I wouldn't say you're alone. Over on the elite dangerous subreddit, I've seen plenty of people report the same as you. I wouldn't expect to see similar reports around here since the community is so divisive tho, so I can see where you're coming from.
Shout Out to FDEV.
- Thread starter Jaguarious
- Start date
- Status
I'm not trying to downplay the issues or cheerlead for Frontier. But there's some unfair arguments getting thrown around and people trying put things in the worst light when at the same time they're not being up front about exactly what their hardware situation is.
Generally speaking, every time I've looked, I'm locked to about 60% of my GPU due to being CPU bottlenecked, but you don't see me complaining that Frontier is incompetent, because I have some understanding about the situation.
Everyone wants the game to run better but OpTiMizaTion is just a magic word like netcode or quality-of-life or endgame or gameplay loop or whatever else. If there's things in the engine that can be cleaned up and made efficient then by all means yes to that. If more ED fans can be brought into the fold then yes to that. But I don't like the slant that the criticism is taking because the game isn't rougher because Frontier sucks, it's rougher because it's better (with some exceptions like rings imo), and because people are not being real about their hardware.
I haven't done much testing since patch 12, but one area i noticed a significant improvement was my FC hangar. Prior to update 12, the FC's hangar would consistently drop terribly in FPS, even as low as 20. Which is strange, because station hangars didn't behave that badly.
Now its buttery smooth 60 FPS.
Need to test out some ground settlements, see if there is any improvement there.
Now its buttery smooth 60 FPS.
Need to test out some ground settlements, see if there is any improvement there.
Yeah there's some inconsistency in hangars. Some are very smooth, some are really rough. Culling issues I guess. Dunno.
It's rougher...because it's better.
Do you not see the complete oxymoron in that statement.
My English isn't perfect despite being native.
It's harder to run and less polished because it has been improved and expanded upon. In this case by "rougher" I meant harder to run, less stable, more visible imperfections. The upside is that, despite edge cases like extremes with the tiling problem which I personally have not yet noticed once, the visuals and feel of the planets are much improved. I didn't enjoy the driving gameplay before. I found planets uninspired and boring. The settlement gameplay I found tacky. The car was never on the space gameplay's level. Now it's closer.
LOL, it's been widely understood for nearly a half century that as games get "better" - so too does the hardware need to improve to keep up to the demands of a "better" game. It's not that complicated to wrap your head around when you actually have an open mind and take into account the context of what's being said.
----
To further respond to your (and others') off topic "arguments" and comments back throughout this thread... the vast majority of complaints about this game include statements like... "anything less than 120fps is horrible performance" Which - like your own comments - show a lack of reasonable perspective when it comes to what is "typical" of a gaming PC for the average EDO player.
My main gaming box has 5 monitors. I normally have 2 webcams, OBS, Spotify, Twitch, and at least 3 other web browsers and/or apps running. ALL while streaming live with - and playing EDO. I see NO performance issues with EDO when I'm streaming and rarely get frame rate drops unless the CPU is constructing a new environment or situation that i've just entered.
Admittedly, I'm not a "typcial" EDO player. But I do have a reasonable perspective of typical hardware.
I'm running an RTX 2070 on an old AMD 1700 8 Core with 20gigs of memory and a 4 Gig SSD.
I often have FUSION 360 (3D Drafting/CAD) software running, and watch (at least) one streaming service while I'm gaming off-stream - but again - have rarely ever had issues playing EDO. Like others - when I do ground based missions/play - I see frame rates drop temporarily while the CPU is getting things sorted out for the instance. This (from my experience) is normal with any game.
But then there are these delirious negative nellies who sit around the forums whining that they can't get better than 120 frames per second on their 4K , 8 foot wide screens with these 40 up/down/over sampling, bla bla bla settings turned on full blast... bla bla bla... and that my system must be junk (compared to theirs) if I'm happy with 60FPS. Which (as you would put it) is an absolute "Oxymoron". Because the demands they're putting on their systems are not even related to the software they're trying to run... it's entirely related to the hardware that is sucking all the performance out of the other end.
Hell - I have one box with an integrated GPU on the motherboard with a low-end to average-at-best ATI CPU that performs with EDO better than 90% of the spoiled whiners report on their monster systems. That proves that the software isn't necessarily even the problem.
...at the end of the day... all the negativity is really just coming from a tiny minority of non-committed players who place enormous expectations on their systems and blame the game for not measuring up. All the while - there are more than 150,000 active daily players logging into the servers and enjoying the game on their perfectly average gaming PCs.
If there really was such a horrible performance problem with the game itself. There would be FAR MORE complaints from MANY others than just the few whiners who troll threads like this one.
Last edited:
Um, I have 2 copies (in original boxes) of the first release of E.D. They were absolutely meant for PCs. Unless you think a "Personal Computer" isn't a PC I suppose.
Source? Or is the '1' a typo?
I noticed improvements in U12 in a couple of areas, but for example just yesterday my FPS went below 20 for a couple of seconds as I dropped out at a Coriolis. Most of the time I still get audio artifacts in social hubs because the engine/my hardware can't keep up.
I think performance complaints are still very valid and it's a bit dishonest to label everyone as negative nellies or haters.
You might want to have a talk to @Morbad, otherwise you should just stick to building models instead of guesstimating how taxing Odyssey is on your hardware compared to other games.
Edit: Oh, I just noticed the general gist of your comments towards people who didn't (fully) agree with you. Before you inevitably are going call me toxic and all that, let me double down on the "stick to the models" suggestion.
Last edited:
![[VR] Bulbulunufus](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/261/261245.jpg?1671230473){kind=avatar}
Yep agree, it is FAR more nuanced. It's possible to think Odyssey is ok or great while being really quite unsatisfied with the performance and optimisation (apart from anything else). I'd say most people in my (large) player group who didn't simply quit the game fall into that broad category. Unfortunately it's not in our interests as players to shower FDev with untempered praise. We really have to be frank about where balls are dropped and recognise that there's a cost in player retention and the life of the game.
The release itself is a large part of the problem since it set the tone for player opinions ever since and we've never really gotten past that. It was sold as a full release, with comparable system requirements to Horizons, and most sane people would say it was a beta at generous best, with jaw droppingly bad performance, and there were some real pants-down moments for FDev on optimisation in particular. On the other hand, we can see this as a good thing since it allowed players a level of indignation that they simply won't leave FDev alone on performance issues until it hits some reasonable-seeming percentage of what we have for Horizons. And I'd say we have that pressure to thank in good part for the progress so far, progress that it is also fair to recognise - it seems to have been a lot of work.
Instance hopping (dropping at a coriolis) is obviously going to cause a spike in CPU threads, and will always have frame rate drops. That's arguably a normal thing in any game. Happens to me every time too.
No, it's not a typo. There have been several individuals commenting within this thread stating that anything under 3 digit FPS numbers is a bad frame rate. Which is pretty much the real point of my rant. That many of those whining are only whining that the game can't keep up to their particularly high expectations. That those who have those type of expectations are simply being "negative nellies" with little real perspective of what a "normal" gaming pc looks like for the average E.D. player. I don't think I suggested that everyone is a negative nellie. In fact - if you read the very next paragraph - I openly reasoned that the vast majority of the negativity isn't coming from the general population of players.
Last edited:
Unless those comments were deleted by a moderator, I don't see any comments with anything close to that kind of statement.
Maybe not in this thread. but you seem to read as much of the forum as I do - and there have been derogatory comments by a poster or two who sneer at lesser results.
Never mind - I get over 300 FPS in EDO...
(pic or it didn't happen....)
Last edited:
OMG! that's amazing!
It was in 1080... (So was being naughty) Sadly I missed it when the counter was at 2180...
In 4K (my normal) I'm still at 60+ FPS in Ultra / Ultra+
But, it does make for fun to post something like this:
If only because 'numbers' are pretty irrelevant, it is the player's impression of the 'smoothness', or otherwise, that counts when 'just playing'.
But, this is on a 5900X / 6900XT combo so, if being pedantic, isn't that good, but is much improved over release, so all isn't dreadful.
I'm impressed by your own setup! I just run the 4K monitor and a 1080 one on this machine.
(and loved your 3D printed FC!)
Regarding those who "Don't agree with me".
To be completely fair - I don't know how it's possible to disagree with me. Afterall - my post is simply thanking FDEV for their efforts and stating that my experience in the game has improved measurably. If that is something someone can disagree with - well then I congratulate them for being able to play on my game box over the past few weeks without me noticing.
As far as "guesstimating" how taxing Odyssey is on my hardware... well - um... since I only have my own hardware to guestimate on - and since I'm intelligent enough to know that 60 is a larger number than 50 or 30... I don't see any need to"guesstimate" in the first place.
...and I'm glad you appreciate the FC build. Too bad you seem to feel a need to use it against me instead of just saying that you liked it like everyone else. Well... except that one guy way back in the thread. Man, was he ever toxic.
Sometimes on the forums you've just got to take the good with the bad. I did like the FC model!
There are a few who will disagree with a positive post toward Frontier or the game and will post negatively regardless. (I am probably one of the 'little gang' accused of disruption on many threads - which, indeed, there are times I certainly could be viewed that way)
In this thread, I am in agreement entirely that EDO has improved performance since launch, so hope that my own interjections have not proved to be 'disruptive'
Are people really disagreeing with you? You've shared your experience, others have shared theirs. Are you disagreeing with them?
The tone of your posts certainly helped make this thread what it is.
- Status