This game is unbearably slow
- Thread starter d3kst3r
- Start date
VimesUK
King
I am begining to think that the game, like many others in the past, is ahead of its time in terms of the 'average' hardware that people are using to play it with.....
When I play it using...
AMD Opteron 64 ran at 10x300=3000mhz
1GB Crucial Balistix
ATI 850XTPE 256mb
.... I am now at the year 1980 (large map) and it runs really fast and smooth at 1280x1024 and 2xAA with all the animations on. It takes around 5 seconds between each turn.
BUT I would expect it to run smooth with that hardware.
The minimum and recommended hardware for most games is a bit of a joke if you expect them to run well.
The same has applied in the past with, Total Annihilation, or more recently with Rome Total War, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Doom 3, Fear etc etc etc......
When it is posted....
Well you are right your graphics card isn't great at all judged by some of todays games demands. If you were playing a FPS type of game then it could be expected that a top end piece of kit is going to be needed to get smooth gameplay, your memory and a P4 2.4 would be then be a problem as well as your card. This game, for me, is the first TBS (Turn Base Strategy) that I have played which demands comparable hardware to that of a FPS type.
I remember Civ 3 needing a pretty fast CPU when playing very big maps with many Civs well Civ 4 pushes that demand even further.
I have some thoughts that a patch or two can help to resolve some of the issues that people are having with CTD's and reboots, and maybe a little optimising might be possible, but I still think that to play the game quite well a top end PC is needed.
When I play it using...
AMD Opteron 64 ran at 10x300=3000mhz
1GB Crucial Balistix
ATI 850XTPE 256mb
.... I am now at the year 1980 (large map) and it runs really fast and smooth at 1280x1024 and 2xAA with all the animations on. It takes around 5 seconds between each turn.
BUT I would expect it to run smooth with that hardware.
The minimum and recommended hardware for most games is a bit of a joke if you expect them to run well.
The same has applied in the past with, Total Annihilation, or more recently with Rome Total War, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Doom 3, Fear etc etc etc......
When it is posted....
Well you are right your graphics card isn't great at all judged by some of todays games demands. If you were playing a FPS type of game then it could be expected that a top end piece of kit is going to be needed to get smooth gameplay, your memory and a P4 2.4 would be then be a problem as well as your card. This game, for me, is the first TBS (Turn Base Strategy) that I have played which demands comparable hardware to that of a FPS type.
I remember Civ 3 needing a pretty fast CPU when playing very big maps with many Civs well Civ 4 pushes that demand even further.
I have some thoughts that a patch or two can help to resolve some of the issues that people are having with CTD's and reboots, and maybe a little optimising might be possible, but I still think that to play the game quite well a top end PC is needed.
It totally sucks when your enjoying a great epic battle in Civ 4 and all of a sudden it slows so much that it becomes unplayable. This game has become synonymous with masochism for me.
I mean what's the point of even playing this game if it's impossible to finish due to slow down?
I mean what's the point of even playing this game if it's impossible to finish due to slow down?
VimesUK
King
Can you not reduce the resolution and 'eye candy' settings as well as play a custom game on a smaller map with fewer Civs..?
Not ideal, maybe, but it might just make a difference for you to make the game enjoyable...?
Whilst I am expecting some optimisation from a patch I am not really expecting it to make the game much faster for slower PC's.
Just maybe the type of coding used (python etc) doesn't allow the game to be 'fully' optimised for speed but at least allows it to be modded, but then again I don't understand any of the programming involved so that is justs a guess..!!!
Similar threads
