Elann2008's forum posts

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

It looks like Sony is willing to finally admit that they cannot handle all the divisions that they so ambitiously created over the years. Hopefully, this results in more focused endeavors in the forthcoming years.

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#2 Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

The Evil Within is your best bet with all things considered. It's not a terrible game like some critics and users make it out to be. And the "forced" sneaking around was from the early levels in the game. The rest is pretty much RE-action.

The Evil Within would have been more likable if the main protagonist had some personality and interesting traits. It's not a good thing when the game leaves you with not liking any of its characters.

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

@04dcarraher said:

@mastershake575 said:

Yes and No

Optimization on a close platform does help but most people overrate it big time (its not magic, your not going to make a CPU that gets smoked by desktop CPU's of six years ago a contender just from a few little tweaks). My 8600GTS was able to play games for the first 5 years of last generation with equal or better settings than the consoles and it was barely more powerful than the consoles GPU (this was all during arguably the worst generation in terms of optimization and dev kits due to the confusing nature of the consoles at the time).

It can help but its not going to make mediocore hardware great. The things I said above (cheap filtering methods for AA/AF, advanced settings turned off, medium to high settings base, 30FPS cap, 900/1080p only.....ect) are all true and in most cases the developer will freaking admit it when a game is being delayed for optimization (Game A: delayed till march, will now run 900p, Game B: delayed till September, 30FPS cap instead of 60 and 32 player limited instead of 64....... Stufff like this happens all the time).

Poorly made ports created on pc's with poor performance nine times out of ten is because of just plain old poor coding from the dev's requiring brute force to process through the inefficiency of using only one or two threads when they could have used more.

This. +1

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

I ran into this today, but set affinity isn't new to some of you guys. With Dying Light, it worked well for me and I saw a huge performance boost. Perform these steps:

1. Start game.

2. Open up task manager, right-click Dyinglight.exe, click "go to process", and then click "set affinity."

3. You will see that "CPU 0" is the only core that is checked. Uncheck it, and check it again. Click OK.

4. Open up "set affinity" again, but this time, you will be checking all the cores. Now, click OK.

5. Do all of this in one succession, and then return to the game.

6. Enjoy the butter-smooth performance.

This has been the MOST helpful temporary fix, as it alleviates performance issues. I wish I found this out sooner. I have played the game for 55 friggin hours with some performance issues. A steam user posted this in another thread, and I jumped on it right away. The result was a massive performance boost. No more stuttering, no more lag spikes, just butter smooth.

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

@KHAndAnime said:

It already performs a lot better after the last patch so it doesn't require any mega-CPU. Still, I think they have yet to actually code the game to take really advantage of multicore CPUs. So i3 dual cores would even be fine playing this game.

Optimization and cutting some settings back are pretty much the same thing. If they felt like the view distance slider went unnecessarily high - I believe them, because I personally had difficulty spotting any differences between having view distance at 50% and 100% pre-patch. Also, they must've done other things. I don't think my current view distance settings are different than what they were pre-patch (never had my view distance maxed, more like at 60%), so aside from the view distance thing I think my game is just running better.

Pretty much this.

I tested the game with the CPU Control tweak method that some gamers have resorted to pre-patch and post-patch. But what KHAndAnime said, sums up my experience thus far. While using CPU Control, I experienced more stuttering (post-patch). Then, I tested it without CPU Control, and it ran a lot smoother and more consistent. I tested it out just for curiosity's sake.

View distance, whether it is at max or 0, does not seem to be affecting my performance either way. While view distance seems to be hitting the performance more than anything, I don't see it as being a dealbreaker as I could not notice much of a difference, if any. Perhaps, it was the way they handled LOD.

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#6 Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

So far, it sounds good on paper. I look forward to seeing the results for the gaming market base. I don't believe we could ever forget about what Microsoft did to PC gamers. And while I have little, to no faith in their gaming division, here is their chance to redeem themselves.

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

@SirDarknight said:

Thanks a lot for your replies, actually my budget is lower than the above total price so I decided to go with a entry level GPU. But I think I'll follow your advice and get the R9 290

Good call. Grab a good 1080p monitor, at least 24", but there are really nice 27" 1080p monitors now that are very affordable even under a budget. A few years ago, they were not as common. Asus has some nice ones. Pour more money into the CPU/GPU/monitor. I feel like you would get the best experience if you budget around those components and then later upgrade the rest of the system if/when needed.

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

I highly recommend reading this so you can get a good understanding on how Dying Light is utilizing cores. It's not so much what settings you tweak or do not tweak that may be the main issue.

http://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/dying-light-pc-performance-analysis/

For those too lazy to read - in a nutshell:

"From the above, it’s pretty obvious that Dying Light lacks major CPU optimizations. We strongly believe that a better multi-threaded code would benefit the game, as it currently hammers only one CPU core. We don’t know whether something like that is possible via a patch, but it’s pretty much unacceptable witnessing a 2015 game – using a new engine that targets current-gen platforms only – that is unable to offer amazing and balanced multi-threaded CPU usage."

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts

Download CPU Control.

1. When running dying light, ALT+TAB to your desktop open up CPU control and right-click dyinglight.exe.

2. Then ALL CPUs > 4 CPUs (or 6/8 depending on your CPU) then 1+2+3+4.

3. You can set the program to run at Windows start minimized and also add dyinglight.exe to it's profile using ADD TO SELECTED CPU PROFILE so that you don't have to go through this every time you load the game.

Avatar image for Elann2008
Elann2008

33028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

276

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By Elann2008
Member since 2007 • 33028 Posts
@bfa1509 said:

@Xtasy26

You lose a lot of integrity by simply not telling us what the deal is.

Hahaha. Made my day. =o)

@04dcarraher said:

@Xtasy26:

Again do not ignore excessive resolutions and settings being used by many of those people. Many are just using too much that no single gpu can handle with a good frame rate.ie 4k, massive amounts of AA etc.

What you seem not to understand that the processing power difference between 970 and 290 series and vram usage will not make any real big difference with future games below 4k. Both gpus dont have enough processing power to do 4k and or massive amounts of AA. It does not matter if a future game can allocate 4gb of vram, When future games come they will more demanding on processing power not just vram usage and by the time 4gb isnt enough for 1080p gaming both the 970 and 290x will be out of the picture.

Exactly.