Battlefield Nation Forums - View Single Post

carramrod01 · 03-23-2004, 02:13 AM

i think so. I believe the only reason BF:V is running like crap for ATI cards is because we all know EA had a deal with nVidia, and since its also obvious BF:V was rushed, Im guessing they optimized for nVidia cards first.

I mean just think about it...When they are showing off this game they are doing it on nVidia cards because of their partnership. So of course they optimize for nVidia's cards first and ATI takes a backseat, why waste time when they have so little of it to begin with optimizing for a card manufacturer who isn't even paying them?

Im sure they will get around to it just because of the player demand, but as for why we don't have it running good now, I think its the above reason.

BTW im 800x600x32, graphics quality on high all others on medium, lightmaps and shadows on. Just enough to run smooth on my 9800 np (although im sure my cpu (xp 1600+)) is holding me back more.

edit: I turned off lightmaps and shadows and now i get like 100+ fps. I cranked up resolution to 1024x768 and textures detail up to highest left others at medium and still get 70 constant fps so that seems to work best. I could prob put it at 1280x1024 and keep 50+ but im happy at 1024x768 for now, looks crazily better.

I'd still like to see them fix shadows and lightmaps though, these are the DX9 paths (along with others) they basically ignored for ATI

03-23-2004, 02:13 AM	#4 (permalink)
carramrod01 First Sergeant Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: a little to the left Posts: 573	i think so. I believe the only reason BF:V is running like crap for ATI cards is because we all know EA had a deal with nVidia, and since its also obvious BF:V was rushed, Im guessing they optimized for nVidia cards first. I mean just think about it...When they are showing off this game they are doing it on nVidia cards because of their partnership. So of course they optimize for nVidia's cards first and ATI takes a backseat, why waste time when they have so little of it to begin with optimizing for a card manufacturer who isn't even paying them? Im sure they will get around to it just because of the player demand, but as for why we don't have it running good now, I think its the above reason. BTW im 800x600x32, graphics quality on high all others on medium, lightmaps and shadows on. Just enough to run smooth on my 9800 np (although im sure my cpu (xp 1600+)) is holding me back more. edit: I turned off lightmaps and shadows and now i get like 100+ fps. I cranked up resolution to 1024x768 and textures detail up to highest left others at medium and still get 70 constant fps so that seems to work best. I could prob put it at 1280x1024 and keep 50+ but im happy at 1024x768 for now, looks crazily better. I'd still like to see them fix shadows and lightmaps though, these are the DX9 paths (along with others) they basically ignored for ATI __________________ #12279 by lucifersam (User) at 2004-02-21 01:56:14 GMT how do i watch this?...how do i \"unrare\" files?