This issue is obviously on the radar, and thats a good thing.

I honestly don't think Funcom are in denial of any of this drama, and again thats a good thing.

Does anyone know what the monthly subscription cost is going to be?

If it is actually 25 bucks a month then I'm dissapointed and wont be buying this game I've been waiting for cause taht it just WAY to much money for a video game.

I miss The Realm days when I could play 4.95 a month and play a great game. Video games should not cost 25 bucks a month.

Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

Does anyone know what the monthly subscription cost is going to be?

If it is actually 25 bucks a month then I'm dissapointed and wont be buying this game I've been waiting for cause taht it just WAY to much money for a video game.

I miss The Realm days when I could play 4.95 a month and play a great game. Video games should not cost 25 bucks a month.

well, thats for you nd your wallet to decide I guess...

I personally can afford and don't mind spending that kinda money on something I enjoy.

 The Realm still only costs $6.99 a month... maybe you should just play that instead if money is an issue?

25 bones a month is way to much... thats just a fact.

I really hope it isnt going to be that much money. The community will not be very big if the game is that expensive.

Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

25 bones a month is way to much... thats just a fact.

I really hope it isnt going to be that much money. The community will not be very big if the game is that expensive.

Well.. The Realm is still looking for new players...

Joking aside...

I think these figures are still valid...

• Key pricing parameters for the game will be:
o The Standard game SKU will have a
Suggested Retail Price (SRP) of 59.99
USD in North America and at 49.99 Euro in
the European markets.
o The subscription fee will be priced at 14.99
USD in North America and 12.99 Euro in
the European markets (plus VAT where
applicable)

This is just another small niche game.  It's system spec requirement guarentee that fact.  None of the computers I have tried run it decently.  Only my son's high end gaming machine ran it respectably.

If they reach 200k subscribers I will be shocked.  Just another Vanguard all over again.

Nice graphics are useless when it won't run on the average computer.

There's a lot more than 200K PCs out there that will run it. I'd be surprised if they don't top 250K subs in the first month let alone after 3months +.

Originally posted by Ozmodan

This is just another small niche game.  It's system spec requirement guarentee that fact.  None of the computers I have tried run it decently.  Only my son's high end gaming machine ran it respectably.

If they reach 200k subscribers I will be shocked.  Just another Vanguard all over again.

Nice graphics are useless when it won't run on the average computer.

I see it doing 250-400k, but yes in todays WoW defined market that is niche.

To me though, as a player and not an investor,  thats ample for full servers and healthy development, so I would be very happy with that.

Tbh, no game's playerbase needs to be in the millions... It's not like WoW has seen the fruits of all that money  right?

But, Oz, seriously... its very weak and lacking to say this is 'just another Vanguard all over again' when the few similarities are superficial. If you have some reason that you hate it, because your PC can't handle it or whatever, thats fine, but please don't try and link it to VG to make other people not give it a go. That just makes you seem bitter and resentful that you personally havent got the hardware....

Originally posted by nikoliath

 

Originally posted by vesavius

Now that I have given it a fair play time, I have to say that I want to play this game as much as I did before, if not more.

Let me get some things straight before the hatebois and trolls jump all over this post looking for a fight.

1. Yes, I recognise there are some performance issues for a few people out there. My PC ran it fine tho I must say... From some of the posts complaining about this problem though I honestly think they would have issues running Moonstone, let alone this game. Some people need to realise that not all games are for them and to play cutting edge graphics (for an mmorpg) you need to spend some money.

 

Why do nealy all the people for whom the game ran "fine" insist on trying to inform anyone who has had performance issues that either, their PC is outdated, cheap and/or badly setup? ~ and from what I have seen, it aint simply "a few people".

 

 

As I do not wish a holiday from MMORPG.com right now I will bite my tongue very hard and refrain from insulting you.

Sure, I can run the game on max settings with AA -shadows from "everything" and get 50fps steady in the tutorial zone, it's in and around Tortage that the "stalling" begins and can get very very bad at times.

Zoning is also a lottery, I had roll another character today becuase ALL of mine were stuck inside tortage, the game would just stop responding after loading into the zone.

And I still get random crashes, due I am sure to the known memory leak.

Intel E6700 Core 2 Duo @ 2.66

2Gb corsair ram

8800GTS 640Mb

Vista 32

 

So yes I have "spent some money" thank you very much, and so I would like to inform people, counter to your findings, that the people suffering performance issues, crashes and other problems are not all plebs, liars and haters using hardware from 1990.

 

For the record, I like this game from what I have been able to see and hope it does do well and have not yet cancelled my pre-order.

 

 

 

I'm in the same boat I have a top of the line computer but the lag and stalling makes the game unplayable, I can play Crysis with ease so this shouldn't be a issue. I really wanted this game to be good but the only thing I've seen is the first 5 levels... I hope they fix the issue.

Set your resolution and your graphics to the lowest settings. The game will run fine and you can see just as good. So shoot me if the game isnt fucking high defintion, badass graphics, and perfection to the eye. The game is about gameplay... you can see and play just the same on high graphic settings as you can on low graphics settings. If you want to play just tone all that bullcrap out and get you some action.

Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

Set your resolution and your graphics to the lowest settings. The game will run fine and you can see just as good. So shoot me if the game isnt fucking high defintion, badass graphics, and perfection to the eye. The game is about gameplay... you can see and play just the same on high graphic settings as you can on low graphics settings. If you want to play just tone all that bullcrap out and get you some action.

gfx drivers,  3 versions - old, 169.25 and new beta 175.12

 a miriad of video option settings, from the lowest possible to the highest going and everything in between.

 tried deleting the shader.cache, compressing resource, defragging, disabling sound, turning off AV and firewall, changing affinity, setting priority, clean gfx driver install, shader.cache dumping, ending any background tasks, overclocking, system tuning.

Not a single difference. For the hell of it I decided to ramp the draw distance to max, it still ran 30-60 FPS outside Tortage.......in between stalling, that was no worse or better than any other setting I have tried.....

I just sat there motionless watching as FPS of 49 would change into SPF ( yes seconds per frame ) of 2.8 while some voodoo went on inside my machine, then all was calm and smooth until I moved back to the small bridge/fork in the path near the stone mason and staaaaaallllllliiiiinnnnnnggggg, etc. All this is usually followed up by a random NOT RESPONDING message.

 And as always the pre-tortage section runs brilliantly.

I really hope this will not be the case in retail.

Originally posted by nikoliath

gfx drivers,  3 versions - old, 169.25 and new beta 175.12

I've seen in a couple other threads people reporting they had problems with all of the nvidia driver versions they had tried, but there was only one that made the game run fine for them. If I recall correctly it's version 169.47 beta, released on April 28th.

169.25 and 175.12 didn't work, but 169.47 did.

Those guys seemed to be in the same boat as you, I suggest you give it a try.

And if this driver 169.47 still doesn't improve things, nvidia have just released a new beta driver today : 175.16.

Originally posted by BigMango

 

Originally posted by nikoliath

gfx drivers,  3 versions - old, 169.25 and new beta 175.12

 

 

I've seen in a couple other threads people reporting they had problems with all of the nvidia driver versions they had tried, but there was only one that made the game run fine for them. If I recall correctly it's version 169.47 beta, released on April 28th.

169.25 and 175.12 didn't work, but 169.47 did.

Those guys seemed to be in the same boat as you, I suggest you give it a try.

And if this driver 169.47 still doesn't improve things, nvidia have just released a new beta driver today : 175.16.

 

thanks for the heads up, will try it out tomorrow