-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Company of Heroes 2 |OT| The Motherland is Calling - [Western Front Armies out now]
- Thread starter Dawg
- Start date
gooderthanu
Member
I have a GTX560 (no ti) and a sandy bridge I5-2400. Game runs fine except towards the end when there's massive explosions and movement everywhere but it's about 20 fps even then. It's not too bad for me. 1080 settings and just left at "auto-detect" defaults.
Could run better but the game is pretty.
I enjoy the game much more than Vcoh. Here's why:
VCoh
- Drop hacking
- Bad gameplay bugs (stick a vehicle on a bridge, let it blow up, now the bridge is un-passable)
- More of getting points early and fast to win than strategy.
- Most maps played were just hideous and take hours because of crazy choke points (anyone remember the "Scheldt!?")
- many other things (too many capture points, running around to capture points in order to have a pop cap, people just turtle and build massive amounts of tanks to one-shot kill a base)
- could only play games based on rank, otherwise you'd get kicked out of games. No real automatch for 3v3 or 4v4. Rank drove everything!
COH2
- Really enjoy all the customization
- graphics +
- Haven't encountered any gamebreaking bugs
- No lame units that are OP or spammed (yet...)
- great progression system
- automatching (get into games quick!)
- lots of "extras"
- Snow system really adds a lot to the game (and strategy). In the beta it was too powerful (couldn't build fires in a blizzard at first) but now you can still fight in a blizzard.
Could run better but the game is pretty.
I enjoy the game much more than Vcoh. Here's why:
VCoh
- Drop hacking
- Bad gameplay bugs (stick a vehicle on a bridge, let it blow up, now the bridge is un-passable)
- More of getting points early and fast to win than strategy.
- Most maps played were just hideous and take hours because of crazy choke points (anyone remember the "Scheldt!?")
- many other things (too many capture points, running around to capture points in order to have a pop cap, people just turtle and build massive amounts of tanks to one-shot kill a base)
- could only play games based on rank, otherwise you'd get kicked out of games. No real automatch for 3v3 or 4v4. Rank drove everything!
COH2
- Really enjoy all the customization
- graphics +
- Haven't encountered any gamebreaking bugs
- No lame units that are OP or spammed (yet...)
- great progression system
- automatching (get into games quick!)
- lots of "extras"
- Snow system really adds a lot to the game (and strategy). In the beta it was too powerful (couldn't build fires in a blizzard at first) but now you can still fight in a blizzard.
cripterion
Member
Man this game keeps delivering, first it doesn't even handle SLI and doesn't seem to handle dual monitor well too. Launch the game and get a black screen, flickers, then back to desktop (game process still running though).
I've had that happen one mission 11. It happens every time I start the mission so I can no longer progress. :/
VE3TRO
Formerly Gizmowned
Can't believe this game performs so bad. I'm basically running everything on medium at 1080 with SLI 680's OC'd and a 3930k at 4.6Ghz.
Been tinkering around with Inspector for SLI and got a slight improvement. I'll keep looking to see what the best values I get.
Was running at these.
Been tinkering around with Inspector for SLI and got a slight improvement. I'll keep looking to see what the best values I get.
Was running at these.
- Min - 38
- Max - 101
- Average - 63
- Min - 50
- Max - 117
- Average - 73
cripterion
Member
Steam downloading 74MB patch. Hopefully will make the damn game playable.
Think it's the ToW commander problem patch.
cripterion
Member
Well whatever they did, it fixed my problem, I finally managed to launch the game.
EDIT : lol that was fast, all it took to screw it up again was to alt-tab. Now it will not launch. Reboot time I guess.
I guess me being broke actually helped me out this time. Maybe all the quirks will be ironed out by the time it's on sale because the gameplay itself is still quite fantastic.
Sad to see another PC game go to $59.99 though, especially another one with a bunch of launch issues.
Sad to see another PC game go to $59.99 though, especially another one with a bunch of launch issues.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
I honestly assume that the 60 dollar price tag is taking into account the fact that the game is perpetually 25% off at places like GMG.
cripterion
Member
Ok ran the benchmark...
Min FPS : 28
Max FPS : 61
Avg FPS : 47
Running on Asus GTX 670 SLI, core i5 3570K @4.4ghz, 16GB ram... I just let the game auto detect the settings, medium image quality and snow. high for textures (there's a higher setting). All this set to 1080P with no AA, goddamn... The game looks barely better than the first one. The snow tech is cool but c'mon... how can it be so taxing? Especially with that big ass UI lol.
Min FPS : 28
Max FPS : 61
Avg FPS : 47
Running on Asus GTX 670 SLI, core i5 3570K @4.4ghz, 16GB ram... I just let the game auto detect the settings, medium image quality and snow. high for textures (there's a higher setting). All this set to 1080P with no AA, goddamn... The game looks barely better than the first one. The snow tech is cool but c'mon... how can it be so taxing? Especially with that big ass UI lol.
Gotta love GMG for that reason...lol
You are alone.
It's frustrating to think, what the fuck have Relic been doing for half a year when the game was meant to be out, clearly not on the UI or to improve performance issues. To fixated on physics and forgot why we loved COH in the first place. I just don't get it, I'm mad I just wanted COH 2.
Maybe we will get it in a years time or earlier by some mod magic.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
As someone who hasn't played CoH in ages, what makes CoH2 inferior?
Gameplay wise, nothing that I can see.
It just doesn't run as well as a 7 year old game does, which seems to be upsetting some folks.
Using the exact same engine, looking exactly the same.
Didn't see that one coming
Interesting, their reviews the first where they said perhaps no need to buy if you only play multiplayer, to them it was all about the campaign
Runs silky smooth for me, maxed out. Might be a specific compatibility issue?
I can see you've read the thread
Please do indulge, as you seem to know a lot about the subject. While the engine may have seen some work, wonder why the game looks exactly like vCoH, a 7 year old game. I see they added snow ... Yes, I can really see why that warrants a game destroying some of the fastest computers available.
The poly count on the models is much much higher, the texture resolution on everything is much higher, the particle system is more complex, there's weather. Of course you already know all this, but are getting on the internet hyperbole bandwagon for some reason.
You're better then that. Stop it.
You should go back to vCoH, because you apparently haven't played that in a long time. Even vCoH got the DX11 patch.
Explosions are pretty much identical to vCoH. vCoH had high resolution textures, especially the latest expansions had high-poly vehicles. There's weather in vCoH - Some of the best looking dense rain, yet a Blizzard brings computers to their knees now.
YET STILL, even if they weren't identical and it was significantly upgraded they should NOT bring 6 core dual titans or dual 680s to their knees.
mr stroke
Member
Ouch
I guess I will wait for a patch and some new Nvidia drivers before buying at full price :/
cripterion
Member
Funny thing is the alpha was running better for me than the retail.
The benchmark is short, and not like there's a lot happening too. Compared to Metro : LL it's pretty laughable.
The benchmark is short, and not like there's a lot happening too. Compared to Metro : LL it's pretty laughable.
BlastProcessing
Member
This is just painful
2560x1600
i7 3930k @ 4.5
2 x Titans OCd
16GB Ram
SSD
Everything maxed except AA ( Low ).
Wow.
Looks like its time for a 3rd Titan!
"Yes, there is snow. Snow is apparently the fundamental gameplay fact of the Eastern Front. The snow doesn’t always happen. It only happens on certain maps. On those maps, your guys will take damage if you don’t put them in houses or near fires. You know the micromanagement you save by not having to actively capture flags? So much for that. Sometimes the snow slows down your dudes unless you manually path them along a road. Sometimes there’s a blizzard and you can’t see very far. Sometimes a tank falls through the ice on a frozen river. There’s a reason most micromanagement intensive RTSs like Company of Heroes don’t bother with variable weather. It’s the same reason Command & Conquer stopped having random lightning strikes destroying your units."
Sure, snow doesn't always happen. Snow falls only on winter maps. Go figure. Northern hemisphere seasonality and history aside, the design decision signals that when fighting in winter you should expect snow. Sometimes you might take your chances, and choose to strike hard and fast, hoping to chase your opponent out of territory before a blizzard arrives. You can snuff as many fire pits as possible to ensure he falls back when the storm hits. Sometimes you plan for the blizzard phase with a slow start, and hope to capitalize on your unprepared opponent. Suddenly halftracks, underutilized in COH, have their place, carting flamethrower crews around to burn Germans out of their winter garrisons. Point is, the mechanic encourages us to make meaningful choices that strawman arguments won't acknowledge.
Same for "Sometimes a tank falls through the ice on a frozen river." Sure, sometimes you choose to accept the risk of crossing a frozen river's cracked ice with a 60-ton tank in a blizzard blitzkrieg, and sometimes you choose to target the same ice with artillery (or preemptively set explosive charges) to deliberately drop that tank, but that's far from "tanks sometimes fall through ice," no matter how determined you are to use the language of randomness when dismissing it as irrelevant.
And is the revision to capture point area actually about reducing micro? Don't you need to direct a unit to the area whether the destination is the flagpole itself or the area around it? And how does this new rule set not encourage competent players to micro even more -- laying mines, seeking strong cover, patching up halftracks, placing mgs, etc -- as they cap?
And since the storm predictably puts emphasis on all-weather units, isn't it freeing up player RAM to focus on effective units during that period while the rest sit inside, around fires, or retreat? We all know reviews are unavoidably subjective and anything else is dishonesty. While I appreciate the winter map mechanics, I'd personally prefer fewer storms per match. But there's a big difference between dressing up the fact that you aren't having fun, and examining and explaining why.
Sure, snow doesn't always happen. Snow falls only on winter maps. Go figure. Northern hemisphere seasonality and history aside, the design decision signals that when fighting in winter you should expect snow. Sometimes you might take your chances, and choose to strike hard and fast, hoping to chase your opponent out of territory before a blizzard arrives. You can snuff as many fire pits as possible to ensure he falls back when the storm hits. Sometimes you plan for the blizzard phase with a slow start, and hope to capitalize on your unprepared opponent. Suddenly halftracks, underutilized in COH, have their place, carting flamethrower crews around to burn Germans out of their winter garrisons. Point is, the mechanic encourages us to make meaningful choices that strawman arguments won't acknowledge.
Same for "Sometimes a tank falls through the ice on a frozen river." Sure, sometimes you choose to accept the risk of crossing a frozen river's cracked ice with a 60-ton tank in a blizzard blitzkrieg, and sometimes you choose to target the same ice with artillery (or preemptively set explosive charges) to deliberately drop that tank, but that's far from "tanks sometimes fall through ice," no matter how determined you are to use the language of randomness when dismissing it as irrelevant.
And is the revision to capture point area actually about reducing micro? Don't you need to direct a unit to the area whether the destination is the flagpole itself or the area around it? And how does this new rule set not encourage competent players to micro even more -- laying mines, seeking strong cover, patching up halftracks, placing mgs, etc -- as they cap?
And since the storm predictably puts emphasis on all-weather units, isn't it freeing up player RAM to focus on effective units during that period while the rest sit inside, around fires, or retreat? We all know reviews are unavoidably subjective and anything else is dishonesty. While I appreciate the winter map mechanics, I'd personally prefer fewer storms per match. But there's a big difference between dressing up the fact that you aren't having fun, and examining and explaining why.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
Part of what I like about the winter maps is it gives novices a much needed breather time against each other, giving them a little bit of time to plan, to set up, and to take those first steps towards more advanced tactics. A more advanced player is hype as fuck for a blizzard, because that's when you can REALLY bring it. I love it being there, either way. Is it too much? Sometimes it feels like "oh, another blizzard, better make sure my dudes are alright" but having that kind of effect serve for both novices and experienced players alike, and faking each other out...yeah. I like it.
This is just painful
2560x1600
i7 3930k @ 4.5
2 x Titans OCd
16GB Ram
SSD
Everything maxed except AA ( Low ).
But apparently I'm on the hyperbole bandwagon, because those numbers are amazing.
For the sake of reference/comparison:
1920x1080
i5 2500K @ 4.2
GTX 570
8GB Ram
All settings at max except for AA = low.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
560ti / 2500 here, I get min fps of like 4 on the test but average of closer to 30. It hangs right at the start then gets pretty smooth for the rest of the test.
I imagine significant performance gains will be had.
Its the first game to use Relic's new engine. So no doubt Relic will be able to improve upon their code, rendering engine, the engine itself, etc.
Nvidia and AMD to my knowledge haven't yet released any optimized drivers around it. Heck right now Nvidia don't even recommend SLI for the game yet alone have a profile for it. I saw a reduction in performance running my two 580GTXs in SLI.
Interesting.
Can you advise if GPU-z's memory usage is physical memory, or does it also include any that's shared paged via WDDM?
GPUz displays both dedicated and dynamic memory usage, was it 2-2.5GB just for dedicated?
My 580GTX's have only 1.5GB of vram, and at 1900x1200 on max settings i saw between 1483-1521 megabytes of vram was used. I'm wondering if the game is failing to take use of WDDM's shared memory pool.....
Yep, from evga forums:
We disabled SLI support for Company of Heroes 2. The game requires changes to be multi-GPU friendly. We will revisit this game if changes are made.
source
cripterion
Member
It's 2013, that's fucking unacceptable imo. Feel, like a moron for supporting this game.
Mr. Luchador
Member
Incendiary Bombs on top of an oncoming group of tanks crossing an iced over river? Best moment so far in the game.
Now I understand why this game runned shit on my pc. Going to install it on my laptop because of this.
Mr. Luchador
Member
Anyone else struggling to find/connect to games at the moment?
John Caboose
Member
Absolutely. Sometimes fun is just a feeling that doesn't have concrete "these are the two things that make this game not fun". That's fine for Joe Schmoe but for a reviewer whose job it is to highlight the things liked and disliked about a game it is not fine. You don't just need to convey if you're happy or unhappy with something you need to motivate it and back it up with an explanation that doesn't just amount to "dressing up the fact that you aren't having fun".
BTW Shawn, could you post your specs so the guys can see with what kind of hardware you got the game running at max with a good frame rate on?
Maxed out? Post a picture of the benchmark please.
For some people silky smooth is sub 20. No way someone is maxing this game and getting silky smooth.
VE3TRO
Formerly Gizmowned
This is just painful
2560x1600
i7 3930k @ 4.5
2 x Titans OCd
16GB Ram
SSD
Everything maxed except AA ( Low ).
But apparently I'm on the hyperbole bandwagon, because those numbers are amazing.
For the sake of reference/comparison:
1920x1080
i5 2500K @ 4.2
GTX 570
8GB Ram
All settings at max except for AA = low.
I've done mine for another example. Everything on max with Low AA. I'm sure it will even be worse in game since the benchmark doesn't show much on screen or move the camera around.
1920x1080
i7 3930k @ 4.6
2 x GTX 680's TOP
16GB Ram
Edit: This game is so broke. I adjusted the settings for Image Quality to Higher and Snow/Physics on medium and the results were worse by 10 frames lower compared to everything on max.
Info on the SLI from nVidia - http://www.evga.com/forums/fb.ashx?m=1963667
Le sigh.
Mr. Luchador
Member
I don't understand how CoH2 has such a horrible unfriendly community already.