Sorry if this belongs in tech support, though I don't think it does. I'm not asking for help, I've already tried everything. Whine threads about bugs don't get thrown into tech support either.
So ANYWAY. I just can't take it anymore. I don't care about anything else. Not the naval invasions, not the bugs, not the balance issues, not the broken features. All I want is to have a playable framerate while at the same time having the game not look like total dog crap.
AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 Dual Core Processor ~2.8GHz, 3 gigs of ram (with the 3 GB "enabler" tweak activated to absolutely zero effect) and a GTX 260 Core 216 = Teens on "automatic" graphics settings in battles between two full armies. TEENS. I'm not a graphics whore but I draw the line where the game can barely support enough frames to create the optical illusion of motion.
I can get into the 30's if I turn everything to low, including putting it on Shader Model 3 Low. 30 fps while the game looks like Medieval 1 practically. My computer rapes Crysis and laughs. At the bare minimum I should get 60 fps constant with everything on low. It's absurd.
What's so mindboggling is the framerate was vastly superior in the demo. And on an old graphics card. The Demo ran better on a 2 year old 8800 GTX than the retail game does on an GTX 260 Core 216 that I recently upgraded to. A LOT better. They pointed out that the demo was some ancient pre-alpha build or something when people complained about the load times. So how is a really old, supposedly un-optimzed build greatly outperforming the "finished" product? If that doesn't make you scratch your head, nothing will.
So I hope CA reads this: the optimizations in this coming patch better work. At this point I'd probably return the game if I could (thanks Steam exclusivity). I used to be one of the so called fanboys who defended CA all the time and scoffed at the whiners, but I'm unfortunately coming around to that mindset. I don't want to but I can't help it.
Bookmarks