#Prayfor60FPS

Just turn off the number in the corner of the screen and enjoy yourself instead.

I believe much of people's problem is counter-watching instead of just playing.

Especially those who complain about low FPS whilst in the lift...
Nah men, Odyssey has a performance problem, in my case it only has it in some very large land bases when you go down on foot.
The drop in FPS it has is abysmal, from about 60 fluids it drops to about 30, and I don't need a counter in a corner to realize that. And precisely a correct and constant flow is what more than anything an FPS needs.

There are people who also have problems in the stations, some when traveling through hyperspace. In my case, and I repeat, in my case, I only have the drop in the large terrestrial bases, especially those used to fight the factions wars.

And in case anyone is wondering, yes, I have a pretty powerful PC, not an office laptop.
 
I'm not sure that's ENTIRELY true. Once the bandwagon jumping started happening, people have been focusing on the number, not on actual playability.

For what it's worth. I've been playing just fine on my i5 &1080 and don't care what the number at the bottom is - it's cracking good fun.
It's really not worth much. @Dartay is right - most people wouldn't have bothered looking at the FPS counter in the first place unless they felt performance was notably worse than what they were used to. I didn't need a FPS counter to realise how much worse performance was in Odyssey compared to Horizons.

It's great that poor performance doesn't bother you - but it really bothers a lot of people (myself included), especially when the resulting graphics are no better than Horizons in most cases.

For what it's worth - planetside performance is so much worse for me in Odyssey that I have no motivation to even attempt any of the on foot missions offered.

What a waste. 🤷‍♂️
 
The "poor performance" isnt bothering me as I'm not experiencing it. I'm aware that for some people there are performance issues, and I'm sure that their concerns are being steadily addressed, but there is also a cabal of others who are basing their opinion not on what they see and experience in game (which is fantastic fun), but a little number in the corner of their screen.

Even during alpha, I just bumped a few settings down and it was eminently playable - and every patch since it has become better.
 
The "poor performance" isnt bothering me as I'm not experiencing it. I'm aware that for some people there are performance issues, and I'm sure that their concerns are being steadily addressed, but there is also a cabal of others who are basing their opinion not on what they see and experience in game (which is fantastic fun), but a little number in the corner of their screen.
That's a highly subjective statement based on nothing more than your personal opinion.

Show us this cabal of people you refer to who have unjustifiably complained about their low FPS. I'll be happy with just 1 link to a genuine post from a real person.
Even during alpha, I just bumped a few settings down and it was eminently playable - and every patch since it has become better.
The point is that for the hardware people are running, they shouldn't have to bump their graphics settings down just to get playable performance.

You may think people are focusing too much on the FPS counter, but it provides a totally objective method of comparison and proof that there is a wider performance issue here, rather than the very subjective "My performance is fine" statements.

You say you're not experiencing poor performance - how do we know that you don't just have incredibly low standards? Show us proof that you're really not experiencing poor performance.
 
I’m getting a constant 59FPS in all areas of the game with ultra settings on my new pc 5900/3080 combinations. Really feel for those getting less. Hopefully it can get sorted soon.
 
That's a highly subjective statement based on nothing more than your personal opinion.

Show us this cabal of people you refer to who have unjustifiably complained about their low FPS. I'll be happy with just 1 link to a genuine post from a real person.

The point is that for the hardware people are running, they shouldn't have to bump their graphics settings down just to get playable performance.

You may think people are focusing too much on the FPS counter, but it provides a totally objective method of comparison and proof that there is a wider performance issue here, rather than the very subjective "My performance is fine" statements.

You say you're not experiencing poor performance - how do we know that you don't just have incredibly low standards? Show us proof that you're really not experiencing poor performance.
4 hours playing last night - raiding a military settlement and an engineering base
20 hours last week preparing and recording a video being released in the next week - in multicrew/wing with 2 other people acting as camera crew.

Will quite happily post my journal files if you want.... though they make for some dull reading.

ranked up in mercenary, made a few credits, got loads of engineering mats, tested some code for HCS to fudge the supercruise assist switching on in lieu of a keybinding existing.

Last weekend got my first few biologicals sampled including the ever elusive bacterial ones.

Travelled via taxi to 20 or 30 stations during that - and walked around those bases.
Used ship, SRV, fighter and on foot....

I had no jerkiness, only 1 "mauve adder" in all those hours, an occasional texture pop approaching a planet (but didn't really care as all I wanted was to get boots down and robbing the place).

I'm not denying that there are improvements required, but in terms of "people focusing on the fps counter" - on my appearance on Lave Radio last week was discussing with a cross section of the guests and when I commented on "Just turn the fps counter off" - FOR EXAMPLE, Psykit admitted that she'd had it "on" and having switched it off for just the reasons I mentioned above about it being a worry gauge, had been able to sit back and enjoy the game more without stressing about the little number in the corner. If you want to check their podcast out you can via their website as it's archived as a matter of record.
 
4 hours playing last night - raiding a military settlement and an engineering base
20 hours last week preparing and recording a video being released in the next week - in multicrew/wing with 2 other people acting as camera crew.

Will quite happily post my journal files if you want.... though they make for some dull reading.

ranked up in mercenary, made a few credits, got loads of engineering mats, tested some code for HCS to fudge the supercruise assist switching on in lieu of a keybinding existing.

Last weekend got my first few biologicals sampled including the ever elusive bacterial ones.

Travelled via taxi to 20 or 30 stations during that - and walked around those bases.
Used ship, SRV, fighter and on foot....
That's lovely. But none of it has anything to do with actual measurable performance.
I had no jerkiness, only 1 "mauve adder" in all those hours, an occasional texture pop approaching a planet (but didn't really care as all I wanted was to get boots down and robbing the place).
Prove that you "had no jerkiness". Just saying that you didn't is meaningless if you don't provide an objective measure (like FPS) - you may just have incredibly low standards.

I could play the same game on your computer and believe that it does have performance issues. Who would be right? How would you measure it?
I'm not denying that there are improvements required, but in terms of "people focusing on the fps counter" - on my appearance on Lave Radio last week was discussing with a cross section of the guests and when I commented on "Just turn the fps counter off" - FOR EXAMPLE, Psykit admitted that she'd had it "on" and having switched it off for just the reasons I mentioned above about it being a worry gauge, had been able to sit back and enjoy the game more without stressing about the little number in the corner. If you want to check their podcast out you can via their website as it's archived as a matter of record.
People are using the FPS as an objective measure to provide evidence that the game has performance issues - anything else is just totally subjective opinion.

It doesn't matter if some people feel the game is fine and others don't - it's all subjective until you present an objective measure as evidence.

That's why you're hearing a lot of people talking about their FPS now when they never used to before Odyssey was released - a lot of people are experiencing poor performance and it's spoiling their game experience.
 
That's lovely. But none of it has anything to do with actual measurable performance.

Prove that you "had no jerkiness". Just saying that you didn't is meaningless if you don't provide an objective measure (like FPS) - you may just have incredibly low standards.

I could play the same game on your computer and believe that it does have performance issues. Who would be right? How would you measure it?

People are using the FPS as an objective measure to provide evidence that the game has performance issues - anything else is just totally subjective opinion.

It doesn't matter if some people feel the game is fine and others don't - it's all subjective until you present an objective measure as evidence.

That's why you're hearing a lot of people talking about their FPS now when they never used to before Odyssey was released - a lot of people are experiencing poor performance and it's spoiling their game experience.
Proof.... other than when the video is released... is hard unless I start streaming the experience just for you.... All I can say is that if I HAD problematic jerkiness I wouldn't have sat in front of it for so long.
You'll have to take my word for it. At 1440p, I've been sitting in front of this screen for hours in my free time and it's been a smooth experience. Yes, it can always improve, but for the time being, I'm firing it up again and raiding the bejeepers out of that base in 1440p again this morning and am going to be enjoying it.

COULD it have been dipping down from my usual solid 60fps? (capped) maybe, but not such that it interferes with my game enjoyment.

Of course, as soon as we release the video, I'll be sure to put a link up for you.

1624526643034.png
1624526819912.png


(image cropped and shrunk so it uploads)

For balance - I've just turned the FPS meter on - and it goes DOWN to 40 when I'm looking at a mission board but it has 0 effect on the gameplay or what I see.
I'm heading for a planet surface to bag you yet more of the proof you require....
 
In fact - the ONLY problem I've got is that my yaw spring on my X52 is bust. Which is a pain in the Asp.

Let me grab you a few more screenshots of the experience..... But what I'm enjoying RIGHT NOW is not broken. Far from it.
 
I'm playing exclusively in Odyssey, but I've now shifted back to playing mostly Horizons content.

The game isn't unplayable, and there are some graphics improvements, but they come with some irritating graphics failures (e.g. late pop-in of the station interior as I approach the mailslot, and a weird readjustment of the geometry of the back wall of the station as I pass through it) and noticeably worse framerates leading to a doubling of the image in my Reverb* as I pitch-turn.

A definite net graphics downgrade so far. Hopefully this will change by console release.

And no, I've never run a framerate counter. Why do you ask?

*My machine is still some way off being two years old. It's the workstation HP sold for VR development.
 
here's me cutting the base open to power it up
1624527920783.png


Still at 60fps (once again, cropped and shrunk so I can paste it here).

So - you've now got my word for it AND proof.

I'm not saying everyone has the same experience, but.... the game is eminently playable. EVEN if it was 45fps (I can possibly bump up the supersampling to 1.5x to force it lower if you want, I'd STILL be having fun)
 
I’m getting a constant 59FPS in all areas of the game with ultra settings on my new pc 5900/3080 combinations. Really feel for those getting less. Hopefully it can get sorted soon.
That is perfectly playble and very nice. It is however completely insane that it takes a 3080, one of the 5 fastest cards currently on the planet, to get 59 FPS (monitor capped though ?). I know one in my squadron also has a 3080, but also plays on a pretty high resolution, and he is dipping as low as 30 FPS in some places, on a freaking 3080 in the expansion of a 6 year old game.
 
Top Bottom