Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Planetside 2 Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Planetside 2 Thread

post #1 of 31
Thread Starter 

So this just went from beta to F2P yesterday and I've played it for about 4 hours. Initial impressions are actually pretty good, though a bit buggy.

 

If anyone cares to join me in running around like a headless chicken pm me your Steam info bigsmile_face.gif

post #2 of 31
I just installed it via Steam (couldn't get it to work via the website yesterday). Logged in for about half an hour, but the lag is a bit too much at the moment (enemies jumping around etc). I'm interested in the game though, saw many interesting videos. I'm mainly looking forward to some good squad teamplay.
post #3 of 31

played in the beta, it's fun (and a great concept; thank you PS1) but it's a little 'stale' if you don't play with a group of people you know in a common squad.  i have the F2P steam version installed but haven't played it yet. 

post #4 of 31

Been playing in the beta since lapsed PS1 veterans got in.

 

It's fun if you're part of an outfit (really, this is the sort of game that needs organized team play to truly get the most out of), but quite demanding on my system. That 3 GHz Q6600 can't even maintain 60 FPS most of the time, even after putting the graphics details to 1280x800, all low to minimize GPU bottlenecking (the 8800 GT shows its age after five years). It's definitely more CPU-intensive than most games out there, and I can't overclock this Q6600 any further without overheating.

 

I'm definitely liking the free-to-play aspect, as not being able to keep up with the subscription fees was why I stopped playing the original.

post #5 of 31
Thread Starter 

I played for quite some time this weekend with a group of friends and I gotta say it was a blast. I have yet to get tired of it really. I think the terrain differences between the continents keep it interesting. Definitely one of the best F2P games I've played in quite some time.

post #6 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by NamelessPFG View Post

Been playing in the beta since lapsed PS1 veterans got in.

 

It's fun if you're part of an outfit (really, this is the sort of game that needs organized team play to truly get the most out of), but quite demanding on my system. That 3 GHz Q6600 can't even maintain 60 FPS most of the time, even after putting the graphics details to 1280x800, all low to minimize GPU bottlenecking (the 8800 GT shows its age after five years). It's definitely more CPU-intensive than most games out there, and I can't overclock this Q6600 any further without overheating.

 

I'm definitely liking the free-to-play aspect, as not being able to keep up with the subscription fees was why I stopped playing the original.

 

That is a VERY old machine and though it may have been 'ok' up to now, that is because most games until now are console ports made to work on 2005 hardware... this is a PC only game meant to be current.. running it on high everything is BEAUTIFUL and well worth it (if you plan on playing the game for a while) to invest in hardware that'll allow that

post #7 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojamijams View Post

That is a VERY old machine and though it may have been 'ok' up to now, that is because most games until now are console ports made to work on 2005 hardware... this is a PC only game meant to be current.. running it on high everything is BEAUTIFUL and well worth it (if you plan on playing the game for a while) to invest in hardware that'll allow that

 

Yeah, it's not like the old days when a ONE-year-old computer had to be completely replaced if you wanted acceptable framerates in the latest games, in large part due to ludicrously fast CPU and GPU advancements. Remember when in 1999, 350-400 MHz Pentium IIs and K6-2s were the norm, while by the end of 2000, people were packing 1 GHz Pentium IIIs and Athlons? Everything's slowed down a lot since 2005, and perhaps because of that, a five-year-old computer can still provide mostly acceptable performance.

 

Here's the thing, though: I can't afford a new computer right now, and when I recently built an i5-2500K/GTX 460 setup for a friend, I didn't immediately notice that much of a performance difference. Thus, I have a feeling that no less than a very heavily overclocked i5-3570K and a GTX 670 will even begin to deliver acceptable framerates, and I'm probably better off waiting until Haswell and whatever the next generation of graphics cards might be.

 

It's not just PlanetSide 2, for that matter. DCS World has also proven to be ridiculously CPU-intensive, especially at lower altitudes when you can get a good look at the terrain around you.

 

Whatever the case, a new computer is going to cost at least $1,000 minimum, and for that much, it had better manhandle every game I throw at it, 60 FPS, maxed-out settings. Crysis, Metro 2033, PS2, DCS, whatever you care to name, I'd better be getting my money's worth, because a system like that won't be worth even half the price after a year.

post #8 of 31
My GTX670 is coming in tomorrow (and my SSD in a couple of weeks), so I'm going to play some more after tomorrow smily_headphones1.gif
post #9 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by NamelessPFG View Post

Here's the thing, though: I can't afford a new computer right now, and when I recently built an i5-2500K/GTX 460 setup for a friend, I didn't immediately notice that much of a performance difference.

 

the 460 was more than likely holding the rig back, depending on what game you tested with of course. i upgraded from a Q6600 @ 3.0GHz to an i5-2500K in January 2011.  i was running a single GTX460 at the time and it made a world of difference in BC2 and Black Ops.  an i5-2500K is the bang for your buck champion right now, much like the Q6600 was back in it's hay day.  it's amazing how inexpensive it is for the performance it delivers.  

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by NamelessPFG View Post

Whatever the case, a new computer is going to cost at least $1,000 minimum, and for that much, it had better manhandle every game I throw at it, 60 FPS, maxed-out settings. Crysis, Metro 2033, PS2, DCS, whatever you care to name, I'd better be getting my money's worth, because a system like that won't be worth even half the price after a year.

 

Metro 2033 will never be playable at max settings.  never.  being tongue-in-cheek here, but seriously that game is absurdly demanding.  my 'mid-fi' rig of i5-2500K @ 4.4GHz and single 7970 @ 1050/1525 comes to a crawl with it maxed. 


Edited by Porter1 - 11/26/12 at 2:33pm
post #10 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Porter1 View Post

the 460 was more than likely holding the rig back, depending on what game you tested with of course. i upgraded from a Q6600 @ 3.0GHz to an i5-2500K in January 2011.  i was running a single GTX460 at the time and it made a world of difference in BC2 and Black Ops.  an i5-2500K is the bang for your buck champion right now, much like the Q6600 was back in it's hay day.  it's amazing how inexpensive it is for the performance it delivers.  

 

Metro 2033 will never be playable at max settings.  never.  being tongue-in-cheek here, but seriously that game is absurdly demanding.  my 'mid-fi' rig of i5-2500K @ 4.4GHz and single 7970 @ 1050/1525 comes to a crawl with it maxed. 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the GTX 460 was bottlenecking things much as the 8800 GT does in my current system.

 

However, PlanetSide 2 wasn't even in closed beta at the time, making it impossible for me to benchmark with that game. At the very least, I could say that it could maintain 60 FPS running PCSX2 far more easily than my system can, and 6th-gen console emulators like PCSX2 and Dolphin get really, REALLY demanding on the CPU if you want full speed without frameskip. (For me, any amount of frameskip or slowdown is unacceptable.)

 

i5-2500Ks are getting pretty cheap on eBay these days (around $160 or so), along with Z68 chipset motherboards (Z77 mostly benefits Ivy Bridge CPUs anyway), but I still want to hold off a bit longer in case Haswell is the big jump in performance I'm hoping for. Even if it isn't, it'll cause the older hardware to drop in price even more.

 

If I can't run something maxed, is 1920x1200 without AA or AF still too much to ask? Heck, I'll drop it to 1280x800 if that's what it takes to keep framerates up. I like visual details, but never at the cost of a smooth, consistent framerate.

post #11 of 31
Press ALT+F in game (default)

It'll show you the FPS and next to it either a [CPU] or [GPU] tag. That is what's bottlenecking you.

Big props to the programmer who created this.
post #12 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojamijams View Post

Press ALT+F in game (default)
It'll show you the FPS and next to it either a [CPU] or [GPU] tag. That is what's bottlenecking you.
Big props to the programmer who created this.

 

really?  that's pretty cool, at least the bottleneck idea.  i'll have to try it out.

post #13 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojamijams View Post
Press ALT+F in game (default)
It'll show you the FPS and next to it either a [CPU] or [GPU] tag. That is what's bottlenecking you.
Big props to the programmer who created this.

 

That's actually why I realized the Q6600 was the real bottleneck, even though I had the impression that the 8800 GT was still a limiting factor. (Obviously, my friend's i5-2500K/GTX 460 system remains untested because PS2 wasn't out yet.)

 

Why it took this long for someone to make an FPS counter that actually shows whether the CPU or GPU is the bottleneck is beyond me, but it's a brilliant move.

 

The unfortunate downside is that it makes me realize just how five-years-old my desktop really is at the core, and I don't have $1,000+ to drop on a new desktop.

post #14 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NamelessPFG View Post

 

That's actually why I realized the Q6600 was the real bottleneck, even though I had the impression that the 8800 GT was still a limiting factor. (Obviously, my friend's i5-2500K/GTX 460 system remains untested because PS2 wasn't out yet.)

 

Why it took this long for someone to make an FPS counter that actually shows whether the CPU or GPU is the bottleneck is beyond me, but it's a brilliant move.

 

The unfortunate downside is that it makes me realize just how five-years-old my desktop really is at the core, and I don't have $1,000+ to drop on a new desktop.

Baby steps man, buy everything in small pieces. If the cpu is the limiting factor at first, just grab a cheap CPU/mobo combo. Then eventually GPU. Then eventually more RAM/HD space etc. Doesn't take loads of cash all at one time to keep a system running the latest games :)

post #15 of 31

much more fun to do it all at once.  i'm a geek and enjoy the building process, as simple as it is these days. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Games Discussion
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Planetside 2 Thread