Ce sujet est fermé
The contents of this thread are about as far from a representative sample of all PC players as you can get.
You are right if you consider this thread as the only way for a feedback. There are other sources (given by the someone on the previous page) confirming same issues.
Citation needed.
I'll grant you a huge number of people in this thread, but I haven't had any problems playing the game since the patch dropped, just for example, so you'll need to provide some evidence that a significant percentage of PC players are even running into those kinds of issues.
Of course, that's not counting the graphical bug, which the workaround fixed for me and is probably going to get hotfixed, but to say that issue makes the game unplayable is utterly ridiculous.
Agreed, too many people on these forums overreacting. People are acting like this game has been out for half a year now. Compare this game to a lot of other games 3 weeks after release and it is far less buggy than most. Also, quite a bit of people that couldnt run the game didnt read the minimum requirements. I have seen far too many comments on here regarding dual core, and not being able to run the game; and they blame Bioware. They should be blaming there teachers for not being able to read the requirements.
I'm not saying the anecdotal evidence in this thread is useless. I just don't think it's enough to justify claims of a "huge amount" of players experiencing unplayability. Even if we take this thread as evidence, the amount of people complaining about problems here is small compared to the overall player base of DAI.
They're all such vague terms though. Unplayable - could be anything from BSOD for anyone who so much as pokes the exe to player takes one look at graphics issues, says sod this for a lark and goes to do something else. Huge amount - 90%, 50%, 1%, 0.1%, you could make a case for them all. Neither of them are terms that need precisely defining before getting used. They're vague and so what, that's perfectly appropriate for this context.
They should be blaming there teachers for not being able to read the requirements.
In former days games were released in a finished state and there were no patches. Nowadays we have to accept gigabytes of day-one-patches and games that simply don't rund good and are bugged when they are released and the devs and publishers want people to spend money on their unfinished products...
I restored my folder from before the patch and now want to use "-ShaderSystem.ShaderQualityLevel High" simply as a performance improvement.
I have almost every setting on ultra, will setting this command line reduce my other options as well, or will it just influence shaders?
Anyone have there Ambient occlusions setting set to none always? I can't seem to change it.
Also is there any way to apply good AA without the performance hit in the game on nvidia hardware? The post AA blurs the game, there is less jaggies but it causes blurrier textures, regular aa hits performance hard even with 2x.
In former days games were released in a finished state and there were no patches. Nowadays we have to accept gigabytes of day-one-patches and games that simply don't rund good and are bugged when they are released and the devs and publishers want people to spend money on their unfinished products...
And the devs are getting praises when they fix their broken product.
In former days games were released in a finished state and there were no patches. Nowadays we have to accept gigabytes of day-one-patches and games that simply don't rund good and are bugged when they are released and the devs and publishers want people to spend money on their unfinished products...
1984 was the first patch release for a game. There is no "former days". The days of no patches are about as real as bigfoot, people just like to repeat it.
They should be blaming there teachers for not being able to read the requirements.
Got me there instead of their. This is what happens when I get carried away. Thanks for that
Where is the link to this 'patch 2' going to appear?
Patched game. Applied workaround. Looks good on my computer so far.
Same here, in fact, game runs much much better for me now.
1984 was the first patch release for a game. There is no "former days". The days of no patches are about as real as bigfoot, people just like to repeat it.
Or, barring that, you had to buy a different version of the cartage when it came to SNES and N64 games. So that's another $60 or so. And yes, that was the average price back in the early 90s.
Yeah, Relm sketch bug from FFIII/FFVI. I'm looking at you.
I'm not saying the anecdotal evidence in this thread is useless. I just don't think it's enough to justify claims of a "huge amount" of players experiencing unplayability. Even if we take this thread as evidence, the amount of people complaining about problems here is small compared to the overall player base of DAI.
The amount of people who don't actually post on Bioware forums is way bigger than the amount of people who do. You realize that, of course.
None of my friends post on these forums. None of them are playing this game after the patch, for one reason or another, but all as a consequence of the patch, yes.
(I'm not either, for what it's worth)
Combined with a huge number of people (relative to how many people actually post here) who are feedbacking gamebreaking stuff, I don't think I need (nor can I) bring in statistical evidence to somehow classify the issues as "serious" or whatever.
The forums are just a small sample of people who own the game, but they are a decent pointer as to how the game performs among ALL customers.
...
Basically everything here would be anecdotal evidence, by definition... even with the screenshots, it's still something that lacks full context etc.
It's completely missing the point, as far as I'm concerned.
I'm willing (as every reasonable person should be) to give the benefit of the doubt to the people having these issues and recognize these issues are real and existing - as opposed to what...?
Bioware haters who went on to buy the game, register on the forums and post false feedback, falsify screenshots, in order to... I dunno, get some people who like the game and have no issues angry or something?
...
This isn't a court, nor a trial.
It's a forum where people post feedback, reviews, issues etc.
If I were Bioware, I'd consider these issues real based on the feedback.
1984 was the first patch release for a game. There is no "former days". The days of no patches are about as real as bigfoot, people just like to repeat it.
Well, it's true, at least for consoles. Before consoles were connected to the Internet, games never got patches. On the plus side, games didn't typically ship with lots of issues. On the other hand, games that did have glitches never got fixes for those problems. The ability for every platform, PCs and consoles, to access game updates and information online is a bit of a double-edged sword.
I mean, he's not arguing that there isn't a huge amount of people experiencing an issue. He was objecting to asserting a "huge amount" without evidence or data. Imprecise hyperbole is something that SHOULD be objected to.
Asking this to make sure it's not just me:
Are people seeing terrain and vegetation pop-up much closer now; and changing those settings seems to do nothing?
I have them both on high and before this patch that was sufficient to stop the appearance of small rocks (and grass) from being disconcerting, now it happens just a few feet (in game) away.
I noticed more dense vegetation (which low my fps), and yes there some pop up, even some npcs pop up from anywhere, I noticed this on towns, sometimes scared me lol.
In former days games were released in a finished state and there were no patches. Nowadays we have to accept gigabytes of day-one-patches and games that simply don't rund good and are bugged when they are released and the devs and publishers want people to spend money on their unfinished products...
What "former days" did you live in? Games have always had bugs. Before the internet there were no patches because there wasn't any way to get the patches to the player. If a game had bugs, you were stuck with them. Games were also a lot simpler on a technical level back then.
What "former days" did you live in? Games have always had bugs. Before the internet there were no patches because there wasn't any way to get the patches to the player. If a game had bugs, you were stuck with them. Games were also a lot simpler on a technical level back then.
I think some of the older gamers are showing our ages here. 
Before the internet there were no patches because there wasn't any way to get the patches to the player.
You could get patches in two ways; developers published patches in magazines that the user could type in. You could order updated copies of the game, be it on cassette or floppy. Patching was a grassroots effort; if you had a patch and we had the same game, viola. It was a much more laborious process if you knew no one who had gone through the process before you.
But, yeah. Plenty of patches as far back as the early 80s.
I will continue to belabor this point.
Have you updated your graphics drivers recently, then?
What CPU, graphics card, and RAM are you using? I have a Radeon R9-270X graphics card (slightly above the recommended specifications) and I get a minimum of 26 FPS running through Redcliffe, and that's on 1080p with maxed out settings.
CPU: I7-4770
GPU: Gigabyte GTX 660 OC 2GB
Ram: 8GB
Resolution: 1600x900 full screen
Every thing on high except for textures and mesh to ultra and HBAO
24-26 fps in the worse case at Redcliffe
Mesh to high: 27 fps
I think some of the older gamers are showing our ages here.
Haha. I remember playing rebal assault, mech warrior, carnivores, and also this one star trek game where I was stuck on this one boss. I fired my phasers, grenades, and every other weapon I could think of, nothing worked. Than I found a ROCK on the ground, threw it at him, and he died form that. A phaser didnt work, but a rock did.
For people who are saying that the game is unplayable, could you tell me what is unplayable? I mean does it crash all the time? Is it an annoyance with the game that you think makes it unplayable? I'm just curious.
This
What "former days" did you live in? Games have always had bugs. Before the internet there were no patches because there wasn't any way to get the patches to the player. If a game had bugs, you were stuck with them. Games were also a lot simpler on a technical level back then.
'Before the internet' demos/patches where usually submitted to gaming magazines for inclusion on accessory CD-ROMs. I still have PC Gamer patch CDs from as far back as '97 and I used to have some 3.5 diskettes from as far back as '94.
Retour en haut