Full game performance vs Demo?

[Hollerbach]

I haven't bought M2TW yet as I'm a little worried about my system handling it. I can't really upgrade at the moment so it would be really frustrating to have bought the game and be unable to run it for a few years!

I played the demo and it was a little clunky, even when I turned all the settings down. It was playable, but not pleasant, especially when there was a lot of cannon fire going on, that really seemed to chunk things up.

What I'd like to know is how does the performance of the full game compare to the demo? I remember the RTW demo ran slowly on my old machine but the full game ran fine so I assume there is some optimization that happens between the demo and full release.

Anyone want to give me a glimmer of hope that poor demo performance doesn't mean poor game performance for M2TW?

[Shahed]

I can't say really.

It works on my machine just fine on mostly medium settings. Usually I play large battles on low.

-1 GiG DDR RAM
-128MB RADEON9700 PRO GPU
-P4 2.6 GHz CPU

You can run it on my rig at low settings with large battles but it wil be much better with better hardware.

[Barry Fitzgerald]

The problem with both the demo and full game is that Anisotropic filtering is set too high by default....this murders mid range graphics cards..so drop it down to Trilinear filtering or on lower ones..Bilinear.

Still looks very good as is...and you get your framerates back up!

Think this is a small oversight from CA on this...on a budget card it will chug big time...

[sapi]

Yeh - and i'm not sure about this one but i get the feeling that it didn't run the 'autodetect settings' feature on installation, as i found that by default settings were set far lower than i could manage, other than the oddities with af and aa that you mentioned.