Wasteland The Wasteland 2 Beta Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

The one we're offering to backers? No.

 

Probably the actor, maybe even the voice actor too. If he was only a voice actor, then IMDB specify him as a voice actor in the cast list, which is not the case here.

Angela Deth is definitely portrayed by that Joanne McCallin chick though.

 

It runs better than ec

 

On my rig it only runs decent if i turn off shadows and AA, else it slows down to a crawl, much worse than EC in that regard. AMD Phenom 9850 quad core at 2.5, 4GB memory, SSD HD and a AMD Radeon HD5800. It should run better all things considered.

 

Thought so. Well, tweaking it is again, i guess. I hate iso/2D games being CPU/GPU hungry these days.

 

You can thank Unity in that regard, because other engines like what Styg has built for Underrail or Iron Tower for Age of Decadence, run better and look better.

 

Nobody should deny Unity is a relatively shitty engine, especially considering the graphics it puts out.

Up until now, I've only seen trouble from it. WL2 still has some time to go before release, so I hope they'll also do their best on optimization.

 

Unity really seems to be quite a shitty engine though, or at least unsuitable for large-scale projects. I haven't seen any game using it (that is large-scale) which doesn't have any issues, or performs worse than it should. And if you look under the hood of what those games are doing with DirectX it's not so surprising. Now of course, it could just be that all those games use Unity badly, but that seems unlikely. Anyway, with the new licensing terms I hope to see some smaller (budget-wise, not in terms of scale) projects on UE4.

On the other hand, considering everything it's doing, Larian's proprietary engine used in Dragon Commander and D:OS performs well in my experience.

 

More like my FPS drop to half by simplying zooing out too much... and I have a i7 with a GTX 660.

 

I haven't noticed any performance issues with Wasteland 2; the GPU gets pretty loud, but that's it. MMXL on the other hand stutters as if it was a rave disco at times (if I recall correctly and it does use Unity).

 

On Ranger Headquarters, I get 50 fps zoomed in, 40 zoomed out and less than 30 with the inventory open.

Oddly enough, the world map gets always 30fps, and on the radio antena area I always had 60fps, even in combat with various enemies...

 

Edgy today arent we? I'm far from the only person having problems with this shitty engine. Also, Age of Decadence looks much better, and runs incredibly smoother on my end.

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

I won't even bother turning you into a blood sausage like SCO, straight to the sharks.

 

World map will be improved performance-wise in future updates.

Also, one way to improve framerate substantially right now is to turn off SSAO. It does make the game look a bit flatter, but it'll probably increase your framerate by a good 25-50% or so.

 

I don't know why people are so in love with Unreal. I'll say this for Unity, it can at least render textures that aren't shiny so everything doesn't look like it's covered in wax.

 

These are all fine numbers. Of course 60 FPS flat would be preferrable, but let's not get all totalbiscuit on this. The game is very playable with 30.

Performance has improved MUCH compared to the initial builds. If it improves even more, all the better.

 

Actually they're not fine if you have a 120Hz+ monitor (like me). Those are essentially shit FPS values.

I got over 100-120 in Expeditions: Conquistador and Shadowrun Returns 99% of the time.

The inventory FPS is especially . Must be a memory leak or something.

 

Having a 120Hz monitor gives you the ability to get 120 FPS, nothing more. Feeling entitled much?

I have 600Hz TV, but I'm not expectign every game and/or film to run at 600 FPS. ;-)

 

Bloody oath I do, because the only reason shit FPS is expected these days is because of fucking consoles. Before the console era, games ran at over 100FPS pretty easily unless they were locked 2D sprite-based games.

There's no such thing as a 600Hz TV, the 600Hz is not the actual refresh rate, it's a marketing term and the 600Hz value is obtained from a piece of hardware in the TV that runs at that value.

http://www.cnet.com/au/news/what-is-600hz/

 

You're not really saying that Wasteland's FPS problems are tied to its console version, I hope?

There are two types of games:

1. Action games, where FPS ties straight into gameplay and the lag low FPS causes can affect your performance. This is where 120 FPS matters and where console affect PC releases.

2. Non-action games where higher FPS affects visual impressions, but has no effect on gameplay. I've played heroes of Might and Magic V at 15 FPS, and it looked horrible, but was perfectly playable. I have even played Arcanum with bad FPS, because my graphics card only had 4 MB of RAM and it wasn't able to contain all character's animations at once. Wasteland 2 belongs to this category and while high and constant FPS would be welcome, it is not required.

Don't get me wrong, I have invested a lot into my PC too, and it should run W2 at 60 or even 120 FPS, if it manages to run Spec Ops: The Line max at these rates. But I don't really think this is that important.

Shh, don't blow me cover, mate.

 

That what pisses me off the most - loud CPU/GPU. Cannot enjoy the game properly. I would understand running some 1st person shooter on max details, but not something like WL or MMX for that matter. Not with adequate hardware.