Jamm0r
-
Posts
34 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Jamm0r
-
-
Consider yourself lucky, my preorder still hasn't even shipped yet after three weeks of being released.
-
It's playable right now for me actually. Are you on medication? </font>Originally posted by Melnibone:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by FaxisAxis:
And when they are all fixed every itsy bitsy one of them according to you're delusional liking you'll still be whining, like an idiot.
Its never going to be "playable" for you guys.
-
A couple of testers sounds like a minority to me, why not make the optimization optional via the UI??Originally posted by Battlefront.com:A speed optimization Charles stuck in worked GREAT for most of us, but actually put a couple of testers down to 1.2fps in some cases. To which Charles said "oh yeah... now I remember why I didn't put that in before"
So he's got to take it out and we have to retest again. That's thrown off our schedule. -
Are you running fraps?
-
I play them all (bar CMBO) -- they are not mutually exclusive.
-
18 FPS
Settings:
Resolution: 1920x1280
3D Model Quality: Balanced
3D Texture Quality: Best
Anti-Alias: On, 4x (8x AF)
High Priority: Off
System Specs:
Pentium-M Dothan 2.0Ghz
Geforce go 7800GTX
1GB DDRAM (dual channel)
WinXP Pro SP2
-
-
Kudos to OpenGL, rather. No lost devices or any such nonsense you get with Direct3D.Originally posted by Blackmuzzle:Also, kudos to your programmers for figuring out how to alt-tab without having to reload the entire map. A lot of other games do that and it annoys me immensely.
-
You can't...
-
Yes. However, I suspect that "fixing" the current pathfinding algorithm could be a fairly large project. A short-term "fix" that could be implemented while the base algo is improved might come in handy for now...Originally posted by Xipe66:Vehicle pathfinding and TAC AI should know this by default, so the patch should be there and not in the map editor.
Another solution could be to flag trenches as "buildings" in the code. Just like vehicles know not to drive through buildings (well, most of the time), they could be made to "know" not to drive through trenches. But the ability to add "custom" flagging to the editor might still be a good idea in order for the scenario designer to handle cases not implemented in the exe.
-
Bump-badda-b00m
-
In the 1st scenario, there is a trench running parallel to the main road. Several Strykers get immobilized by falling into the trench without fail every time I play this scenario. This is obviously caused by the "special" pathfinding implemented in CM:SF...
As someone else mentioned previously, the ability to mark certain terrain features as "off-limits" in the scenario editor would be of great help to work around the currently problematic pathfinding.
Would it be feasible to implement this in a patch??
-
I'm able to run everything maxed out at 1920x1200 with decent framerates (20-30). I have to bump model detail down to "Balanced" or just above to get playable fr's with 4xAA/16xAF though...
Pentium-M Dothan 2.0, Geforce go 7800GTX, XP Pro SP2
-
Got Fraps running perhaps??
-
-
Agreed, and well said. It is indeed obvious now why the developers/testers all prefer RT -- WEGO is pretty much broken. Not that I personally miss it much, I'm having a blast in RT (albeit broken pathfinding and several other minor quirks are starting to rub the wrong way...)
-
-
Is there any way to run the game in windowed mode?? I would like to have both the game and manual visible at the same time to avoid alt-tabbing ad nauseum.
-
The keyboard input freezes so many people have been talking about are caused exclusively by Fraps on my end. Without Fraps running, keyboard input works just fine; with it running though, any key press causes the game to freeze for up to 5-10 seconds...
HTH.
-
Not a bug, just the (naive) way shadow maps are implemented in CM:SF.Originally posted by AstroCat:Also, the shadows look corrupted, they are very jagged and "shimmery". They also create a huge performance hit, I was noticing a 40%- 70% FPS drop turning shadows on and off, that doesn't seem correct either.
-
Folks,
This sounds like the fairly well-known issue with OpenGL/Nvidia/dual-core systems. Setting CPU affinity to one of the two cores should fix these issues right up.
-
Pentium-M Dothan 2Ghz
Geforce go 7800GTX
1GB RAM
Windows XP SP2
Runs like a charm, looks great too, with one major exception: shadow maps need a lot more work -- and I'm not talking about "driver issues". They need to be 1) filtered (pcf, vsm, etc) and some sort of space partitioning (cascaded, pssm, whatever) needs to be implemented... in the meantime, I'll play with them disabled, thankyouverymuch.
-
Ah, whelp that probably explains the small 1 psi variation, then. Compared to the 5+ psi variation one would expect from heat alone.Originally posted by dieseltaylor:The TPMS system measures temperature and pressure and an algorithm adjusts it so I think then reports its unheated normal pressure.
-
Erm... centrifugal force may very well affect pressure, but I'd wager that the increase in tire temperature at those high speeds accounts for most of that 1 psi variation they measured. A tire's pressure increases as its temperature rises. Temperature rises with speed. This is why race car tires are slightly underinflated, and often need a few laps to get tire temperature and pressure up to where the tire produces optimal grip. A race tire's pressure often increases much more than 1 psi though -- more like 5, on average.Our system appeared to pass every test with flying colours except one. At extremely high speeds, it appeared to be registering a tyre pressure slightly higher than expected by the client. When I say high speeds, I mean speeds a lot higher than you could legally drive at in the UK and when I say slightly higher I mean something like a 1psi variation when the normal reading might be expected to be around 33psi.[ August 18, 2006, 09:42 AM: Message edited by: Jamm0r ]
So he's got to take it out and we have to retest again. That's thrown off our schedule.
NOT got the steel box!!
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Very disappointed. Haven't even recieved an "it shipped" email.