Performance

[qu4d]

Well yeah... is this supposed to be fixed? When there are multiple enemies in one room the game slows down to an unplayable level. :(

Athlon 64 3700+
GeForce GT 240
2GB Ram
Win7 32 Bit

Mafia had better FPS than Isaac ::confused:

[Stixsworld]

DUDE...look at my post...I was able to play and record the game in HD for 23+ minutes and no where do you see me struggle with FPS...and I ran the game on HIGH settings not auto...so ya...

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2154249

I thenk you needa chek your task manager and make sure your not having sumthang else take up too much memory...cuz this game is well optimized...

---Stixsmaster

[qu4d]

My system is clean and the game runs smooth until there are many enemies at once. The more I kill the faster the game gets.

[Stixsworld]

Well im jest telling you I can have as many enemies as I want on screen and never notice any frame loss...

Did I forget to mention that in my video I did not STRETCH anything?...it was produced in the same resolution I recorded it at...and its still HD...with no frame loss whatsoever...

---Stixsmaster

[flingkatu]

The game is not well optimized. It runs well on some machines and not others.
It runs very well on my dekstop, and has some slow down on my laptop. It probably due to the fact the game is built in flash.
Theres lots of reasons more people do not develop games in flash and this game shows off some of those signs.
Just because the game runs well for you does not mean anything really.
There are plenty of posts with people claiming the same issue of slowdown.

[tacc]

How about meeting the system requirements first before complaining?

[qu4d]

How about meeting the system requirements first before complaining?

My system is better than the requirements :rolleyes:

[Stixsworld]

Huh...I never read them but it does clearly state you needa pretty powerful processor to play atleast 2.5Ghz...and well I did a looking on the web what the average Ghz for OP's processor is and from what I have seen it is on average only 2.2Ghz...jest falls shy of meeting minimum requirements...

Especially if he is using a single core version of that processor...it jest falls short...if its dual core or sumthang...youd probley have better chance(s)...

---Stixsmaster

[tacc]

My system is better than the requirements :rolleyes:

OS: Windows XP, Vista, 7
Processor: 2.5 GHz
Memory: 1GB
Hard Disk Space: 50MB
Video Card: Direct X9.0c Compatible Card
DirectX®: DirectX® 9.0c



How many GHz do you think your processor has?

[Stixsworld]

How many GHz do you think you processor has?

I bet on it being round 2.2Ghz.

Me I got 2.67-2.7Ghz...infact here is a direct link to clearly read my dxdiag.txt...

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SbjUnCyhtaFt_HQ-D-k7WOPuGNcIlRGEVg2n8m0Qwhc/edit?hl=en_US

Enjoy...I already know my rig is pretty beast even for today's standards...compared to the average PC gamer that is...

---Stixsmaster

[qu4d]

How many GHz do you think you processor has?

You do know that especially older AMD cpus were equivalent to Intel CPUs? Like an AMD XP 2000+ was as fast as an Intel Pentium with 2GHz when it had infact less MHz? :rolleyes:

[tacc]

I bet on it being round 2.2Ghz.

I don't think so. Otherwise he wouldn't say that it "is better than the requirements". So he must think that it's something like 3.7 GHz.
The real clock is really 2.2 though.

[Stixsworld]

You do know that especially older AMD cpus were equivalent to Intel CPUs? Like an AMD XP 2000+ was as fast as an Intel Pentium with 2GHz when it had infact less MHz? :rolleyes:

You do know you could jest run dxdiag on your PC and then save all info into a dxdiag.txt file like me and upload it to the web for free which will clearly tell you how many Ghz or Mhz yer processor has?

All you are doing now is lying to yourself till you do that...

I don't think so. Otherwise he wouldn't say that it "is better than the requirements". So he must think that it's something like 3.7 GHz.
The real clock is really 2.2 though.

I checked online and the max his type of processor can be overclocked to is 2.8Ghz...so ya...that still is over the minimum requirement...but even if he had 2.6 or 2.7 he shouldnt experience any frame issues...the only possible way that is happening is it is either 2.5 or lower Ghz...

---Stixsmaster

[tacc]

You do know that especially older AMD cpus were equivalent to Intel CPUs? Like an AMD XP 2000+ was as fast as an Intel Pentium with 2GHz when it had infact less MHz? :rolleyes:

You're living in the past.
You can't compare the X GHz of your stone age CPU with 2.5 GHz of a "newer" CPU.


I checked online and the max his type of processor can be overclocked to is 2.8Ghz...
I doubt that he overclocked it.

[Stixsworld]

I thenk peeps jest needa be more careful and pay more attention to their specs before buyeng a product you thenk your able to handle...

As this sounds like my issue with my old rig that I had before my current...it was an 7 year old XP...I had tried running games such as Doom 3 and ♥♥♥♥ like that on it...they ran but in horrible frame rates...I couldnt figure out why...the I did a very extensive specs background check and was like FFS I needa upgrade NEOW!

---Stixsmaster

[qu4d]

You do know you could jest run dxdiag on your PC and then save all info into a dxdiag.txt file like me and upload it to the web for free which will clearly tell you how many Ghz or Mhz yer processor has?

All you are doing now is lying to yourself till you do that...


I'm not lying to myself... I know that my PC doesnt have 2.5GHz
:rolleyes:

You're living in the past.
You can't compare the X GHz of your stone age CPU with 2.5 GHz of a "newer" CPU.

I am not living in the past. The system requirements mention a 2.5GHz CPU. There is no mentioning of a dual core. I know that like an Atom 1.6 GHz is faster than a Celeron 1.6GHz or that a dual core with 2x1.6GHz doesnt add up to 3.2GHz etc...

And ITS A FUKKING FLASH GAME! No PhysX, no Shadows, almost no A.I. etc... it should run better.

[flingkatu]

the athalon 64 series of chips are pretty old. and that one is a single core chip. 2.2 ghz chip win 32 bit and only 2gb of ram. most flash apps are cpu intesive so your going to be struggling with only 1 core. maybe its time for a new chip?

[qu4d]

the athalon 64 series of chips are pretty old. and that one is a single core chip. 2.2 ghz chip win 32 bit and only 2gb of ram. most flash apps are cpu intesive so your going to be struggling with only 1 core. maybe its time for a new chip?

of course it is... but still thats crappy development for such a great title.

my friend has a PC which is WAY better than mine, but she still suffers the same problem.

[Stixsworld]

of course it is... but still thats crappy development for such a great title.

my friend has a PC which is WAY better than mine, but she still suffers the same problem.

As you can tell...even the slightest off set of specs apparently can make a major issue...always remember to check specs to atleast meet minimum requirements...if they are jest shy...dont bother still...as your jest going to still be pushing your rig over or close to over the edge...and in the end all your gunna do is complain because the devs clearly stated what you needed to play the game yet you dont meet them so you think its their fault...

---Stixsmaster

[flingkatu]

your right it is a pretty common problem, maybe some of the issues will be cleared up with later patches.
but I wouldnt count on it. if the slowdown gets real bad just set the quality to low.
and I agree that it is crappy development for a great title, but that is part of the limitation of flash. :o
these guys know flash well so im sure its easier for them to do it this way. i guess building engines is too time consuming who knows.

[qu4d]

As you can tell...even the slightest off set of specs apparently can make a major issue...always remember to check specs to atleast meet minimum requirements...if they are jest shy...dont bother still...as your jest going to still be pushing your rig over or close to over the edge...and in the end all your gunna do is complain because the devs clearly stated what you needed to play the game yet you dont meet them so you think its their fault...

---Stixsmaster

and what do you think what the 3700 is supposed to indicate? :rolleyes:
your right it is a pretty common problem, maybe some of the issues will be cleared up with later patches.
but I wouldnt count on it. if the slowdown gets real bad just set the quality to low.
and I agree that it is crappy development for a great title, but that is part of the limitation of flash. :o
these guys know flash well so im sure its easier for them to do it this way. i guess building engines is too time consuming who knows.

funny thing is - it doesnt matter on which settings i play the game. low or high, 640x480 or way more... it runs perfectly as long as there are just 1 or 2 enemies.

[Beany:)]

People are actually defending the optimization?

Stop kidding yourselves, the game runs like garbage because its coded in flash and unless you've got a newer sandy bridge processor or something of the like you'll almost always encounter some slowdown.

Although this certainly doesn't make it unplayable in most cases if you meet the system specs required, its definitely not optimal. Whether or not it can simply be fixed with a patch is uncertain too, seeing as flash itself is the garbage part here, not the game coding.

[flingkatu]

all evidence considered this is all pointing at processing power. if you got some easy overclock settings on your motherboard try giving it a little boost. if you arent comfortable overclocking then /shrug ...
also try to see your CPU usage during the game and see if its at 100% or not.

[flingkatu]

People are actually defending the optimization?

Stop kidding yourselves, the game runs like garbage because its coded in flash and unless you've got a newer sandy bridge processor or something of the like you'll almost always encounter some slowdown.

Although this certainly doesn't make it unplayable in most cases if you meet the system specs required, its definitely not optimal. Whether or not it can simply be fixed with a patch is uncertain too, seeing as flash itself is the garbage part here, not the game coding.

We may be waiting for a new version of flash before these kind of improvements can be seen.

[Jalan]

funny thing is - it doesnt matter on which settings i play the game. low or high, 640x480 or way more... it runs perfectly as long as there are just 1 or 2 enemies.This was my experience with it before I removed it entirely.

Granted, I don't run Windows 7 (before anyone chimes in about bad resource allocation in Vista/etc.) or have a i*numberhere* gen CPU and compatible motherboard but what I do have shouldn't be seeing performance dip (granted not constantly, and mainly when a vast number of projectiles are zipping about or those damned brains are on screen) as often as it does.

http://pastebin.com/ZRwpXxfF

The card is a GTS 250, though with Flash I would venture a large guess and say it doesn't make that big an impact what card you're using as long as it isn't prehistoric by PC standards.

[foadiron]

People are actually defending the optimization?

You always get that, even on the worst offenders. They think that because it runs well on their system (which it probably doesn't because they're probably lying or involved with the game) doesn't mean that it runs well on every system.

Personally I really like the game. But I don't like the slowdown.

[Reallylongname]

I think that its the same with everyone , you see this type of fps drop in consoles too