The SH4 graphic engine needs to be optimized?

[danlisa]

I don't venture over here too often however, I would at least like some input on the possible optimisation or reduction of hardware strain.

Let me give you an example.

I can run SH3/GWX @ 1280x1024 with 6xAA & 16xAF and maintain a steady 100fps at sea, 30fps in port and 40-50fps in heavy seas.

In SH4 (stock & patched) @ 1024x768 with 2xAA & 0xAF I can only manage 25fps (freecam & bridge, after reducing the effect settings) and don't even get me started on when AI ships start to train their weapons on my boat.

While I appreciate, that SH4 has huge improvements in graphical aspects and that SH4 is the next evolution of the genre, this is one hell of a leap in system requirements. Incidently, when the SH4 system checker was posted, I met the recommended requirements.

I know all about freeing up system resources, infact most of the timemy system is running on about 25 processes (the highest of which is explorer.exe at around 35mb) and editing the debug issue in the cfg's. I'm relatively competent with PC's & Operating Systems.

So, bugged files or can SH4 be user optimised further?
First place to look would be the visible horizon, IIRC approx 21km. If the scene.dat is similar to SH3's, that's a huge drain on resources. Has anyone tried to pull it back to 8/16km?

Seriously, it's the only thing stopping me play. I can live with jaggies (just) but smooth gameplay is a must.

[maerean_m]

If a computer can run any modern game (like Bioshock and "Orange Box") then it can run SH4 at the same resolution.

And since SH4 behaves the same as the games in its era, I vote Neutral.

PS: no, Crysis doesn't count here

[danlisa]

Originally Posted by maerean_m

If a computer can run any modern game (like Bioshock and "Orange Box") then it can run SH4 at the same resolution.

Whoa, hang on.

I have Orange Box and I can run it @ 1280x1024 w/full AA/AF and do not get the slow downs/FPS issues that I experience in SH4. However, Portal struggles in places but that's universally attributed to coding bugs (by users admittedly).

I'll have to see what pans out in SH4 down the line.

[Wilcke]

There is way to much cross platform variations and how PC's are setup to make any kind of analysis on this subject. I have seen posts from folks that have state of the art blazing rigs that say their install crawls and posts from folks with mediocre rigs that are happy with their results.

How do you determine if an "engine" is optimized, tough one to analyze. I would rather judge the title on its ability to scale for the end user. The ability to turn things off and on in the video graphics department is important. I have found SH4 to be really scalable in this regard from the GUI. I can make it crawl on my PC or fly in regard to FPS. Yes it can look photo perfect but it also looks pretty good when running at high FPS. Frankly, for this sim anything over 25 FPS on average is perfectly adequate from what I have seen. Again, subjective opinion, my eyes only.