quote: 82 was the best one |
actualy speed wise i thing 83 was the best, loading almost instantly, no lag, but they crashed for 90%, and had horendus buggs, so it was scrapped, and that god awfull 84 came out (it was the dawn of lagfests)
+0 / -0
|
Currently I seem to be having an issue with my game starting. I get an error starting spring that states that my access is denied when I push the start button. This may be due to something I did but if this an engine issue please let me know.
+0 / -0
|
I am getting this: !transmitlobby@voice@buildUnit@add something spam too.
+0 / -0
|
Ok so looks like my problem was due to my antivirus not liking the new engine but I fixed it now so no problems.
+0 / -0
|
Hopefully I'll have time to look over the bugs on the weekend. [pikts]wolasNever going to be used (it more than doubles Spring memory footprint) :(
+0 / -0
|
@KingRaptor quote: Never going to be used (it more than doubles Spring memory footprint) :( |
RAM is cheap these days, and is generally the only component of laptops and all-in-one machines that can get aftermarket upgrades. I fail to see how memory usage of all things is the bottleneck there.
+0 / -0
|
Making the engine convert to QTPFS will make the default setting take up more computer power, though this might not be a big problem for some people; others who have a bad computer won't be able to play any normal games. Essentially it would be pushing a part of the community out of the standard lobbies. QTPFS is a good option, but as a default it may shrink the community.
+0 / -0
|
|
QTPFS also has some usability issues that hamper its use for high-level play. Namely, units calculate their path before starting to move. You select that tick planted in advance of the enemy felonball, and start clickclickclicking it to engage. But each click just makes it wait more, and it never moves until zapped by outlaw. (that recalculation of course is what allows it to play nicely with terraform though)
+0 / -0
|
@[DOOP]fortaleza Only default default GUI is supported... You enable two EXPERIMENTAL features. 1) you disabled default chat in F11 2) you enabled voice commands Both are clearly marked as experimental.
+0 / -0
|
I don't think 1.2GB of memory usage for an 18x12 map (Koom Gorge) at start of game is acceptable regardless.
+0 / -0
|
@KingRaptor quote: I don't think 1.2GB of memory usage for an 18x12 map (Koom Gorge) at start of game is acceptable regardless. |
Really? Looking at task manager when playing most modern games, I see RAM usage that high all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some RAM optimizations that could be made here, but ~1GB RAM usage when playing a game is not abnormal nowadays (possibly Epic Games' fault, but I still find that typical). The usability issue w.r.t. unit speed is a more convincing reason to me to avoid using QTPFS.
+0 / -0
|
quote: see RAM usage that high all the time. |
You don't understand. Those 1.2 are for qptfs alone, without regard for rest of Spring.
+0 / -0
|
roll back to 91. now game starts only with 50% success in best case. Just now we started game like 10 times, and it would not start. This is fucked
+0 / -0
|
it still. 94.1 dummy when it load.s
+0 / -0
|
My 4 year old laptop has 4GB ram (unupgraded) and bottleneck is cpu, so I honestly think if QTPFS is actually better it is worth have it, maybe for few days and get people reactions, but definitly after whatever initial launch bugs hunted down.
+0 / -0
|
quote: roll back to 91. now game starts only with 50% success in best case. Just now we started game like 10 times, and it would not start. This is fucked |
+1
+0 / -0
|
OK after a few minutes of playing the game completely lags out. I will wait for a stable version :(
+0 / -0
|
just specced big game. On version 91 i had like 25-50fps with 10*10players and full map of units. Now on this 94 crap i had 8fps. Roll back to 91 now, or this game will go to oblivion
+0 / -0
|
lol. performance! it is! NOT!
+0 / -0
|