Home_Sliced Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 Hehe you may want to upgrade your machine It's upgraded as far as I'm going to: 384mb of ram and a GeForce2. Beyond that, it's time for a new computer (which I hope to get within a year). How are the load times compared with Elite Force on normal settings? Twice as long? Thrice as long? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChangKhan Posted March 28, 2002 Author Share Posted March 28, 2002 Originally posted by Home_Sliced How are the load times compared with Elite Force on normal settings? Twice as long? Thrice as long? Actually quite a bit faster, if you read my thread-starting post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YummyPork Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 Originally posted by nykel007 You'll putting my P3 800mhz 128RAM ...... to shame. I don't have the game yet so I don't know how it would handle, so pray for me. We have the same situation nykel. I plan on using any long load times for biology breaks and topping off any refreshing beverage I may be enjoying while playing. PatientPork Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpliffCartel Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 Damn, I thought 256 MB of RAM would last me a while! Its not the loading times that bother me so much, its the juddery-ness for a few seconds after loading. Once it stops the whole game runs nice tho! I'll have to try turning down the detail and see if its worth the tradeoff! TBird 1333MHz 256 MB DDR RAM Gainward Geforce 3 Ti 200 clocked at 210core/480mem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwyjibo Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 long loading times at the beginning of a level are fine by me but the quick load isn't very quick especially when compared to the quick load of medal of honour: allied assault, which uses the same engine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 But what about doing a load/reload/reload, etc.? Dropping out of the executable give as nice fresh test, but I's still seeing crashes on reloads. Even if I drop the textures and colour depth, if I go from one level to the next, I can guarentee the next quick load will crash - I have to quit the game and restart to make quickloads work without hanging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 Okay, time for a bit of backpedalling here. After seeing the post on timings and how long some of them were, I thought maybe I am just being stupid and so left the game alone to load. It turns out the game is not hanging, just taking a VERY long time to do a reload. I loaded the game at 1024x768, default colour depth/texture depth (running desktop at 32 bit, so I presume that's what default is). I started the game and: 1. Load a save game (takes 40 seconds) 2. Hit Quicksave (1-2 seconds) 3. Hit Quickload (9 minutes and 40 seconds). Yes that's right, a "Quickload" is nearly FIFTEEN times slower than loading from fresh! Why on earth is this happening? How can loading the whole level from scratch be so much faster than a quickload from a machine with 512 megs ram? Jeez, throw out the code for quickload and use the code for an ordinary load! The game looks and plays fine, even loads fine at these colour depths and textures sizes, but quickload is a dog! Help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polygon_monkey Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 On my laptop (PIIIm-1.2, Radeon 7500M 64mb, 512mb ram and Windows XP) it takes about a minuite for the initial level load (best quality textures) and after that load times are only a few seconds. Thats pretty reasonable to me. Ain't tried it on my slightly more powerful desktop but I assume it would be better due to 7200rpm desktop HD versus 4200rpm Laptop HD. So Win Win or something. Not really anything to complain about really. Damn this game kicks ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiles4 Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 I have heard that Win 98 does not correctly support 512 MB RAM The problem occurs when you have more than 512MB, at which time you can get that much RAM to work by tweaking your VCache setttings. Your're right, TUS_Tomcat If you're still using win98 i think its time to upgrade I couldn't tell if that was a wink afterwards or not. But I'm hoping you weren't serious. True to form, it seems that XP is giving more trouble with this game than Windows 98. the AGP aperture should be about half of what your total RAM is. I would keep this at the lowest value that works good for your system - either 64MB or 128MB. I don't think you should ever raise it higher than 128MB. It's not a case of more = better. but I suffer from slowdown with anything above 1024 resolution. Your problem, Jam_effect, as Lt. Durden said is your 8 (????) MB onboard Intel Video Card. Your lucky you can run much of anything with that. I thought that the onboard Intel video "cards" weren't supported by JK2? IMHO, anything over 40 seconds to load a level is pretty brutal - this game must be using massive textures on high detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainPOE Posted March 30, 2002 Share Posted March 30, 2002 I haven't really noticed the reloads to be a real problem yet. At first when it initially loads the level it can take a CLOSE to a min. But after I die and it reloads its done within 10-15 seconds. The reload times in AvP2 were god awful compared to this, AvP2 took forever to reload. I'm also kinda tempted to upgrade my hardware just so I can turn on volumetic shadows cause its just too damn cool But with them on my fps ranges from 20-60 But once again great job on the game Raven guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedArmy Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 One piece of advice. If you Nocliped through a puzzle, go back and do it properly. I did, and my load times for the "Fid teh doomgiver" mission went from * min with FULL detail and 7:30 with MIN detail to 30 seconds max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ah Boon Posted March 31, 2002 Share Posted March 31, 2002 mine is 20 sec on Pentium4 1.8ghz, 64mb geforce2 mx and 256mb ram 20 SECONDS@!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chubtoad Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 I run a pIII 600, with 256mb pc133. Geforce 2 MX (Hercules) @ 1024, all settings on High (not Very High) on WinXP and load times are around a minute or two and reloads bout 5 seconds. At first I thought it was going to be crappy having to reload the levels all the time, but the levels are HUGE! I've played EF and HL and Q3 and all, but to me these levels are so HUGE and detailed I'm surprised the loads don't take 2 hours! If anyone isn't satisfied with under 2 min load times, you need to get some patience, did you notice the SIZE of the levels!??! I just beat the game on easy, fantastic game, just amazing, I loved it soo much! ::No Spoilers:: I love how they... and how you can.... and with those... also. my god:atat: , I loved this game. Even if I had to wait 10 minutes for a level load, it would be worth it! I've been a loyal SW fan since I was 10, This game definetly lives up to the saga! I wish there was ewoka though, heh, just messin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kx_Dra_Sycdan Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 Originally posted by ChangKhan[RAVEN] Our loading times are actually very good FALSE I have over 512mb or ram and your level loads are horrible. Period, I can run games like Q3, RtcW, UT, HL, and Max Payne all at various levels of resolution above 800*600 with no long load times at max Details ...In fact i never have to wait more than a minute load the levels(most games only take no more than 30 seconds to load on my system) Yet with JO i have to wait a miserable 2 minutes or in some cases even longer (Yavin swamp level) And there is no exceptable excuse for that. really it's like you guys expect everyone to have a friggin $2000 gaming rig, and on top of all that alot of the time having your specs maxed out will make minimal deference in anything noticeable, for example the grass sections of the Jedi Academy map you can plainly see mis-aligned textures and mis-aligned level architecture (you can see these horrid lines were they misaligned the grass) i'll post a pic for you after i finish this post so you can see for yourself. I love this game but there are some Blatantly obvious fixes that must be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckman Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 I have an Athlon 1.2 ghz, 512 mb of PC133, and a Radeon 8500 64 mb. The reloads are pretty quick -- just a few seconds -- but loading missions does take a really long time (for the single player). I can't remember waiting a full minute to load a game since my Commodore 64. The levels are enormous, and the textures look great (mostly), so I guess it's worth the wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Draugmahl Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 Well, to be perfectly honest I am seeing load times comparable (often somwhat faster in MP) to what I normally get playing RTCW, which I have been playing online religiously since it came out. I am running Jedi with the settings much higher in Jedi as well since running wolfenstein over 800x with a voodoo produces a hated framerate. My system is 1.4 Ghz Athlon 1024 MB SDRAM Voodoo 5 5500 PCI My load times at the start of a level are usually about 30 seconds maybe 50 in single player and I'm not noticing and difference between a quick load and loading a savegame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCPVIP Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 I have an AXP 1900+, 512 DDR, two 60GXPs in an ATA100 RAID stripeset, and a GF3 and it still takes two minutes to load. I can fix a snack and eat it, too. Awesome game once you make it there. There need to be dynamic light from the sabers and laser shots on the walls. The quick load isn't so quick either. It's wierd because the multiplayer (botmatch or online) does not take that long at all to load. Something needs to be done.I don't know which loads slower, the game or these forums... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiles4 Posted April 1, 2002 Share Posted April 1, 2002 My system: 1.2Ghz Tbird 512MB DDR IBM 60GXP 7200rpm HDD Single Player Load Times: 1st Load: ~40 seconds Reload(after death): ~10 seconds To me these times are acceptable though the 40 seconds can be a bit trying. I presume anyone who's complaining about load times isn't bone-headed enough to run with "Very High" detail settings. If you are, get yourself a SCSI drive - but even that might not be the final cure depending on the size of the textures being loaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbiesan Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 I guess the load times we hear about are average.. I am getting just under 1 minute for a fresh loadup at highest setting.. reloading from save is about 5 secs.. AMD 1.2G 512MB PC133 Quantum 40GB 7200RPM ATI Radeon 8500 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasuki Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 I don't think its the ram that matters more like the vid card and ghz. My computer before it was updated yesterday had 128 ram and the load times were like 5 secs or less after the first load. The first load was tlike 12 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bullseye69 Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 I have 3 systems p-3 800mhz with 512pc133 ram Elsa Geforce 2 Ultra 64meg Video card 7200 rpm Western Digital HD Aureal Vortex 2 Sound Card AMD Classic 800mhz with 512 Pc133 Ram Radeon 32meg Video Card 40 Gig Maxtor 7200rpm HD Diamond Vortex 2 Sound ccard AMD XP 1700+ with 256mb PC 133( can push 512mb) Gainward Geforce3 Ti 200 Golden Sample 64meg Video card 40 Gig Western Digital HD On board sound The 1700+ runs stable at 100/100 makes it 1.1ghz Needs better ram or DDR Would any of the systmes run this game ok. Bullseye69 Does the game play well and is it fun. Buying it for single player only have a 28.8 upload DSL not avaible in my area and the phone company to cheap to upgrade the card at the switching station to 56k they have 28.8 in them. Any advice would be welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kx_Dra_Sycdan Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 I have 3 systems p-3 800mhz with 512pc133 ram Elsa Geforce 2 Ultra 64meg Video card 7200 rpm Western Digital HD Aureal Vortex 2 Sound Card AMD Classic 800mhz with 512 Pc133 Ram Radeon 32meg Video Card 40 Gig Maxtor 7200rpm HD Diamond Vortex 2 Sound ccard AMD XP 1700+ with 256mb PC 133( can push 512mb) Gainward Geforce3 Ti 200 Golden Sample 64meg Video card 40 Gig Western Digital HD On board sound The 1700+ runs stable at 100/100 makes it 1.1ghz Needs better ram or DDR Would any of the systmes run this game ok. Yes. Definatly. Check out the Minimum Requirments on the main page to find out for yourself. Does the game play well and is it fun Yes Gameplay is very good and very fun. However, MP games are basicly immpossable on your connection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahs Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 I heard that you could change the amount of RAM the game uses by changing something in a file. Does this affect loading times? HI btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creston Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 I love JK2, I'm playing it to death, and while I have a few criticisms of the game (such as NOT being able to choose your own path through force powers!!!), I think it is by far the finest FPS in existence, and comes close to Deus Ex to being the best game ever (sorry, Deus Ex still comes first in my book). But the load times just plain suck. I don't have a super SOTA rig or anything, but it runs silky smooth for it's specs, I have no problems playing anything at all. Athlon 700, Asus K7V Via Chipset,512MB SD, Geforce2 32MB DDR, ATA66 7200 RPM harddisk. I have every driver completely updated. I've played the game under both Win2k SP2 and Win98SE, and it is just slow when loading. on 1024x768 High textures it takes over a minute to load a level (which I can live with), but the reloads take about 10 seconds, which is annoyingly long (especially in those heavy jumping sections..). If I shift down to medium textures (and medium geometry) at 800x600, my initial loading time is a bit shorter (to about 40-45 seconds), but my reload time stays at around 10 seconds... I'm not complaining or anything, but I DO feel that JK2 has an issue with load times, and I DO feel that simply saying "well, it runs fine here, run at crap detail settings and you'll do fine as well" isn't a very satisfying "solution" to the problem. I'll jaunt over to a buddy of mine's place tomorrow, and see how the load times are on his rig, he's got a 2Gig state of the art baby. Creston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hellbinder Posted April 2, 2002 Share Posted April 2, 2002 what we dont need here is every tom dick and harry posting yet another *this here is my computer* bla bla bla. Nor do we need you yahoos who make ludacrist statements about how your game loads in 15 seconds.. Or that your atari runs the game with max settings at 1600x1200x32 at 100 FPS... Truth you are all full of BS. The bottom line is this game loads WAY to damn slow. Period. The Dev's have already started what many devs do, make one assinine excuse and statemenet after the next about how *they* dont see the issue or *its due to your slow computer* or *your settings are to high*. Sorry folks, all the above answers are bunk. The max detail textures are frankly.. Not that maxed. 90% of the people with these issues have pretty mamoth systems. The problem is OBVIOUSLY in the GAME CODE. I absolutly HATE it when Dev's do everything but FIX THEIR CODE. Blame the moon if you want to, but there are about 5 games out there that look better and load WAY WAY faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.