Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Optimizing of games.
Celtaidd Rwsiaidd
Member
One of the scourges of modern developers. On the one hand, they can be understood: computer technologies are developing very quickly, and games are being made for a long time. Besides, professional optimizers are very expensive. On the other hand, there is such a thing as "compatibility". And when games slow down and have other problems, even on powerful computers, it doesn't look very respectful towards the players. I hope the developers of this game will pay due attention to this aspect. Just not two years of beta test, please, like the "Rift" 
)))) Although it must be admitted, "Rift" just "flew" on the computer, even in massive fights one hundred to a hundred for the world boss. Well, I want to say that one of the things that brought the World of Warcraft success is optimization - a huge coverage of the computer hardware of the players.
And finally, I would advise the company to introduce an analytics department, which would be engaged in predicting the consequences of this or that decision, if there is none yet. Well, or at least always remember that it is the players who feed the producers, and not vice versa - it is very important to keep in touch with the players, especially when you have already become a huge corporation. Poor Blizzard ...
In general, I wish you not to step on the same rake, but to be wise and learn from the mistakes of others. Good luck for all of us))
)))) Although it must be admitted, "Rift" just "flew" on the computer, even in massive fights one hundred to a hundred for the world boss. Well, I want to say that one of the things that brought the World of Warcraft success is optimization - a huge coverage of the computer hardware of the players.And finally, I would advise the company to introduce an analytics department, which would be engaged in predicting the consequences of this or that decision, if there is none yet. Well, or at least always remember that it is the players who feed the producers, and not vice versa - it is very important to keep in touch with the players, especially when you have already become a huge corporation. Poor Blizzard ...
In general, I wish you not to step on the same rake, but to be wise and learn from the mistakes of others. Good luck for all of us
)) 0
Comments
Ashes of Creation alpha testing minimum system specification.[3]
Operating System: Windows 10 64-Bit
Processor: Intel Core i3-2125 3.3GHz / AMD Phenom II X4 3.3GHz
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 or AMD Radeon 6870 HD with 1GB and DirectX 12
Memory: 6 GB RAM
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Storage: 35 GB of available space
Sound Card: DirectX Compatible Sound Card
Recommended specification.[3]
Operating System: Windows 10 64-Bit
Processor: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz / AMD FX-9590 4.7GHz
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 or AMD Radeon R9 Fury with 4GB and DirectX 12
Memory: 16 GB RAM
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Storage: 35 GB of available space
Sound Card: DirectX Compatible Sound Card
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/System_requirements
True, but you seemed to be interested in the hardware needed to run the game. There it is anyway, regardless.
You asked for them indirectly - because optimization has only 1 goal and a result - which is to lower requirements
― Plato
The way I am reading the OP, it is mostly talking about server optimizations (which is what allowed Rift to have 100v100 fights with no issue).
The OP talking about compatibility now makes no sense - compatible with what?
Anyway, given what Intrepid is aiming for, I'm confident that both server & client performance are among their top priorities, also since Ashes is still in alpha stage, I'd say it's still too early to worry about performance because ...
... code optimization ("the process of modifying a software system to make some aspect of it work more efficiently or use fewer resources.") is something one usually does NOT do until relatively LATE in the development stage, like AFTER most features have been stabilized and sufficient testing (with profiling on) have been carried out to pinpoint performance issues.
In fact, premature optimization is among one of the worst things a software engineer can do. Coz we're usually wrong about what we THINK might be causing a performance issue, and what actually IS causing one.
Therefore I would have no reason to worry about performance unless I see some serious issues in beta-2, or if Intrepid suddenly declares that they're gonna do something crazy (foreseeable performance nightmare) like full real time action combat in large scale sieges.
And compatibility is a different concept, usually about OS/architecture/hardware.
e.g.
"Playstation 5 can run PS4 games but not PS123 games" is a is a compatibility thing.
"Latest mobile apps can run on iOS 10+ but not older versions", is a compatibility thing.
But "a new game can't run on old, low performance PCs" is NOT a compatibility issue.
Not entirely. It's both server and client optimization. Server optimizations will fix your ping, but client (game) optimization will fix your FPS issues. Both are needed for a good experience.
An advantage Ashes has going for it is that they are making a PC exclusive game. This is fantastic news for us as because it means that the dev team will be hyperfocused on one version of the game and not beholden to other governing bodies to push updates. For example, Microsoft or Sony could halt or slow updates for any number of reasons, slowing the rate the game gets updated.
Another advantage is that Intrepid is a private and independently funded studio. The funders of Ashes are Steven and all of us. This means that the incentive to cut corners to increase the bottom line for investors is lowered. Assuming Intrepid is acting in good faith and this is not a cash grab. The studio can actually focus on optimization if they need to. From what I have been led to believe, this was not the case with CP77.
For these reasons, I am pretty optimistic that Ashes will run smooth. The bugs I have encountered so far have all made perfect sense to me. Unlike CP77, which ran okay on my rig at launch, but I will admit did have its share of glitches. I just pretended like my optical implant was... "after market".
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
U.S. East
Solution: Build more Chip Factories
New Problem: Need $$$$ to build clean rooms for chip factories
Solution: Research cheaper clean rooms
New Problem: This tech is very far away
Solution: Patience
Original Problem: cannot upgrade PC
S-
hmm...
Are we getting a constant 60+ fps in those 500 player battles with those requirements? What kind of performance can we expect with higher numbers in/out of combat/nodes?
These would be interesting things to discover and know
Thats not entirely true, a poorly optimised game can run on a entry level gaming pc but will still run like shit on a $10000 pc.
I went down quite the rabbit hole just now looking for a good answer to this. Unreal Engine 4 seems not to have great multicore CPU support. Especially when I played ARK a lot at the launch of Early Access. After a few hours of digging through forum threads and the like for Unreal developers, I am still not understanding the situation as well as I would like. I don't think the situation is as easy as Epic can just make multicore CPU support good in a patch or something. It looks like it's on the individual game devs to make their game optimized. Which I thought was the case, but am still not 100% sure on.
In any case, eventually Ark did get optimized to the point that my old rig went from like 22fps to 80fps on higher settings. I bring this up because it is the very situation that taught me, exactly how big of a deal, optimization can be.
So far, Ashes has run great for me. I don't think I have seen frames lower than 60fps on a 2060. I am not certain how many CPU cores the game is using, but it runs about as well as any other MMORPG I have played. Better if you consider that the sieges I have participated in had numerous people and seemed to run just fine.
A far cry from the slide show sieges in Aion back in the day.
I think the verdict is: They are going to try like hell.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
I'm pretty sure UE's Blueprints don't support multithreading, but iirc Intrepid has a squad dedicated to optimizing Blueprints in raw C++ which may or may not include multithreading. (Also, I'm not sure how dependent they are on Blueprints in the first place). AND I have a feeling this is hitting a topic that some of their engineers would LOVE to talk about but can't because of security concerns.
I am not entirely sure their methods for optimisation but judging by certain new games or ones currently in development (more specifically MMORPG's), some are quite heavy on the CPU as well as GPU's. It's an interesting discussion especially since they're using UE4 and doing their custom work with it.