazade.4170]

Why do we have to suffer worse looking maps just because you are playing on a potato? Tone your settings down or work for a new pc.

[Mistwraithe.3106]

GW2 is already reasonably forgiving. My family are running it on a range of machines including my wife on a i7-4790K and Geforce 980 computer from 2014. Admittedly that was pretty high specs back in 2014 but still, that's a 10 year old computer and it runs it adequately at HD resolution, even in SOTO.

[Cherazade.4170]

13 minutes ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

GW2 is already reasonably forgiving. My family are running it on a range of machines including my wife on a i7-4790K and Geforce 980 computer from 2014. Admittedly that was pretty high specs back in 2014 but still, that's a 10 year old computer and it runs it adequately at HD resolution, even in SOTO.

That's why I'm starting to think OP is playing gw2 on a calculator or something

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

3 hours ago, Cherazade.4170 said:

That's why I'm starting to think OP is playing gw2 on a calculator or something

On 6/12/2024 at 3:55 AM, quake.9023 said:

im running 14600k at 5.3ghz fixed  and 3070. 

[Zebulous.2934]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 Quoting people from other threads that they have made?  I am impressed!  I'm not sure why I am impressed, but I am.  I also also feel a bit unsettled. I have a need to make sure my posts are consistent with each other from now on.

Edited July 30 by Zebulous.2934
Corrected my own repetitive boring grammer

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

It's not too difficult when one makes essentially the same post repeatedly.  🤷‍♂️

[Liewec.2896]

GW2 runs fine even on my handheld PC.

i'd recommend you try Lossless Scaling from Steam if you're having FPS troubles, you can cap your FPS at 30 or 60 and the app will double it with artificial frames.

on my handheld i had to play the game on lower setting s to get decent frames, but with Lossless Scaling i can run the game on fairly high settings and 60 FPS,

(outside of the massive zerg balls like world bosses and convergences etc)

[quake.9023]

3 hours ago, Liewec.2896 said:

GW2 runs fine even on my handheld PC.

i'd recommend you try Lossless Scaling from Steam if you're having FPS troubles, you can cap your FPS at 30 or 60 and the app will double it with artificial frames.

on my handheld i had to play the game on lower setting s to get decent frames, but with Lossless Scaling i can run the game on fairly high settings and 60 FPS,

(outside of the massive zerg balls like world bosses and convergences etc)

i did. it has a response delay of 3 seconds. lol. id rather 30fps thn that. 

[Liewec.2896]

37 minutes ago, quake.9023 said:

i did. it has a response delay of 3 seconds. lol. id rather 30fps thn that. 

did you turn the scaling off and only use the frame generation? (2x)

also did you cap your frames at 30fps?

i found i was getting crazy input delay on my handheld like you, but it was only when my machine was pushed to its limits,

once i capped FPS to 30 and turned off the "scaling" my machine had a little performance wiggle room, now there is absolutely no input delay

[Mistwraithe.3106]

I'm starting to think there might be some problem with OPs new computer? Either software (eg Driver) or hardware? Either that or perhaps just very high expectations or sensitivity to low frame rates?

[Raizel.1839]

On 7/26/2024 at 5:50 PM, Randulf.7614 said:

I don't necs disagree with toning down some detail/effects for map design and making them more like PoF, but I've never found it unplayable and my PC is 4 years old. Are you playing on the highest settings?

Is 4 years considered to be a lot for a pc? I never change mines before 10 years xD

[Gehenna.3625]

6 hours ago, Raizel.1839 said:

Is 4 years considered to be a lot for a pc? I never change mines before 10 years xD

Hehe, the thing is that it depends really on what you buy and what your expectations of it are. If you want good graphics and smooth gameplay and you buy a low end computer it's outdated the same day you buy it 

[Jukhy.2431]

13 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

I'm starting to think there might be some problem with OPs new computer? Either software (eg Driver) or hardware? Either that or perhaps just very high expectations or sensitivity to low frame rates?

Well, 14600K is 14th gen Raptor Lake CPU. In case you haven't been following tech news it's possible that the whole 13th and 14th gen line-up (= Raptor Lake) has a microcode error affecting voltage usage that's causing instability and crashes. Intel "promised" BIOS update to fix it sometime mid-August but if your system is already crashing the fix most likely won't help you anymore, so in that case your best chance is to contact Intel support (they said to do this).

One source for this: https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/1e9mf04/intel_core_13th14th_gen_desktop_processors/