GameFan1983's forum posts

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

Best game I ever played, the combination of strategies for hunters and monsters are endless, that's for gameplay and it looked deadly gorgeous.

I wouldn't recommend PC version for now because of cheaters and declining playerbase, cheater aside you might end up join a game where guys competing for the same class or with at least 1 or 2 AI controlled NPC, I encountered first cheater just in the first 3 hrs of play, a guy with infinate jetpack and weapon, fortunately I was in hunter's team so didn't get pissed off that much, lvl 5 on PC and lvl 28 on PS4, PS4 version has about 100 times more players at any given time, bad part is it also has a lot dumb 7 year old have no idea there are doing and love trash talk on a mic, but you can at least join games with friends and always get the class you wanted..

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

Aside form the provocative wording used in topic, as a life long PC gamer/QA engineer, I have to say rendering/graphic wise The Order indeed surpassed anything I've seen on PC, as well as Drive club, Killzone, and infamous. reality is, other than Ryse and AC:U there's almost no next gen worthy(graphically) games on PC at moment. unfortunately both games have system requirements that are out of reach for most PC gamers around world. No need to say agree/disagree, since GS's system war is a place where fanboyism always overwhelm truth and fact

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

@commander said:

@steaminpotatoes: It's more than that,

There are a ton of details that you simply cannot see on the lower view distance, a lot of textures are simply missing on the lower view distance. Some objects are simply gone, like when you look to the left on the picture, a whole city block is dissapaered, broken windows are just holes, balconies missing, colors just turned grey. The other type of trees just make it look a lot more artificial.

This is also on a resolution of 1000p, so a much sharper image, like you would have with 4k , would amplify the difference in detail.

This is also with nvidia hbao disabled.

The simple fact is , that higher view distance looks more realistic, simply because it's more realistic. You can put your pink glasses on and say that it isn't important, but to me and a lot of other people it is.

view distance in dying light = cast shadows on distanced objects according to GI's light direction and increase all object's LOD level by one notch, especially trees since they are rigged by physics animation. Difference will became very notable only when you stand on top of a crane or a very tall building, which doesn't happen very often, Dev did a very good job by providing peak LOD loop on all objects within 100 feet even at view distance 0% plus you will be spend most of your time running on the road or jump from 2 story buildings from time to time fighting zombies, which is what dying light is all about, that's why majority players won't notice view distance 0-100%

<---- From someone playing at view distance 75%

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

even moar dying light

no spoiler, he's not a boss or anything, just a player invaded my game and trying to kill me

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

@GoldenElementXL I can confirm the flicking on SLI, solution = go in and out of a loading screen, problem solved(why the heck we need to do that? I know) yes, the game also runs better at launch for me too, but too many animation bugs made me nuts.

edit: I noticed co-op rarely worked for latest PC games, dying light, ACU, Farcry4 etc, I live in southern CA,

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

@Ben-Buja said:

@OP: The 680 GTX minimum requirement is no joke.

Keep in mind that this is a game that runs in 1600x900 at 15-25 fps on the new consoles which surpass your specs by far

To be fair ACU is running at 23-30 on X1 with comparable high setting on PC with no micro shutter, which is better than 95% PC gamers can have. I don't see why $350 for someone who doesn't want to deal with spec(meaning TC)to get desirable graphic is a bad option.

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

@Byshop I7-5820K 4.2GHz(OCed yesterday) 3200 mhz 16G DDR4, GTX980 4G SLI (soon will change) 500G samsung SSD. While still not very 4kable but currently getting locked 60fps at 1080p at 75% VD, cut scene still shutter little bit.

To make things clear for PC gamers, SLI profile does work on day one but crossfire DOES NOT, and AMD CPU owners aren't so lucky either.

So played each ps4 and pc version for a couple hours, if you have anything less than a ultra high end PC(and a high end Nvidia card) then you bet console version will deliver a better experience. I read X1 version has better AF and View distance than PS4 on beta version, in case you have that console.

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

it's running ok, I still getting micro shutter(especially when got into cut scene) here and there regardless getting over 100fps half of time, and there's nearly no better CPU/GPU solution better than mine. so now I play at 50% view distance and v sync on.

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

@KHAndAnime said:

I think that's exaggerating a bit. I have a 1st-gen i7 and the majority of my play experience is at 60+ FPS. But I'm overclocking to 4.2 currently. But I think since it's so dependent on the first core, overclocking seems to make all the difference.

Can you record a footage or take few screenshots with fps/settings displayed? I don't doubt GTX970/980 users can hit 60fps from time to time , but gaming experience as a whole is not about peak fps for the time being, 6 hrs in, you will see gun fights, intense run and chase, big time explosion etc, that's where the stress test really begin.

Avatar image for GameFan1983
GameFan1983

2189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By GameFan1983
Member since 2004 • 2189 Posts

There's no mystery about dying light's performance, if your CPU is anything less than a high end 4th-5th gen I-5/ I-7, then you are getting 40ish fps max even with the best GPU available. and AMD users are pretty much chit out of luck. I can only suggest drop draw distance as low as possible, it max out all core loads. But then those with latest intel build and 9 series nvidia card are likely have little trouble, playing it on my X99 built, even with 2 GTX980, sometimes cut scene still give me micro shutter.

Loading Video...