Need for Speed Racing Games

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/05/2009 09:02:45

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:Finally.......http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/333357.page

On second reading "- Improved ATi graphics card support " is a bit of a woolly statement. It's not improved support that we need, it's improved performance.

The dynamic vertex buffering thing could be the reason we see crap performance with loads of cars visable or blinging tracks. I've done a bit of reading, and if it's setup wrong then it can screw performance.

Matt, can't help thinking that you're being a touch pedantic, its just common developer speak thats all. I'm keeping an open mind, only because this is an unusual one. Purely just in terms of FPS performance, this is not a poorly coded game as anyone who's seen it running on an nVidia equipped PC will testify. In this case, the performance of ati equipped pc's has been sabotaged and just needs to 'unsabotaged' - if thats possible obviously. In fact, I'm reasonably optmistic - the last time I bought a game that ran this badly was Saints Row 2 but that situation was different. It never got fixed as the actual code for PC was an abomination, so the furore over it eventually died down and the developer lost interest. This, on the other hand, is 'just' a case of optimising the code for a popular piece of hardware. If I'm wrong, I'll hold my hands up.

I'm not trying to prove a point or anything. I really hope it's fixed. I was just pointing out that when describing the PS3 version we got a nice specific statement, compared to a little more lawyer speak about the PC version.

It probably will mean absolutely nothing and Shift might finally work for me with the new patch, I'm just saying what I see.

Fair comment, we should all report back once the patch is released to see if its worked or not. Personally, if it doesn't, I'll be going round Ian Bells house to put a brick through his window. (joke).

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:Finally.......http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/333357.page

On second reading "- Improved ATi graphics card support " is a bit of a woolly statement. It's not improved support that we need, it's improved performance.

The dynamic vertex buffering thing could be the reason we see crap performance with loads of cars visable or blinging tracks. I've done a bit of reading, and if it's setup wrong then it can screw performance.

Matt, can't help thinking that you're being a touch pedantic, its just common developer speak thats all. I'm keeping an open mind, only because this is an unusual one. Purely just in terms of FPS performance, this is not a poorly coded game as anyone who's seen it running on an nVidia equipped PC will testify. In this case, the performance of ati equipped pc's has been sabotaged and just needs to 'unsabotaged' - if thats possible obviously. In fact, I'm reasonably optmistic - the last time I bought a game that ran this badly was Saints Row 2 but that situation was different. It never got fixed as the actual code for PC was an abomination, so the furore over it eventually died down and the developer lost interest. This, on the other hand, is 'just' a case of optimising the code for a popular piece of hardware. If I'm wrong, I'll hold my hands up.

I'm not trying to prove a point or anything. I really hope it's fixed. I was just pointing out that when describing the PS3 version we got a nice specific statement, compared to a little more lawyer speak about the PC version.

It probably will mean absolutely nothing and Shift might finally work for me with the new patch, I'm just saying what I see.

Fair comment, we should all report back once the patch is released to see if its worked or not. Personally, if it doesn't, I'll be going round Ian Bells house to put a brick through his window. (joke).

Well judging by the big list its clear they had released the game in a beta stage.
This patch will do wonders, and I suspect there will be more to come..

45 pages of this thread and like 2 months passed by still no patch ?
This game was a flop. EA I'll never buy from you again. Fire up the torrents.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/07/2009 20:28:33

cem_ea_id.MPicco wrote:45 pages of this thread and like 2 months passed by still no patch ?
This game was a flop. EA I'll never buy from you again. Fire up the torrents.

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/333357.page

it's coming... it doesn't take 2 minutes to make a patch you know

but who cares... 1 less whiner playing the next game

nfs_web.zedex wrote:

cem_ea_id.MPicco wrote:45 pages of this thread and like 2 months passed by still no patch ?
This game was a flop. EA I'll never buy from you again. Fire up the torrents.

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/333357.page

it's coming... it doesn't take 2 minutes to make a patch you know

but who cares... 1 less whiner playing the next game

It is good to see that EA is working on a patch that may be available soon.

I can understand why some people would have a problem with paying full price for a product when clearly the developer had not finished. The game is amazing, but it is frustrating being unable to use it reliably on very common hardware. I get about 10 seconds into the first laps before it hangs, if I'm lucky. I've got dual ATI 4850s with Crossfire enable. No amount of setting fiddling fixes it.

Can't wait for the patch.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/08/2009 16:39:50

cem_ea_id.MPicco wrote:it doesn't take 2 minutes to make a patch you know

Especially when there are dozens of major issues to address... paying full price for this crap has left a lot of people pretty pissed off. That's what we get for buying into the hype. You can't trust EA to choose releasing a quality product over simply rushing a release to make quick cash.

I wish I would have done the smart thing and waited. Assuming the patch fixes this game (if it is fixable) we will finally have a finished product $10 cheaper. EA is one of the most hated companies in the industry for a reason.

According to the review over at [H] the patch won't be out until the end of November.
http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/336844.page#3216120

Finally there's going to be an ACTUAL patch...patch 1 and 1.1 was just little adjustments. This is a real patch now, look at all the fixes

Finally getting hyped up from what EA are working on.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/11/2009 19:58:09

Guys patch out at the end of November and guess what, BIG perfomance for ATI cards!

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/11/10/need_for_speed_shift_gameplay_performance_iq/1

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 11/12/2009 12:18:50

nfs_web.f0xx wrote:Guys patch out at the end of November and guess what, BIG perfomance for ATI cards!

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/11/10/need_for_speed_shift_gameplay_performance_iq/1

How about this quote on page 7 though?

"Since we didn’t see the performance increased we hoped to see with patch 2, but we were seeing some performance gains throughout testing on the Radeon HD 5000 series video cards, we could only assume that the Hemlock driver was causing it."

It looks like ATI have added a Shift performance profile in the new drivers. This is similar to the Grid profile that some have taken advantage of by renaming the shift.exe file.

Looking back to previous reviews, I can see that they were getting half decent number on a 4870 during the 5770/5750 review 1 month ago. This is in no small part due to high clock speed of the used CPU during the test.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/10/12/amd_ati_radeon_hd_5770_5750_review/5

I'd like to see some numbers on a mainstream CPU that allow a decent graphics card to get 60 FPS average without 12xMSAA etc. That would really seal the deal for me.

**Update**

Also from page 7.

"Between Patch 1 and Patch 2, we found a small decrease in performance when using Patch 2 vs. Patch 1 with the Hemlock driver. The difference was small, at about 7%, but it was consistent. And yes, this graph and analysis are correct."

Well done SMS, good work. If these results are to be taken as an indication of how the final patch will perform, then it's taken you over 8 weeks to write a patch that actually makes the game slower... EPIC fail!

I've got a sneaky suspicion that the "ATI Support" statement just means Crossfire support.

I didnt read it al but from what ive read to achieve the best performance we will have to play with this nex patch + the latest drivers in that time... possibly 9.12 catalyst that will be released in mid december...

nfs_web.f0xx wrote:I didnt read it al but from what ive read to achieve the best performance we will have to play with this nex patch + the latest drivers in that time... possibly 9.12 catalyst that will be released in mid december...

I know what you are saying. It's just more than a little disappointing reading in HardCOP's article that the new patch actually gave them a lower frame rate.

The drivers look good, giving about a 15-25% performance increase. So well done ATI. Unfortunately in my situation that doesn't translate into a decent frame rate or a good gaming experience.

I'm still holding my hopes up, because that article was more a review of the graphics cards at high AA, instead of a comparisson of real world frame rates using real world hardware and settings. In my opinion any good reviewer would take frame rates with settings on medium to measure the highest FPS you can achieve (after all 60 fps is the holy grail of racing gaming). Also you can't do a game specific performance article, without even mentioning CPU scaling. Poor show HardCOP!

After reading the review twice I can't say that it tells me anything.

Testing only the latest ATI cards and not the cards that the majority of us run, only testing at max FSAA, only using a beta driver to be released in December and not testing the patch with a driver that ATI owners are currently using, only testing one track and not the tracks that ATI owners have the most trouble with (e.g. Tokyo).

Indeed, poor show.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/13/2009 08:54:05

nfs.GCReDi wrote:After reading the review twice I can't say that it tells me anything.

Testing only the latest ATI cards and not the cards that the majority of us run, only testing at max FSAA, only using a beta driver to be released in December and not testing the patch with a driver that ATI owners are currently using, only testing one track and not the tracks that ATI owners have the most trouble with (e.g. Tokyo).

Indeed, poor show.

Agreed. If it wasn't for the 7% worse performance statement, I'd be thinking that they were bound by NDA or something.

Let's just hope that wasn't the finished patch and it works better in the real world.

WELL HERES HOW I FIXED THIS PROBLEM: I HAD TO INSTALL NVIDIA 8800GT FOR PHYSX OTHERWISE IT WOULDNT PLAY AT ALL

Need for Speed Racing Games

Find us on the web

Electronic Arts

Highlighted Game

Need for Speed SHIFT