Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
I think 100 player ships on top is sufficient to fight all wars that are neccessary in ONE sector.
200-300 ships are not a nightmare to play. I have a Ryzen 3 1200, and 12GB ram, and a NVME drive to put the pagefile of windows to optimize the ram usage, and it runs smooth like butter (it was even on 8GB, even though the Memory was permafull), until a certain size of empire, but virtually its enough for anything you might engage in the game, as long as you STOP tu build up single sectors further, after they supply enough ships for you.
I think its not only egosoft ( having a hard day man, its just very hard work taking away the years for them and im sure they are working on) but also the players EXCEEDING (the game lays the responsibility how the game runs afterwards your behavior alot on what you are doing. as long as you orient on GAME goals, and not collecting up just insane resources for sake of you are not planning to use up in this amount, then yo uare just a bit off the efficiency ANYWAYS
->behavior that to fix would fix the game
^^ this.
@OP: X4 is a special game because:
a) it is both a strategy game and a first person action game at the same time
b) every NPC ship and station is working all the time in real time across the whole map(whether you can see it or not)
c) every NPC ship and station in the game is making individual AI decisions for itself every three or four seconds that 100% determine it's behaviour, there is no pre-scripting, it's all emergent according to circumstances
There is no other SP game that comes even close to doing this, not SC anyway. All other SP games are:
* either action games or strategy games but not both, or
* the strategy layer stuff is "faked" (i.e. the game state is conjured out of thin air when you happen to be looking at it, otherwise it's asleep on disk)
MP games like Eve Online can do what X4 does but of course that has a server farm to do it.
The compromise X4 makes is that the algorithms used for the NPC ships and stations are significantly streamlined OOS compared to what's used when you are in sector watching them.
It is these factors that explain why
a) there has to be only two main threads to run the real time simulation (everything in the game must be able to respond to everything else immediately, in-sector this is modelled down to the last bullet/beam/missile. My best guess would be one of these threads handles all the OOS stuff and the other the first person in-sector stuff. A second guess would be one handles all the economy stuff, trades, station management etc, and the other all the military stuff.
b) everything slows down when a large number of NPC ships, stations or characters come into view range of the player - they are all getting their much more complex in-sector AI algorithms activated.
The truth is X4, and all the previous X games, are a technical tour de force of game programming. They are not perfect by any means but they do something that no other game dev has dared to attempt, except arguably Chris Roberts.
Chris Robert's has always talked the talk about doing what X games do but conspicuously failed to walk the walk. He did with Freelancer. He failed. He did with SC. After 10 years trying he has so far failed again. He has not succeeded in producing a 100% proceduraly generated real time clockwork universe comprising 400 star systems like he promised. He has produced a fake tech demo of it comprising four star systems, his hundreds of programmers and $300m+ crowdfunding notwithstanding.
So when you say the X4 engine is a "disaster" you could not be further from the mark.
The next ironic thing is that he called it "hot" crap, as I've read people having cooling problems with AMD CPUs more often than I would like for a processor I considered when assembling my computer back then.
I'm not saying the Ryzen is all bad, but his statement is just plain wrong.
Ryzen? not so much....
Sounds cool but actually it isn't.
Compare with eg CK2 that runs in realtime considering interrelationships of thousands of NPCs with dozens of possible actions, each action rolling the dice for a new set of possibilities.
... complex approximation of fluid and gas movements and thermal reaction, plus NPC pathfinding, and more.. in Oxygen not included
'Yes but those games are nothing like X4' Ok, have a look at Astrox, developed by a single guy.
No, there is absolutely no AI involved in this, especially no intelligence. There is no decision tree behind what AI is doing. The things happeningn in X4 as 90% scripted and as simpel as 'search buy/sell offers and execute the trade'.
The 'AI' and 'decision' is obvious when it come to eg flee, find hostile (patrole), ... 'War' works like 'after x amount of time, gather ships, move in sector'.. that's it.
This is like comparing ELIZA with Data in Star Trek.
I call the action part of X4 fake, if you didn't notice yet how 'simple' ships behave when in-sector.
I guess is this pure assumptions and wild guessing what you write and it doesn't explain anything.
'large number of NPC ships'? 10? 50? 100? that is not a large number and they don't have AI at all. They crash into things, they fly towards hostile ships (repeatedly), they don't know when to de-/activate travel drive, ...
It is not to 'dare' to attempt but rather never thought of trying. If you would ask PDX to add first person to eg Stellaris, they would ask why?! If you would ask Frontier Dev to add economy to Elite Dangerous, they would ask why?!
X4 did it, but does not have any strategy or depth like Stellaris, nor does it have the first person experience as in Elite. I wouldn't say X4 failed but definitely it doesn't shine.
Anyways... I just had the feeling to reply to the post because I keep reading how 'AI intense' X4 is and how it 'combines the best of several gaming worlds'.
Egosoft did not so bad in what they delivered. I have hundreds of hours without any crash. The games runs quite OK. So it is no disaster, but it could be so so so much more that's maybe because I keep coming back.
really? what happens to your fps when you sit at some of the largest AI stations and suddenly the ai shows up with a good 20 ships?
or what about fps when watching the full map?
Such a ridiculous comparison, op.
Of course frames will drop, according to steam's FPS module, but that isn't a processing problem but the fact that not even that many frames are being rendered to begin with.
The further you zoom in, the more frames the map needs. In contrast if you zoom out further, you will need less frame, because those little dots on your map will move less, as not every millimeter of distance they pass will get rendered.
Your "drops in with 20 ships" problem also sounds like less of a CPU and more of a Graphics Card problem.
I run a RTX 2080 with 11GB Vram (yeah, that much for the "who needs that much Vram comments of the past) and therefore don't have these issues.
Your ship problem is basically, that other parts of your computer have to do your.
Also note that I run SSAA x4, which eats much more FPS than the MSAA in any configuration ;)
There is also the performance issues, I keep seeing with the RTX 30xx series around discussions.
Fun observation about steam's FPS overlay btw: If you open the map, it seems to only count the map's FPS, not whatever is going on the layer below. Which is strange, since the map is transparent.
i got a 2060s and max usage is about 85%? 8gb of vram too. shouldn't be short on anything.
So SC runs better than this game? Man I always thought my pc was not good enough for SC perhaps I will give it a try
I also don´t have any issue..... but.... why don´t you ask Flavalicious what HIS problems are.....?
Since you didn't say you are using something else, I'll assume you are using Steams FPS meter.
As I showed earlier, Steam's FPS program might not be the most trustworthy around. 85% is a lot btw. my 2080 is using between 38 and 52% of it's Vram in gaming mode going by ASUS tweak.
However, this also includes what's going on on the second screen, as only one of them is actually being used for X. - Ironically the worse one, because it's bigger.
If you have an AsusCard I can also recommend Asus CPUTweak. It has 3 modes, Silent>Gaming>OC
Modern CPU's should give you at best a boost of around 10FPS at best btw, the rest should be done by your GPU. Unless you have some weird setting that brings back the mechanic where your GPU is outsourcing it's calculations to the CPU or VRAM to the hard drives ;)
Also don't trust Steam's FPS meter.
When I drift around the HQ in my spacesuit with 7 m/s and don't move, it will at some point claim I only have 8 FPS, and instantly goes back up the moment I move even just slightly, despite the voloumetric fog's movement alone needing more than 8 fps.
sorry, i actually meant 58% overall usage. i switched up the numbers lol.
and i'm using msi' dragon center to measure overall gpu usage. it doesn't tell me vram usage though. got gpu-z for that, and it seems about 3,6gb rounded up. and nvidia's automatically giving me an fps counter in most of my games, which seems to give the same fps statistics as steam.