F.E.A.R. demo

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-08-07 10:47pm

I'm downloading the demo and trembling at the thought of what it's going to do to my poor, poor computer. I should be able to run it at low, low prices... I mean, settings.

Brother-Captain Gaius · Post by **Brother-Captain Gaius** » 2005-08-07 11:51pm

Well, I gave it a whirl. I really hope that this is simply a case of poorly-optimized/incomplete demo-ness, because my system just simply cannot handle it. My system's aging, sure, but given it can run the massive comp-hog that is Battlefield 2 at medium settings, I really shouldn't be seeing this (lack of) performance. Running at mostly minimum settings (except for little details that have utterly neglible performance effects) and 800-motherfucking-x-600 resolution, the game simply chugs to the point where it's unplayable, and it looks like absolute shit while doing it due to the low settings.

Shame too, it looks moderately interesting. But no way I can buy it unless it's optimized far better at release.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2005-08-08 12:56am

I played it at 1024x768 and mostly max settings and it went through it at a pretty good pace and chugged only at one point where all that volumetric light was filtering through those pipes, but that was it.

Twas pretty enjoyable.

Post by **weemadando** » 2005-08-08 01:03am

How long do you think there is until someone releases a flash game where you can wail upon that little FUCKING BITCH at leisure and kick the shit out of her.

The way she is continually CREEPING THE SHIT out of me.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2005-08-08 01:11am

What sorta systems are you guys having issues with? I'm pulling down the demo now (at Australian speeds, ugh), but I'm curious to see if my 3600/2048Mb/6600GT will chug like a little girl.

Post by **weemadando** » 2005-08-08 01:14am

It should eat it up.

RAM is the bottleneck. And you've got plenty.

I've seen it running on 9600s without a hitch. Meaning that a GF6600 should have NO issues.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2005-08-08 01:18am

Oh sweet. I knew that RAM I didn't really need would come in useful for more than just Photoshop.

Looking at screenshots, I'm not sure I understand why RAM is such a bottleneck. The textures don't look THAT good, and the stuff that impressed me (the lighting effects, mainly) would be CPU/GPU stuff, wouldn't it?

Post by **weemadando** » 2005-08-08 01:27am

Try the hundreds of particles, insane AI and rather detailed environments and LOTS AND LOTS OF PHYSICS.

My CPUr (p4-2.8c) can hack it, but every time the action heats up or I enter a newish area I get a slideshow if not a complete freeze for a few seconds.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2005-08-08 01:53am

I thought the girl appeared too often and too clearly during this run. The mission in the gameplay movie a long time ago was more suspenseful, imo. The girl only appeared in brief instants that made you doubt your eyes, but in the demo you could clearly see her, which was kinda cheesy.

Maybe they'll shift things around for the final release.

Sephirius · Post by **Sephirius** » 2005-08-08 02:12am

Shinova wrote:I thought the girl appeared too often and too clearly during this run. The mission in the gameplay movie a long time ago was more suspenseful, imo. The girl only appeared in brief instants that made you doubt your eyes, but in the demo you could clearly see her, which was kinda cheesy.

Maybe they'll shift things around for the final release.

the demo is a mishmash of different parts of the game, iirc

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2005-08-08 02:26am

I like how they handled the low accuraty at full burst. It comes down to good mouse handling on your part instead of just getting a bigger crosshair if you know what I mean. So basicly it boils down to your own skill (might be interesting for multiplayer)

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2005-08-08 04:03am

This game uses about 700mb of ram, and then it does on the fly loading as you go. 1gb is about the minium amount of ram for this to be playable. More is better.

Anyone looking for a highspeed mirror? Here is one.

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2005-08-08 04:06am

Stark wrote:What sorta systems are you guys having issues with? I'm pulling down the demo now (at Australian speeds, ugh), but I'm curious to see if my 3600/2048Mb/6600GT will chug like a little girl.

I pulled the demo down in 30 minutes, I love my 5 mbit down

I'm hoping I can get more when I upgrade my router from a adsl1 to adsl2+

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2005-08-08 04:52am

ggs wrote:This game uses about 700mb of ram, and then it does on the fly loading as you go. 1gb is about the minium amount of ram for this to be playable. More is better.

I figured that much. I got 512ddr and thats pushing it sometimes. Luckely RAM is relatively cheap to upgrade (compared to videocard or processor anyway)

Julhelm · Post by **Julhelm** » 2005-08-08 07:59am

I have it running quite well on 512mb ram.

Oberleutnant · Post by **Oberleutnant** » 2005-08-08 10:54am

I first tried playing the game on my parents' computer (Athlon 3200+, 512mb, shitty ATI X600 card) and encountered awful performance problems even with medium graphics settings. My own computer (Pentium 4 3,0 GHz, 512mb RAM ATI Radeon 9800 XXL) on the other hand played it like a dream, with high/medium settings. I had turned anti-aliasing off, but visual quality was still pretty awesome.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2005-08-08 07:57pm

The demo was fun, but it made my computer cry...

Good thing a major upgrade is a month away!

Post by **weemadando** » 2005-08-08 07:59pm

Then why the fuck does my P4-2.8, 512mb DDR400 and X800pro (256mb) get AXED by this demo?

Pcm979 · Post by **Pcm979** » 2005-08-08 08:01pm

Hrm. I'm up to the bit where you have to go into the open in broad daylight (Eh? It was dark 5 minutes ago. Well, demo). No problems so far. It looks like getting that extra RAM pays off after all.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2005-08-08 09:16pm

I enjoyed it, mainly. The engine is good, its the best ragdoll I've ever seen, and it's packed with swearing.

Many of the little features annoy me (auto-reloading guns - ugh) but it's only a demo.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2005-08-08 10:06pm

Stark wrote:I enjoyed it, mainly. The engine is good, its the best ragdoll I've ever seen, and it's packed with swearing.

Many of the little features annoy me (auto-reloading guns - ugh) but it's only a demo.

The guns auto-reload? I never let my guns' mags go dry at all. I always reload after a guy goes down. Call it a bad habit i picked up from RtCW.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-08-08 10:07pm

My own rig had to settle for low-low settings on this (P4 2.26, 512 PC3200, GF4Ti4400... sigh), but it was still some fun play. Wish the slow-mo were a little longer....

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2005-08-09 03:54am

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:The guns auto-reload? I never let my guns' mags go dry at all. I always reload after a guy goes down. Call it a bad habit i picked up from RtCW.

Same: but if you change guns mid-clip, when you change back after the battle to reload all your weapons, they're magically reloaded by pixies. It just irked me.

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2005-08-09 04:58am

In darker news, I got this annoying soundbug thingy that I also had at games like Chronicles of Riddic or Battlefield 1942 (strangely always FPS). After playing a while, I get this really hard static noise

Glimmervoid · Post by **Glimmervoid** » 2005-08-09 07:05am

The Demo was very fun. It ever surprised me a few times. It got to the point near the end were i would put on slow time just to go round a corner. And at the end were the Battle Mech thing drops down through the roof is cool.

Though I would like to know why a particle gun burns people down to the bones rather than punch a hole through them.