Not necessarily...especially with 3.17. SC may be buggy and broken...but it runs well enough on middling gear.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Define "middling gear." Because my definition may differ from yours.
Well my rig is not anything to brag about 9th gen i5 nvidia rtx 2060, 32 gb ram, and Odyssey is installed to HDD.....
Mostly last gen stuff...if we can call it that yet. Higher end i5's and mid range i7's like the 6700k...GTX cards ranging from the 1650 to the1060's and 1080's. Hardly worth mentioning...but must haves are SSD's and a bare minimum 16Gb of RAM, the more the merrier.Define "middling gear." Because my definition may differ from yours.
A lot of running SC at decent levels of detail with acceptable frames is not trying to run at silly resolutions with the older machines...1080p is fine for SC, you can then perhaps wind some of the newer graphic options up a bit more...although turning down the detail makes very little difference. My RTX 2070 super with all the bells and whistles on maximum at 1440p handles it fine...but using a constant 90%+ of the GPU (30-50% CPU) to get there which is fine if you have decent cooling. Turning the resolution down to 1080p gives the GPU a bit of breathing space.
SC is heavy on the GPU but not so much on the CPU these days so you can get away with an older CPU as long as your graphics card is in the range mentioned above... it's not optimised so the performance varies greatly depending on where you are.
I'd suggest the default base graphics setting should be set to 'very high' for everyone then tweaking the other options to suit. Setting it at medium to low makes the framerates worse for some reason.
Last edited:
As I've said a few times, my laptops over a year old, and it set me back barely £1,000 when I bought it, and 3.17 runs at a level I'd deem playable.Define "middling gear." Because my definition may differ from yours.
I've spent my evening kicked back to the unedited footage of JackFrag's latest vid
And god damn is it a jank-fest. The only reason he's left bugs in the final cut is because there'd be no way to edit them all out.
But lord has he excised huge swoops of dysfunction from the vid.
This clip sums up the 2hrs+ it takes them to get to the actual mission:
And this one, some of the rage moments placid Jack has about the state of the game...
I haven't even got to the bunker interior yet. They're still overcoming various disasters... (Disappearing mission markers & disappearing boxes, box injuries, ~10 FPS lag, confusion over the invisible turret fire, that thing where vehicles Jack is driving in would only strafe right, etc etc...)
I think it's fair to say, his YT vids put a shine on the experience...
The best summary of the contrast with the scuffed reality is perhaps the way the YT vid lingers on the stuffed gun rack of the ship owner at length. But never explains why he's only using a pistol on the mission. (It's because the box with all the ammo was the one that got stuck to Jack's hand. And they never did get it to behave right after that)
And god damn is it a jank-fest. The only reason he's left bugs in the final cut is because there'd be no way to edit them all out.
But lord has he excised huge swoops of dysfunction from the vid.
This clip sums up the 2hrs+ it takes them to get to the actual mission:
And this one, some of the rage moments placid Jack has about the state of the game...
I haven't even got to the bunker interior yet. They're still overcoming various disasters... (Disappearing mission markers & disappearing boxes, box injuries, ~10 FPS lag, confusion over the invisible turret fire, that thing where vehicles Jack is driving in would only strafe right, etc etc...)
I think it's fair to say, his YT vids put a shine on the experience...
The best summary of the contrast with the scuffed reality is perhaps the way the YT vid lingers on the stuffed gun rack of the ship owner at length. But never explains why he's only using a pistol on the mission. (It's because the box with all the ammo was the one that got stuck to Jack's hand. And they never did get it to behave right after that
)
Mostly last gen stuff...if we can call it that yet. Higher end i5's and mid range i7's like the 6700k...GTX cards ranging from the 1650 to the1060's and 1080's. Hardly worth mentioning...but must haves are SSD's and a bare minimum 16Gb of RAM, the more the merrier.
A lot of running SC at decent levels of detail with acceptable frames is not trying to run at silly resolutions with the older machines...1080p is fine for SC, you can then perhaps wind some of the newer graphic options up a bit more...although turning down the detail makes very little difference. My RTX 2070 super with all the bells and whistles on maximum at 1440p handles it fine...but using a constant 90%+ of the GPU (30-50% CPU) to get there which is fine if you have decent cooling. Turning the resolution down to 1080p gives the GPU a bit of breathing space.
SC is heavy on the GPU but not so much on the CPU these days so you can get away with an older CPU as long as your graphics card is in the range mentioned above... it's not optimised so the performance varies greatly depending on where you are.
I'd suggest the default base graphics setting should be set to 'very high' for everyone then tweaking the other options to suit. Setting it at medium to low makes the framerates worse for some reason.
I'd like to test SC out on my new last gen RTX2060 just to see how it runs... but that would involve having to download it all over again, and i really can't be bottomed to do it.
I've spent my evening kicked back to the unedited footage of JackFrag's latest vid
And god damn is it a jank-fest. The only reason he's left bugs in the final cut is because there'd be no way to edit them all out.
But lord has he excised huge swoops of dysfunction from the vid.
This clip sums up the 2hrs+ it takes them to get to the actual mission:
And this one, some of the rage moments placid Jack has about the state of the game...
I haven't even got to the bunker interior yet. They're still overcoming various disasters... (Disappearing mission markers & disappearing boxes, box injuries, ~10 FPS lag, confusion over the invisible turret fire, that thing where vehicles Jack is driving in would only strafe right, etc etc...)
I think it's fair to say, his YT vids put a shine on the experience...
The best summary of the contrast with the scuffed reality is perhaps the way the YT vid lingers on the stuffed gun rack of the ship owner at length. But never explains why he's only using a pistol on the mission. (It's because the box with all the ammo was the one that got stuck to Jack's hand. And they never did get it to behave right after that
Its blatant dishonesty. And then, ok, someone buys the game based on what they saw on YouTube and they have an experience like he had on on his live stream? Congrats Jack, you've just created a new skeptic who won't believe you any more.
Golgot see bugs, Golgot happy
In other words... you are afraid to see the improvements by yourself...
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
This has not really much to do with Golgot just looking for bugs. Although bugs and all kinds of issues in Star Citizen seem to be a given and indeed greatly out of the ordinary (and that alone deserves to be discussed, especially in the absence of formal reviews anyways). But this case in particular is rather about a YouTuber who has previously accepted money to produce heavily curated videos under an agreement explicitly not to show the serious bugs and issues with other games, possibly doing the same thing again with Star Citizen.Golgot see bugs, Golgot happy
Last edited:
Dude, you ran away when asked to present supporting evidence despite hounding people over their claims.
It's pretty hypocritical to call others afraid
Talking about being afraid, still no source for your 85% ?Dude, you ran away when asked to present supporting evidence despite hounding people over their claims.
It's pretty hypocritical to call others afraid
I have the laptop version of the RTX2060, and again its playable for me.
Important though, update your drivers. I just did a full windows reinstall a week or two ago and forgot to do this and when I booted it up, well... it was a sludgey mess until I remembered to patch em.
This is just another version of what you were doing the other day. Say something and then try to turn it around on other people when it's brought up.
Pure trolling.
Why would i not have my drivers updated? Unlike many SC players, i do actually play a variety of games.
Because some people just forget/are away from decent internet connections for periods of time and I was trying to pass a friendly word of warning.
And i was making a joke comment about certain backers who apparently haven't played a different game in the last 20 years
Say the guy using numbers coming from nowhere and doesn't want to admit it...
Mostly last gen stuff...if we can call it that yet. Higher end i5's and mid range i7's like the 6700k...GTX cards ranging from the 1650 to the1060's and 1080's. Hardly worth mentioning...but must haves are SSD's and a bare minimum 16Gb of RAM, the more the merrier.
A lot of running SC at decent levels of detail with acceptable frames is not trying to run at silly resolutions with the older machines...1080p is fine for SC, you can then perhaps wind some of the newer graphic options up a bit more...although turning down the detail makes very little difference. My RTX 2070 super with all the bells and whistles on maximum at 1440p handles it fine...but using a constant 90%+ of the GPU (30-50% CPU) to get there which is fine if you have decent cooling. Turning the resolution down to 1080p gives the GPU a bit of breathing space.
SC is heavy on the GPU but not so much on the CPU these days so you can get away with an older CPU as long as your graphics card is in the range mentioned above... it's not optimised so the performance varies greatly depending on where you are.
I'd suggest the default base graphics setting should be set to 'very high' for everyone then tweaking the other options to suit. Setting it at medium to low makes the framerates worse for some reason.
A high load on the GPU is what you want in games if what you want it the maximum FPS, if not you can lock your games to 60 FPS in the Nvidia control panel.
But the rule of thumb is if your GPU is loaded to 95%+ the game is working well, you're getting the maximum performance from your hardware, you're not bottlenecked by your CPU or a lack of optimisation in the game.
GPU's are designed to run at maximum load constantly, its what Nvidia / AMD expect them to do.