Warmonger - OMG!

[Pottsey]

“3D cards took off because they made a massive difference to visuals.”
Not at first they didn’t and they slowed down FPS.





“I've just download Warmonger and they blatantly have made it run bad on non PPU machines. When I spawn I get around 70fps and then my fps slowly decreases to around 15 and then will stay like that until I die. I respawn and I'm back at 70-80 fps...”
80fps I don’t believe that. Looks like your making stuff up. They have not blatantly made it run bad on none PPU machines. It’s a well known fact that the CPU cannot handle lots of physics. If they was such a clear case of FPS slowly going down without the PPU then it would be all over the net. But on all the PPU forums there is no mention of it. Just you and you alone. Blatantly makeing FPS go slow without some hardware is the type of thing net users love to read about and spread news about. It would be all over the news sites as bad press.




“that big, twisty, turny, exciting building would be demolised in 5 mins flat and all we would end up with would be a few guys running around in a big square full of rubble.”
Easily fixed you do what they do in warmonger and UT make some walls out of different stuff that doesn’t break to bits.





“actually scratch that, i can see it being a huge detriment.”
You can do lots of fun stuff like run up stairs as a sniper and blow out the stairs.

Use C4 style explosive to make a hole in a wall or ceiling and make a new entrance.

 

[div0]

Well, I figured UT3 runs perfectly well on my system (E6400, 2GB RAM and 8800GT) so this game should atleast be ok on it, even if they do say it needs the £80 PhysiX card...

Tried it out, default setting at 1440x900, got 9 FPS!
Tried it on minimum graphics, 9 FPS!
Tried it on full graphics, 6 FPS!

And it looks crud too, far worse than UT3, the better looking, physics packing game this is built on. I have therefore come to this conclusion.

This game has been designed to automatically run appaulingly badly on any machine without a PhysiX card as to promote the card. Not through there being a need for the card, but in such a way that it must detect you dont have one, then run slowly on purpose.

I do not belive for a second that my machine cannot run this game at all, yet UT3 runs at prob 60+ FPS (havent Frapsed it yet) on full graphics.

Haha, this is comedy.

It's like me having a PC with an inbuilt graphics card and an awesome CPU and saying - I can run a really CPU intensive (fairly low detail) game and it looks fine. I also get 60+fps.

Then I go out and buy Doom3 and it says I need a decent graphics card - but I don't believe them. My CPU is easily good enough to run this game, so I just can't believe that it'll not work.

But when I play it I get like 5fps and it looks like ****!!


By the sounds of things the game in the OP is designed to make use of lots of physics effects - your CPU and graphics card are not able to cope with this type of calculation particularly well. Just like, no matter how good your CPU is, it just isn't going to be able to do the job of a proper graphics card. So you're trying to run a game that your pc can't cope with and complaining that it runs slowly and looks really bad. What did you expect? Would you expect Doom3 to run properly on a machine with an awesome CPU, but no graphics card? Of course not! Would you try and accuse the makers of Doom3 of deliberately trying to promote the benefit of having a graphics card?

 

[Deanje]

“actually scratch that, i can see it being a huge detriment.”
You can do lots of fun stuff like run up stairs as a sniper and blow out the stairs.

Use C4 style explosive to make a hole in a wall or ceiling and make a new entrance.

I agree with this point, I think it would add a new dimension to a game; the environment then becomes an obstacle as well.

Infact, I agree with most of Pottsey's point. However, I find it highly unlikely that I'd ever buy a PhysX card myself, unless they became a recognised standard; but I do believe they have a place.
I also think that Catch 22 analogy is particularly apt.

 

[perox]

80fps I don’t believe that. Looks like your making stuff up.

Oh dear, do you want screenshots?

 

[Deanje]

I think he does, yes. Post away.

I think it's entirely possible that you start off with a high FPS which then grinds to a halt, it sounds like the physics havn't really started at that point. When they kick off, the hit takes its toll.

Of course, that's a guess as I havn't seen/played the game.

 

[div0]

Infact, I agree with most of Pottsey's point. However, I find it highly unlikely that I'd ever buy a PhysX card myself, unless they became a recognised standard; but I do believe they have a place.
I also think that Catch 22 analogy is particularly apt.

I am pretty much in agreement with those comments. I'm quite amused by how many people are very narrow minded when it comes to something like physx.


Sure it may not catch on and so it might not be required.

And there may well be a 'better' option in future - by 'better' I don't nessesarily mean technically better, but possibly better supported, or more diverse, or perhaps integrated into future graphics cards, etc)

And, no I won't be buying a physx card myself until I see that they are supported by more games and offering a benefit over a standard cpu+graphics card system.

But most of the people who are having a go at it saying its a load of **** are just too short sighted to see what COULD be a very good step forward in gaming. By all means it MAY well die out and be a total flop, and so for that reason have your reservations and don't go out buying one now. But please, some people need to get a clue before posting some of the comical things that I've read so far in this thread and in others like it.

 

[perox]

I think he does, yes. Post away.

I think it's entirely possible that you start off with a high FPS which then grinds to a halt, it sounds like the physics havn't really started at that point. When they kick off, the hit takes its toll.

Of course, that's a guess as I havn't seen/played the game.

Yes, when I spawn I'm at 60-90 fps, but I'm only moving a couple of steps then my fps dives, Im not doing anything to cause the fps to dive.

 

[Deanje]

Yes, when I spawn I'm at 60-90 fps, but I'm only moving a couple of steps then my fps dives, Im not doing anything to cause the fps to dive.

That's where you went wrong, walking requires PhysX.

But seriously, does it still dive even if you stand still from spawn? I'm not trying to justify why it's dropping, i'm just curious.

 

[div0]

Yes, when I spawn I'm at 60-90 fps, but I'm only moving a couple of steps then my fps dives, Im not doing anything to cause the fps to dive.

Having not played the game it's hard to comment - but is it possible that some physics effects (weather, dust, fire, explosins?) automatically start happening just after you spawn?

For example in a standard game, I could spawn looking at a wall and get 100+ fps, then take 2 or 3 steps and suddenly be looking over a huge city. In that case my fps would understandably drop.

Just saying that you get good fps at the start and then 2 seconds later you get low fps, doesn't mean that the game is doing anything 'dodgy' to deliberately reduce your fps.

In fact, would it be possible that the game is trying to add in some physics/effects, but that your comp is struggling to even show them? In that case you may get a fps drop, but without even seeing any noticable change. Just a suggestion, I doubt its likely, but as I say, I've not tried playing the game myself.

 

[perox]

That's where you went wrong, walking requires PhysX.

But seriously, does it still dive even if you stand still from spawn? I'm not trying to justify why it's dropping, i'm just curious.

Yep it does.

 

[div0]

What about my suggestions (above)?

 

[perox]

Spawned

Walked forward and turned left, fire a few bullets off... Nothing involving physics has happened.

 

[perox]

What about my suggestions (above)?

Yes I think your most probably right, but I don't think the fps loss for what's happening on screen it justified, just doesn't seem right to me.

 

[Deanje]

Having not played the game it's hard to comment - but is it possible that some physics effects (weather, dust, fire, explosins?) automatically start happening just after you spawn?

That's pretty much what I was trying to get at, except I failed miserably at communicating.

 

[div0]

Yes I think your most probably right, but I don't think the fps loss for what's happening on screen it justified, just doesn't seem right to me.

Looking at it - I'd say there may well be some physics calculations going on in that scene. But its hard to say for sure from a screenshot.

Whether or not you could get the same 'visual' effect without the calculations is another story.

I would suspect that they could maybe have picked something where the NEED for physics calculations is a bit more apparent. I can understand why you might be looking at that and thinking 'my comp should be able to handle this'. But I would suspect that there are possibly a lot of interactions being calculated (dust/explosions/debris?) that your comp just isn't suited for.

 

[Skeeter]

Yep, my FPS go from 50 at spawn to 9 within 3 seconds.

Didnt realise this would become a massive argument of PhysiX cards. Some people are seemingly trying to justify their purchase of a card. And saying my system is weak and slow is well... wrong, and is doing nothing that bigging up your own ego.

My main argument, that seems to have been forgotten, is that Warmonger is just poo. I would understand if I was trying to run a current game on my 3 year old graphics card, but the fact is im running current games on my 2 week old graphics card... all of which run fine, except Warmonger. a CPU and a GPU are REQUIRED for top PC gaming, a PPU is OPTIONAL, and should remain that way. They should make good games great, not crap games playable...

 

[Pottsey]

“Walked forward and turned left, fire a few bullets off... Nothing involving physics has happened.”
You have no physics in the first screenshot and demanding physics in the 2nd screenshot. How can you say nothing physics has happened.

The 2nd shot has wind and debris blowing which the CPU struggles with. You have the ash and objects blowing in the wind. There is a metal looking sheet or 3 being blown about along with the rest of the stuff being blown about.

By the 2nd screenshot assuming that’s your first spawn you now have the bots or player all running about blowing buildings up and causing more physics work.

Lastly you have large simple walls in the first screenshot and a more open landscape and fire in the 2nd.

 

[perox]

Yep, my FPS go from 50 at spawn to 9 within 3 seconds.

Didnt realise this would become a massive argument of PhysiX cards. Some people are seemingly trying to justify their purchase of a card. And saying my system is weak and slow is well... wrong, and is doing nothing that bigging up your own ego.

My main argument, that seems to have been forgotten, is that Warmonger is just poo. I would understand if I was trying to run a current game on my 3 year old graphics card, but the fact is im running current games on my 2 week old graphics card... all of which run fine, except Warmonger. a CPU and a GPU are REQUIRED for top PC gaming, a PPU is OPTIONAL, and should remain that way. They should make good games great, not crap games playable...

I agree as well, the game is dire. The physics are terrible for needing a PPU to make it playable, none of the debris is interactive you just walk straight through it when its destroyed. The cloth physics are also rubbish. I would be tempted to buy a PPU if a saw a game which actually made it look worth while.

 

[Pottsey]

“Some people are seemingly trying to justify their purchase of a card. And saying my system is weak and slow is well... wrong,”
It’s not wrong your system is weak and slow at physics. It’s got nothing to do with ego or justifying buying a PPU. There are effects the CPU cannot do at playable speeds which a PPU can. You trying to do those effects on the CPU. You get the same results on very high physics maps with UT3 or even Crysis. The CPU drops down to sub 15fps. In other words you system cannot handle the work as it’s too weak for what being asked.

The PPU is nice to have for the FPS boost let alone the new effects.

 

[perox]

“Walked forward and turned left, fire a few bullets off... Nothing involving physics has happened.”
You have no physics in the first screenshot and demanding physics in the 2nd screenshot. How can you say nothing physics has happened.

The 2nd shot has wind and debris blowing which the CPU struggles with. You have the ash and objects blowing in the wind. There is a metal looking sheet or 3 being blown about along with the rest of the stuff being blown about.

By the 2nd screenshot assuming that’s your first spawn you now have the bots or player all running about blowing buildings up and causing more physics work.

Lastly you have large simple walls in the first screenshot and a more open landscape and fire in the 2nd.

So you think 3 object being blown around justifies that fps drop? This was on a local game with no bots, and the fire is there on both shots, its in the same place.