Low FPS in recent releases
#21
Posted 07 May 2022 - 07:38 AM
I just tried the new " 2036 " version and so far the recent case of " Hiccups " has disappeared . I use both ORTS and ORMG - - - I switched back and forth several times and I think the problem has been solved . None of the options seem to change and FPS are right back up to the long time standards .
I announced my concerns when things were not suitable as I saw it .
Now - - - I thank you for considering those concerns and attending to the problems !
THANX AGAIN !
Much Appreciated !
Hobo
#22
Posted 08 May 2022 - 02:36 AM
It is clear now that the problems are caused by the new "default settings" and therefore some that are suddenly ON.
(for me especially the "Dynamic Shadows" was one of the biggest culprits).
However, I still didn't get the FPS at the old release value.
A later test shows that another option is always ON, the "All Objects to horizon"....
TEST Objects-Horizon2.zip (2.09MB)
Number of downloads: 21
IOW, the function always works like this in in the background, but the option is no longer visible in the Option-Set or even in the log file.....
In NYMG the options are also ON now, but you can turn them OFF again. IOW, here you can get the same situation again as in the older relases.
I agree with Hobo, why change the settings? leave everything as it was, users can then "upgrade" everything more if their PC allows it.
(And if many default settings are turned ON now, make sure you can turn all them OFF again if needed.....)
Pending how this will be adjusted....... (?)
#23
Posted 08 May 2022 - 04:58 AM
QJ-6811, on 08 May 2022 - 02:36 AM, said:
Any project that cannot accommodate change will stagnate and eventually fade away.
What is really needed here, I believe, is a good way of communicating with users so that changes are anticipated and can be coped with. We have talked a little about communicating features of a new version with users.
#24
Posted 09 May 2022 - 12:13 AM
cjakeman, on 08 May 2022 - 04:58 AM, said:
What is really needed here, I believe, is a good way of communicating with users so that changes are anticipated and can be coped with. We have talked a little about communicating features of a new version with users.
Small note, I am not opposed to changes, many new items/possibilities are welcome!
A better way to display "changes in updates" and/or "necessities" is fine!
In the "FPS case" one new item is "the new default of settings". OK, by itself, if this is useful for "general use", fine.
However, whoever thought that "All Objects to Horizon" is good and can't hurt, probably hasn't tested, thought or uses "easy routes".
IOW, my question/request is if options (or how they work in the background) are changed, make sure they can be reset as well.
(Otherwise create a TAB sheet with "old option", or something like that?)
At the moment I can only play my route with older releases, or NYMG.
Do we have to admit that new, future releases of OpenRails are no longer suitable if someone wants to use an extended route?
#25
Posted 09 May 2022 - 12:49 AM
And the idea to gather all these switches to "advanced" or "fine-tuning/debug" tab (where they can be turned on/off one by one) seems to me very clever.
One will be able to change preferences for each case: making good screenshots, or getting smooth movement/seeing whole scenery or focuse on action.
#26
Posted 09 May 2022 - 12:51 AM
Quote
Hello.
What does this apply to?
1. For the length of the track, more precisely for the length of the laid tracks and lines:
2. The amount of tile?
3. the size of the tile file?
What is the limit?
Our most popular and most beautifully developed track is 2400 km on 1754 tile.
Or is google having fun with me again and turning it around aside?
Sincerely, Laci 1959
#27
Posted 09 May 2022 - 02:02 AM
#28
Posted 09 May 2022 - 05:22 AM
I've followed this thread in silence and I too will voice my opinion that MORE options is always better. I don't update my installation very often and I run OR on a less-than-adequate laptop for the time being, so anything that allows adjustments to improve playability is very much a requirement to enjoy the simulator.
Never look past the users who may - for whatever reason - not have a top-spec machine. And to anyone saying "they will have to upgrade to meet the game requirements" I will retort with that not everyone have money in the bank and that sort of attitude is alienating a part of the player base, that is never a good thing.
#29
Posted 09 May 2022 - 08:33 AM
Laci1959, on 09 May 2022 - 12:51 AM, said:
What does this apply to?
1. For the length of the track, more precisely for the length of the laid tracks and lines:
2. The amount of tile?
3. the size of the tile file?
What is the limit?
Our most popular and most beautifully developed track is 2400 km on 1754 tile.
Or is google having fun with me again and turning it around aside?
Sincerely, Laci 1959
Hi Laci,
Out of curiosity, what exactly do you mean?
I think you are concerned about the railway length or number of World tiles?
That is not the case, all this has -in the first instance- nothing to do with your route length! Even if you make a railway of 5000km, don't care.
The Number of World Tiles doesn't matter either, feel free to expand "20+" World Tiles left and right. (Certainly with 'zig-zag' routes this will occur more often than with "2000km straight")
Problems arise with the number of Objects that "pop up" from the World-Files, seen as a diameter around your train. Simple, the more Objects, the more shadows, the more performance is needed for your PC, and therefore a lower FPS.
Again, "Distance-View" is the diameter of World-Files you see (terrtex + the forests), the discussed option now causes all Objects to "pop up" too. I hope I'm clear?
#30
Posted 09 May 2022 - 09:04 AM
QJ-6811, on 09 May 2022 - 08:33 AM, said:
Out of curiosity, what exactly do you mean?
I responded to this question. Based on the question, I thought of some kind of limitation. Maybe I should have waited to ask the question? If so, I apologize.
Quote