Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Zora'e
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:20:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Zora''e on 19/06/2011 09:25:54 Just got back from SISI. New build. Lets see where to start...
A: Esc menu audio & chat tab produces a blank wall of nothing.
B: 1 client on sisi uses the same CPU as three currently on TQ
C: 1 client on sisi uses 5-6 times as much GPU resources as one client on TQ (I.E. I can run 3 clients on TQ and still not use as much CPU/GPU resources as ONE client running CQ).
D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ)
E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture.
F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ.
G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients)
H: Overall UI functionality is... while not reduced... greatly more troublesome to access with CQ controls
I: Glitchy and missing gun animations
J: Spastic (sometimes there, sometimes not) warp animations.
K: Spastic module animations (i.e. Nos/Neut etc)
L: (Good Point) New Maller Hull design looks tight as hell.
My Prediction for Incarna's success: Not a snow balls chance in hell CCP isn't going to have to do damage control and undo 3/4 of the garbage they are doing before all is said and done or face losing quite probably 1/4 or more of their subscription base due to the ultimate fiasco Incarna is shaping up to be. This is a shame because I was looking forward to the possibilities Incarna could bring. -
|
Hyperforce99
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:24:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Zora'e Just got back from SISI. New build. Lets see where to start...
A: Esc menu audio & chat tab produces a blank wall of nothing.
B: 1 client on sisi uses the same CPU as three currently on TQ
C: 1 client on sisi uses 5-6 times as much GPU resources as one client on TQ (I.E. I can run 3 clients on TQ and still not use as much CPU/GPU resources as ONE client running CQ).
D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ)
E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture.
F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ.
G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients)
H: Overall UI functionality is... while not reduced... greatly more troublesome to access with CQ controls
My Prediction for Incarna's success: Not a snow balls chance in hell CCP isn't going to have to do damage control and undo 3/4 of the garbage they are doing before all is said and done or face losing quite probably 1/4 or more of their subscription base due to the ultimate fiasco Incarna is shaping up to be. This is a shame because I was looking forward to the possibilities Incarna could bring.
Mind if I take this and quote you somewhere else ? --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/ |
Digital Messiah
Oregami Ultd
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:25:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Zora'e Just got back from SISI. New build. Lets see where to start...
A: Esc menu audio & chat tab produces a blank wall of nothing.
B: 1 client on sisi uses the same CPU as three currently on TQ
C: 1 client on sisi uses 5-6 times as much GPU resources as one client on TQ (I.E. I can run 3 clients on TQ and still not use as much CPU/GPU resources as ONE client running CQ).
D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ)
E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture.
F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ.
G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients)
H: Overall UI functionality is... while not reduced... greatly more troublesome to access with CQ controls
My Prediction for Incarna's success: Not a snow balls chance in hell CCP isn't going to have to do damage control and undo 3/4 of the garbage they are doing before all is said and done or face losing quite probably 1/4 or more of their subscription base due to the ultimate fiasco Incarna is shaping up to be. This is a shame because I was looking forward to the possibilities Incarna could bring.
Please post system specs and difference with drivers if any. Also, how are you monitoring this?
Quote: "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"
|
Tobias Sjodin
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:32:00 -
[4]
What? Beta builds on a TEST server aren't working properly?
I hope you are reporting these issues to CCP instead of being an attention woman providing sexual services for money.
HABIT
|
Solar Blade
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:33:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Solar Blade on 19/06/2011 09:34:15
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin What? Beta builds on a TEST server aren't working properly?
I hope you are reporting these issues to CCP instead of being an attention woman providing sexual services for money.
Would you mind not calling other people wh*res, when they are reporting an issue, thank you.
|
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:35:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin What? Beta builds on a TEST server aren't working properly?
I hope you are reporting these issues to CCP instead of being an attention woman providing sexual services for money.
considering how QA in this game works, I'm expecting these bugs to get through.
and then CCP will spend 2 weeks to fix them. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:38:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin What? Beta builds on a TEST server aren't working properly?
I hope you are reporting these issues to CCP instead of being an attention woman providing sexual services for money.
you should post with an alt or turn off your alliance tags, makes your trolling seem too obvious
7/10 though, well done _____________________ Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're on a forum, with the alt your alt could post like. |
Zora'e
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:39:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Zora''e on 19/06/2011 09:46:49
Originally by: Hyperforce99 Mind if I take this and quote you somewhere else ?
Not at all. Feel free.
Originally by: Digital Messiah
Originally by: Zora'e Just got back from SISI. New build. Lets see where to start...
A: Esc menu audio & chat tab produces a blank wall of nothing.
B: 1 client on sisi uses the same CPU as three currently on TQ
C: 1 client on sisi uses 5-6 times as much GPU resources as one client on TQ (I.E. I can run 3 clients on TQ and still not use as much CPU/GPU resources as ONE client running CQ).
D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ)
E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture.
F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ.
G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients)
H: Overall UI functionality is... while not reduced... greatly more troublesome to access with CQ controls
My Prediction for Incarna's success: Not a snow balls chance in hell CCP isn't going to have to do damage control and undo 3/4 of the garbage they are doing before all is said and done or face losing quite probably 1/4 or more of their subscription base due to the ultimate fiasco Incarna is shaping up to be. This is a shame because I was looking forward to the possibilities Incarna could bring.
Please post system specs and difference with drivers if any. Also, how are you monitoring this?
I'm monitoring this using CoreTemp, EVGA Precision, Windows Performance (task manager), and by running one, two and three accounts on sisi, and then doing the same on tq to get performance comparisons. Docked, and in space.
My testing system isn't uber. AMD dual core 2.6 Ghtz, Windows 7 x64, 8 gigs ram, 1 gig Nvidia GT430.
I use this machine for baseline testing. It isn't 'Uber' and is probably roughly middle of the road as computers go. Drivers are current as of 2 days ago (I check for updates every Thurs/Fri). -
|
Zora'e
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:57:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin What? Beta builds on a TEST server aren't working properly?
I hope you are reporting these issues to CCP instead of being an attention woman providing sexual services for money.
TQ beta build on a test server less than 3 days from deployment. By now one would 'think' the build on the test server would be ready for deployment, however, that isn't what is being seen. At best the current build should be a month away from deployment, not 2-3 days.
As for the other part of your post, I learned by watching the best. PL members. -
|
N'tek alar
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 10:04:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Solar Blade Edited by: Solar Blade on 19/06/2011 09:34:15
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin What? Beta builds on a TEST server aren't working properly?
I hope you are reporting these issues to CCP instead of being an attention woman providing sexual services for money.
Would you mind not calling other people wh*res, when they are reporting an issue, thank you.
Posting on the forums is not "reporting an issue". Filing a bug report is. |
|
Fury Poljus
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 10:04:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Zora'e Edited by: Zora''e on 19/06/2011 09:25:54
F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ.
G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients)
This is the thing thats goin **** me off simple things like changing ships, emptying cargo hold of ore, refilling ammo,ect ect.
I already think TQ is slow as it is and now you have to load CQ each time its goin to become very boring very quickly.The novelty value of the shiney new CQ will soon diminish once relize how ****in slow its goin to be.
I recently come back to eve after quiting for 6 months even got a second account and really enjoing playing eve with two clones and second monitor but worried CQ goin ruin all this.
|
Nuhm DeAra
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 10:38:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Zora'e Edited by: Zora''e on 19/06/2011 09:25:54 My computer is a pile of crap and the end is nigh.
TL;DR
|
Anne Arqui
Minmatar Diamonds in the Rough Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 10:44:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin What? Beta builds on a TEST server aren't working properly?
I guess those Beta builds work the same on the production server?
|
Holy One
Quiet.Storm Frater Adhuc Excessum
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 10:51:00 -
[14]
Still flying the flag for dudes worried they are going to be forced to quit eve because their PC can't handle 3x more memory footprint and cpu/gpu overhead to run a feature they don't want/ need.
BBQ makes me hungry for more... |
Krevnos
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 11:09:00 -
[15]
To add discomfort to misery, the client is already unstable from a patch that was released a few weeks ago: an issue that hasn't been addressed in the subsequent multiple patches since then.
I really hope they don't go an release this Incarna patch on Tuesday. The publicity stunt might be thwarted by delaying it, but we're talking about a product that is nowhere near a stage where it should be released to the public.
For once I wish they would turn back on their company ethic, and release a finished, "polished" product.
|
Zora'e
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 12:01:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Nuhm DeAra
Originally by: Zora'e Edited by: Zora''e on 19/06/2011 09:25:54 My computer is a pile of crap and the end is nigh.
TL;DR
What part of my statement that my testing computer is 'middle of the road' did you misunderstand, or is it you just choose to ignore what you don't want to see?
I won't bother mentioning that it exceeds CCP's stated minimum for Incarna by a fairly decent factor. Oh wait, I just did. In fact, it sits just above the MIDDLE of CCP's stated minimum and their stated optimum machine specs to run Incarna, that put's it as about an average machine. Hmm.. so an average machine is a pile of crap to you, well... I guess not everybody can afford the newest and greatest over priced piece of hardware.
Me? I'm just a regular working stiff. I'd rather pay my bills and put some RL isk away for the future, than blow it on a $5000.00 high end gaming machine. My comp works well for everything I do, including the current build of EVE on TQ. It has absolutely no trouble running the number of clients I normally run (3). In fact it doesn't even struggle to do that.
However the build on SISI for Incarna more than triples the CPU and GPU requirements for a single client. And running three clients pushes the hardware a bit, docked or in space (though my comp still handles it fairly well except when docking three clients at once.. then it takes forever to load CQ).
Thought lag was bad before? Wait till the first fleet fight after Incarna goes live. When people start realizing that their GPU's are now doing 3-5 times the work they used to do... People used to lag in fleet fights before... now... I predict those fleet fights are going to be a massive stop-motion experience in pure frustration for a lot more players.
Anyway, I am glad you have such an uber machine that you consider the average machine a pile of crap. Must be nice to be able to afford toys like that. If you ever want to hand down your 'old' gaming rigs let me know. LOL.
~Z
-
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 12:11:00 -
[17]
Not to worry, CCP will just reclassify ants as features leaving only a few bug carcasses.
|
|
CCP Navigator
C C P C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 12:15:00 -
[18]
Moved from General Discussion.
Navigator Lead Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online
|
|
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 12:15:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Zora'e D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ) E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if that were intentional. I.c.: the only old station view we're gonna get will be a static image, and no longer the real deal. --
|
Madcow
Minmatar Sebiestor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 12:16:00 -
[20]
What everyone seems to dont know or doesnt wanna mention is you have full access to the neocom while you load so if loading goes slow you can edit your ship and undock before the full screen is loaded. ______________________ I am just a crazy cow |
|
|
CCP Navigator
C C P C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 12:23:00 -
[21]
Zora'e, I have passed this on to the QA team but it would be really helpful if you could submit a detailed bug report so that we can try and reproduce these issues.
Navigator Lead Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online
|
|
|
CCP Vertex
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 13:40:00 -
[22]
Zora'e, I would appreciate it if you could reply to this thread when you have filed a bug report. I would also like to know what graphic settings you have enabled (a screenshot would be great) and your DxDiag just attach it to the bug report.
Thanks :)
|
|
Salpun
Gallente Paramount Commerce
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 14:10:00 -
[23]
While we got devs looking at this thread can you please take a look at my CQ bug threads and give some feed back, please. Thanks
|
Soden Rah
Gallente EVE University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 14:16:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Soden Rah on 19/06/2011 14:17:28
Originally by: Salpun While we got devs looking at this thread can you please take a look at my CQ bug threads and give some feed back, please. Thanks
Given Salpun has been doing your job for you, and running a very good consolidated, kept up to date, feedback thread, documenting your otherwise completely undocumented patches... you owe him this.
EDIT: and while you are about it, This thread could do with some attention... --------
By Grfmsv÷tn, Eyjafjallaj÷kull, Vatnaj÷kull, and Hekla itself... THIS is my sig.
Support Optional CQ
|
Commissar Kate
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 14:38:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Commissar Kate on 19/06/2011 14:47:55 Hmm while we got CCPs attention. I'd like to point out that for me atleast, Postprocessing and interior effects especially seem to have the greatest performance hits. The steam under the catwalk is a killer when interior effects is set on high.
Id like to think I got a decent machine to run this too. AMD 1090t 6 core cpu and a Nvidia GTX460.
The CPU can max out at around 45%-50% at times and other places in the CQ it sets around 10%. Graphics settings don't seem to effect this much.
When postprocessing is enabled or interior effects are set on high the GPU spikes and goes to around 99% usage. The steam under the catwalk has great effect on FPS. Does a GTX 460 not have enough power to run the CQ on full settings?
I'v just left postprocessing off and interior effects on medium and its quite playable with a steady framerate like that although CPU usage can still spike.
Edit: so it makes a little more sense, its early morning
|
|
CCP Vertex
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 22:45:00 -
[26]
Salpun, I've been reading your feedback thread for a while and although I havenÆt replied it does not mean we arenÆt taking feedback from the thread. I would like to thank you for your efforts in collating issues and encouraging people to bug report. Generally a comment such as 'I crash when doing xyz' is hard to replicate due to so many variables so having a bug report with system details/screenshots and crash dmp files is invaluable.
Soden Rah, test server patches are extremely difficult to document because of the sheer amount of development code changes that go into the code branch each day. Although this makes it difficult for players who are using new features on the test servers to see what got fixed, it would in the end be counterproductive as those development hours could be better used investigating and resolving issues.
Commissar Kate, the post processing and interior effects are GPU intensive as they control the settings for Lens flares, ILR, Particle effects and other graphic awesomeness. I would appreciate it if you could file a bug report with the following details:
DxDiag attached, screenshots of client graphic settings, screenshots of specific areas in the CQ you have low FPS on.
If you reply to this thread with the Bug report # I can take a look at this.
|
|
Salpun
Gallente Paramount Commerce
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 22:53:00 -
[27]
/highfive CCP Vertex.
Thanks for the reply.
|
Soden Rah
Gallente EVE University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2011.06.19 23:01:00 -
[28]
Originally by: CCP Vertex Salpun, I've been reading your feedback thread for a while and although I havenÆt replied it does not mean we arenÆt taking feedback from the thread. I would like to thank you for your efforts in collating issues and encouraging people to bug report. Generally a comment such as 'I crash when doing xyz' is hard to replicate due to so many variables so having a bug report with system details/screenshots and crash dmp files is invaluable.
Soden Rah, test server patches are extremely difficult to document because of the sheer amount of development code changes that go into the code branch each day. Although this makes it difficult for players who are using new features on the test servers to see what got fixed, it would in the end be counterproductive as those development hours could be better used investigating and resolving issues.
Commissar Kate, the post processing and interior effects are GPU intensive as they control the settings for Lens flares, ILR, Particle effects and other graphic awesomeness. I would appreciate it if you could file a bug report with the following details:
DxDiag attached, screenshots of client graphic settings, screenshots of specific areas in the CQ you have low FPS on.
If you reply to this thread with the Bug report # I can take a look at this.
yes but their is a difference between not being able to give detailed accounts of what's going on and total deafening silence.
If there are 5 devs working on a feature (I imagine Incarna has many more than that) and one each day could spend 15 mins responding to the major themes of the received feedback (so if an issue is being brought up many times it would get some sort of acknowledgement, with trickier issues dealt with in periodic dev blogs) that would go a long way to solving your problem... I am not asking for you to spend so much time talking to us you can't work, I am not that stupid, I am asking for 15 mins per day per team... surely that's not too much to ask?
The response I got to the list of questions I posted was there will be a dev blog.... several days later a dev blog appears telling us what we knew already, and ignoring all our questions... since then.... total silence... --------
By Grfmsv÷tn, Eyjafjallaj÷kull, Vatnaj÷kull, and Hekla itself... THIS is my sig.
Support Optional CQ
|
Zora'e
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 03:02:00 -
[29]
Originally by: CCP Vertex Zora'e, I would appreciate it if you could reply to this thread when you have filed a bug report. I would also like to know what graphic settings you have enabled (a screenshot would be great) and your DxDiag just attach it to the bug report.
Thanks :)
I'll go you one better. I'll Fraps it for you.
Oh and new problem has cropped up. When you change graphics settings while in game the client stops responding all together and gives you a solid black screen. Only fix is to restart the client. -
|
Zora'e
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 04:26:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Zora''e on 20/06/2011 04:30:45
Originally by: Madcow What everyone seems to dont know or doesnt wanna mention is you have full access to the neocom while you load so if loading goes slow you can edit your ship and undock before the full screen is loaded.
Not quite. While loading CQ the neocom reacts sluggishly. Yes you can use it once the buttons appear, but until then you get no reaction. Once the CQ is fully loaded everything reacts smoothly again. Disabling the CQ and docking etc is actually faster than TQ. TQ takes me anywhere from 5-10 seconds to load a single client after docking with station environment enabled. On CQ with it disabled it takes me about 3-5 seconds. I think my docking times on TQ with station environments disabled are roughly the same... 3-5 seconds.
The biggest problem is the clients GPU and CPU footprint has increased by a factor of 3 or more both docked or in space (and docked with environment enabled it is a resource hog). This isn't so bad running one client. But running 2 or more you start running out of resources on the GPU and CPU. Basically what this means is that non graphics intensive environments won't severely tax most peoples machines while running one client, moderate graphics situations (small gang fleet fights) will likely cause the older machine sets to begin to function horridly and high graphics environments (large fleet battles) is going to cause even high end machines to start choking much sooner than before.
Get into multiple client use and the problems start increasing even more. Two clients buries my CPU to 100% utilization and my graphics card starts being pushed. Three clients and my graphics card is running nearly full out and that is in a docking/station area environment w/o anybody else around me. Start bringing in ships (say Jita 4-4 as an example) and the systems requirements starts shooting through the roof. Add into that combat and you start seeing graphics needs pushing even gaming systems.
Overall, things look great yes. Can't deny that but CCP's stated minimum requirements is much to low for anything but say mining. The good side to this is the newer graphics environment may very well reduce some macro users to being unable to play.
That would be a good thing in my mind. -
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |