Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.
How in the **** are you going to help fix the issues?
The game is what is ******, not people's PCs.
Unless you are a programmer working at CA, then you can't do sh!t.
No, they don't. Most of the things either don't do ****, or they slightly improve performance for people with really old systems. Anything else is mere placebo effect.
Hard to play through constant game crashes, and the majority of those who suffer such things are running newer rigs. The game is a pile of ****.
There you go cowboy bring that fillie home show 'er who's daddy! I'm with ya! Most these "fixes" make as much sense as titt*es on a bull. Somebody in QA didn't know whether to check his as* or scratch his watch, that or we really got ridd*n hard and left hung up to dry amigos.
Wait for the patches, until then, play CoD or minecraft
Most of his ideas do work and that is why it is sticky.
There are just some people who still complain so hard about flickers or fps and refuse to play the game because of it.
It does not break the game to have flickering coast or minimap.
FPS is just a waiting game for you specific system to get fixed you cant bash a whole game just because your specific system is poorly optimized.
In some cases sure, but this was a poorly chosen generalisation.
I have a system perfectly capable of running this game. I have a six-core 3.2Ghz processor. I have a top-of-the-line video card with 3Gb memory. I have 8Gb of high-speed DDR3 RAM. Are there beefier systems? Sure, but my setup is perfectly capable of running the game and I'm lucky to hit 16 FPS on low settings. I have tried all of the fixes, despite knowing they're half-arsed bandaids. My system is not poorly optimised, the game is poorly optimised.
I understand that there will always be launch problems, but there are a few things I cannot abide.
Trying to blame the poorly optimised game on hardware manufacturers. They may be able to help alleviate the problems somewhat, but it's not their responsibility.
Trying to minimise the scale of the problem. Certainly not ALL players are encountering game-breaking problems, but it's fairly apparent it's greater than 2%. Perhaps only 2% of players have actively reported a problem through official channels (SEGA support, perhaps?), but from asking around it seems almost all players are experiencing optimisation and graphics issues of some sort, and I expect more than 2% of purchasers cannot even really play the game.
The half-arsed, false apology. CA knew this game was months away from being ready when they released it. CA didn't deliberately make a poor game as some have suggested, but they did choose to release the game in its current form. Some blame this solely on SEGA. SEGA and Creative Assembly have traditionally enjoyed a rather friendly and responsive relationship. Regardless of who set the release date, they're both responsible for the quality.
Tied into the previous point, the game is simply nowhere near ready. There's the slew of glitches and bugs. There are stripped-out features that have been long-running staples. Popular opinion from those that can play the game seems to be that the AI is fundamentally broken. Behind it all there are some questionable design decisions that seem to have remained untested. Individually these problems are easy to forgive, but together they expose two important truths. Firstly, CA misrepresented the product they were offering. Secondly, they knew the product they were selling did not function as advertised.
I have many other gripes with how this has been handled, but I could look past them if it weren't for these four points. They knew about the problems. They misled their consumers and handed them a product that was far from complete. The response has since been a rather hollow and patronising apology, an attempt to play-down the scope of the problems and passing the blame onto external parties. I'm sure there are understandable reasons that lead to these circumstances, but that doesn't negate the responsibility on SEGA and CA's parts. It's a very bad look.
In some cases sure, but this was a poorly chosen generalisation.
I have a system perfectly capable of running this game. I have a six-core 3.2Ghz processor. I have a top-of-the-line video card with 3Gb memory. I have 8Gb of high-speed DDR3 RAM. Are there beefier systems? Sure, but my setup is perfectly capable of running the game and I'm lucky to hit 16 FPS on low settings. I have tried all of the fixes, despite knowing they're half-arsed bandaids. My system is not poorly optimised, the game is poorly optimised.
I understand that there will always be launch problems, but there are a few things I cannot abide.
Trying to blame the poorly optimised game on hardware manufacturers. They may be able to help alleviate the problems somewhat, but it's not their responsibility.
Trying to minimise the scale of the problem. Certainly not ALL players are encountering game-breaking problems, but it's fairly apparent it's greater than 2%. Perhaps only 2% of players have actively reported a problem through official channels (SEGA support, perhaps?), but from asking around it seems almost all players are experiencing optimisation and graphics issues of some sort, and I expect more than 2% of purchasers cannot even really play the game.
The half-arsed, false apology. CA knew this game was months away from being ready when they released it. CA didn't deliberately make a poor game as some have suggested, but they did choose to release the game in its current form. Some blame this solely on SEGA. SEGA and Creative Assembly have traditionally enjoyed a rather friendly and responsive relationship. Regardless of who set the release date, they're both responsible for the quality.
Tied into the previous point, the game is simply nowhere near ready. There's the slew of glitches and bugs. There are stripped-out features that have been long-running staples. Popular opinion from those that can play the game seems to be that the AI is fundamentally broken. Behind it all there are some questionable design decisions that seem to have remained untested. Individually these problems are easy to forgive, but together they expose two important truths. Firstly, CA misrepresented the product they were offering. Secondly, they knew the product they were selling did not function as advertised.
I have many other gripes with how this has been handled, but I could look past them if it weren't for these four points. They knew about the problems. They misled their consumers and handed them a product that was far from complete. The response has since been a rather hollow and patronising apology, an attempt to play-down the scope of the problems and passing the blame onto external parties. I'm sure there are understandable reasons that lead to these circumstances, but that doesn't negate the responsibility on SEGA and CA's parts. It's a very bad look.
I agree with you completely mate, it's not the hardware that's at fault here it's the game that's unoptimized.Everyone has the same game, has the same code running on their systems everyone has these things.Most of them lower the settings and get good FPS while they should be able to get that FPS on higher settings, some play with FPS below 30 and then come here and tell us that they have no problems and it's our systems.Most of these people don't know anything about hardware or software, the fact is the game is poorly optimized and most of these FPS issues come from the GPU usage problems.If the game uses the GPU at a low level for me it will do so for everyone else, having different hardware won't change how the code works.And I do get %99 usage in some battle maps so it's clear something's wrong with the game.
So don't come here telling me my system is poorly optimized, it's not.My system is working perfectly and should be able to run the game at decent FPS on Ultra settings.And the moment CA fixes the GPU usage problem, I will be able to.New drivers from Nvidia won't change that much, sure it will give some kind of FPS boost but that won't do much for us as long as the game doesn't use our GPUs at %99.
for those of you who have laptop video cards that arent being recognized,
go to C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Roaming\The Creative Assembly\Rome2\scripts
open a file called "preferences.script", and scroll down to the 39th line.
It will say
gfx_gpu "Intel (R) 4000 "; # gfx_gpu <path>, The GPU description #
Change the "Intel (r) 4000" to your card's name within the quotes.
To do so go to device manager and check how youre video card is named.
Here is how mine would look like after the change.
gfx_gpu "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M ";
Also the 18th line determines if you want directx 11 or not. Experiment with "true" and "false" values in that line. See if directx 9 or 11 is better for you.
I myself tried changing what the primary gpu should be via the nvidia control panel to no avail...
I think we should all be used to this by now, games and hardware and considerably more complicated than they were a few years ago. Many DX 11 games have had bad launches and i would expect others to also suffer this problem but as always the bugs and issues will be squashed.
I have 2 systems, the one I have with me right now is an amd build:
FX8350 @4ghz
Asus formula-z ROG gaming board
16GB RAM
Asus HD 7979 ghz edition CU2
running on an ASUS 1440p monitor (2560x1440)
This machine runs battlefield 3 max without breaking a sweat. It also plays War Thunder without issue.
When COH2 came out it was a little stuttery, especially on winter maps where the main elements of Dx11 kicked in for particle physics and fluid dynamics which ironically are also heavy integrated into Rome 2 on the campaign map.
I have no issues on battles themselves but the campaign map is painful to watch as it stutters while cycling through the factions.
Interesting I monitored my GPU with GPU tweak which came with the GPU and as someone stated earlier the GPU is far from being utilised (50%)ish.
When running the benchmark I get around 60 Fps with high settings and very high achieves around 32 which is almost half the Fps. The GPU however showed no more activity when changing settings from high to very high. I didn't bother with ultra as I could hazard a guess at what the results would be.
Te beta drivers from amd improved the situation a little, but thinking back to COH2 when they released the official drivers the difference was staggering and everything smooth.
Basically we all just need to wait a little while for the drivers to be released.
Now I wish I had brought my i7 4770k chip and relevant board as I would be interested to see if the graphics options to take advantage of haswell would be a major advantage or not.
for those of you who have laptop video cards that arent being recognized,
go to C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Roaming\The Creative Assembly\Rome2\scripts
open a file called "preferences.script", and scroll down to the 39th line.
It will say
gfx_gpu "Intel (R) 4000 "; # gfx_gpu <path>, The GPU description #
Change the "Intel (r) 4000" to your card's name within the quotes.
To do so go to device manager and check how youre video card is named.
Here is how mine would look like after the change.
gfx_gpu "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M ";
Also the 18th line determines if you want directx 11 or not. Experiment with "true" and "false" values in that line. See if directx 9 or 11 is better for you.
I myself tried changing what the primary gpu should be via the nvidia control panel to no avail...
My game recognizes my graphics card (Nvidia GTX GeForce 555M) normally, but when I turn dx 11 false it only recognizes my Intel one... and not even this fixes it. Unfortunately, when dx 11 is true, I get awful lag spikes every few seconds down from 25-35 fps to 5-10 fps.
So basically I have to choose between a steady rate of 15 fps with lowest graphics (Intel and Dx11 false) or whatever graphics I want and a fps of about 30 but with every-other-second lag spikes down to 5 fps. (Nvidia 555m and dx11 true).
Don't know which one to pick.... they're both unplayable.
If only I could play with dx 11 false but have it still recognize my Nvidia card.
Currently if you look at the notes in the drivers you download as of right now from either Nvidia or AMD's main sites you will realize that Neither of them actually support Rome 2 officially. The two companies have not yet released the BETA drivers for Rome 2, and this might be causing the majority of your issues regarding lag on most settings (assuming your hardware is up to par). For now the best thing you can do is too keep an eye on your respective Card companies for the latest BETA Drivers. One of which soon will support Rome
What a load of ****.
This game was designed for some imaginary future drivers ??
Did they not have drivers while they were making this game ??
Do turn Depth of Field to ON increase performance or just decrease it ? there are multiple comment that different to each other , some say DOF can increase performance , some say it is a performance hit so better turn it off...
I will never buy any fantasy, fiction and non historical Total War title.
My setup is a asus t53A with AMD A6-3400M APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics (4 CPUs), ~1.4GHz 6720G2.
This setup uses the 6520G as its primary adapter and the GPU AMD Radeon HD 6600M Series as a linked adapter.
Both shogun 2 and rome 2 recognizes the 6520G with its proper memory of 1536 mb (6520G:512mb and 6600M series:1024mb)
When i play Shogun 2 the 6600M kicks in and supports the 6520G (with great results on high settings). With rome 2 the 6600M does nothing. Explaining all the ****.
I cant change settings in the bios and can not try the high performance trick in the controle center (powerplay!?) or any other trick.
Switching off crossfire automatically cuts off the 6600M as it is the linked adapter.
My game recognizes my graphics card (Nvidia GTX GeForce 555M) normally, but when I turn dx 11 false it only recognizes my Intel one... and not even this fixes it. Unfortunately, when dx 11 is true, I get awful lag spikes every few seconds down from 25-35 fps to 5-10 fps.
So basically I have to choose between a steady rate of 15 fps with lowest graphics (Intel and Dx11 false) or whatever graphics I want and a fps of about 30 but with every-other-second lag spikes down to 5 fps. (Nvidia 555m and dx11 true).
Don't know which one to pick.... they're both unplayable.
If only I could play with dx 11 false but have it still recognize my Nvidia card.
Hey swissbob, when you turn dx 11 false and the game defaults to your intel card, go back to the preferences.script file to see if the default video card has actually changed back to the intel card. If so, change it again to your gtx card. But now change the first line of the file to false.
The first line enables/disables rome 2 from editing the file...
Hey swissbob, when you turn dx 11 false and the game defaults to your intel card, go back to the preferences.script file to see if the default video card has actually changed back to the intel card. If so, change it again to your gtx card. But now change the first line of the file to false.
The first line enables/disables rome 2 from editing the file...
See if that woks.
After it defaulted to my intel card, the preferences.script file still says Nvidia unfortunately... Does my Nvidia card require direct x 11 or something?? That can't be right...
The original page be updated asap. The original advices contain a lot of silly stuff, like one very complicated way to play in a window in order to avoid crossfire problems, lol (windowed mode just disables crossfire which can be done much easier in CCC).
I also didn't see anything about lowering shadow quality in order to improve performance in battles. Lowering shadows (and unit details as stated on 1st page) helps a lot with battle framerates.
Probably it is broken game code guys! And that is bad, very bad.
I upgraded my system, bought GTX760 and overclocked my processor (i7-920) from 2,66Ghz to 3,8 Ghz and you know what? I still get frame stuttering for 1 second or so on specific maps and in specific situations, maybe 40% of battles goes smooth and rest 60% has this frame stuttering problem and I'm mostly on medium setting except unit details to high and antialiasing on. Well hopefully CA can modify and optimize the game, but how can they make optimization with 20-40MB patches? I would rather wait for 2-3 weeks to receive something we can call a patch, that at least improves something in terms of optimization, otherwise I'm just keep spending money to get this game more or less playable in results I just realise more it is not finished properly... that is why they did not made any changes to multi core support and rest, all patches until now just fixed some bugs but did not improved optimization at all.
Also it is so desperate from CA to refer to ATI or INVIDA that they did not yet released drivers that support ROME 2...
I think developers should release the game in playable form and drivers should only make it better months after release.
Now I understand why they released the game with such minimum and recommended tech requirements, because it does not matter what hardware you have - anyway the game will lag as hell!!!
I am not experiencing any CPU issues... My game is showing an entirely maxed out GPU during the horrible stutter moments...... also it seems to only really use one of my i7 cores... the GPU is even under full load just when the dam launcher for the game is started up... ?? That particularly is troublesome.. I have been playing games for decades and this is the first game launcher I have ever seen to max out a new gen card's gpu.... ?????? O_O
still only getting 15 fps on campaign map... any battle with 3000 men in it results in stuttering and crash... battles are still only 5 minutes... even if they do fix all the bugs... who the hell wants to play a 5 minute battle.... point is, I am looking forward to that moment a year from now when a mod team releases an awesome overhaul of this game that brings it to a state total war fans will love.. I dont think CA can do it whilst under the whip of Sega or whoever drove this beast down to the depths of game development hell.
Im completely baffled at the fact that my hd radeon 7870 and amd anthlon x2 270 is having less issues with this game than people with better specs... And to those who don't regularly update your graphics cards' drivers you're not getting the most game for your buck by buying a more expensive card. Always update drivers!!!
Also wish more people would list settings along with fps as that can help a lot..... CA says turn unit details from ultra to high but mine is at etreme along with textures being at ultra and I get 25-35 with my older motherboard AND processor. However I do have the rest of my settings at low or medium... Knowing which game features use your cpu or gpu can help with properly setting your graphics.
Perhaps try adjusting settings individually until you find out what slows your fps until they find a resolution?
I played like 24 hours in the frist 2 days. Then the fps drops on campaigne map after selecting stuff got me so annoyed that i had to stop. I always reinstalled when a new patch came out, tried all the suggestions in the forum, all stuff on reddit, made format C etc. etc. nothing helped. Tried Mods even that remove Graphic effects clouds and stuff: Nothing.
Tryed again with Patch 5 and still the same fps issues. I am SO incredibly DISAAPOINTED. I have never ever played a game that had these performance issues for so long and after so many patches and i play ALOT of games on a regular bases. I have no words for this "mess" to say the least. Just incredibly disappointed...
If you want dx stuff etc. just look at my post history, posted it all months ago.
I bought every TW game on release but i guess from now on i have to pass. You had month to fix this and still tehre is NOTHING fixed in terms of these performance issues. I'm done with this game and i waited for YEARS ( I really saw every other TW game just as "another TW till Rome 2 yaaay! )) ). And now this. ****!
Campaign FPS improved a little bit with every patch, but there is still lag in battles. I hope we will finally see performance improvements in battles with patch 6.
I had continuous lag in battle until I got a better CPU and used an fps cap software and just capped my fps at 25 and am not getting any more lag, something I can live with even though I wish it was better.
Can anyone confirm if running the game in windowed mode still improves the FPS? Or has this changed since a previous patch? I can't confirm if it does or doesn't right now because the game crashes on me a few seconds into the battle.
AMD user here.Installed the lates driver.Didn't notice a performace boost:mad:
"So do all who live to see such times,but that is not for the to decide.All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us"
(Gandalf the Grey)
Yup i also get poor FPS on campaign map (20 'ish max after 100+ turns) but its okey in battles (30-60)... Since you spent so much time on campaign map i really think its still an unplayable and not enjoyable game...
Although having a brandnew high end rig and using actual drivers, the nvidia geforce experience "optimal settings" for rome 2 and having tried the suggested fixes I have low fps lags every ten to twenty seconds or so. The cursor seems not to move anymore, then it goes a bit further, then lags again, then everything runs smooth for like ten seconds or so until it starts anew. (Battles run smooth - [ok, forget this, see below], what I said is just concerning the campagin map)
Ok, I must revoke my report. Battles are actually not running smooth. They are even more unplayable. Frames go down to 4 FPS after 5 minutes. I had one smooth battle, but that was a small one at the beginning of the campaign. ****, this game is out now for 2 months and I bought a complete new gaming-pc (unlike Naberius I own "only" a gtx 770) and it is and remains unplayable!
I have installed the directx thing, edited the script file so directx11 is false, and used 1 CPU processor. I have everything on low for graphics, and I still get 5 fps on any battle. My rig is GeForce 7950 GT driver version 307.83 CPU Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU [email protected] Memory 2.00 GB RAM (2.00 GB usable) current resolution 1680x 1050 60Hz Operating system Microsoft Windows XP Professional. On a side note maybe you could use this for you smarties http://event.msi.com/vga/afterburner/download.htm. I'm not very good with all this stuff sorry.
I doesn't work anymore for me (GTX 680 4GO). I previously run well but since the last update, I experience weird stuttering and lags I hadn't before. The game has become unplayable....
Comments
There you go cowboy bring that fillie home show 'er who's daddy! I'm with ya! Most these "fixes" make as much sense as titt*es on a bull. Somebody in QA didn't know whether to check his as* or scratch his watch, that or we really got ridd*n hard and left hung up to dry amigos.
Wait for the patches, until then, play CoD or minecraft
RAM 8GB @ 1600 Hz
GPU EVGA 680 SC edition
O/S Win 7 64bit
TW Rome II forest benchmark (extreme settings): 41 fps average (patch 4). 42 fps (patch 3). 42 fps (patch 2). 42 fps (patch 1)
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeIn some cases sure, but this was a poorly chosen generalisation.
I have a system perfectly capable of running this game. I have a six-core 3.2Ghz processor. I have a top-of-the-line video card with 3Gb memory. I have 8Gb of high-speed DDR3 RAM. Are there beefier systems? Sure, but my setup is perfectly capable of running the game and I'm lucky to hit 16 FPS on low settings. I have tried all of the fixes, despite knowing they're half-arsed bandaids. My system is not poorly optimised, the game is poorly optimised.
I understand that there will always be launch problems, but there are a few things I cannot abide.
I have many other gripes with how this has been handled, but I could look past them if it weren't for these four points. They knew about the problems. They misled their consumers and handed them a product that was far from complete. The response has since been a rather hollow and patronising apology, an attempt to play-down the scope of the problems and passing the blame onto external parties. I'm sure there are understandable reasons that lead to these circumstances, but that doesn't negate the responsibility on SEGA and CA's parts. It's a very bad look.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeI agree with you completely mate, it's not the hardware that's at fault here it's the game that's unoptimized.Everyone has the same game, has the same code running on their systems everyone has these things.Most of them lower the settings and get good FPS while they should be able to get that FPS on higher settings, some play with FPS below 30 and then come here and tell us that they have no problems and it's our systems.Most of these people don't know anything about hardware or software, the fact is the game is poorly optimized and most of these FPS issues come from the GPU usage problems.If the game uses the GPU at a low level for me it will do so for everyone else, having different hardware won't change how the code works.And I do get %99 usage in some battle maps so it's clear something's wrong with the game.
So don't come here telling me my system is poorly optimized, it's not.My system is working perfectly and should be able to run the game at decent FPS on Ultra settings.And the moment CA fixes the GPU usage problem, I will be able to.New drivers from Nvidia won't change that much, sure it will give some kind of FPS boost but that won't do much for us as long as the game doesn't use our GPUs at %99.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agreego to C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Roaming\The Creative Assembly\Rome2\scripts
open a file called "preferences.script", and scroll down to the 39th line.
It will say
gfx_gpu "Intel (R) 4000 "; # gfx_gpu <path>, The GPU description #
Change the "Intel (r) 4000" to your card's name within the quotes.
To do so go to device manager and check how youre video card is named.
Here is how mine would look like after the change.
gfx_gpu "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M ";
Also the 18th line determines if you want directx 11 or not. Experiment with "true" and "false" values in that line. See if directx 9 or 11 is better for you.
I myself tried changing what the primary gpu should be via the nvidia control panel to no avail...
- Report
0 · Disagree Agreehttp://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/88993-***-to-all-having-low-fps-on-campaign-map-please-try-this-***
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeI have 2 systems, the one I have with me right now is an amd build:
FX8350 @4ghz
Asus formula-z ROG gaming board
16GB RAM
Asus HD 7979 ghz edition CU2
running on an ASUS 1440p monitor (2560x1440)
This machine runs battlefield 3 max without breaking a sweat. It also plays War Thunder without issue.
When COH2 came out it was a little stuttery, especially on winter maps where the main elements of Dx11 kicked in for particle physics and fluid dynamics which ironically are also heavy integrated into Rome 2 on the campaign map.
I have no issues on battles themselves but the campaign map is painful to watch as it stutters while cycling through the factions.
Interesting I monitored my GPU with GPU tweak which came with the GPU and as someone stated earlier the GPU is far from being utilised (50%)ish.
When running the benchmark I get around 60 Fps with high settings and very high achieves around 32 which is almost half the Fps. The GPU however showed no more activity when changing settings from high to very high. I didn't bother with ultra as I could hazard a guess at what the results would be.
Te beta drivers from amd improved the situation a little, but thinking back to COH2 when they released the official drivers the difference was staggering and everything smooth.
Basically we all just need to wait a little while for the drivers to be released.
Now I wish I had brought my i7 4770k chip and relevant board as I would be interested to see if the graphics options to take advantage of haswell would be a major advantage or not.
Anyone got a haswell chip to test that option?
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeMy game recognizes my graphics card (Nvidia GTX GeForce 555M) normally, but when I turn dx 11 false it only recognizes my Intel one... and not even this fixes it. Unfortunately, when dx 11 is true, I get awful lag spikes every few seconds down from 25-35 fps to 5-10 fps.
So basically I have to choose between a steady rate of 15 fps with lowest graphics (Intel and Dx11 false) or whatever graphics I want and a fps of about 30 but with every-other-second lag spikes down to 5 fps. (Nvidia 555m and dx11 true).
Don't know which one to pick.... they're both unplayable.
If only I could play with dx 11 false but have it still recognize my Nvidia card.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeWhat a load of ****.
This game was designed for some imaginary future drivers ??
Did they not have drivers while they were making this game ??
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeMy setup is a asus t53A with AMD A6-3400M APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics (4 CPUs), ~1.4GHz 6720G2.
This setup uses the 6520G as its primary adapter and the GPU AMD Radeon HD 6600M Series as a linked adapter.
Both shogun 2 and rome 2 recognizes the 6520G with its proper memory of 1536 mb (6520G:512mb and 6600M series:1024mb)
When i play Shogun 2 the 6600M kicks in and supports the 6520G (with great results on high settings). With rome 2 the 6600M does nothing. Explaining all the ****.
I cant change settings in the bios and can not try the high performance trick in the controle center (powerplay!?) or any other trick.
Switching off crossfire automatically cuts off the 6600M as it is the linked adapter.
I have no ffing clue on what to do now.....
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeHey swissbob, when you turn dx 11 false and the game defaults to your intel card, go back to the preferences.script file to see if the default video card has actually changed back to the intel card. If so, change it again to your gtx card. But now change the first line of the file to false.
The first line enables/disables rome 2 from editing the file...
See if that woks.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeAfter it defaulted to my intel card, the preferences.script file still says Nvidia unfortunately...
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeI also didn't see anything about lowering shadow quality in order to improve performance in battles. Lowering shadows (and unit details as stated on 1st page) helps a lot with battle framerates.
TW-WH art filter gallery, WH2 5K gallery, WH1 5K gallery
[email protected], [email protected], 32GB [email protected], Win10
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeI upgraded my system, bought GTX760 and overclocked my processor (i7-920) from 2,66Ghz to 3,8 Ghz and you know what? I still get frame stuttering for 1 second or so on specific maps and in specific situations, maybe 40% of battles goes smooth and rest 60% has this frame stuttering problem and I'm mostly on medium setting except unit details to high and antialiasing on. Well hopefully CA can modify and optimize the game, but how can they make optimization with 20-40MB patches? I would rather wait for 2-3 weeks to receive something we can call a patch, that at least improves something in terms of optimization, otherwise I'm just keep spending money to get this game more or less playable in results I just realise more it is not finished properly... that is why they did not made any changes to multi core support and rest, all patches until now just fixed some bugs but did not improved optimization at all.
Also it is so desperate from CA to refer to ATI or INVIDA that they did not yet released drivers that support ROME 2...
I think developers should release the game in playable form and drivers should only make it better months after release.
Now I understand why they released the game with such minimum and recommended tech requirements, because it does not matter what hardware you have - anyway the game will lag as hell!!!
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeAlso wish more people would list settings along with fps as that can help a lot..... CA says turn unit details from ultra to high but mine is at etreme along with textures being at ultra and I get 25-35 with my older motherboard AND processor. However I do have the rest of my settings at low or medium... Knowing which game features use your cpu or gpu can help with properly setting your graphics.
Perhaps try adjusting settings individually until you find out what slows your fps until they find a resolution?
GPU: Saphire hd7870 ghz e.d.
8gb ram ddr2
m2a-vm motherboard (I know)
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeTryed again with Patch 5 and still the same fps issues. I am SO incredibly DISAAPOINTED. I have never ever played a game that had these performance issues for so long and after so many patches and i play ALOT of games on a regular bases. I have no words for this "mess" to say the least. Just incredibly disappointed...
If you want dx stuff etc. just look at my post history, posted it all months ago.
I bought every TW game on release but i guess from now on i have to pass. You had month to fix this and still tehre is NOTHING fixed in terms of these performance issues. I'm done with this game and i waited for YEARS ( I really saw every other TW game just as "another TW till Rome 2 yaaay!
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree(Gandalf the Grey)
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree:mad:
AMD FX-8350
AMD Radeon 7950
8 gb ram.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree