World In Conflict

I run max settings at 1900x1200 and it's Beautiful. Awesome SP, Better MP, All around definite GOTY Material.

Q6600
IP35PRO
8GB Patriot PC6400 DDR2
8800GTX
WD300 GB SATA Drive
1TB hitachi SATA Drive
 
Elios said:
wic2007082718235612xa1.jpg
Click to expand...

Yup, no difference at all :rolleyes:
screen0001.jpg

screen0001.jpg

screen0049.jpg
 
spicey said:
Well after 2 days of trying to get the game to run well I've given up and returned the game to the store for a full refund. I'm glad Sierra and Massive won't be getting any of my money. There is a big problem with this game and DX10. I tried reinstalling DX10, updated graphics drivers to no avail. The game even runs badly at 800 x 600 in DX10 mode. I would expect the game to run a minimum of 1024 x 768 at high detail on my card but no this game kills it. The game looks awful at 1024 on medium, it resembles a game from the mid 90's. This has to be the worst optimised game in living history. Bioshock, C&C and Medal of Honor : Airborne all ran nicely at 1280 x 1024 maxed, so what is so special about this game? MASSIVE disappointment!
Click to expand...

i looked around the forums for the game
turn the textures down a bit to med
it seems at high it uses more then 512MB or vram so your 320MB on your GTS whats holding you back
 
Elios said:
i looked around the forums for the game
turn the textures down a bit to med
it seems at high it uses more then 512MB or vram so your 320MB on your GTS whats holding you back
Click to expand...

Thanks, Elios

I borrowed my friends copy and tried lowering the texture quaity and terrain texture quality to medium manually (even if you select medium from the main menu it sets these to high)

I'm now getting

Average 28fps
Min 12fps
Highest 82fps

In game is much smoother. DX9 mode reaps further speed increases and looks pretty much identical. Also XP runs the game much faster than Vista 32 bit from what I've read.

It would seem that the 320MB 8800GTS cards simply cannot cope with high texture quality. The issue is discussed here http://www.massgate.net/read.php?28004,38410,page=1
 
For what it is worth I have the BFG 640 8800 GTS and last time I ran the bench it gave it some trouble but so far - I've not had any problems or noticed any slowdowns.



Avg.22
Min. 12
Max. 59.

1600x1200x
4x AA/AF - everything else turned on
 
hmm, maybe I shouldnt have skimped and bought the cheaper GTS card with 320mb huh? Wish I would have known that then.
 
I dunno why i didn't like this, i tired the demo.

But it looks amazing
 
The game is fun, and the story is actually pretty damn good for a RTS, but i gotta say, this game almost plays itself at times. Thats def my biggest gripe against it at the moment. Sometimes in big battles it seems like im watching a movie then playing a game.

Anyway, 1920*1200 everything maxed out:

AVG - 26
Min - 8
Max - 52

DX9

Avg - 32
min - 13
max - 74

Obviously DX9 has better performance, even in the retail version. Two important things to note though:

1: DX10 def has the better looking effects
2: This Benchmark is really absolutely worst case. The game is more then playable at these settings, as it rarely performs that bad.
 
Well I can set the video options to High as long as I uncheck DX10. I get an average of 40fps when doing this. So I guess the 320mb of ram on my card just isnt enough. I read the review on WIC over at Guru3d.com and they confirm that too with some nice benchmarks. This is the most graphically demanding game out right now according to them too.
 
It certainly is a graphics card killer. I'm still a little puzzled why DX10 is so much slower than DX9. I've installed the recommended MS hotfix which is meant to resolve poor DX10 performance but it's still laggy. Nevermind DX9 looks pretty nice anyway.
 
spicey said:
It certainly is a graphics card killer. I'm still a little puzzled why DX10 is so much slower than DX9. I've installed the recommended MS hotfix which is meant to resolve poor DX10 performance but it's still laggy. Nevermind DX9 looks pretty nice anyway.
Click to expand...

Which hotfix? Please post KB######.
 
spicey said:
Well after 2 days of trying to get the game to run well I've given up...
Click to expand...
What store allows this? Also, don't give up. :D I've only completed 1 mission, but it's very entertaining.

GJohn said:
I dunno why i didn't like this, i tired the demo.
Click to expand...
I didn't care for the demo. The map's VERY small and confining. The 1st mission in SP's at least 2x the size...or at least it feels that way.

Cali3350 said:
This Benchmark is really absolutely worst case.
Click to expand...
I much prefer that vs the easy bench where you get double the FPS as the game...source stress test vs any online HDR map comes to mind.

Rebel44 said:
Which hotfix? Please post KB######.
Click to expand...
He might be referring to the one that deals w/ the gpu's ram getting pulled into the virtual address space. At any rate, there's a list of a few here:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/windows_vista_hotfixes.html

It looks like the bottom 2 already came down via windows update tho.

Also, does anyone else notice some very serious aliasing going on in buildings, on fences, and pole-like objects? Even @1680x1050 and 4x AA it's pretty rough. Supersampling didn't help much either. This is w/ 163.71.
 
I've done some testing after applying the hotfix. Bioshock had laggy performance before the hotfix was applied. After installing the hotfix the game is much faster and smoother. No mouse lag and high framerates throughtout. It feels like a different game. This doesn't seem to apply for WiC however.
 
Amazing game !

Ran choppy at VERY HIGH setting on my 8800 ulta + Q6600.

Runs great at HIGH detail, though.
 
The NY cutscene before you battle the Speznas at the Statue of Liberty is worth the price of this game by itself. Amazing.
 
ninty said:
The NY cutscene before you battle the Speznas at the Statue of Liberty is worth the price of this game by itself. Amazing.
Click to expand...

I had to show the GF that scene, she loved it also. The music fits perfectly with the action. Best cut scene so far.
 
Awesome game...Graphics are amazing! DX10 looks sweet...On Very High I got an average of 11 FPS. Then moved to High and got 25 FPS. Still at High settings, I turned down the AA and a few other settings and I'm over 30 FPS at 2560x1600 on Vista. No problems with my 640m GTS.

Q6600
Evga 8800 GTS 640m
2 Gig Corsair XMS
2 WD 10000
Dell 30" & Vista
 
ninty said:
The NY cutscene before you battle the Speznas at the Statue of Liberty is worth the price of this game by itself. Amazing.
Click to expand...

QFT, that was probably the best cutscene i've ever seen in a game. bioshock was great, but if WIC doesn't win game of the year honors i'll be disgusted. it has the graphics, the gameplay, the story, and i have a good feeling i'll want to play it over again so it has the replay value which is something bioshock lacked (for me at least). it'll take the pc GOTY easily IMO but i have a feeling halo 3 will win overall game of the year, its just obligatory :rolleyes:
 
Its a tough call. Bioshock, Team Fortress 2, or World in Conflict for game of the year I'd say.

Semi spoiler on WiC but you might of already figured it out after the demo:



I was really surprised they snagged Alec "Jack Ryan" Baldwin for the main VA. I played through the whole game thinking dang this guy sounds like Alec Baldwin *credits roll* Zomg it is! :eek:



Not sure if I've played through all of the multiplayer maps yet but so far I think I still like the demo map the best. Not that the new ones are bad but I just really like the city maps.
 
I run the game at 1920x1080 on Westinghouse 37w3 and get average 25 fps in the benchmark. Everything on the highest settings in the advanced menu. no AA and 16x anisotropic filtering
 
hey send me a msg in game guys if you want to start a clan
 
There appears to be a major problem with the 8800GTS 320MB cards. Using DX10 I get massive slowdown - lag. The game starts off running perfectly and smoothly but after about 20 - 30 minutes of play fps will dive bomb and become unplayable. Alt-tabbing doesn't seem to make much difference.

Searching in Google this is a common problem and was meant to be rectified in July with new Nvidia drivers. Why is this problem still not resolved? I'm running 163.69 with the MS hotfix.

So far this is the worst graphics card I've ever bought, how disappointing. It almost makes me want to go 2900XT! :mad:
 
I thought nothing could beat Company of Heroes but World in Conflict definately gives it a run for it's money.

The gameplay is all action. No tedious unit building..etc. It's all strategy and combat. The DX10 graphics are great and the quality is top-notch.

I even love the story and it was genious having Alec Baldwin as the voice actor. He really is a great narrator.

The multi is ONLY FUN WHEN THERE is GOOD COMMUNICATION with your teamates. Without that, it's basically chaos. I like that it forces you to communicate with your teamates which substantially increases your chances of not only winning, but pwn as well.
 
spicey said:
So far this is the worst graphics card I've ever bought, how disappointing. It almost makes me want to go 2900XT! :mad:
Click to expand...
That's what you get for picking up the gimped version. :p

Buddy of mine's got a 2900XT and it's nothing but problems. World in Conflict was a slideshow @ very high settings, TF2 keeps crashing, BF2 has "Cheetah" spots all over the place. And it's loud as fu$$.

Getting a GTX @ a good price shouldn't be too hard anymore. I'd check the FS forums here, Anand, OCF, and of course techbargains.com.
 
powersurge said:
Its a tough call. Bioshock, Team Fortress 2, or World in Conflict for game of the year I'd say.

Semi spoiler on WiC but you might of already figured it out after the demo:



I was really surprised they snagged Alec "Jack Ryan" Baldwin for the main VA. I played through the whole game thinking dang this guy sounds like Alec Baldwin *credits roll* Zomg it is! :eek:



Not sure if I've played through all of the multiplayer maps yet but so far I think I still like the demo map the best. Not that the new ones are bad but I just really like the city maps.
Click to expand...

I vote for MOH:A as GOTY :eek::D
I have not had much time to play WIC as of yet, only an hour or two that I spent in multiplayer, I gotta tell ya, Graphics are pretty damn good on most maps at least, fun game. Maxed out at 16whatever its called MSXAA? everything else max @ 1680x1050 with no lag :)
 
WesM63 said:
I plan on picking a copy up. I'll report back with rig in sig.
Click to expand...

Got busy playing. No issues here. Runs like a champ on the rig in my sig. 1680x1050 max settings (very high), it averages 60-90fps, sometimes it will dip way down to the 20's however.

I'll run the benchmark and get back.
 
Jodiuh said:
That's what you get for picking up the gimped version. :p

Buddy of mine's got a 2900XT and it's nothing but problems. World in Conflict was a slideshow @ very high settings, TF2 keeps crashing, BF2 has "Cheetah" spots all over the place. And it's loud as fu$$.

Getting a GTX @ a good price shouldn't be too hard anymore. I'd check the FS forums here, Anand, OCF, and of course techbargains.com.
Click to expand...

I game at 1280 x 1024 (max monitor supports) So according to every review I researched a 8800GTS 320 should be great card for gaming at that resolution. WiC totally disproves that.
 
Well, you know NV...it'll be resolved eventually. And of course tweakguides will get into all the setting fun for you.
 
Here are a few SS's at 1680x1050 everything maxed DX9 (8xCSAA, 16xAF IIRC). I'm using the beta 163.71 drivers running XP Pro x64.

screen0000.jpg


I'm just going to link the next one as it may be a spoiler.

http://www.needmoreboost.com/wes/screen0001.jpg

Benchmark results in this:
Resolution: 1680*1050
Detail Level: Very High
Average fps: 31
Min fps: 14
Max fps: 74
 
I'd also be down for some [H]ard gaming. Trouble is, I suck at multiplayer. I'd appreciate any tips that might help me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top