player unknown's battlegrounds

Br4tPr1nc3

anyone playing this?
picked it up the other day,

played the mod for arma 3,

have to say, really smooth for an early access game.
very well put together. if anyone wants to duo or squad up gimme a shout.

Dcully

Theres a thread over on general games forum but probably more at home over here, I think its planned for console too however.

Ill be buying it once I get through some of my huge backlog of games, hope it runs well on low settings on my i5 2500K and GTX970.

The game is a massive success even at early access stage, your man player unknown is from Kildare, grew up a few km from me, no joy on a code for beta when I asked though lol .

Br4tPr1nc3

jaysus thats deadly!
never knew anything about him.

youve a better graphics card, and Ive a slightly better processor.
you should be grand,
I dont some ini tweeks and it runs really well,
no noticeable lag or frame rate drops,

mainly just some server issues/lag

Mr Crispy

Will pick it up once I build a new machine over the summer, but looking at it now from the outside, it definitely seems like they've got the formula right.

ondafly

picked it up recently also - however seemed super laggy last evening. no worries its a beta/alpha/omega

Br4tPr1nc3

ondafly wrote: »

picked it up recently also - however seemed super laggy last evening. no worries its a beta/alpha/omega

some servers can be laggy, and others can be perfect.
devs seem fairly transparent, and say theyre working on server issues

Noxin

Bought it and played a few games since last weekend but what mostly gets me killed is the seriously buggy footsteps in the game.
Makes me rage to no end.
Was supposed to be fixed in todays patch but they've rolled that back so I'll go back to it once they re-release it.

Shiminay

So just like the various survival games that are kinda first cousins of these sorts of games, do any of these ever get finished?

They look kinda fun, but I've no interest in paying to be a beta tester.

Mr Crispy

This might be a repost, and it could well change in any of the updates, but someone made a map showing loot and vehicle spawn sites. I saw it on the OcUK forums. Not playing this yet myself, but it might be useful to some of ye.

dunworth1

played two games just now

underwhelmed its basically a copy and paste of similar games

froog

ya im not impressed to be honest. adds nothing new to the genre and actually it gets really boring after a while.

a jogging simulator a lot of the time, clunky movement, bad graphics.

i thought the culling captured the spirit of battle royale the best before the devs messed it up.

jumbobreakfast

I like it, it's less arcadey than The Culling or H1Z1. It's more like the original Arma mod but with a better game engine and you can play as a squad which makes it way more fun. The performance has improved a lot since release (servers used to tank at times) but there are still more improvements needed.

I like the pacing, everyone starts with nothing. Picking a good spot to parachute to is your first decision (less loot or high risk?), you do a quick 5 minute loot and then the play area starts shrinking, the intensity grows, risks need to be taken and mistakes will probably be made (stay in a house or keep to the trees?, make noise in a car or run across an open field?). Odds are that you will probably die but you get to do it all over again and this time the odds are different because you've learned something new.

Korvanica

jumbobreakfast wrote: »

I like it, it's less arcadey than The Culling or H1Z1. It's more like the original Arma mod but with a better game engine and you can play as a squad which makes it way more fun. The performance has improved a lot since release (servers used to tank at times) but there are still more improvements needed.

I like the pacing, everyone starts with nothing. Picking a good spot to parachute to is your first decision (less loot or high risk?), you do a quick 5 minute loot and then the play area starts shrinking, the intensity grows, risks need to be taken and mistakes will probably be made (stay in a house or keep to the trees?, make noise in a car or run across an open field?). Odds are that you will probably die but you get to do it all over again and this time the odds are different because you've learned something new.

I'm liking it too, though i can see why some might dislike it.

Came 4th in my first duo game, tons of fun, very intense at the end.

Looking forward to playing loads of this. Its surprisingly addictive.

Also, in the plane before drop is always gas, with randomers going off in VOIP.

dunworth1 wrote: »

played two games just now

underwhelmed its basically a copy and paste of similar games

He did create the original BR mods for Arma and H1Z1. Which also influenced the Culling.

I'd imagine this will get more love than those games got.

ondafly

have a few more games under the belt now - think I need a defib beside the computer though for those super tense last 10 players moments

CruelCoin

Dcully wrote: »

hope it runs well on low settings on my i5 2500K and GTX970.

I'm running it with a GTX970 and everything is set to "Ultra", you have no worries there.

Mickeroo

CruelCoin wrote: »

I'm running it with a GTX970 and everything is set to "Ultra", you have no worries there.

Except foliage of course :pac:

Zillah

CruelCoin wrote: »

I'm running it with a GTX970 and everything is set to "Ultra", you have no worries there.

I'm not sure I'd be ok with 10fps though.

CruelCoin

Mickeroo wrote: »

Except foliage of course :pac:

er.......you know what, the foliage has been pissing me off when prone, and i really should have turned it off.

God damn it!

I went for pretties over winning, never thought of that, cheers!

CruelCoin

Zillah wrote: »

I'm not sure I'd be ok with 10fps though.

Ok, i'm on a i7-4790k, but still, the main drain is on the card, not the CPU. You should be pulling much more than 10fps.

Zillah

CruelCoin wrote: »

Ok, i'm on a i7-4790k, but still, the main drain is on the card, not the CPU. You should be pulling much more than 10fps.

Have you actually played the game much? My 1070 crashed to 25 in the big towns on ultra. Over 100 in other places, of course, but you need it to be consistent.

CruelCoin

Zillah wrote: »

Have you actually played the game much? My 1070 crashed to 25 in the big towns on ultra. Over 100 in other places, of course, but you need it to be consistent.

Played it plenty, no problems whatsoever with graphics.

The forums are stuffed with people like you who have good gear and getting crappy performance, while others with worse gear are doing better.

The game is poorly optimised right now by their own admission. You just got unlucky.

Mr Crispy

I'm not playing this yet, so I can't vouch for this at all... However, from the OcUK thread for the game;

Anyone getting terrible FPS after the last update?

I know it's not optimised, but last night (even inside buildings), getting 40~ fps. Looking at the floor would increase it to 80-90, with the game being very jumpy with lows of 18~ FPS!!
This is on 1600x900, all settings on very low.

Beforehand I was getting around 60-130fps dependent on where I was, but being inside a building with such bad FPS makes me worry! My machine was wanting to restart to install the creators update, I wonder if that may have been killing it. Argh!

It's been mentioned a few times here but if you have everything on low it defaults all the processing to the CPU, raise a few settings and it puts the load over to the GPU instead. This may help, raise a few to medium/high and see how you get on.

Worth a try at least.

awec

I have a i7 6700K, 16gb and a 1070 and on Ultra I get ~60fps until you get near buildings / people when it drops randomly into the 40s and sometimes lower. This is at 1440p. I would say it's playable on ultra most of the time but it's annoying when the rate drops.

I dropped it to low and to 1080p and it rarely goes below 70fps now. It looks crap but at least it's a decent framerate.

Icyseanfitz

turning down foliage and shadows to low was all i needed to do to get 60+ fps at 4k, also helps with spotting people

Zillah

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

also helps with spotting people

It seems odd that most people beyond high-five range seem to be rendered with old-school 1992 sort of resolution. I've renderscale set to 100% so it's obviously doing some other resource-saving trickery.

The game looks like muck, the GUI is like walking through treacle, the physics are a joke...basically all it has going for it is gameplay. Which is good. But everything else feels like we haven't moved on from Operation Flashpoint, which was released in 2001.

Zillah

Not enraging at all or anything.
https://gfycat.com/TimelyConcernedCockerspaniel

jumbobreakfast

Zillah wrote: »

Not enraging at all or anything.
https://gfycat.com/TimelyConcernedCockerspaniel

That's realistic. The 8x scope is zeroed for 300m+ and you are shooting over a rise directly in front of you. The bullets won't magically come out of the scope instead of the barrel.

Zillah

jumbobreakfast wrote: »

That's realistic. The 8x scope is zeroed for 300m+ and you are shooting over a rise directly in front of you. The bullets won't magically come out of the scope instead of the barrel.

In the real world I'd be holding the rifle in my hands and would have a feel where the bullets come from. You can't provide that sensation in a game. The realism argument seems to be used a lot when punishing the player but is forgotten about when it comes to them not having access to information and abilities they'd have in the real world.

Counterstrike just has the bullets come from the players POV regardless of the gun graphic. No need for magic, it's a game, they can make it work any way they like.

CruelCoin

Zillah wrote: »

Not enraging at all or anything.
https://gfycat.com/TimelyConcernedCockerspaniel

The smae happens in arma 3.

You lean out from behind a tree shoot at something and hit the tree.

Not an issue though, because the bullet comes from the barrel and not the scope.

CruelCoin

Zillah wrote: »

it's a game, they can make it work any way they like.

Ture. Realistic or not it is counter-intuitive for a game that's not really meant to be a mil-sim.

What i dislike about the game at the moment is how its really hard to pinpoint where a shot is coming from.

This dude at PCGAMER puts it very well:
@Better directional sound

"My biggest problem in Battlegrounds—apart from the fact that my aim isn't so great—is that when I'm fired at from a long distance away, I have a lot of difficulty telling where the shots are coming from. Bluehole posted recently about how the gunshot sounds work in Battlegrounds, but in my experience—and I've seen others saying the same—even though I know what the sounds mean, it's still very difficult to tell which direction they're coming from.

Many times I've taken cover from an assailant, only to continue to take fire because the assailant isn't where I think he is, based on the sound of the gunshots. And I've seen it happen in-game to players I've been firing on. Above, I nail a guy a few times, and he moves behind a tree, but he clearly thinks the sounds are coming from the left side of the screen. He tries to put a tree between us, but fails. While I'm happy he was wrong and that I was able to kill him, I've been in the exact same situation, and I know how frustrating it is."

http://www.pcgamer.com/7-things-we-want-to-see-from-playerunknowns-battlegrounds-in-early-access/


This happens to me all the time. My headphones tell me the shot is from the right, i put myself behind cover and continue to get shot.....

jumbobreakfast

CruelCoin wrote: »

Ture. Realistic or not it is counter-intuitive for a game that's not really meant to be a mil-sim.

There is also a good gameplay reason to do it this way. Even Dice implemented this for Battlefield 4 (in a clunky way) to prevent head glitching:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbfEvAMKPIo

Skip to around 2 minutes