PDA

View Full Version : Tips for running this crap.


Patrick Wolf
08-03-2010, 03:13 PM
I'm running a C2D E6750 @ 3.5Ghz and an EVGA GTX 275 FTW on Win7 x64. Using Precision I see the GPU usage is a constant 97-99% w/ vsync off. Turn vsync on and GPU usage flucuates normally. Poor coding? I'd say so. That excessive GPU usage may cause crashing for some and it just isn't good for your card. The original EFBB does this too.

I'm at 1920x1080 w/ max settings except no AA or SSAO as either one really screws with performance. I also have triple buffering enabled in the nvidia control panel since this is an OpenGL game. The game runs at a near constant 60 fps. There are some slowdowns like in the pit for example. The original EFBB runs at a constant 60 fps.

The original EFBB didn't have AA or SSAO so it doesn't suprise me that it hurts performance so much. I also noticed they changed some of the music and cut a bit of dialog. And it wasn't all for the better, though the music changes will be insignificant to most, and the cut dialog is too insignificant to matter. The gamma seems off no matter the setting. But providing your monitor is set right it should be 40-50%. Damn Atari.

Anyway hope this helps some of you experiencing issues. Also install the latest TAGES driver if you're having activation issues.

I have the retail version btw. Got it from newegg $2 shipped. Glad I didn't pay more than that...

MADDOGGE
08-03-2010, 03:29 PM
I haven't bothered with the BB portion of the requel game yet since I have the original retail of BB but the Athena portion of the requel played fine on Win7 RC for me with no problems(retail for me also). I haven't gotten around to reinstalling it yet since I upgraded to retail Win7 64.


Phenom 9600 2.3 Ghz quad
4 GB ram
8800GT 512 MB
1280x1024

HotSh0t_
08-04-2010, 09:23 AM
Reading the changes they made, to someone that hasn't played the Riddick series yet but is planning to, would you recommend getting the original EFBB? Are the graphical differences huge between the new and the old?

Patrick Wolf
08-06-2010, 03:13 PM
Reading the changes they made, to someone that hasn't played the Riddick series yet but is planning to, would you recommend getting the original EFBB? Are the graphical differences huge between the new and the old?

Well I played the original and remake some more and the original does use excessive GPU usage w/ vsync off so that's not Atari's fault. The gamma should be set between 40-50%. And the removed dialog is too insignificant to matter.

(no spoilers) Unfortunetly it seems like for every improvement they also introduced a detraction. The visuals are much improved for the most part (gamma still doesn't seem right and inside areas w/ HDR lighting seems unrealistic). The minimal GUI was refined/improved. Hand-to-hand combat is much improved. It's more brutal and includes more "final blows" and different stealth kills. It's also a bit harder, most notably the fight with Rust. In the original he's only slightly tougher than his pawns. In this version he's more boss-like and stupidly tough. There is a strategy of sorts to defeat him, but that's for you to figure out. And they removed a significant "mission" in the pit that makes it less intense and kinda dull, why they did this is beyond me.

The AI of enemies is better in some aspects, but worse in others. There's other minor improvements here and there in reguards to gameplay (ex. exploding barrels that destroy lights in the room.) Gunplay is much better. In the original; the accuracy is abysmal and enemies take too long to die, plus you can't shoot from beyond cover. There's other minor differences that aren't really worth mentioning.

I only made it to the guard quarters so who knows what else they changed/removed. I think ideally you should play the original first, then the remake. If you'd rather not, then just play the remake as the core material that made it so great seems intact.

I've only played a small portion so it's possible there isn't any more detractions, just improvements in which case I may consider it the better version.

DeadlyDragon
01-14-2011, 02:04 AM
Im running a i7 920 with dual gtx 480 in sli, when i ran it in 32 anti-aliasing it would drop to 15 fps, if i turned it off back up to 120. So looks like no aa for me

Neithan
01-15-2011, 11:15 PM
Im running a i7 920 with dual gtx 480 in sli, when i ran it in 32 anti-aliasing it would drop to 15 fps, if i turned it off back up to 120. So looks like no aa for me

Perhaps try a lower AA setting like 16x or 8x? Did work for me, and seriously, who needs 32x AA anyway? ;)

Seems they have just messed up the 32x AA setting..

scowie
01-16-2011, 08:05 PM
Using Precision I see the GPU usage is a constant 97-99% w/ vsync off. Turn vsync on and GPU usage flucuates normally. Poor coding? I'd say so. That excessive GPU usage may cause crashing for some and it just isn't good for your card. The original EFBB does this too.
That's completely normal behaviour for computer games generally and is not a problem at all and it's not bad for your card either. Games run as fast as they possibly can do without vsync on.

DV8ing1
01-16-2011, 08:24 PM
I agree with the above poster. Vsync is the throttle for your graphics card! A lot of games have vsync incorporated or at least a max frame cap programmed to avoid unnecessary gpu usage. You have to remember that gfx cards realeased back when the game came out weren't capable of hitting ridiculous fps over 120 so throttling wasn't as common. Just turn on vsync and youre golden (unless your computer is inadequate, which opens a whole new can of worms)!

thelonesoldier
01-16-2011, 09:35 PM
You did notice almost everything about the graphics is improved right? From the textures to SSAO, DOF, motion blur, etc. I can't remember for certain if the original had AA but since every 3D game has AA, I'm sure it did.

I was running Dark Athena's Butcher Bay with a GTS 250 (with an i7 though, not a Core 2 Duo) and I got good framerates at 1600x900 with SSAO on low or medium. You should be able to have SSAO on low at least with a GTX 275, and it's a great effect so its worth the performance.

Admittedly it had been a few years since I played EFBB, but I pretty much liked all of Dark Athena's version better. The graphics obviously, but the extended melee animations and the shooting behind cover are stars in an already awesome show.

thelonesoldier
01-16-2011, 09:38 PM
I've heard rumors that the Starcraft 2 menu isn't VSYNCed or capped and it was blowing out people's video cards running at hundreds of frames per second, but that seems hard to believe for me. I noticed one of my games running the menu at 999 FPS a few weeks ago and nothing exploded.

In Counter-Srike at least, I can feel a difference between 70fps and 140fps even though I play on a 60hz screen. It's smoother for some intangibile reason.

edit: If you're running at 32xAA, you deserve terrible performance.

MattMock
01-20-2011, 12:17 PM
32xAA at a high resolution like 1080p can often cause a game to completely use up the graphics card's memory. This triggers swapping to HDD and can kill performance. You really should try an intermediate AA setting like 8xCSAA.
The only time I can tell the difference between 8x and higher levels is if I look at blown up screenshot comparisons, but to each their own. If you really want high levels of AA you might need a GPU with about 2 gigs of memory.

fenixraven
01-21-2011, 09:17 AM
i be honest i never seen a whole lot of improvement from 8 - 16 and it does chew more of ya whatever it is it chews prossive power

32 is just redicouls

bestkeeper14
01-27-2011, 09:38 AM
Any way to change the Vsync to on without the game being loaded? Might be the reason my game won't start up and freezes the moment it starts?

JackM
01-27-2011, 10:02 AM
Any way to change the Vsync to on without the game being loaded? Might be the reason my game won't start up and freezes the moment it starts?
Use Notepad to edit Environment.cfg file located in Documents and Settings\[user]\Local Settings\Application Data\Atari\The Chronicles of Riddick - Assault on Dark Athena and change "VID_VSYNC=1" to "VID_VSYNC=0" (without the quotes).

kn00tcn
02-19-2011, 02:36 PM
I've heard rumors that the Starcraft 2 menu isn't VSYNCed or capped and it was blowing out people's video cards running at hundreds of frames per second, but that seems hard to believe for me. I noticed one of my games running the menu at 999 FPS a few weeks ago and nothing exploded.

In Counter-Srike at least, I can feel a difference between 70fps and 140fps even though I play on a 60hz screen. It's smoother for some intangibile reason.

cuz 70 is too close to the refresh so the tearing is more pronounced, nothing is smoother than vsync, but there would be some input lag due to it (remedy this as much as possible by capping the game at your fresh at the same time as vsync, so fps_max 60 for valve games)

the SC2 menu thing would be similar to running furmark, which is also capable of blowing out cards if they're not being cooled or if they're dusty or if the user's power supply sucks

BuckyBit
02-20-2011, 02:22 AM
AMD dual-core 2.5GHz
3 GB RAM
ATI Radeon 4670 512VRAM
Win7 32-bit

all specs on high in 1440x900
AA 4x

runs smoothly, like a charm.

posted specs for those, who want to know, if it would run on "lower" spec PCs