COD Ghosts texture quality

  • 61 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by mabblebrox (6 posts) -

Is it just me or are the textures in COD Ghosts really low-res? I barely see a difference between Low and Extra settings. Unless something is wrong with my computer/install?

#2 Edited by the_bi99man (11022 posts) -


It's a COD game, and it's available on PS3/360. What did you expect?

#3 Posted by lostrib (30829 posts) -

make sure the image quality is set to extra

#4 Edited by Cyberdot (3510 posts) -

It's a COD game, and it's available on PS3/360. What did you expect?

Pretty much.

#5 Edited by metroid5 (927 posts) -
#6 Posted by Bikouchu35 (7191 posts) -

quake 3 baby!

#7 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@lostrib said:

make sure the image quality is set to extra

On top of that, DO NOT put the Aspect Ratio on Auto, it does some weird calculation and makes it look like a console game.

Set the ratio manually and the game will look much better.

#8 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

It's a COD game, and it's available on PS3/360. What did you expect?

This, As with any PS3/360 game.. with the few rare excellent ports.

#9 Posted by lostrib (30829 posts) -

@lostrib said:

make sure the image quality is set to extra

On top of that, DO NOT put the Aspect Ratio on Auto, it does some weird calculation and makes it look like a console game.

Set the ratio manually and the game will look much better.

yeah, IW did some weird things with the settings. Oh and make sure to set your texture resolutions manually

#10 Posted by PredatorRules (7000 posts) -

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

#11 Edited by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

#13 Posted by alan_carter (1398 posts) -

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

#14 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts. I remember I couldn't play it properly for the first 4 weeks until they finally fixed it with 2 or 3 patches.

At least Ghosts with the first patch is a lot better and playable now.

#15 Posted by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

@alan_carter said:

@FelipeInside said:

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts. I remember I couldn't play it properly for the first 4 weeks until they finally fixed it with 2 or 3 patches.

At least Ghosts with the first patch is a lot better and playable now.

What made the launch of BLOPS 1 worse for you? BLOPs 1 worked perfectly for me at launch (in fact, I got to max level and got bored of the game by the end of the first month). No bugs, no crashes, no poor optimization. Multiplayer worked perfectly, better than any Battlefield game at launch. Benchmarks at game's launch showed that modest systems could max the game at 60 fps. For Ghosts on the other hand, I have a really decent system and benchmarks are showing me that I wouldn't even be able to play Ghosts at high settings. People complaining about lack of players online on Youtube and the forums. Doesn't sound like a better launch to me :(

#16 Edited by Arthas045 (5045 posts) -

Did they get rid of the RAM deal if you do not have 6GB?

#17 Posted by lostrib (30829 posts) -

Did they get rid of the RAM deal if you do not have 6GB?

not for multiplayer, and you have to use a hack for singleplayer

#18 Posted by lostrib (30829 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@alan_carter said:

@FelipeInside said:

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts. I remember I couldn't play it properly for the first 4 weeks until they finally fixed it with 2 or 3 patches.

At least Ghosts with the first patch is a lot better and playable now.

What made the launch of BLOPS 1 worse for you? BLOPs 1 worked perfectly for me at launch (in fact, I got to max level and got bored of the game by the end of the first month). No bugs, no crashes, no poor optimization. Multiplayer worked perfectly, better than any Battlefield game at launch. Benchmarks at game's launch showed that modest systems could max the game at 60 fps. For Ghosts on the other hand, I have a really decent system and benchmarks are showing me that I wouldn't even be able to play Ghosts at high settings. People complaining about lack of players online on Youtube and the forums. Doesn't sound like a better launch to me :(

if i remember correctly it had stuttering issues, but I feel like BLOPS1 launch was better than Ghost.

#19 Edited by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@alan_carter said:

@FelipeInside said:

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts. I remember I couldn't play it properly for the first 4 weeks until they finally fixed it with 2 or 3 patches.

At least Ghosts with the first patch is a lot better and playable now.

What made the launch of BLOPS 1 worse for you? BLOPs 1 worked perfectly for me at launch (in fact, I got to max level and got bored of the game by the end of the first month). No bugs, no crashes, no poor optimization. Multiplayer worked perfectly, better than any Battlefield game at launch. Benchmarks at game's launch showed that modest systems could max the game at 60 fps. For Ghosts on the other hand, I have a really decent system and benchmarks are showing me that I wouldn't even be able to play Ghosts at high settings. People complaining about lack of players online on Youtube and the forums. Doesn't sound like a better launch to me :(

So it ran perfectly for you then it must of ran perfectly for the rest of the planet right?

I had issues on both my PCs, my friends also had issues. One of my friends for some reason could run it at a playable rate but still not perfect. There was outrage all over the internet about the port (just like when Ghosts launch), I guess you didn't have internet that month to read those comments?

After about a month and a few patches they fixed it up and it ran fine.

Ghosts' launch was also awful. I have a decent system and it kept crashing, performance problems, bugs galore etc. After they released the first patch 3 days after launch (I've explained this to you 10 times already but you seem to ignore it), the game now runs at a playable rate on 4 different PCs I am witnessing. Perfect? far from it. They still need to keep optimizing and fixing bugs etc.

As for lack of players I don't know since every time I connect it finds a match straight away, and if you play at low population hours you now have Squads to play which only needs another human player and the rest are bots so lag is not an issue.

I don't know why you keep insisting and commenting on this game since you don't even own it so

1) you have no idea how it would run on your PC

and

2) you haven't played the actual game to see it's features and gameplay. Simple really.

#20 Posted by Arthas045 (5045 posts) -
@lostrib said:

@Arthas045 said:

Did they get rid of the RAM deal if you do not have 6GB?

not for multiplayer, and you have to use a hack for singleplayer

Yeah I knew about the hack on SP, but I am surprised this didn't get addressed....

#21 Posted by wis3boi (30800 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@Arthas045 said:

Did they get rid of the RAM deal if you do not have 6GB?

not for multiplayer, and you have to use a hack for singleplayer

Yeah I knew about the hack on SP, but I am surprised this didn't get addressed....

addressed? They were bragging about the game needing a 780 and 8gb of ram. I think they lied on purpose :P

#22 Posted by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

@FelipeInside said:

@alan_carter said:

@FelipeInside said:

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts. I remember I couldn't play it properly for the first 4 weeks until they finally fixed it with 2 or 3 patches.

At least Ghosts with the first patch is a lot better and playable now.

What made the launch of BLOPS 1 worse for you? BLOPs 1 worked perfectly for me at launch (in fact, I got to max level and got bored of the game by the end of the first month). No bugs, no crashes, no poor optimization. Multiplayer worked perfectly, better than any Battlefield game at launch. Benchmarks at game's launch showed that modest systems could max the game at 60 fps. For Ghosts on the other hand, I have a really decent system and benchmarks are showing me that I wouldn't even be able to play Ghosts at high settings. People complaining about lack of players online on Youtube and the forums. Doesn't sound like a better launch to me :(

So it ran perfectly for you then it must of ran perfectly for the rest of the planet right?

I had issues on both my PCs, my friends also had issues. One of my friends for some reason could run it at a playable rate but still not perfect. There was outrage all over the internet about the port (just like when Ghosts launch), I guess you didn't have internet that month to read those comments?

After about a month and a few patches they fixed it up and it ran fine.

Ghosts' launch was also awful. I have a decent system and it kept crashing, performance problems, bugs galore etc. After they released the first patch 3 days after launch (I've explained this to you 10 times already but you seem to ignore it), the game now runs at a playable rate on 4 different PCs I am witnessing. Perfect? far from it. They still need to keep optimizing and fixing bugs etc.

As for lack of players I don't know since every time I connect it finds a match straight away, and if you play at low population hours you now have Squads to play which only needs another human player and the rest are bots so lag is not an issue.

I don't know why you keep insisting and commenting on this game since you don't even own it so

1) you have no idea how it would run on your PC

and

2) you haven't played the actual game to see it's features and gameplay. Simple really.

Benchmarks are completely indicative of the performance I'd get on my PC (that's why they exist). Scanning the forums and people's reactions to that patch you're talking about...

Yeah, game still stutters like a bitch after the patch.

There was a 200mb patch last night but the game still runs like shit for me. *shrugs*

Did something happen? It's performing even worse online right now. Starting to stutter anytime anyone fires a gun in a 10m radius around me. Went from nearly unplayable to stupid broken.

Patch seems to have done nothing, still runs like shit and controls like shit.

How does me seeing the features and gameplays effect its atrocious bugs and optimization? :| I don't buy games that barely run and look like ass.

Also, lol @ low population hours. Shouldn't even have to think about low population hours in a brand new MP-centric game (that is supposedly popular).

Other research on the game's poor performance....

Ok so, from the beginning I suspected all this was RAM Related (in my case at least) It's a 64bit game with a minimum required of 6GB and it stuttered like hell while it was streaming stuff from the HDD.

So I decided to buy additional 8GB of DD3 2400Mhz RAM (for a total of 16GB) and guess what...

The game now runs smoothly, I've only noticed one very brief moment of

HDD streaming stuttering

in the Intro Chapter. And how much better does it like when it runs they way it's meant to. I'm guessing moving it to the SSD will completely eliminate Stuttering.

Checking it out, I've figured I'm using above 10GB - 11GB with Chrome + Neogaf opened - when running COD Ghosts (and I've closed a lot of resident programs before doing so) So the belief that the 6GB requierement is absurd because the game only gets to use 2GB is... errr... Absurd.

IW must absolutely know what the problem is, but they don't really want to drop a bomb saying their game demands that much memory to run properly.

source for all

I'm not in the "ungodly amount of RAM" club like you Felipe, looks like I'm going to have to buy twice as much RAM if I ever plan to play the game.

Think I'll pass.

#23 Edited by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

- What's so funny about low population hours? Do you even know what that means?

If I try to play COD in the early Australian mornings then it's going to put me in an American or European Server, therefore my ping is going to be too high and I wouldn't be able to play it properly (MP). If I play it in the afternoons when everyone is back from work, or on the weekends, then the local population is fine, it puts me with Australian players and my ping is fine. Is this a concept too hard to understand?

Now don't go saying "see, this is why MM sucks" because the same things happens with BF4 and dedicated servers. All the local servers are practically empty in the mornings, and fill up in the afternoon. The concept is doesn't matter if a game is MM or Dedicated Servers, you need ACTUAL PLAYER to be able to play with.

With MMOs it's different because ping doesnt really matter in most cases.

- As for the patch, I've told you about 3054 times before but you STILL don't seem to understand is that it fixed some issues for some but it's not there yet. One of my friends has basically nearly the same specs as you and he plays it daily with me without no issues. Another friend has a more powerful PC and it stutters occasionally. READ: the patch fixed a lot but needs more work. Hopefully they get it to the state Blops2 has been with all the updates.

You want to pass? FINE. You want to wait till they optimize the engine and iron the bugs? FINE. Just don't assume things.

#24 Edited by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

- What's so funny about low population hours? Do you even know what that means?

If I try to play COD in the early Australian mornings then it's going to put me in an American or European Server, therefore my ping is going to be too high and I wouldn't be able to play it properly (MP). If I play it in the afternoons when everyone is back from work, or on the weekends, then the local population is fine, it puts me with Australian players and my ping is fine. Is this a concept too hard to understand?

Now don't go saying "see, this is why MM sucks" because the same things happens with BF4 and dedicated servers. All the local servers are practically empty in the mornings, and fill up in the afternoon. The concept is doesn't matter if a game is MM or Dedicated Servers, you need ACTUAL PLAYER to be able to play with.

With MMOs it's different because ping doesnt really matter in most cases.

- As for the patch, I've told you about 3054 times before but you STILL don't seem to understand is that it fixed some issues for some but it's not there yet. One of my friends has basically nearly the same specs as you and he plays it daily with me without no issues. Another friend has a more powerful PC and it stutters occasionally. READ: the patch fixed a lot but needs more work. Hopefully they get it to the state Blops2 has been with all the updates.

You want to pass? FINE. You want to wait till they optimize the engine and iron the bugs? FINE. Just don't assume things.

Is it too hard to understand that there should be enough Aussie players that you should have no worries about connecting to American servers no matter what time of day you play? Only have hundreds of people playing CoD in Australia? Sounds patheitc.

#25 Edited by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

@FelipeInside said:

- What's so funny about low population hours? Do you even know what that means?

If I try to play COD in the early Australian mornings then it's going to put me in an American or European Server, therefore my ping is going to be too high and I wouldn't be able to play it properly (MP). If I play it in the afternoons when everyone is back from work, or on the weekends, then the local population is fine, it puts me with Australian players and my ping is fine. Is this a concept too hard to understand?

Now don't go saying "see, this is why MM sucks" because the same things happens with BF4 and dedicated servers. All the local servers are practically empty in the mornings, and fill up in the afternoon. The concept is doesn't matter if a game is MM or Dedicated Servers, you need ACTUAL PLAYER to be able to play with.

With MMOs it's different because ping doesnt really matter in most cases.

- As for the patch, I've told you about 3054 times before but you STILL don't seem to understand is that it fixed some issues for some but it's not there yet. One of my friends has basically nearly the same specs as you and he plays it daily with me without no issues. Another friend has a more powerful PC and it stutters occasionally. READ: the patch fixed a lot but needs more work. Hopefully they get it to the state Blops2 has been with all the updates.

You want to pass? FINE. You want to wait till they optimize the engine and iron the bugs? FINE. Just don't assume things.

Is it too hard to understand that there should be enough Aussie players that you should have no worries about connecting to American servers no matter what time of day you play? Only have hundreds of people playing CoD in Australia? Sounds patheitc.

Maybe there could be thousands of Australian players, but it still depends what time you play. It's been like that since COD4. People work you know, or go to School/University. Don't you get that?

When I try to connect in the mornings I get put on an overseas server, because of this reason. When I connect in the afternoon I connect straight away and have no ping issues. Thats why I play Squads in the morning. Same thing was happening with Blops2 and that had thousands of people playing.

Does Ghosts have as much players as Blops2? of course not, it just came out. Many of my friends haven't even bought it yet.

This happens with BF4 as well, whicht has more players than COD currently. The Aussie servers are empty in the mornings because of the things mentioned above.

#26 Posted by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

@FelipeInside said:

- What's so funny about low population hours? Do you even know what that means?

If I try to play COD in the early Australian mornings then it's going to put me in an American or European Server, therefore my ping is going to be too high and I wouldn't be able to play it properly (MP). If I play it in the afternoons when everyone is back from work, or on the weekends, then the local population is fine, it puts me with Australian players and my ping is fine. Is this a concept too hard to understand?

Now don't go saying "see, this is why MM sucks" because the same things happens with BF4 and dedicated servers. All the local servers are practically empty in the mornings, and fill up in the afternoon. The concept is doesn't matter if a game is MM or Dedicated Servers, you need ACTUAL PLAYER to be able to play with.

With MMOs it's different because ping doesnt really matter in most cases.

- As for the patch, I've told you about 3054 times before but you STILL don't seem to understand is that it fixed some issues for some but it's not there yet. One of my friends has basically nearly the same specs as you and he plays it daily with me without no issues. Another friend has a more powerful PC and it stutters occasionally. READ: the patch fixed a lot but needs more work. Hopefully they get it to the state Blops2 has been with all the updates.

You want to pass? FINE. You want to wait till they optimize the engine and iron the bugs? FINE. Just don't assume things.

Is it too hard to understand that there should be enough Aussie players that you should have no worries about connecting to American servers no matter what time of day you play? Only have hundreds of people playing CoD in Australia? Sounds patheitc.

Maybe there could be thousands of Australian players, but it still depends what time you play. It's been like that since COD4. People work you know, or go to School/University. Don't you get that?

When I try to connect in the mornings I get put on an overseas server, because of this reason. When I connect in the afternoon I connect straight away and have no ping issues. Thats why I play Squads in the morning. Same thing was happening with Blops2 and that had thousands of people playing.

Does Ghosts have as much players as Blops2? of course not, it just came out. Many of my friends haven't even bought it yet.

This happens with BF4 as well, whicht has more players than COD currently. The Aussie servers are empty in the mornings because of the things mentioned above.

#27 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

Cool, so u put a random photo up since you have nothing to say and therefore agree on what I posted. About time, thank the Lord this conversation is over. At least u finally got my point :)

#28 Posted by alan_carter (1398 posts) -

I tried Ghosts sp, thinking that the singleplayer part had some visual differences from regular cods and this is what i come across. Don't know why is it like 28gb big, high resolution textures?

Don't know what's wrong, but i set everything to Extra. Game runs fine, but not as good as it should with this crappy quality

#29 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23349 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@alan_carter said:

@FelipeInside said:

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts. I remember I couldn't play it properly for the first 4 weeks until they finally fixed it with 2 or 3 patches.

At least Ghosts with the first patch is a lot better and playable now.

What made the launch of BLOPS 1 worse for you? BLOPs 1 worked perfectly for me at launch (in fact, I got to max level and got bored of the game by the end of the first month). No bugs, no crashes, no poor optimization. Multiplayer worked perfectly, better than any Battlefield game at launch. Benchmarks at game's launch showed that modest systems could max the game at 60 fps. For Ghosts on the other hand, I have a really decent system and benchmarks are showing me that I wouldn't even be able to play Ghosts at high settings. People complaining about lack of players online on Youtube and the forums. Doesn't sound like a better launch to me :(

you're kidding right?

it ran like crap and had an insane amount of input lag

#30 Edited by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

@JigglyWiggly_ said:

@KHAndAnime said:

@FelipeInside said:

@alan_carter said:

@FelipeInside said:

@PredatorRules said:

All CoD games are optimized for gamers that do not own decent gaming rig, I can run it on 60fps+ on my laptop which isn't for gaming.

Except Ghosts which for some weird reason has excessive system requirements.

I think Blackops 1 performed pretty badly on pc too

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts. I remember I couldn't play it properly for the first 4 weeks until they finally fixed it with 2 or 3 patches.

At least Ghosts with the first patch is a lot better and playable now.

What made the launch of BLOPS 1 worse for you? BLOPs 1 worked perfectly for me at launch (in fact, I got to max level and got bored of the game by the end of the first month). No bugs, no crashes, no poor optimization. Multiplayer worked perfectly, better than any Battlefield game at launch. Benchmarks at game's launch showed that modest systems could max the game at 60 fps. For Ghosts on the other hand, I have a really decent system and benchmarks are showing me that I wouldn't even be able to play Ghosts at high settings. People complaining about lack of players online on Youtube and the forums. Doesn't sound like a better launch to me :(

you're kidding right?

it ran like crap and had an insane amount of input lag

Experienced little to no problems with it, wasn't even rocking a particularly strong system and found it to perform excellent. My only problem with Ghosts is that it was too easy and too poorly balanced. Exploiting the right killstreak perks led me to first place of every match, got boring after awhile.

#31 Posted by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

Cool, so u put a random photo up since you have nothing to say and therefore agree on what I posted. About time, thank the Lord this conversation is over. At least u finally got my point :)

#32 Edited by MlauTheDaft (2963 posts) -

@KHAndAnime:

What in the world makes it require all that RAM? it certainly does'nt do much with it.

#33 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

I tried Ghosts sp, thinking that the singleplayer part had some visual differences from regular cods and this is what i come across. Don't know why is it like 28gb big, high resolution textures?

Don't know what's wrong, but i set everything to Extra. Game runs fine, but not as good as it should with this crappy quality

Put the Aspect Ratio manually (NOT Auto) and it will look better. For some reason Auto makes it look like a console game.

#34 Edited by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@KHAndAnime:

What in the world makes it require all that RAM? it certainly does'nt do much with it.

Probably bad optimization on the engine. It shouldn't require that much RAM at all. Hopefully future ports don't follow the same trend.

#35 Edited by MlauTheDaft (2963 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@MlauTheDaft said:

@KHAndAnime:

What in the world makes it require all that RAM? it certainly does'nt do much with it.

Probably bad optimization on the engine. It shouldn't require that much RAM at all. Hopefully future ports don't follow the same trend.

You would'nt happen to own a high memory video card? It'd be interesting look at performance in regards to both system and video RAM, not to mention PCI-E bandwidth.

High system RAM reqs might be a matter of compatability with "low memory" cards, which would partially explain the underwhelming optimization; but I still can't see why they'd need a massive framebuffer, with what they're actually doing.

Edit:

OR, it's more a less a direct port, with unified memory management in place and all. As far as I can tell, it's frame spikes, rather than universally weak performance, and that COULD actually be caused by the bandwidth of system memory.

In other words, it might not actually be using the GPU much as a framebuffer.

#36 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@MlauTheDaft said:

@KHAndAnime:

What in the world makes it require all that RAM? it certainly does'nt do much with it.

Probably bad optimization on the engine. It shouldn't require that much RAM at all. Hopefully future ports don't follow the same trend.

You would'nt happen to own a high memory video card? It'd be interesting look at performance in regards to both system and video RAM, not to mention PCI-E bandwidth.

High system RAM reqs might be a matter of compatability with "low memory" cards, which would partially explain the underwhelming optimization; but I still can't see why they'd need a massive framebuffer, with what they're actually doing.

Edit:

OR, it's more a less a direct port, with unified memory management in place and all. As far as I can tell, it's frame spikes, rather than universally weak performance, and that COULD actually be caused by the bandwidth of system memory.

In other words, it might not actually be using the GPU much as a framebuffer.

Check out my specs in my sig.

When the game launched I could barely play it. It had performance problems, crashes etc. With the patch I can now play it fine, but it still needs work on some areas.

#37 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

Experienced little to no problems with it, wasn't even rocking a particularly strong system and found it to perform excellent. My only problem with Ghosts is that it was too easy and too poorly balanced. Exploiting the right killstreak perks led me to first place of every match, got boring after awhile.

Sigh..... you really are one of those people that think because you ran a game fine, then the rest of the world did as well, and vice versa. I'll remember that when you post again.

Here, since you don't believe me or Jiggs:

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/11/11/pc-gamers-complain-of-call-of-duty-black-ops-performance-issues/

http://gamedrone.net/2010/11/16/7-tips-for-improving-black-ops-pc-performance/

"I’ve made it abundantly clear that Call of Duty: Black Ops has been released in a bug-riddled state during these past few days"

#38 Edited by MlauTheDaft (2963 posts) -

@MlauTheDaft said:

@FelipeInside said:

@MlauTheDaft said:

@KHAndAnime:

What in the world makes it require all that RAM? it certainly does'nt do much with it.

Probably bad optimization on the engine. It shouldn't require that much RAM at all. Hopefully future ports don't follow the same trend.

You would'nt happen to own a high memory video card? It'd be interesting look at performance in regards to both system and video RAM, not to mention PCI-E bandwidth.

High system RAM reqs might be a matter of compatability with "low memory" cards, which would partially explain the underwhelming optimization; but I still can't see why they'd need a massive framebuffer, with what they're actually doing.

Edit:

OR, it's more a less a direct port, with unified memory management in place and all. As far as I can tell, it's frame spikes, rather than universally weak performance, and that COULD actually be caused by the bandwidth of system memory.

In other words, it might not actually be using the GPU much as a framebuffer.

Check out my specs in my sig.

When the game launched I could barely play it. It had performance problems, crashes etc. With the patch I can now play it fine, but it still needs work on some areas.

No offense, but you could've just told me since you responded anyway ;)

I deactivate sigs because they're a nuisance.

#39 Edited by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@MlauTheDaft said:

@FelipeInside said:

@MlauTheDaft said:

@KHAndAnime:

What in the world makes it require all that RAM? it certainly does'nt do much with it.

Probably bad optimization on the engine. It shouldn't require that much RAM at all. Hopefully future ports don't follow the same trend.

You would'nt happen to own a high memory video card? It'd be interesting look at performance in regards to both system and video RAM, not to mention PCI-E bandwidth.

High system RAM reqs might be a matter of compatability with "low memory" cards, which would partially explain the underwhelming optimization; but I still can't see why they'd need a massive framebuffer, with what they're actually doing.

Edit:

OR, it's more a less a direct port, with unified memory management in place and all. As far as I can tell, it's frame spikes, rather than universally weak performance, and that COULD actually be caused by the bandwidth of system memory.

In other words, it might not actually be using the GPU much as a framebuffer.

Check out my specs in my sig.

When the game launched I could barely play it. It had performance problems, crashes etc. With the patch I can now play it fine, but it still needs work on some areas.

No offense, but you could've just told me since you responded anyway ;)

I deactivate sigs because they're a nuisance.

Oh sorry, lol.

Here are my specs:

i7 3770 3.40Ghz - ASUS Sabretooth Z77 - 32GB DDR3 800Mhz - SanDisk SSD - Win8 Pro 64bit - Asus Xonar DGX - Gigabyte Nvidia GTX 680 2GB

#40 Posted by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@mabblebrox:

game runs like shit too. can run BF4 on high/ultra just fine... this game on extra destroys my computer.

#41 Posted by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

Experienced little to no problems with it, wasn't even rocking a particularly strong system and found it to perform excellent. My only problem with Ghosts is that it was too easy and too poorly balanced. Exploiting the right killstreak perks led me to first place of every match, got boring after awhile.

Sigh..... you really are one of those people that think because you ran a game fine, then the rest of the world did as well, and vice versa. I'll remember that when you post again.

Here, since you don't believe me or Jiggs:

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/11/11/pc-gamers-complain-of-call-of-duty-black-ops-performance-issues/

http://gamedrone.net/2010/11/16/7-tips-for-improving-black-ops-pc-performance/

"I’ve made it abundantly clear that Call of Duty: Black Ops has been released in a bug-riddled state during these past few days"

gratz, you figured KHAndAnime out pretty quick. he is just a dumbass that thinks his experience is the only one that matters/is true.... just ignore him.

#42 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

One thing I will say about Ghosts apart from the bad launch and optimization on the engine.

After all these years they STILL haven't fixed the spawn points. I'm no game developer but how hard can it be???

#43 Edited by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@FelipeInside said:

@KHAndAnime said:

Experienced little to no problems with it, wasn't even rocking a particularly strong system and found it to perform excellent. My only problem with Ghosts is that it was too easy and too poorly balanced. Exploiting the right killstreak perks led me to first place of every match, got boring after awhile.

Sigh..... you really are one of those people that think because you ran a game fine, then the rest of the world did as well, and vice versa. I'll remember that when you post again.

Here, since you don't believe me or Jiggs:

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/11/11/pc-gamers-complain-of-call-of-duty-black-ops-performance-issues/

http://gamedrone.net/2010/11/16/7-tips-for-improving-black-ops-pc-performance/

"I’ve made it abundantly clear that Call of Duty: Black Ops has been released in a bug-riddled state during these past few days"

gratz, you figured KHAndAnime out pretty quick. he is just a dumbass that thinks his experience is the only one that matters/is true.... just ignore him.

I'm simply providing a contrary anecdote to your useless anecdotes. And you guys think your experiences are the only one that matters. I'm weighing in the entirety of the matter (forum feedback from customers) - Black Ops had a better launch than Ghosts. To deny this is being an idiot. Ghosts is already the laughing stock of the benchmark community - as well as the CoD community as well. Stuttering is nothing compared to the state of Ghosts at the moment (people requiring 10+ GB of RAM just to play the game without massive framerate dips and massive stuttering). Every single "Let's Play" I've watched is filled with criticism's of the game's performance (even from non-techies). Or their games are clearly running poorly.

But hey, let fanboys be fanboys. IW will surely fix all the issues a week from now with their magic wand :roll:

#44 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

But hey, let fanboys be fanboys. IW will surely fix all the issues a week from now with their magic wand :roll:

You must have the same problem as Air Shocker, as in CANNOT READ ENGLISH PROPERLY.

No one is defending the port, NO ONE. I even said the launch of Ghosts is AWFUL, as bad as Blops1 (that's how Black Ops came up in the first place). The only positive thing I ever said about the port is that the patch fixed some of the issues (SOME). I talked positive about some game modes in the other topic because they are a welcome addition.

I suggest from now on before commenting, please re-read other people's posts because you have trouble doing so. I've capitalized some words on this one so you can concentrate on them and maybe understand the sentence.

#45 Edited by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

But hey, let fanboys be fanboys. IW will surely fix all the issues a week from now with their magic wand :roll:

You must have the same problem as Air Shocker, as in CANNOT READ ENGLISH PROPERLY.

No one is defending the port, NO ONE. I even said the launch of Ghosts is AWFUL, as bad as Blops1 (that's how Black Ops came up in the first place). The only positive thing I ever said about the port is that the patch fixed some of the issues (SOME). I talked positive about some game modes in the other topic because they are a welcome addition.

I suggest from now on before commenting, please re-read other people's posts because you have trouble doing so. I've capitalized some words on this one so you can concentrate on them and maybe understand the sentence.

revelation #2 about KHAndAnime... he does not read. he simply sees key words, assumes a position that is contrary to yours and then makes it sound like he is the only one that could possible be correct.

you are learning a lot today FelipeInside.

#46 Edited by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

@KHAndAnime said:

But hey, let fanboys be fanboys. IW will surely fix all the issues a week from now with their magic wand :roll:

You must have the same problem as Air Shocker, as in CANNOT READ ENGLISH PROPERLY.

No one is defending the port, NO ONE. I even said the launch of Ghosts is AWFUL, as bad as Blops1 (that's how Black Ops came up in the first place). The only positive thing I ever said about the port is that the patch fixed some of the issues (SOME). I talked positive about some game modes in the other topic because they are a welcome addition.

I suggest from now on before commenting, please re-read other people's posts because you have trouble doing so. I've capitalized some words on this one so you can concentrate on them and maybe understand the sentence.

Yeah, the launch of Blops1 was awful, even worse than Ghosts.

That's the opposite of what you said Felipe. You're not fooling anyone with your barbarism.

#47 Edited by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@FelipeInside said:

@KHAndAnime said:

But hey, let fanboys be fanboys. IW will surely fix all the issues a week from now with their magic wand :roll:

You must have the same problem as Air Shocker, as in CANNOT READ ENGLISH PROPERLY.

No one is defending the port, NO ONE. I even said the launch of Ghosts is AWFUL, as bad as Blops1 (that's how Black Ops came up in the first place). The only positive thing I ever said about the port is that the patch fixed some of the issues (SOME). I talked positive about some game modes in the other topic because they are a welcome addition.

I suggest from now on before commenting, please re-read other people's posts because you have trouble doing so. I've capitalized some words on this one so you can concentrate on them and maybe understand the sentence.

revelation #2 about KHAndAnime... he does not read. he simply sees key words, assumes a position that is contrary to yours and then makes it sound like he is the only one that could possible be correct.

you are learning a lot today FelipeInside.

Oh well.... sometimes I don't even know why I bother. Oh, that's right, I bother because I would like the forums to be free of people like that, guess it can't happen.

#48 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23349 posts) -

hellopls

stop quoting so gamespot stops giving me notifications

#49 Posted by KHAndAnime (13089 posts) -

@Geminon said:

@FelipeInside said:

@KHAndAnime said:

But hey, let fanboys be fanboys. IW will surely fix all the issues a week from now with their magic wand :roll:

You must have the same problem as Air Shocker, as in CANNOT READ ENGLISH PROPERLY.

No one is defending the port, NO ONE. I even said the launch of Ghosts is AWFUL, as bad as Blops1 (that's how Black Ops came up in the first place). The only positive thing I ever said about the port is that the patch fixed some of the issues (SOME). I talked positive about some game modes in the other topic because they are a welcome addition.

I suggest from now on before commenting, please re-read other people's posts because you have trouble doing so. I've capitalized some words on this one so you can concentrate on them and maybe understand the sentence.

revelation #2 about KHAndAnime... he does not read. he simply sees key words, assumes a position that is contrary to yours and then makes it sound like he is the only one that could possible be correct.

you are learning a lot today FelipeInside.

Oh well.... sometimes I don't even know why I bother. Oh, that's right, I bother because I would like the forums to be free of people like that, guess it can't happen.

You're the only people who sit around and complain about people you don't like using the forums. It's the epitome of childish behavior.

#50 Posted by FelipeInside (24966 posts) -

That's the opposite of what you said Felipe. You're not fooling anyone with your barbarism.

The opposite of what? Are you really THAT THICK?

The POINT (KEYWORD: POINT) is that BOTH (KEYWORD: BOTH) launches were bad. For some Blops1 was worse, for others Ghosts was worse. How bloody hard can that be to understand?

Are you READING (KEYWORD: READING) the keywords?

Damn, it's like talking to a 5 year old. On that subject, how old are you really? Maybe you are real young and me here trying to explain things thinking it's an older person.