why PR so Heavy

[xseeyax]

Do you mean the highest it will change to in the menu? Because you can get it to run in higher resolutions with a command line argument. For example i run it in 1920x1200 which can not be set in the menu.

Yeah that's what I'm running with with everything on high and I'm not getting any problems.

[Cpt.Kawakowitsch]

I recommend people use their nvidia control panel or the ati equivalent rather than use ingame graphics options. It works better in my experience.

Can you give me a short explanation on this, how I can set my ingame graphics setting via nvidia driver?

[Antiglucke]

I have some drops in the city-maps, when watching in a special direction it seems that there are more detailled objects or stuff, then I drop from 50fps to 25fps...when I then use the scope it is fine to 50fps again...

imho happens at Fallujah West while watching in SW direction...

I guess I have to switch off the AA in the graphics....

[CareBear]

The bottom lines is we dont have a full testing team that has a wide range of processor and video cards. Some times things get over looked. Take Korengal for example, while I had no issues a few had fps so low it was unplayable. all it ended up being was a large texture that lower end gfx cards coulnt handle. And then on to Fajita West myself and and another tester have almost the same rig but while I get high fps he get BAD fps.

So only bug reports and users specs will help us find the problems. Which is why its so important for you and us.

And on to why the mods so heavy? we are working on cutting out allot of fat which should start to bring the size down a bit, until we add more. But its not an easy process as removing on ladder static could be a child static on all the maps.

Where working on it, but dont expect the mod to get lighter on size or lighter on graphics cards.

well during all the testing builds etc my PR was fine, now witht eh final build, my comp takes aggggeeessss to load up now although i still get a good fps, but sometimes (probs when the comp been on a while) its really juttery for ages
what im saying is tha this finaly build is much more intense than all the test builds, was it meant to be

[TheOak82]

Yeah that's what I'm running with with everything on high and I'm not getting any problems.

People have different views on what is "smooth". For me it's 60FPS or above and on some maps(falluja, muttrah, korengal)I can't get that all the time(drop down to low 40's high 30's in some parts of Falluja. Running C2D 3.8GHz/HD 4870 512mb/4gb RAM.

Just had a friend buy a new PC with AMD Phenom II X4 940 quad core/HD 4870 1gb and he's getting similar frame rates, so it's not my rig either.

[CodeRedFox]

i not going to upgrade.

Were going to keep improving the mod and its assets. The file size may not go down by much as the more we take out the more we can put back in. And we do understand some of you have set bandwidths pre month. But the mod is what it is.

btw my question was why same map from 0.8 have fps drop at 0.85 nothing change

While nothing in the level might have changed the new assets have. We have new resupply, razorwire, 50cals nets, foxholes, ammo crates, improved textures, improved models, sounds, ambient sounds, etc.

[CodeRedFox]

get out of town...who would have thunk!

[thecoolj85]

all or nothing

[TheFaceCC]

well my pc work only for PR and MSN
i not going to upgrade.
btw my question was why same map from 0.8 have fps drop at 0.85 nothing change
like on ramiel i got 30 fps in 0.8
and in 0.85 i got 15-20 fps ( same place )
map not change as far as i know

Also im not a 100% sure on this, but i am pretty sure they upgraded the sky in .85 from .8 and i think it might be lowering peoples fps alot, at least it looked alot better when i upgraded from .8 to .85 guess it could be my imagination but i am almost positive.