Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

And once again....

Discussion in 'Survival' started by Aven Valkyr, Mar 17, 2014.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. mastpayne Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,385
    Has anyone bothered to look at his 'world' to see if his complaints are justified?

    (Don't ask me....I left the room when he started chuckin' around F-Bombs.)
     
  2. Merinsan Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    209
    You simply want the end game experience now - in early alpha - and that is completely unreasonable.
    At most you should report that the game lags when you do a massive build, and it's up to the developers to fix it before release. The developers will address performance issues, but they'll be wasting their time doing it now.
     
  3. radam Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,207
    Aven check this thread to see just how many polys there are per block. http://forums.keenswh.com/post/jakejuds-polygon-optimization-mod-project-small-blocks-too-6708353?&trail=15

    Compared to minecraft with 12 polys per block, 200pixel texture and 250 block render limit.

    Tho maybe the could use the trick with using low poly model for undamaged blocks, and switching them for high poly in the moment collision is detected.
     
  4. Merinsan Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    209
    I just looked at his world, and it's not an overly complex build.
    He has max asteroids and 3 small ships, 3 big ships and a station cutting through an asteroid. It's very nice actually.
    It doesn't lag for me, and my computer is reasonable, but not cutting edge:
    8Gb Ram, windows 7 64 bit, i7-2600 3.4ghz CPU, 8 cores, AMD Radeon HD 6800 graphics with 1GB memory.

    I'm going to look at his second save now.

    Edit:
    His second build was massive, and also lagged me. The number of lights on the ship is most likely the issue. As soon as I turned off all the reactors (why so many!!), performance improved significantly.
     
  5. Aven Valkyr Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    69
    Look I'm not asking the Dev's to optimize the game at the snap of the finger. I would however like it if they would respond with *something* saying they are looking into it. Cause as it stands now it's all the ppl with high end computers that say they want more content and don't care about the lag. Yes I have downloaded a workshop build where there was one massive ship and it lagged so bad for me I could hardly move and made me wonder how the guy even got it that complex. I am not saying that my computer doesn't need to be upgraded, either. But one big ship in a single world where even high end computers start feeling the lag is not good enough. People are going to want worlds set up where there are SEVERAL big ships, maybe a station they can dock at, dozens of small ships, you know, worlds where there are possibly 16 or so players all working to build ships and make it a busy place. As it stands, the game at its core is flawed. This IS an alpha thing I'm talking about. It should be the first thing they should have looked at.. how big can they make a build before the game lags out too much. And it doesn't take much. You think you could have a 93 million block ship in this game?? NOPE. And unless the community really starts pressuring these guys to stop with content and work on all the brutal memory leaks, random files written to ram, and all the obscene amount of memory being used to keep a world running, then they won't do anything about it. If everyone else says the game is fine until release day then guess what, you've got yourself a broken game. Yes, in fact I DO understand what an alpha is. It's not about fixing the features and adding content. It's about polishing the CORE of a game first to make sure they have a stable and solid platform to build the rest of the game from.

    Let's take building a car for example. You know the most important part of a car is the frame, suspension and wheels. You think a car designer would start with the leather seats and add nice digital illuminated dial clusters because the "community" wanted all the nice stuff first? Hell no, they work on the frame. You people think I'm just a rage monkey and I need pills.. fine. I am getting angry because in fact, I do care about this game. I love the concept. But at present I think it's HORRIBLY BROKEN and all the content updates in the world won't fix it. You all say "but it's a game of physics" well great. You can take your physics and call it "space physics simulator" where you build a couple of tiny little ships and check out the physics of space. Cool. That was fun, now on to a real game. Do you see what I'm getting at? This is where the anger is coming from, from people like you who are saying don't worry about how laggy it is and give us guns and inter-server battles. I really want to love this game but I can't. How can I when after about 30 hours of working on ANYTHING in this game I have to start a new world because it's totally lagged out and rather than support a more polished engine you guys would rather see more features. And you are the ones being rude. Telling me to quite whining and buy a new computer? What are you a bunch of 12 year olds with daddys new computer and it doesn't matter to you? DO you realize the kind of hardware that will be required to really play this game will cost the average users thousands? People just don't have the money to buy a maxed out top of the line machine just to play this game for any length of time.

    Fixing this problem of only having a very very small amount of objects in this game is NOT beta polish. This is LET'S FIX IT CAUSE IT'S ALPHA AND IT'S BROKEN stuff. You people are not getting what I'm saying. Even "buy a new computer" isn't going to fix this. It needs to be addressed by the devs. It can only be done that way. The game needs a severe weight loss program before it goes any further. Why am I the only one saying this. Everyone I talk to in game, even the ones that have high end computers seem to agree with me. But you community members seem to be OK with it being laggy and only want more features. Until this game can see mega projects, like HUGE builds, then it's basically a waste of any more time for them to add any more content. This is a brutal problem and it needs to be fixed. Imagine if the main feature of the game was being able to go online with your friends and building a massive space station and having a fleet of carriers to fly around. THEN yes they can work on the problems of having no capital ship guns that work, fighters that explode when you move your ship and they are mag locked, password/hackable mainframes, inter-server wars, and all that other stuff. That stuff should come LATER, not now.

    I'm sick of arguing this stuff. You guys can all have your way. Fine. Get your features and wait months, maybe even years of having to load one new world after another because all a world can fit is one single large ship. You don't seem to get that. Even with all the features in the world, there will come a point when even your high end machines you will want to be able to do so much more with this game. I'm telling you months, maybe years ahead of you getting that point, that the problem needs to be addressed now. Not later. And I've given valid suggestions as to how they can go about doing just that, and looking into the main lag related problems. How much of their time would it really take to hone in on those issues.

    So that's it. Fin. Done. bye bye space engineers. You were fun for a giggle.. now to move on to a game that actually WORKS. Later dudes..
     
  6. Aven Valkyr Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    69
    Look I understand there is more to this game than minecraft. That's not the argument. The argument is that a single minecraft world can have TRILLIONS of blocks in it. Where as this game lags to death with only a few thousand. I'm not asking for minecraft don't get me wrong, but this game kinda sorta works on the same premise where you build awesome ships and stations and work with others to do the same. If minecraft can handle trillions of blocks, then if this game could handle a few million, people would be happier. Much.. happier.
     
  7. Aven Valkyr Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    69
    And tell me how is it wasting their time by fixing lag and optimizing the game now? I'm not asking them to pick through the entire source code before all the features are added. I'm asking them to look into the problems I have reported and if/when fixed, will make this game MUCH smoother to play. Dammit you guys just don't get it do you.
     
  8. Skeloton Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,069
    A game this early in development, we should count ourselves lucky it works at all.
     
  9. Aven Valkyr Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    69
    Finally, someone with something reassuring to say. At least this is something.
     
  10. Azi Dahaka Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    220
    Aven Valkyr, I have debated this with you before. Almost everyone agreed with me. For those reading this thread that have not seen the previous debate, it's here: http://forums.keenswh.com/post/getting-to-the-point-where-i-cant-build-anymore-6795373.

    The "it's alpha" argument works perfectly fine. Alpha doesn't care how much fun you are having, it doesn't care if you can play, it cares if you can test. You can. I know that you're going to argue that you spent good money on this. I know. You spent money on Early Access. You should have known what you were getting into.
     
  11. radam Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,207
    So i get 10 fps on the bridge of that ship, not unplayable. But it is a BIG ship. Also has a few mechs in the lower bay. Very nice ship!

    Tho if they optimise it and people get better computers, someone is still gonna push it to the max.

    Heard about an artist coming to trim the polys? I guess not. Have fun.

    I remember all the whining when EVE online was crashing with thousands of people in one place. Now it seems it can handle 6000+ so. And that game is a spreadsheet compared to this.
     
  12. Barrio575 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    290
    It also helps if you try out survival, that is where this game will definitely help out with these issues. If you look at a lot of the builds currently available on Steam you will see that there are a lot of unnecessary parts being used, and when coupled with high poly count parts, you are slowing it down yourself. Build responsibly/modestly and then you will see a difference. I am happy with survival so far because we won't have all that nonsensical overly built crap. And seriously, if you want to let people know how you feel, find another approach that isn't spewing forth rage, you will need that in the real world.
     
  13. yomanrelax Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    10
    It's quite clear that you have no idea how to create a game, or the technical issues that come up and how long it takes to polish them out. The only thing you can compare this game to minecraft with is it's concept of player creativity. Outside of that, this game is way more advanced in terms of CPU calculations when it comes calculating damage, physics, etc. and its not pixelated voxel graphics It is extremely hard to make a game like this, and you should give the developers some props and space to polish this game out even more before you start raging. You should also attempt doing research on how to make a game like this before you rage, and you should also research on how to make multiplayer games. This isn't just something you pull out of your ass. The fact that it's in "alpha" is an extremely valid excuse and if you can't handle simple lag once in a while or can't handle not building large things and all, THEN STAY OUT OF THE EARLY ACCESS SECTION ON STEAM AND WAIT FOR THE FULL GAME INSTEAD. I run this game perfectly on a laptop. A LAPTOP. So either there's something terribly wrong with your computer, or you're doing something wrong.
     
  14. Neotician Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    440
    3.6ghz Core 2 Duo Processor
    4 Gigs of RAM
    Radeon HD 5870 Graphichs Card
    This is old stuff and i'm running the game fine, only one of my worlds where i get "unplayable" aka below 30 fps, is the world where i have a 110,000,000kg carrier, with 12x 110,000kg fighters aboard, with asteroids in the world as well.
    Have you considered that just smashing a bunch of powerful-looking components together and thinking that makes a good computer, doesn't make it so?
    In any case, it's an alpha game, contents and infrastructure comes before optimization, what would be the point of optimizing the game, making it run smoothly, and then having to do it all over again for next patch because you've changed and/or added stuff?
     
  15. Dequire Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    178
    The game has already been HUGELY optimized. When it started, I could barely run the game. Now I'm running at max graphics with only lag in the largest of worlds. However, I have a gaming laptop. 12 hundred for this thing, MSI. I'm very happy with it.

    The game could always use more optimization. And honestly, I prefer playability and usage over features and fluff. I'm going to have to vote for optimization here.

    However, getting a few upgrades for your computer doesn't hurt. Surely you can get a discount of some kind, your job being what it is.
     
  16. Merinsan Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    209
    Because you optimize, then add new features which make the previous optimizations redundant. This is why you don't optimize until you are core complete (ie finished the features).
    You are the one that doesn't get it. The game is not finished. It's not ready for optimization. There is no way the developers will declare it finished until they do an optimization pass, but they aren't going to do that right now, because they haven't finished adding features.
     
  17. Merinsan Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    209
    Not a single person is denying the game can be laggy, but it is certainly not game breaking. We are all testers who have paid to do testing, and get the game in an unfinished state. Our reward for this testing is we get the completed game cheaper, since they'll up the price on release. The developers are aware that lag is an issue for some people, and since they know already, your job is done in this area. Posting multiple threads with the same issue doesn't help. Demanding it be addressed before other things is even less helpful.
     
  18. piddlefoot Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,182
    Well if you go into your Hyperion, [nice ship too by the way ] I notice you have a CRAP LOAD of spotlights inside, instead of just internal lights, when I deleted them alone I went from 12fps to 25fps, you really need to think about what blocks you use on ships, I love a big build, just for fun though, lets face it, a station like Babylon 5 is way to big for this games engine to run with multiple people in the same map area, yet I get a higher fps on my Babylon 5 station than on your , in comparison small ship the Hyperion, so I going with read more and select a better choice of block when building big while its in Alpha stages , at least until we get dedicated servers, things might get a lot better then hard to tell.

    Your Avens world map is fine, Im getting over 50 fps on it.

    You should also be polite on this forum, not many people get a response from Mr Rosa himself, the game founder, learn to appreciate.
     
  19. Disodium Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    10
    Less lag = more uninterrupted productivity, content can come later.
     
  20. fanzypantz Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    27
    The specs on most the PC's listed up on this forum seems to be quite outdated.. who uses dual cores anymore? And this game does a lot of hard processing so I'd go for intel because of power instead of AMD for speed. I have the old i7 3770k 16gb ram(cheap as hell now) and a gtx670(also cheap as hell now) and I run smooth 60 fps all the time, with 10 people on with starter ships, crashing and etc does drop it slightly but not noticeable if I don't look at my fps meter. And my PC is now 2 years old, it is old as f... in the digital age.
     
  21. Jezz Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    10
    Original post came across as a complete meme to me which has already had 4 pages to much attention.
     
  22. Beachernaut Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    47
    IMO, this game is pretty good in it's current state. Yes it gets laggy when the world gets crowded, but I kind of expect that. As for optimization..... As I understand it, little optimizations here and there throughout the development is normal, and I believe that's what we're seeing. This game is much smoother than it was when I started playing it. OTOH real optimization and polish is wasted at this stage of the game. Further development will negate the previous optimizations to a point.

    I don't quite understand why this is such a surprise. You want to play a new game that is very processor and memory intensive, yet you want it to run well on a mediocre computer? PC gaming has always been pushing the boundaries of current tech. Thus is the continuing problem we face. I'm currently running on an AMD FX-8350 8gb of RAM and a GTX760 (4gb ram). Previously enjoyed it with an AMD FX-6100 and GTX560. The updated processor and video card do run the game better, but it ran pretty good on the old setup.

    Edit: As mentioned previously, it's not all about your hardware. Is your computer healthy and running efficiently? Do you have a lot of other programs running in the background taking resources?
     
  23. piddlefoot Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,182
  24. Valdemar |FIN| Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    631
    So, this leads to two conclusions:

    1. The world isn't as madly laggy as OP implies, so new computer rule applies here (Despite he saying he doesn't want to hear that ''excuse'').

    2. Big ship world is full of spotlights, which means that OP didn't follow performance recommendations that Marek Rosa himself kindly gave.

    Extra conclusion: This game isn't even half-ready, so expecting ''finished product'' kind of performance from alpha game game is just plain wrong (Again, despite he saying he doesn't want to hear that ''excuse'').

    So I'd say OP has had enough from focused fire of reasons why this game doesn't really play on his computer.

    Case closed... for now.
     
  25. ChaosUnlimited Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    97
    Back again when I said what 16 core I was wondering because there is no such thing on desktop computers I don't even thing there is a single CPU chip that is over 8 core

    I run amd 6 core 6100-fx it was on sale mixed with 8 gig ram running at 1600mhz and a 660 superclocked 2gb version

    Also amd has the fastest clock sped for their new chip but Intels architecture is still kicking Amds in the ass

    Amds 8 core runs at a base speed of either 3.8ghz - 4ghz

    I do beleave intel has a 6 core running at 3.6ghs

    Though I could be wrong

    Intel only wins. Because their architecture is better

    Amd wins for me because of their price

    Sry for grammar errors I am currently on my ipad
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.