Truant said:I don't know if this is against the ToS, but I replaced the Steam .exe and the .dll file with the GOG versions, and I got a nice performance boost. Around 10fps, plus the game starts up much quicker.
5 gigs of saves! Had no idea I had that many.Stahsky said:How many save files do you have in your save folder? Try deleting half of them and check back for me
Yeah, probably. Someone who benefits from the GoG exe and paul.dll should try with a cracked exe and see if the same performance increase is still there, I'd do it but I'm too lazy.teiresias said:So once again the non-pirates are the only ones hurt by anti-piracy measures? This is getting damn annoying.
Kerrinck said:5 gigs of saves! Had no idea I had that many.
Thanks man, deleted half of them and that did the trick.
toasty_T said:I hope AMD comes out with these drivers soon. All I want is an extra 5 fps.
epmode said:I tried both Steam and the GOG version and I don't see a significant difference either way. No SLI here though.
It may be worth mentioning that I'm only averaging about 30 FPS anyway so it might be more apparent at higher framerates.
epmode said:I've decided that gameplay DOF can go die. I don't mind the camera telling my eyes where to focus during cutscenes but nuts to that when it comes to general exploration. The long-distance blurring especially hurts on high-resolution displays.
Thankfully, we have the option of turning it off! God bless PC gaming.
Stahsky said:Yeah, it's a bit silly. Good thing is takes just a few clicks to clear it up.
Maybe you don't get every issue everyone else gets. Not every single issue affects everyone the same to test on your machine to confirm it. Don't you have the game on SSD? Even if there are loading issues you'd hardly be noticably affected in that regard unless it was seriously fucked up.Minsc said:No difference in FPS w/ Steam when replacing in GOG's exe & dlls. Same framerate either way. Looks like Steam version is not affected.
This is sounding more and more like placebo, or at worst some weird SLI thing that the DRM is messing with.
teiresias said:Are the saves easily identifiable when you're looking at them in Windows Explorer? Since I'm on an SSD I'll definitely want to go in there and delete some games but it would majorly suck to delete the wrong ones by accident.
Truant said:I don't know if this is against the ToS, but I replaced the Steam .exe and the .dll file with the GOG versions, and I got a nice performance boost. Around 10fps, plus the game starts up much quicker.
teiresias said:Are the saves easily identifiable when you're looking at them in Windows Explorer? Since I'm on an SSD I'll definitely want to go in there and delete some games but it would majorly suck to delete the wrong ones by accident.
Alextended said:Maybe you don't get every issue everyone else gets. Not every single issue affects everyone the same to test on your machine to confirm it. Don't you have the game on SSD? Even if there are loading issues you'd hardly be noticably affected in that regard unless it was seriously fucked up.
teiresias said:Are the saves easily identifiable when you're looking at them in Windows Explorer? Since I'm on an SSD I'll definitely want to go in there and delete some games but it would majorly suck to delete the wrong ones by accident.
epmode said:Just tested some more. There is no difference at all between the Steam files and GOG. For me, anyway.
Dual core 2.9
GTX570 (no SLI)
Dynamic3 said:I really wish I knew how to OC my 2500K to 4.5 like everyone else .
loganclaws said:Hey it's really easy, but you should only try it if you have a custom fan on your cpu. You can follow this guide:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/265056-29-2600k-2500k-overclocking-guide
Corky said:wait what, 2600k stock voltage is 1.3v?
loganclaws said:I wouldn't know I have a 2500k OCed to 4.6GHz and I set my voltage to 1.35v.
Corky said:Yeah same here, although lately I've been playing around with trying to get better temps/voltages by sacrificing just abit of speed.
I started at 1.36 v at 4.6ghz just like you, my chip is pretty meh I couldn't get it over 46x multiplier without going nuts with the voltage. After a while I settled with 4.4 but only 1.26 which made me happier.
Anyways, I'm very bummed out that the reason behind the ridiculous long startup time of the game is nothing more than messed up drm I was thinking that my ssd-less pc was sweating but no.
loganclaws said:Are you talking about the time between clicking "launch game" and seeing the first intro video (gog intro for me)? I just timed it on my SSD with the GOG version it takes exactly 10 seconds.
Durante said:So basically the reason I didn't understand the performance complaints is because I got the gog version?
subversus said:
RedSwirl said:So the GOG version has the best performance of all?
Anyway, Roche and his dudes are starting to look like a medieval version of an SAS squad like Captain Price and the gang from COD4: highly trained, experienced, slightly amoral, and out of their minds.
I have both GOG and Steam versions, don't notice a performance difference between the two.RedSwirl said:So the GOG version has the best performance of all?
Anyway, Roche and his dudes are starting to look like a medieval version of an SAS squad like Captain Price and the gang from COD4: highly trained, experienced, slightly amoral, and out of their minds.
They did say Steam version would only use Steam itself as DRM, didn't they?MickeyKnox said:I have both GOG and Steam versions, don't notice a performance difference between the two.
Do you have SLI? Someone said earlier it was mainly for them.MickeyKnox said:I have both GOG and Steam versions, don't notice a performance difference between the two.
Aww fuck.Truant said:I don't know if this is against the ToS, but I replaced the Steam .exe and the .dll file with the GOG versions, and I got a nice performance boost. Around 10fps, plus the game starts up much quicker.
I have a single GPU and a dualcore CPU, I got a pretty damn nice FPS increase from unplayable mess to playable and pretty good looking, high/ultra mix . So it's not just CrossFire or SLI people who benefit from this.Nekrono said:Do you have SLI? Someone said earlier it was mainly for them.
I see, that's good to know, I have AMD and single card and I didn't gain anything but I think my CPU is bottlenecking everything since I tried going down to 720p and I got the same framerate lol.Easy_D said:I have a single GPU and a dualcore CPU, I got a pretty damn nice FPS increase from unplayable mess to playable and pretty good looking, high/ultra mix . So it's not just CrossFire or SLI people who benefit from this.
Coupled with AMD's performance hotfix and upcoming patches to the game I might be able to keep a stable 30 at all times
MickeyKnox said:I have both GOG and Steam versions, don't notice a performance difference between the two.
HixxSAFC said:Done the gog.exe (switched from retail .exe's) and yep, substantially quicker boot time and about 10 fps increase on e8400 + hd5770.
How can they let shit like this slide, it's ridiculous.
HixxSAFC said:Done the gog.exe (switched from retail .exe's) and yep, substantially quicker boot time and about 10 fps increase on e8400 + hd5770.
How can they let shit like this slide, it's ridiculous.
epmode said:I've decided that gameplay DOF can go die. I don't mind the camera telling my eyes where to focus during cutscenes but nuts to that when it comes to general exploration. The long-distance blurring especially hurts on high-resolution displays.
Thankfully, we have the option of turning it off! God bless PC gaming.
Corky said:How is it even possible that rendering the game is hindered by drm?
HixxSAFC said:Done the gog.exe (switched from retail .exe's) and yep, substantially quicker boot time and about 10 fps increase on e8400 + hd5770.
How can they let shit like this slide, it's ridiculous.
Really? Your answer to that is that people can experiment and identify and even help resolve issues rather than get no solution and explanation beyond it is how the game is?Reallink said:Truly disgusting.
Witcher 2. This kind of shit is exactly why.