68 replies to this topic

[shosca]

hoghead, on May 18 2014 - 11:09 AM, said:

I don't know what your talking about my COMMODORE 64  does just fine!

When it first came out, that floppy drive was way more expensive than the computer itself. I remember it had a tape reader where sometimes you needed to do the reader head adjustment to be able to read the cassette tapes.

[AsianJoyKiller]

guest511234902, on May 18 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

Hawken is pretty dang computer intensive. Unless you have a 4000$-water-cooled-triple-tower-case-with an I7 processor, you're going to be grinding your face on the floor with 10 frames per second.

...
I have a $800-$1000 PC that's 7 years old, and I didn't dip below 30 FPS when I accidentally forgot to turn off Ultra quality after the last patch.

According to you, this should be impossible, but it is, which means you are being extremely dishonest.

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, May 18 2014 - 11:55 AM.

[Estif]

I can play on ultra settings.

[BoompigXD]

My processor is not even dual core and i run the game just fine.

I have a Nvidia GeForce GT 610 and I run the game just fine.

I REPEAT, THE PROCESSOR IN MY COMPUTER IS NOT EVEN DUAL CORE AND I RUN THE GAME PERFECTLY FINE

[RunaPanda]

hoghead, on May 18 2014 - 11:09 AM, said:

I don't know what your talking about my COMMODORE 64  does just fine!

Oh Commodore, I miss you so </3

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

I can play to a 1900 MMR level (pretty good compared to most players) on an Asus G52vx laptop:

Core-2 duo T9600, GTX 220M, 4GB RAM, a 7200 internal (since upgraded to a SSD).  Plays at 45-60 fps (except Lost Eco).

But I *do* play on an i5 Haswell with GTX660...

[Beefsweat]

LOL, my 5 year old tower with a 2 year old GPU runs hawken at a solid 40fps in 1080 resolution with max graphics and full physx...

[panickypress]

I run everything on highest settings with no problem at all ... and i still get owned
maybe your internet connection needs a tweek_ but really, hawken is not that demanding.

also.. i had a commodore 64 with a cassette deck just like the one in the pic ... brings back memories

Edited by panickypress, May 18 2014 - 02:29 PM.

[Mawnkey]

Bazookagofer, on May 18 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

HD INTEL 4000

....... every single graphics card Intel has ever made is spectacularly fast...



AT SPREADSHEETS.


Intel graphics cards are not for gaming. At all. Ever. Period. Even on brand new hardware with the latest in Intel graphics "technology" playing a 5 year old game, your framerate will be measured in seconds per frame. This is not a problem of Hawken's "poor optimization". It is 100% that horrendous card.

Edited by Mawnkey, May 18 2014 - 02:30 PM.

[Ker4u]

My 15 years old 1000mhrz Celeron , riva tnt 32mb, can  run game just fine, stable 2 frames per second

Edited by Ker4u, May 18 2014 - 02:31 PM.

[Mawnkey]

Estif, on May 18 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

I can play on ultra settings.

Speed on the front_ I bet you have a turbo button. That's the only reason you can play it.

[KejiGoto]

guest511234902, on May 18 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

Hawken is pretty dang computer intensive. Unless you have a 4000$-water-cooled-triple-tower-case-with an I7 processor, you're going to be grinding your face on the floor with 10 frames per second.

Ummm... What_

I'm using an XFX Radeon 6950 2GB, i5 3500k OCed @ 4.0ghz, 8GB of RAM, and I use air cooling which nets me a fairly solid 60 fps playing with everything maxed outside of PhysX which isn't supported by my card. I built this thing back in 2011 before Hawken even had its first Closed Alpha and it ran me around $1,500 total starting with absolutely nothing. The idea that you need a super beefy computer to get a worthwhile performance out of your system is just silly.

I know it's a crazy concept but PC gaming kind of demands that you have a semi decent system which is reasonably up to date. As hardware improves eventually you'll need to upgrade and you can't expect development studios to constantly lower the quality of their game in order to cater to extremely outdated hardware. This would be like expecting Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony to keep releasing all their big budget titles on old hardware that isn't capable of handling it because you refuse to upgrade to a Wii-U, Xbox One, or PS4.

Hawken doesn't always have the best optimization it is certainly a long ways away from being some super high end PC only game you seem to think it is.

[6ixxer]

correlation <>  causation.

Players who dominate often have high end computers yes, but they dominate because they play a lot.
They also happen to have a high end computer because they play a lot.

This is also why most scientific studies are rubbish as they start with garbage data and then only pay attention to the factors that allign with their argument.

[Beefsweat]

6ixxer, on May 18 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

most scientific studies are rubbish

[aToastfan]

So uuh, after that fairly unscientific bombshell.

I have a first generation i5 and a GeForce 560ti. I do good, I've had this rig for years, granted I do spend a few hundred every couple to upgrade something.

I have the feeling the person who made this thread has disappeared, and mayhaps it has outlived its purpose.

[BigLag]

guest511234902, on May 18 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

Hawken is pretty dang computer intensive. Unless you have a 4000$-water-cooled-triple-tower-case-with an I7 processor, you're going to be grinding your face on the floor with 10 frames per second.

That's a bit extreme. I built my gaming rig for less than $1000 and it runs Hawken very smoothly on ultra settings @ 1920x1080.

The parts breakdown as follows with newegg pricing

i5 3570=$230
7950=$240
ddr3 1600 16gb= $130
asus mobo+case+750w ps+air cooler= $330

Sure not the cheapest pc, but handles any game I can throw at it. I have dual monitors but only play on one, so no exotic resolutions like you'd see for triple monitor setup @ 576x1080.

[RunaPanda]

guest511234902, on May 18 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

Hawken is pretty dang computer intensive. Unless you have a 4000$-water-cooled-triple-tower-case-with an I7 processor, you're going to be grinding your face on the floor with 10 frames per second.

The lowest settings just aren't low enough to give a usable frame rate, whereas those who have top-dollar supercomputers are DOMINATING games by themselves, with a berserker cutting down an entire enemy team.

Technicians with a good computer can take on anybody, really...

This game gives an unfair advantage to those with GODLIKE computers.

I feel like this is contributing to the low player base.

Oh wait, it is.

This game limits the player base to those with good computers, those with mediocre computers just quit.

For me, i feel like good graphics quality is nothing but icing on the cake compared to a usable frame rate.

So, in conclusion, we need lower graphics settings or some form of tweaking to the maps to make them less computer intensive.

I can say from pure experience, the PC does not make the gamer no way no how. I've got a PC worth around $9500, sure I have 510fps in Last Eco but yet in my opinion I suck even though some disagree. I get a usual ping of 40~80 with east coast servers, and 5~20 with the experimental ones. Just because the PC itself can run the game like a champ the player still has to control the PC to control the game, if the player isn't good then their ability in the game is gonna be lack luster.

[HadronVictorioso]

I have a 16-year-old monitor, a 13-year-old sound card, a 5-year-old Radeon HD 5670, and a 4-year-old 3.0 GHz dual-core processor. I still end up dominating most matches myself. Your statement is invalid, unless you just have a fuzzy bunny computer.

[hellc9943]

For 4000 bucks you could not only buy a decent rig but also rent an experienced player who will level up your account to 30 in no time.

[EM1O]

troll. click my Dementia link to se my $600 newegg diy piledriver build runs high/physex, bit hot, so medium works excellent. amd8350, hd7750 no prob. this is now an official box-brag thread!