Welcome

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.

Categories

Performance and Optimization in Warhammer III

Sindri_TWACSindri_TWAC Registered Users Posts: 132
Is it just me or does everyone tries to overlook the elephant in the room?

Every single gameplay footage of Warhammer 3, CA has released untill now, suffers largely from fps issues. It appears as fps is dipping below 20 at times... and this in showcase videos. I already plan an upgrade for my hardware for this game's release, but... i predict grim....

Your thoughts?

Comments

  • JoelethJoeleth Registered Users Posts: 158
    CA likes to record their gameplay videos at 30fps.
  • AxiosXiphosAxiosXiphos Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 7,732

    Is it just me or does everyone tries to overlook the elephant in the room?

    Every single gameplay footage of Warhammer 3, CA has released untill now, suffers largely from fps issues. It appears as fps is dipping below 20 at times... and this in showcase videos. I already plan an upgrade for my hardware for this game's release, but... i predict grim....

    Your thoughts?

    Simone has said they have taken performance enhancements from 3k / troy and applied them to warhammer 3. So I guess they will run as well as those games do... overall though I'd expect it to run about as well as Warhammer 2.
  • RamsesIIIRamsesIII Registered Users Posts: 1,080
    The reason I'm not so concerned (only a little, but about as much as I would be with any Total War game) is that the gameplay recordings youtubers were sent, as well as their own streaming gameplay that CA recorded, all showed the game running much better. Most importantly these were proper gameplay videos, not just cinematic shots taken from a battle, but it does make you wonder what went wrong with those other trailers.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,386
    A. No need to upgrade your PC unless you were running a potato. Your Game 2 rig will handle Game 3.

    B. Some quality drops are inherent to converting gameplay to footage. There's always information lost in the conversion.

    C. What do you think they're doing for the next 3 months? 😆 The game is largely finished in terms of major content. This is the bug fixing, polish, and optimization window.

    D. Considering they continuously improved Game 2 optimization as Game 2 developed, regardless of what optimization state Game 3 launches with (hopefully a good one), I imagine it will only get better.

    TL;DR: I'm not concerned.
  • LaindeshLaindesh Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,246
    Indypride stated that the nurgle vs slaanesh gameplay was recorded at 1080p 30 fps.
    This probably applies to alot of their other videos too.
  • Jman5Jman5 Registered Users Posts: 1,766
    It's because they have some genius at CA that keeps uploading these videos in 1080p, 30 FPS. Uploading it with either a higher resolution, or higher framerate would improve video quality immensely.

    The thing that **** me off the most is that this is a simple problem to fix. What the heck is the manager in charge of this stuff doing? YOUR TEAM IS UPLOADING GARBAGE TIER VIDEOS!
  • Sindri_TWACSindri_TWAC Registered Users Posts: 132
    Valkaar said:

    A. No need to upgrade your PC unless you were running a potato. Your Game 2 rig will handle Game 3.

    .

    Oh i highly doubt it. At least the CPU won't do much anymore.

  • MasariusMasarius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,175
    edited November 2021
    Joeleth said:

    CA likes to record their gameplay videos at 30fps.

    Even if the videos are capped are 30fps, that doesnt mean a dip into the 20 is good.

    The shown footage as visible stutters which have nothing to do with 30fps-cap. It simply means either game runs poorly or the video recorded badly.
    Till shade is gone,
    till water is gone,
    into the Shadow with the teeth bared,
    screaming defiance with the last breath,
    to spit into Sightblinder's eye on the Last Day
  • AlduineeAlduinee Registered Users Posts: 191

    Is it just me or does everyone tries to overlook the elephant in the room?

    Every single gameplay footage of Warhammer 3, CA has released untill now, suffers largely from fps issues. It appears as fps is dipping below 20 at times... and this in showcase videos. I already plan an upgrade for my hardware for this game's release, but... i predict grim....

    Your thoughts?

    Simone has said they have taken performance enhancements from 3k / troy and applied them to warhammer 3. So I guess they will run as well as those games do... overall though I'd expect it to run about as well as Warhammer 2.
    There weren't any fps drop in 3K's gameplay footage, even in Troy iirc. Whereas in every WH3 gameplay videos there are insane drops that you can't miss, and they likely play on high end setups.
  • mightygloinmightygloin Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 5,342
    They could easy improve performance by removing the useless Denuvo especially when considering that this game could use every bit of a FPS increase. So punish legit buyers further or just sell a few copies more at best?
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 17,411
    Not even remotely worried. CA just copy videos at 30 frames a second, more of a red herring than an elephant.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,386
    edited November 2021

    Valkaar said:

    A. No need to upgrade your PC unless you were running a potato. Your Game 2 rig will handle Game 3.

    .

    Oh i highly doubt it. At least the CPU won't do much anymore.

    People overly assume because they like a game or are looking forward to it, that it must require elite hardware. This is simply not true.

    CA has stated from the very beginning that the goal was to keep the system requirements as uniform as possible across the trilogy. Which they have done so far. A rig that could run Game 1 on high/ultra can run Game 2 at the same. Game 3 isn't shaping up to be any different.

    The LARGEST performance improvement I've experienced across the trilogy was from optimizations that CA made themselves, such as the ME optimizations. NOT from upgrading my rig. Now, I upgraded my rig for other reasons. But my new rig ran Game 1 and 2 just as well as my old one, more or less.

    Again, I don't know what you currently have.

    But if it's running Game 2 at high fps, high/ultra settings, with good load/end turn times....you will be fine.

    Upgrading just for Game 3, in today's computer parts market, is pointless.

    Again^, I'm open to being wrong if you're running a potato, or you lack an SSD, or something. I'm assuming, in my advice, that you're currently running Game 2 with satisfactory specs. IF that's true, you're fine.

    Just for reference, I've run this game smoothly on High, with an intel 4700 (2.4ghz), on Ultra with an intel 6500 (3.2 ghz), and Ultra with an intel 9750 (2.6 ghz).

    ^upgraded graphics cards from an Nvidia 765, 970, and a 2060 respectively.

    The first rig (4700 + 765) did NOT have an SSD and I kept the game on High/Large unit settings. It had noticeable performance issues, but it was still playable with visually impressive smoothness for what it was. I actually almost completely forgot I had used this comp for this game before, because it was only briefly lol 😆. Normally when I tell people about specs I only mention the 970/6500 as my 'lowest' rig because I forgot about this one entirely 😅. It was just a backup I used when someone else was using the main one.

    But I digress, the 6500/970 combo, which has served as my main rig during Game 1 +2, has always been Ultra on Ultra, smooth frames, with just a 256 gb SSD. No issues. It may have even been overkill.

    The upgrade to a 9700/2060/1tb SSD has yielded marginal, barely noticeable increases in performance. IF I had upgraded just for Warhammer (which I didn't), I would have felt foolish, like I had wasted my money. This rig is DEFINITELY overkill for this series.

    The biggest performance difference between these latter two comps came from CA's ME optimization patch. Nothing to do with the computers themselves.

    You can continue to pretend that "I like Game 3, so it must require L33T rig!" If you want to. But that's just not true.
    Post edited by Valkaar on
  • NyxilisNyxilis Registered Users Posts: 5,576
    There were some old shots that were wobbly in front of game 2 as well. I don't view this as much of an issue. It's still effectively the same engine with minor upgrades at most.

    Since as someone mentioned above they want the trilogy to remain accessible for those who started at the front and they've really not deviated from this.

    And I started this game with a potato near the end of its lifespan with game one to the monster machine I have now. The biggest performance changes have been what they did with ME than anything I really upgraded to. Total War wasn't at the front of some graphics flag planting to start. Few games these days truly are.
  • abishaabisha Registered Users Posts: 39
    from a none bias prespective

    The game ain't released yet so driver optimizing ain't done yet
    but i do have to state that the game is made on the old engine but altered or something so i people claimed

    i guess last few months of the release devs are gonna optimize the game textures etc and get likely support from SKD kits to make the game better.

    i seen how they do that in Divinity 2 it's kind of weird to see it they like scan a area or map for weird overlayers etc that bugs the engine or other weird artifacts
  • Steph_F_DavidSteph_F_David Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,396
    Something almost no other content creator mentionned, but M4F gaming talked about optimization when they could play test the Kislev survival battle a few months ago.

    It seems CA made a good job at optimizing the IA for unit behaviour : units are moving much more smoothly from one point to another, especially if they have to turn, and units respond much better to order, especially fro cavalry stuck in melee.

    He said it was really an improvement for gameplay, to see units following your orders as you want.

    So CA made optimization, I'm not too worry about that.
  • drclaw_twdrclaw_tw Registered Users Posts: 123
    Valkaar said:

    A. No need to upgrade your PC unless you were running a potato. Your Game 2 rig will handle Game 3.

    B. Some quality drops are inherent to converting gameplay to footage. There's always information lost in the conversion.

    C. What do you think they're doing for the next 3 months? 😆 The game is largely finished in terms of major content. This is the bug fixing, polish, and optimization window.

    D. Considering they continuously improved Game 2 optimization as Game 2 developed, regardless of what optimization state Game 3 launches with (hopefully a good one), I imagine it will only get better.

    TL;DR: I'm not concerned.

    I hope you are right. I can run ultra unit scale at 1080p pretty smoothly with the fluff settings turned down. I don't wanna upgrade, I would rather play large unit scale than buy better hardware.
  • mightygloinmightygloin Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 5,342
    edited November 2021
    Valkaar said:

    Valkaar said:

    A. No need to upgrade your PC unless you were running a potato. Your Game 2 rig will handle Game 3.

    .

    Oh i highly doubt it. At least the CPU won't do much anymore.

    Just for reference, I've run this game smoothly on High, with an intel 4700 (2.4ghz), on Ultra with an intel 6500 (3.2 ghz), and Ultra with an intel 9750 (2.6 ghz).
    What is your definition of smooth though? 30 FPS is not smooth for me be it a strategy game or not, but for some people it is and they call it fine. Do you get stable 60 FPS in battles @ at least 1080p? Now that i'd call smooth.
  • mattkiffmattkiff Registered Users Posts: 17
    I would imagine they record gameplay at 30 fps on purpose, so as to distract from the likely huge fps drops when the line actually clash. They're trying their best to market, not shine a light on the game's likely pitfalls.

    Performance and optimization improvements are my number one wish for game 3, over anything else. Better multithreading use could do wonders for fps gains. I just hope over the game's lifecycle we see results.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,386

    Valkaar said:

    Valkaar said:

    A. No need to upgrade your PC unless you were running a potato. Your Game 2 rig will handle Game 3.

    .

    Oh i highly doubt it. At least the CPU won't do much anymore.

    Just for reference, I've run this game smoothly on High, with an intel 4700 (2.4ghz), on Ultra with an intel 6500 (3.2 ghz), and Ultra with an intel 9750 (2.6 ghz).
    What is your definition of smooth though? 30 FPS is not smooth for me be it a strategy game or not, but for some people it is and they call it fine. Do you get stable 60 FPS in battles @ at least 1080p? Now that i'd call smooth.
    I only recently figured out how to monitor my FPS lol 😆.

    I've always known how it 'feels' though. Like I've seen the tangible change in 'fluidity' of motion across the screen when adjusting the graphics settings of games in the past.

    If there's stuttering or screen splitting in games I figure I'm significantly below 30 fps

    If it feels smooth, and cinematic, without stuttering, I figure that's between 30 and 60 fps.

    If I'm getting that...I don't know how else to call it, 'soap opera camera', where it's so smooth it's almost distracting, and almost looks like the units are standing across a background that's moving behind them, like a car driving scene in an old movie, then I figure I'm above 100 fps.

    ^I do not know what my actual FPS was on all my older rigs, because I didn't care so long as the game 'felt good' and smooth to play. I always thought buying FRAPS or any other program to track your FPS was just an 'epeen' move, unless you were a streamer or something and actually needed to know what you were broadcasting to your audience.

    However! I recently discovered that several graphics cards come with an FPS tracker in their free software UI package, and Windows itself has an FPS tracker built in. AND the game itself has a benchmark built in. These were things I didn't realize and didn't track on older rigs as I was totally unaware of the Windows feature and outside of the occasional driver updates, always treated those graphics card apps as bloatware and deleted them.

    To actually answer your question, that first ancient rig, the 765, I felt was below 30 FPS for sure on Ultra, as far as I could tell anyway. I had to turn it down to High to get what I could call 'smooth'.

    The 2nd rig, 970, easily hit Ultra at what I would call smooth, well above 1080p (I had one of those high end monitors at the time that was nicer than my TV lol 😆) It could go up to 4k actually, but usually caused screen splitting, not due to the graphics card, but the refresh rate of the monitor was too low. So I usually played at 2k instead.

    This 3rd rig, the 2060, more or less hits what I would I would call smooth on Ultra; it feels very, very similar to my second rig.

    AND I can finally check the FPS now! The monitor isn't 4K anymore, but still 1080p and its refresh rate is much higher.

    It ran the Battle Benchmark on Ultra at 51 FPS, the Campaign Benchmark on Ultra at 56 FPS, and the Skaven Benchmark on Ultra at 54 FPS.
  • mightygloinmightygloin Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 5,342
    Assuming those are average FPS, you should also look at minimum FPS to determine how stable it is. If it is at least 45, i'd say thats allright, but probably it dips below 30s.

    Also if you are using Steam, it has a built in FPS tracker. The easiest method.
  • YannirYannir Registered Users Posts: 1,811
    CA records with fps capped to 30. You can't restore frames once they are taken out. So, the promo material being low fps doesn't concern me at all.
    Ugh, I have spoken.
Sign In or Register to comment.