Hopeless 2 Forum

zesuga wrote:My FPS is 77
my pc hmm
AMD X5200+ . That is old. isn't it?
Dram 8Gb . Build in VGA ATI-3100.
I will upgrade CPU to Phenom II X4-965. VGA to ATI -4670 1Gb

If you already get the max. FPS value with that config, the upgrade is optional.

Congratulations Boss
my first test the FPS 77
ı dont try to cached browser

PC specs:
Win-XP professional SP-3 version-2002.
Intel Pentium Dual CPU
E2180 @ 2.00 GHz
0.99 GB RAM.
Intel graphics media accelerator driver.

When I checked the map yesterday it was almost b/w 32-37..and at times would go to around 62-63, but just for a second or so, value was 32-36 everywhere. This was on 22nd.
Today, whenever I moved towards d tents, 1) Besides WH, the value would rise frm 32-36 to 67-73.
When move away from there, values drop to 32-34, i.e towards castle.
Same happens at yellow flag. When m facing tent beside yellow base, value 73, at yellow base, value 73, but on moving towards AK-47 house and the tent beside it towards tank, values 32-37..
Amazingly when I move from truck to tank and beyond towards the tower there, values rise frm 32 to 73, but when I turn back and come by the same route towards truck the values fall from 73 to 32...smthing odd na??

Thats wht I got on my PC.
yes, motion is very smooth...(dont know wht will happen in full camps...)

In castle the values fluctuate b/w 32-50...but mostly 32-34....
The place where dog is kept, value is 37 constant..
whenever I move into corners or enter any houses around values rises frm 32...and be smwhere b'w 40-50...

cins wrote:Congratulations Boss
my first test the FPS 77

Shashwat wrote:0.99 GB RAM.
Intel graphics media accelerator driver.

I did notice Unity3D bad performances on Intel onboard graphics.
Also, you need 2GB RAM (at least).
Thanks for infos.

Milan wrote:Great
I love it!
My FPS was 93 everywhere

mine is 73 -74 in everywhere if u want u can use

Hi Boss u did another good work if u still make us being surprise then change the weapons an uniforms(form and colour).Ah, I should have to say my FPS value, it's 73 -74 in everywhere

ulubatli wrote:Intel Core 2 Quad CPU
Q 8200@ 2.33 GHz
3,00 GB RAM
IE8

Ah, I should have to say my FPS value, it's 73 -74 in everywhere

But the most important info is missing: your graphics card.

when will opened

cins wrote:when will opened?

Read again my first posted message.

Remus wrote:I cannot estimate the release date of the first beta, so don't ask.

Now the max. rendering speed should be really locked to 64 FPS.
Please retest and share the following informations:
medium FPS value / OS / browser / processor / graphics card.

Median FPS Values
Outside: 64
Inside Castle: 48
Dog Run: 64

OS
XP Pro SP3

Browser
IE-6

Processor
Pentium(R) D
3.40 GHz
2.37 GHz
3 GB RAM

Graphics Card
NVIDIA Quadro
NVS285
128MB RAM

fps 60-50

Dorsai wrote:Outside: 64
Inside Castle: 48
Dog Run: 64

Pentium(R) D
NVIDIA Quadro NVS285

Very good results for a Pentium D and a graphics card with only 128MB VRAM.

JAJA !! my PC die here, fps 9 inside castle, and outside maximum 18fps.

gonzawa wrote:JAJA !! my PC die here, fps 9 inside castle, and outside maximum 18fps.

Please give us a few details (processor / graphics card) about your amazing Atari 65XE (1985) computer.

Don't knock it!

When you play with Atari, you're playing with power.

wonderful image

This is a question to all players.
How many of you have been on sites that test you're connection speed and other things.

These sites seem good to me.
http://www.speedtest.net/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.pingtest.net/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I did a ping test with my ISP and the Chicago server.
The results were.
0% packets lost.
Ping 119ms
Jitter 12ms
Grade B connection. (It's not the best but pretty good)
So Im pretty shore i receive most if not all bullets sent my way.
In you're face Josh.
There's loads of information to tell you if you're getting the best you can from you're ISP or which is the best where you live.
I think this may help allot of players out.

Lenny wrote:This is a question to all players.
How many of you have been on sites that test you're connection speed and other things.

These sites seem good to me.
http://www.speedtest.net/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.pingtest.net/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I did a ping test with my ISP and the Chicago server.
The results were.
0% packets lost.
Ping 119ms
Jitter 12ms
Grade B connection. (It's not the best but pretty good)
So Im pretty shore i receive most if not all bullets sent my way.
In you're face Josh.

Useful tests, but they have nothing to do with a multiuser environment.
The in-game test is much better and more accurate.
For example, your latest logged entry shows: "SMC / 149ms ping / 2 errors".
Very good connection.

Yes Lenny but you need test to infdat server...
So the best way is this: open Command Prompt program, type: ping infdat.com than ENTER and repeat this 5 times and you will see your lost, send data packets and your ping of course. You also can type: tracert infdat.com to see your ping way to Chicago.

And for losing data packets aren't important only your ping or connection, glitches while you are playing cause packet loss as well...

Milan wrote:Yes Lenny but you need test to infdat server...
So the best way is this: open Command Prompt program, type: ping infdat.com than ENTER and repeat this 5 times and you will see your lost, send data packets and your ping of course. You also can type: tracert infdat.com to see your ping way to Chicago.

And for losing data packets aren't important only your ping or connection, glitches while you are playing cause packet loss as well.

Again, useful tests, but they have nothing to do with a multiuser environment.
On the server (located in Chicago - USA) is installed a multiuser server app.
Only the game can communicate with that MUS.
And that's your real ping & connection quality when you play.
There is a HUGE difference between browsing websites or downloading files and playing a multiuser game.
Especially a multiplayer 1st person shooter (the fastest action & data exchange).

So it's just a coincidence that i do well in both tests
You're saying that if a player perform well on one test, he may perform bad on the other and vice versa.
all I'm saying is it's a good test to see if you're getting the best you can, if you're not, then where you can get it.

Lenny wrote:You're saying that if a player perform well on one test, he may perform bad on the other and vice versa.
all I'm saying is it's a good test to see if you're getting the best you can, if you're not, then where you can get it.

I didn't say that.
I said all those tests are useful, but their results are not accurate (cannot be).
But if you perform well in those tests, there is a big chance to get good results during the game.

OK

So i ask my question again.
How many player have tried these sites.
The reason I'm asking this question is.
I know some players want a better connection but allot of them will not.
Better connection to most players would just mean they get killed more often.
So where's the incentive.

The way I see it, the biggest "problem" bad connections give is one that's probably never going to be fixed unless you have a grade A connection relatively close to the server.

Remus has worked wonders in the way bad connection players move and how you're able to aim at them. (That has caused good connection players to become sitting ducks for sniper/shotgun, but it's the give-and-take of life.)

The big problem seems to me to be the players who don't receive YOUR packets during a game.

Idiots can blink and twitch until the cows come home. But as long as they're receiving packets from the player shooting them, the field is essentially level because the player taking the most damage is dying like he/she is supposed to.

But we don't have that happening here frequently enough. As Remus has said, and as I've had no problem reminding people: 159ms and 0 errors does not mean your connection is "good" inside of the game if you're not receiving data packets sent to you by other players.

It's the exact same immortality without looking like gktufb or mucaht. That's all.

I don't know what fixes this. I don't think it can be fixed.

But I'm still 100% for all players doing what they can to personally improve their connections.

This is an Internet game played on a computer. If you have the wrong stuff, get the right stuff! If you can't, make sure you play only with others at the kids' table.

I think that since majority has to rule in the game here, maybe the server should switch to someplace in Germany or something. Or maybe in Castro land.

Josh is right.
I've done the impossible ( ) to make the players with bad connection look good.
Now they move as smooth as possible even if their connection is messed up.
But as long as they send queued messages most of the time and they lose data packets,
the game engine cannot fill those gaps.
A server in Germany might be a solution for the turkish players.
But for the players from South America is gonna be worst.
So we need to "force" them to fix their connections.
More features for the "elite" connections, less features for the rest.
Probably the only way to go on.

YOUR right Remus.
YOU"RE an Expert.
The packet thing is the biggest problem. Many players are typing immortal in the game, sometimes maybe unjustly but other time it's justifiable.

Nobody seems to be playing in Elite camp WHY.

Many players are typing immortal in the game, sometimes maybe unjustly but other time it's justifiable

The thing about the players not receiving packs from other players is that it's inconsistent. That's perhaps the reason that it's so bad to begin with, because it's so sporadic/unpredictable.

For instance: I can shoot a guy 4 times in the head before he dies. The next time he dies from 2. The next time he takes 3. The next time he takes 2 again. The next time it's back to 4.

So the times that this player dies from 2, he can scream, "SEE, I'm NOT immortal! I die like you!"

In fact, this has been happening. Many players are so used to dying from 3 or 4 that getting killed with 2 causes them to flip out and think someone is cheating.

So as long as the player is missing your packs some of the time, that "immortal" tag fits. In the context which is arose, "immortal" doesn't mean Sean Connery in Highlander, per se. It means a player taking a whole hell of a lot of bullets to kill. So it's totally justifiable if they're a spaz.

Sometimes i think they're not receiving bullets but it's probably my bad shooting.
Maybe this is happening to other players in the game as well but they put it to bad connection.

Well, I think there's an easy way to tell if you hit someone as long as you're firing the sniper rifle. With the machine gun or even the shotgun, the accuracy isn't 100%.

But I can remember being in SMC domination and CTF about 7 times with kurt. And every single time it would be the exact same deal:

He would come walking, I would have the drop on him and put him in the sights before letting sniper shots go.

1 hit, no damage
2 hits, down to 98
3 hits, shit - still breathing
Finally, he turns around, stands perfectly still, aims his sniper at me (in this 2 seconds, I then fire TWO more shots directly to the chin/neck area), and fires ONE shot and kills me.

This scenario happens with a lot of players.

The first two or three times, I tell myself, "Okay, I must be missing." But after a dozen times, I realize that there's just no way I suck that bad.

If they receive the packets, they seem to still only receive damage on the extremely low end of the spectrum. A headshot might take away 50 HP if you're lucky.

Nah. Don't sell yourself short. As long as we've been playing, "aiming" is second nature.

To play against someone with good connection makes you want to avoid playing anyone with bad connection. It's just 100% different.

Timberwolf wrote:If they receive the packets, they seem to still only receive damage on the extremely low end of the spectrum. A headshot might take away 50 HP if you're lucky.

This is the behaviour of a computer bloated with network suckers.
The game is just a cheetah in a small Zoo.

Also, a few AntiVirus programs mess up the internet connection.
That's why I recommend Avira: http://www.avira.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.free-av.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Timberwolf wrote:Well, I think there's an easy way to tell if you hit someone as long as you're firing the sniper rifle. With the machine gun or even the shotgun, the accuracy isn't 100%.

But I can remember being in SMC domination and CTF about 7 times with kurt. And every single time it would be the exact same deal:

He would come walking, I would have the drop on him and put him in the sights before letting sniper shots go.

1 hit, no damage
2 hits, down to 98
3 hits, shit - still breathing
Finally, he turns around, stands perfectly still, aims his sniper at me (in this 2 seconds, I then fire TWO more shots directly to the chin/neck area), and fires ONE shot and kills me.

This scenario happens with a lot of players.

The first two or three times, I tell myself, "Okay, I must be missing." But after a dozen times, I realize that there's just no way I suck that bad.

If they receive the packets, they seem to still only receive damage on the extremely low end of the spectrum. A headshot might take away 50 HP if you're lucky.

Nah. Don't sell yourself short. As long as we've been playing, "aiming" is second nature.

To play against someone with good connection makes you want to avoid playing anyone with bad connection. It's just 100% different.

-->This scenario happens with a lot of players.
Yesss, the same with me too, a lot of!!

Remus wrote:

Timberwolf wrote:If they receive the packets, they seem to still only receive damage on the extremely low end of the spectrum. A headshot might take away 50 HP if you're lucky.

This is the behaviour of a computer bloated with network suckers.
The game is just a cheetah in a small Zoo.

Also, a few AntiVirus programs mess up the internet connection.
That's why I recommend Avira: http://www.avira.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.free-av.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, but i recomend to disable that autoupdate function
in administration---> scheduler----> clear that box update daily
feel free for you update it

Topz007 wrote:This scenario happens with a lot of players.
Yesss, the same with me too, a lot of!!

That's why for all these players with decent connections we are preparing the "elite" camps.

Remus wrote:Please give us a few details (processor / graphics card) about your amazing Atari 65XE (1985) computer.

I have a SEMPRON 2800+ 1.5 GB ram
Grapics card, jajaja, whats that ?? its onboard...
yes my pc is caca!!

does that unity 3D thing give viruses?
also, is it a download thing?

P.S.
Remus, I'm about to take game designing classes and I was wondering...would you try my game when it's finished and tell me what you think about it, and, if possible give me a few pointers on it?

Varex wrote:does that unity 3D thing give viruses?
also, is it a download thing?

P.S.
Remus, I'm about to take game designing classes and I was wondering...would you try my game when it's finished and tell me what you think about it, and, if possible give me a few pointers on it?

i would like to try it too!!!

Varex wrote: Remus, I'm about to take game designing classes and I was wondering...would you try my game when it's finished and tell me what you think about it, and, if possible give me a few pointers on it?

Sure.

ok, cool...I'll tell you when it's finished

When he's open a game hopeless 3 like it be to.

I waited until I got a new PC to test Hopeless on the Unity player.

Here are my results:

77 FPS everywhere - outside, inside, the corners, etc

My new system:

Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
AMD x4 quad-core 2.9Ghz
4GB RAM
1TB HDD
eVGA GeForce GTS 450 OC

Played on Google Chrome

Are this Expensive 1 Terabyte and 4 GB Ram

In the USA, you can get 4gm RAM and 1TB HDD for under $100. I don't know Turkey prices.

My entire PC only cost $500, and would have only cost $400 if I selected the 9800gt and dual-core processor.

I got 77 FPS - Is this max?

Graphics card:
Mobility Radeon HD 4330 - Laptop Class 3 graphic's card.

Xela wrote:I got 77 FPS - Is this max?

Graphics card:
Mobility Radeon HD 4330 - Laptop Class 3 graphic's card.

The limit is set to 75, but obviously Unity3D has several bugs.

Ohh ok ;)
Unity seems a lot faster than shockwave.

Xela wrote:Ohh ok ;)
Unity seems a lot faster than shockwave.

I thought the same, but it's not.
At the same image quality, SW3D is about 30-40% faster than Unity3D.
Keep in mind: this is a very simple benchmark of the SMC map.

Remus wrote: I thought the same, but it's not.
At the same image quality, SW3D is about 30-40% faster than Unity3D.
Keep in mind: this is a very simple benchmark of the SMC map.

Ohh ok I see, and I guess the unity demo doesn't have as much features as the current game.

The lighting looks pretty cool though :)

Xela wrote:Ohh ok I see, and I guess the unity demo doesn't have as much features as the current game.

The lighting looks pretty cool though :)

If I use the same SMC map and I unlock the FPS value, I get these results on
Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM, GeForce 8600GT:
- SW3D: 180 FPS
- Unity3D: 130 FPS.

And there is no lighting at all in this benchmark.
Those are static lightmaps.
Realtime lighting in Unity3D is out of question: HUGE performances drop.
But it's true: those flares look pretty cool.

Remus wrote: If I use the same SMC map and I unlock the FPS value, I get these results on
Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM, GeForce 8600GT:
- SW3D: 180 FPS
- Unity3D: 130 FPS.

And there is no lighting at all in this benchmark.
Those are static lightmaps.
Realtime lighting in Unity3D is out of question: HUGE performances drop.
But it's true: those flares look pretty cool.

Wow 180 > 130 Didn't expect that.
Normally Technology gets better over time not worse ;)
Didn't adobe release a new version of director a few years ago? I guess they didn't work on its 3D Engine, just fixed a few bugs and added a few more basic features and resold it?

I think I like that camp better when its in the dark with those lighting watch towers.

bn juego pero que es lo que hay que hacer juego mucho pero no encuentro lo que hay que hacer por fabor me dicen gracias