Forge > General > Topic Details
Cleril Aug 23, 2013 @ 6:00pm
Optimization Needed
Lowest settings possible and still getting at most 32 unstable FPS.

Intel HD 3000, I know, it's not made for gaming. Fun fact though, I get a full consistent 60 frames on Dota 2.

With Forge I average 22 and the lowest is 11.

Which makes the game unplayable.
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
< >
The Tarman Aug 23, 2013 @ 6:04pm 
Your fun fact is more like a" totally unrelated to to your performance in Forge" fact.
Cleril Aug 23, 2013 @ 6:11pm 
Originally posted by The Tarman:
Your fun fact is more like a" totally unrelated to to your performance in Forge" fact.

It's very related. If other F2P games can offer me a solid 60 FPS on greater settings than Forge then something could be adjusted.

What's funny is that Forge offers more graphics options than Dota 2 but can't manage half the frames.

The game itself seems clunky with the controls but looks like it's servicable and certainly interesting. The issue is I simply can't enjoy a game all about action at 20 FPS.
JustAnotherRogueAI Aug 23, 2013 @ 6:44pm 
Forge's system requirements are higher than Dota 2's. You really can't make that argument.

You should really look into getting a different graphics card if you're worried about FPS. I did some research, and it looks like, depending on what kind of system you're running, that thing will only get you anywhere from 64 to about 400 MB of dedicated video RAM. Forge's recommended requirements for graphics cards is at least 1 GB of dedicated video RAM.

That being said, there are still some optimization issues with some of the larger maps (Siege maps, to be specific). I believe that these are being addressed currently, though I wouldn't expect you to be able to run the game very well even after a patch.
Cleril Aug 23, 2013 @ 6:50pm 
Originally posted by AssassinOfKings:
Forge's system requirements are higher than Dota 2's. You really can't make that argument.

You should really look into getting a different graphics card if you're worried about FPS. I did some research, and it looks like, depending on what kind of system you're running, that thing will only get you anywhere from 64 to about 400 MB of dedicated video RAM. Forge's recommended requirements for graphics cards is at least 1 GB of dedicated video RAM.

That being said, there are still some optimization issues with some of the larger maps (Siege maps, to be specific). I believe that these are being addressed currently, though I wouldn't expect you to be able to run the game very well even after a patch.

Hm, suppose I'll have to skip the game then.

Either way, developers would certainly like to know how players left especially when it comes to F2P.

In this case, I couldn't give the game too much of a chance due to it running poorly.
JustAnotherRogueAI Aug 23, 2013 @ 7:20pm 
Originally posted by Cleril:
Originally posted by AssassinOfKings:
Forge's system requirements are higher than Dota 2's. You really can't make that argument.

You should really look into getting a different graphics card if you're worried about FPS. I did some research, and it looks like, depending on what kind of system you're running, that thing will only get you anywhere from 64 to about 400 MB of dedicated video RAM. Forge's recommended requirements for graphics cards is at least 1 GB of dedicated video RAM.

That being said, there are still some optimization issues with some of the larger maps (Siege maps, to be specific). I believe that these are being addressed currently, though I wouldn't expect you to be able to run the game very well even after a patch.

Hm, suppose I'll have to skip the game then.

Either way, developers would certainly like to know how players left especially when it comes to F2P.

In this case, I couldn't give the game too much of a chance due to it running poorly.
Well, if you do end up upgrading that card, don't forget to try Forge again. Trust me when I say that it's a wonderful game when it's running properly.
Cleril Aug 23, 2013 @ 8:06pm 
Originally posted by AssassinOfKings:
Originally posted by Cleril:

Hm, suppose I'll have to skip the game then.

Either way, developers would certainly like to know how players left especially when it comes to F2P.

In this case, I couldn't give the game too much of a chance due to it running poorly.
Well, if you do end up upgrading that card, don't forget to try Forge again. Trust me when I say that it's a wonderful game when it's running properly.

No doubt, it'd have to be a new machine which likely won't happen as I plan to get a PS4. This laptop is for college and I abuse it enough with Dota 2.

The only gameplay complaint I have is just the awkward controls but I imagine rebinding them is an easy solution. The whole 1-8 ability usage is just silly.
Wayward1 Aug 23, 2013 @ 8:40pm 
Thx for your post and follow-up posts Cleril.

We are doing another optimization pass that will make it to our next patch. Perhaps you can try once more after to see if Forge would run on your laptop. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that we can get you in game then.

If not, that PS4 is not a bad backup to Forge! :)
Cleril Aug 23, 2013 @ 9:01pm 
Originally posted by Wayward1:
Thx for your post and follow-up posts Cleril.

We are doing another optimization pass that will make it to our next patch. Perhaps you can try once more after to see if Forge would run on your laptop. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that we can get you in game then.

If not, that PS4 is not a bad backup to Forge! :)

I'll be sure to keep an eye out for when that patch is up. I'd be willing to try Forge more given a proper FPS.

Namely, if the optimization allowed me to turn off shadows that would solve a lot of problems. I can promise at least 15+ more frames if I could disable shadows at least on the environment.

I did enjoy the experience I had but only the tutorial was managable at 25 FPS. There's no way to compete in these types of games without consistent and above average FPS.

Appreciate the devs being active on minor topics like these. I've had a lot of issues with F2P on Steam being terribly optimized and that's just a thorny barrier to entry.
The Tarman Aug 23, 2013 @ 9:50pm 
Originally posted by Cleril:
Originally posted by AssassinOfKings:
Forge's system requirements are higher than Dota 2's. You really can't make that argument.

You should really look into getting a different graphics card if you're worried about FPS. I did some research, and it looks like, depending on what kind of system you're running, that thing will only get you anywhere from 64 to about 400 MB of dedicated video RAM. Forge's recommended requirements for graphics cards is at least 1 GB of dedicated video RAM.

That being said, there are still some optimization issues with some of the larger maps (Siege maps, to be specific). I believe that these are being addressed currently, though I wouldn't expect you to be able to run the game very well even after a patch.

Hm, suppose I'll have to skip the game then.

Either way, developers would certainly like to know how players left especially when it comes to F2P.

In this case, I couldn't give the game too much of a chance due to it running poorly.

Can you not see that there exists the possibility that it could be your system? You realize that not everyone is having the issue you describe don't you? You even say you knowingly realize that your hardware cannot handle rendering shadows and it would be a good thing if one could disable the feature in the options. This is the hard result of what could be your PC reaching it's ceiling. That obviously means the problem is at least somewhat as a result of unmet spec requirments.

The satisfactory level that DOTA seemingly acheives on your PC is NOT a correlating factor that can be used to gauge how this game will run on your PC under the same conditions. There is NO way to compare the two in a useful maner. NONE. ZERO. ZILCH. If the two games in question required the exact same hardware THEN you could make the comparison but they do NOT.

Why do so many poeple seem to not understand this basic idea? Also, why do these types of posts never seem to include the OP's computer specs but always call out the developers as having done an unsatisfactory job in x area?
Last edited by The Tarman; Aug 23, 2013 @ 10:01pm
Cleril Aug 23, 2013 @ 10:09pm 
There's no point in including anything but my graphics card which I did, did I not?

I can run plenty of games just fine that I don't meet the mininum requirements for given the right .ini tweaks or graphics options.

It's always games that don't include shadow options that bork my laptop up.

And again, the developer should take note that players like myself would be happy to play and support the game. Of course, in this, I'd need more proper game time to see if I wanted to support it but given I can't run it I can't even determine if I'm a customer for the developer.

And correct me if I'm wrong but the whole point of Free to play titles is to attract a larger number of customers instead of only customers willing to go through a pay wall.

It's not like I'm one of the few gamers who can't run games beyond Skyrim. In fact, I'd argue many pc gamers could not run the majority of modern day titles. What requirements your game has is very much a factor into how much money you will acquire because it limits what people can enjoy your game.

There's plenty of single player games I could not purchase due to my laptop being unable to handle them. Games in genres similar to them I could run just fine.

What do I do? Buy the lower requirement game of course.

Basically, FTP is supposed to attract a lot of customers.

Having high system requirements is not going to attract a lot of customers.

Why not strive to have both?
The Tarman Aug 23, 2013 @ 10:16pm 
Thank you for sharing your thoughts but what I said still stands as true.

I also play on a laptop by the way. A four hundred dollar Pavillion g6 laptop I bought for class which just so happens to be able to run many games on low-medium settings. I do understand your position you see.

Regardless, I only meant to dissuade others whom like yourself, feel that one games functionality on a PC correlates directly with how another completly different game will also run on said PC.
Last edited by The Tarman; Aug 23, 2013 @ 10:19pm
Cleril Aug 23, 2013 @ 10:29pm 
Originally posted by The Tarman:
Thank you for sharing your thoughts but what I said still stands as true.

I also play on a laptop by the way. A four hundred dollar Pavillion g6 laptop I bought for class which just so happens to be able to run many games on low-medium settings. I do understand your position you see.

Regardless, I only meant to dissuade others whom like yourself, feel that one games functionality on a PC correlates directly with how another completly different game will also run on said PC.

My point was more so about the lack of customers compared to games that run.

You could have the most beautiful graphically impressive game in the world.

If only 5 computers can rn it you're not going to make anything even if you went FTP.

That's hyperbole in this case, sure, but the point I was making should be clear now.

Minecraft made billions because any toaster can run it while higher end machines can get a decent graphical experience. It makes both types of pc owners happy.

Forge does not.

This laptop can at best get skyrim at 60 FPS if I stare at the ground or sky. This using the same settings a PS3 copy of Skyrim would have (medium at native resolution). It's not playable but Oblivion is pretty dandy if shadows are gone.
RedmanXplosion Aug 24, 2013 @ 12:19am 
It really sounds like this is entirely your fault for expecting to run a game at less than minimum requirements not the developer's. Also I'm not sure how your whole "F2P games have to becompatible with all comupters to be good" makes any sense. There are plenty of F2P Games that have been extremely successful while running best on high end machines only.

I really think you're taking the easy way out and blaming the developers without actually taking the time to realize that, oh, it just might be that I'm trying to play high spec games on a pretty low end laptop.

You should think about purchasing a new system, preferably a desktop, something that you can upgrade, because laptops have very limited options.
Last edited by RedmanXplosion; Aug 24, 2013 @ 12:20am
Jonathansty Aug 24, 2013 @ 3:55am 
If your computer can't run it. And your specs are below the minimum requirements. Then it's not a fault of optimization. It's just a bad computer. We are sorry but we can not change anything about that. Forge is optimized better then most f2p games.
Cleril Aug 24, 2013 @ 4:30pm 
I didn't blame anybody.

I just stated that I would like to play Forge and upon trying I could not run it in a playable fashion.

I would argue most gamers do not have ultimate god boxes or even decent gaming computers by todays standards. There's a reason consoles exist and have continued to exist.

This thread is about letting the developer know that because of spec requirements I cannot even potentially be a customer.

There's no blame games and there is no fault to be found.

I can play many video games that I do not meet requirements for. This is due to the games having plentiful graphic options that can make my laptop happy go lucky. The argument that me not being able to run a game is something I need to fix is ridiculous.

If someone makes a movie that doesn't fit your screen, is it your responsibility to buy a brand new television? No. It's the creators responsibility to get their product in a working fashion.

The developers, or at least one of them, seems to understand this. And I greatly appreciate them adressing me despite me not even being a potential customer right now since I can't play the game.

Being a game developer myself, I understand this.
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50