Age of Conan

90-100 fps here.  cancel anyway.

the game is just not good enough, and its sure not a mmorpg,  never seen so many instances.

1997 UO made a whole world with not a single instance,  now 10 years later they fail to do it.

thanks and sorry for my english. 

Originally posted by jessian

Reason i XC'd game account is due to the pathetic frames per second issues thats effecting the vast MAJORITY of players.

Just visit the technical part of forums to read other players issues.

btw your specs suck balls IF you want to play the latest games. its not like AoC demands much more of your rig then other heavy games like crysis. i mean cmon.. your vid card scores a mere 2.6k on 3dmark06.. even the latest budget cards like 9600 gt score over 10k. im even suprised u can start the game up :S

For computer people the answer is right in the post whats causing FPS issues. its "ATI" if you do a little research you can figure out they have not really updated there stuff for the past two years. They have recently started again, due to complaints. Hence why Nvidia is getting most of the partnerships.

Just a side note 2Gb of ram is pretty much standard these days, 4GB is more of what you should be looking at also to help out.

Originally posted by jessian

with the following specs, i could never get over 10fps outside

Amd 64 3500+ 2 gig ram, Ati 1650 pro, 2 maxtor 180gig hard disks, audigy sound card.

And still could not get it over that threshold of stability 20fps

 

Second of all, dude look at your rig, its what 3-4 years old now? be happy you get 20 FPS. I remember buying my new mainstream PC about 4 years ago about time when WoW released or something and I couldn't play WoW on high without going -20 FPS so stop whining about upgrading PC for AoC (in general all the whiners not just you).

If you are a serious gamer you have to have a decent rig every now and then. I can play the game on my new mainstream PC with 30-40 FPS smooth with HDR on, on high. Spec: AthlonX2 6000+, HD3850 512MB, 2GB DDR2 RAM. Hardly a  600$-700$ PC...

Originally posted by Jetsonix

I cancelled my World of Warcraft account...i played up to lvl 40...the graphics just way too cartoonish

This game however, is a masterpiece, yes quite the masterpiece and the game frame rates are well over 100

For you kids suffering from horrible computers and no jobs to buy new ones or if your parents won't buy you a new computer because they gave you money for GTA 4...well sucks to be you

NEXT!

Mate shut up, you only get over 100FPS if you are in a cave by yourself or your playing the game on low with a small display.

My specs

Motherboard - Asus Rampage Intel X48

CPU - Intel E8400 3.0 Ghz

GPU - Asus EN8800GTX

Souncard - Creative X-Fi Elite Pro

RAM - Corsair Dominator PC6400 4Gb

HDD - WD RaptorX 10,000rpm

PSU - Corsair HX620w Modular

In a town i get 20-30FPS, the wilderness around 40FPS, in a cave by myself around 120FPS. This is on High settings at 1920x1200 using the 175.16 drivers.

Originally posted by Psiho246

 

First of all, can I have your stuff?

 

Second of all, dude look at your rig, its what 3-4 years old now? be happy you get 20 FPS. I remember buying my new mainstream PC about 4 years ago about time when WoW released or something and I couldn't play WoW on high without going -20 FPS so stop whining about upgrading PC for AoC (in general all the whiners not just you).

If you are a serious gamer you have to have a decent rig every now and then. I can play the game on my new mainstream PC with 30-40 FPS smooth with HDR on, on high. Spec: AthlonX2 6000+, HD3850 512MB, 2GB DDR2 RAM. Hardly a  600$-700$ PC...

Also where do you get the FPS in the solo instances? these are no reference. Even 8800GTS users see the difference between the city instances and the solo content.

I think we will see the TRUE face of Conan coding when you'll all TRY to play the 48vs48 siege battles, because I have the impression the limit of number of people in ONE instance(or copy) of a zone is 40 to 50 at the moment.

By doubling it in the siege instances, even the 8800GTS cards could be taking a HUGE hit on their FPS.

Remember the first days of open Beta? Now I could be wrong, but .... what is MORE probable:

-a they found a solution to ALL of the code in 5 days and so eliminated a lot of the lagging of open day beta after having developped the game for 5 years?

)-b they limited the number of people playing in one copy of a zone (say from 100 to 40 or 50)

Now that would mean they needed to add some servers.... (even though they acknowdged now they have 400K player on line and said earlier they had the server capacity to have 700 K players). They did add servers, curious ....

So I am VERY anxious to see the first siege battles of 48 against 48 and than let's talk again !

Originally posted by talismen351

 

Originally posted by jessian

Reason i XC'd game account is due to the pathetic frames per second issues thats effecting the vast MAJORITY of players.

Just visit the technical part of forums to read other players issues.

Vast MAJORITY...? Is that cause you couldn't get better that means everybody else has the same issue? I am running on about 80-100FPS, as are the most I know in game.

 

WinXP SP3

duo 6750

4Gig

8800 gtx 640mb

Creative sound blaster.

I call bullshit, show us a screen where you are getting 80-100FPS and the conditions are that it has to be on High settings in a populated area, not solo in cave crap. I can only see people getting 50-60FPS if they are using a small display.

Oh and your GPU is a GTS not X...

Originally posted by jessian

Reason i XC'd game account is due to the pathetic frames per second issues thats effecting the vast MAJORITY of players.

Just visit the technical part of forums to read other players issues.

But for you with that very very old computer and outdated gfx card, it's not very strange that you can't run the game as you would like. So since you are so well paid, why don't you buy some new hardware. My old rig was almost the same as your current one, and it was 4 years old, so I bought this one early this spring.

Originally posted by Zorndorf

 

Originally posted by Psiho246

 

First of all, can I have your stuff?

 

Second of all, dude look at your rig, its what 3-4 years old now? be happy you get 20 FPS. I remember buying my new mainstream PC about 4 years ago about time when WoW released or something and I couldn't play WoW on high without going -20 FPS so stop whining about upgrading PC for AoC (in general all the whiners not just you).

If you are a serious gamer you have to have a decent rig every now and then. I can play the game on my new mainstream PC with 30-40 FPS smooth with HDR on, on high. Spec: AthlonX2 6000+, HD3850 512MB, 2GB DDR2 RAM. Hardly a  600$-700$ PC...

I wouldn't call "30-40" FPS smooth.

 

Also where do you get the FPS in the solo instances? these are no reference. Even 8800GTS users see the difference between the city instances and the solo content.

I think we will see the TRUE face of Conan coding when you'll all TRY to play the 48vs48 siege battles, because I have the impression the limit of number of people in ONE instance(or copy) of a zone is 40 to 50 at the moment.

By doubling it in the siege instances, even the 8800GTS cards could be taking a HUGE hit on their FPS.

Remember the first days of open Beta? Now I could be wrong, but .... what is MORE probable:

-a they found a solution to ALL of the code in 5 days and so eliminated a lot of the lagging of open day beta after having developped the game for 5 years?

)-b they limited the number of people playing in one copy of a zone (say from 100 to 40 or 50)

Now that would mean they needed to add some servers.... (even though they acknowdged now they have 400K player on line and said earlier they had the server capacity to have 700 K players). They did add servers, curious ....

So I am VERY anxious to see the first siege battles of 48 against 48 and than let's talk again !

30-40 is smooth as you cant see difference in frames above 25 FPS, and I didn't mention that my FPS is dropping below that. I can even afford turning 2x AA though I don't really need it as my pixels look as good without it.