Did someone say... Smooth?

Back you vile creature! back!

No one summoned you O_o

The engine CCP wanted to run dust on was too much for the PS3 to handle. The unreal engine was a last minute decision and they had to settle with highly customizing an engine that doesn't accommodate gameplay mechanics they were looking for.

Gameplay mechanics have nothing to do with the engine...

The Unreal Engine is extremely easy to develop on which is why it was chosen, it wasn't a "last minute decision", they had no deadline to release DUST to the public by. They had chosen to use Unreal BEFORE they started development.

They weren't forced into it, they could have chosen any number of engines or built their own, but they made the decision to use Unreal for whatever variety of reasons they did.

Saying its the fault of the engine that the game isn't optimized is ridiculous when you can look at any number of Unreal titles and see that they run smoothly.

I'm just confused here.

There are several cases of multiplayer FPS games that look SO much better than this game (Battlefield 3, Killzone, Call of Duty, Borderlands, Crysis, Resistance, Far Cry, Bioshock, Unreal Tournament, Ghost Recon, RAGE, F.E.A.R, the list goes on...) and yet they do not suffer nearly the performance issues this game has.

What is it exactly that makes this game run so poorly? Is it the engine? The coding? The models and textures? Resolution? Network structure? Like honestly, this game doesn't look all that great. In fact, it probably is equivalent to ~04-05 games in terms of graphics.

Don't believe me?

Here's Battlefield 2 (2005)

Yeah it doesn't look spectacular, but I wouldn't exactly say DUST is a huge jump up from this game, and BF2 ran PERFECTLY SMOOTH even when you had 32 players flying around in Jets, helicopters, blowing each other up in tanks, what have you.

So please, enlighten me. Why does this game run so poorly? What makes it so much bigger and better than these other games that you force us to play sub-30 frames per second in order to try and enjoy it?

Gameplay mechanics have nothing to do with the engine...

The Unreal Engine is extremely easy to develop on which is why it was chosen, it wasn't a "last minute decision", they had no deadline to release DUST to the public by. They had chosen to use Unreal BEFORE they started development.

They weren't forced into it, they could have chosen any number of engines or built their own, but they made the decision to use Unreal for whatever variety of reasons they did.

Saying its the fault of the engine that the game isn't optimized is ridiculous when you can look at any number of Unreal titles and see that they run smoothly.

I'm just confused here.

There are several cases of multiplayer FPS games that look SO much better than this game (Battlefield 3, Killzone, Call of Duty, Borderlands, Crysis, Resistance, Far Cry, Bioshock, Unreal Tournament, Ghost Recon, RAGE, F.E.A.R, the list goes on...) and yet they do not suffer nearly the performance issues this game has.

What is it exactly that makes this game run so poorly? Is it the engine? The coding? The models and textures? Resolution? Network structure? Like honestly, this game doesn't look all that great. In fact, it probably is equivalent to ~04-05 games in terms of graphics.

Don't believe me?

Here's Battlefield 2 (2005)

Yeah it doesn't look spectacular, but I wouldn't exactly say DUST is a huge jump up from this game, and BF2 ran PERFECTLY SMOOTH even when you had 32 players flying around in Jets, helicopters, blowing each other up in tanks, what have you.

So please, enlighten me. Why does this game run so poorly? What makes it so much bigger and better than these other games that you force us to play sub-30 frames per second in order to try and enjoy it?

I'm just confused here.

There are several cases of multiplayer FPS games that look SO much better than this game (Battlefield 3, Killzone, Call of Duty, Borderlands, Crysis, Resistance, Far Cry, Bioshock, Unreal Tournament, Ghost Recon, RAGE, F.E.A.R, the list goes on...) and yet they do not suffer nearly the performance issues this game has.

What is it exactly that makes this game run so poorly? Is it the engine? The coding? The models and textures? Resolution? Network structure? Like honestly, this game doesn't look all that great. In fact, it probably is equivalent to ~04-05 games in terms of graphics.

Don't believe me?

Here's Battlefield 2 (2005)

Yeah it doesn't look spectacular, but I wouldn't exactly say DUST is a huge jump up from this game, and BF2 ran PERFECTLY SMOOTH even when you had 32 players flying around in Jets, helicopters, blowing each other up in tanks, what have you.

So please, enlighten me. Why does this game run so poorly? What makes it so much bigger and better than these other games that you force us to play sub-30 frames per second in order to try and enjoy it?

Is it failure of the developers to make the game run smoothly or failure of the engine to accommodate whatever it is CCP intended for it? Because honestly it just seems like the PS3 isn't able to handle whatever it is that's being processes and the game comes to a crawl as a result.

I'm just confused here.

There are several cases of multiplayer FPS games that look SO much better than this game (Battlefield 3, Killzone, Call of Duty, Borderlands, Crysis, Resistance, Far Cry, Bioshock, Unreal Tournament, Ghost Recon, RAGE, F.E.A.R, the list goes on...) and yet they do not suffer nearly the performance issues this game has.

What is it exactly that makes this game run so poorly? Is it the engine? The coding? The models and textures? Resolution? Network structure? Like honestly, this game doesn't look all that great. In fact, it probably is equivalent to ~04-05 games in terms of graphics.

Don't believe me?

Here's Battlefield 2 (2005)

Yeah it doesn't look spectacular, but I wouldn't exactly say DUST is a huge jump up from this game, and BF2 ran PERFECTLY SMOOTH even when you had 32 players flying around in Jets, helicopters, blowing each other up in tanks, what have you.

So please, enlighten me. Why does this game run so poorly? What makes it so much bigger and better than these other games that you force us to play sub-30 frames per second in order to try and enjoy it?

The engine CCP wanted to run dust on was too much for the PS3 to handle. The unreal engine was a last minute decision and they had to settle with highly customizing an engine that doesn't accommodate gameplay mechanics they were looking for.

What is your source for unreal being a last minute decision? They have been using unreal since the original 2009 demo.

A lot of that can be attributed to asinine decision making, inexperience, and skewed priorities.

Lol no...do some research it was also on pc in 2009

yeah, they had to break the engine into 5 parts. maybe you should youtube ccpgames.

the game was in development for far longer on carbon than it's been on the unreal engine.

they chose the unreal engine because it's proven to be reliable, but it's had to be heavily modified just to make it work.

you are talking about titles, and ccp provides 'service' not 'titles'.

it doesn't seem like you have any idea what you're talking about, as every single thing you said was wrong.

thanks for coming out.

May 03 02:55:14 Orca_Amsel hey [CCP]nothin do you know when ccp switch to unreal for dust?
May 03 02:55:23 Orca_Amsel switched*
May 03 02:55:38 [CCP]nothin it's been on Unreal since it was announced
May 03 02:55:44 Orca_Amsel since 2009?
May 03 02:55:48 [CCP]nothin yup

Also it may have been running on a PC but at the time they announced it as a console game.

Sorry for double post. That quote is actually really enlightening. That means the assumption around the forums about it originally being on Carbon is completely false.

So the excuse of engines switching is now knocked down too.