Need For Speed: Rivals x64 - Impressions/Thoughts?

[Knife Party]

I managed to play this for some time and ...

 

Wow what a utter piece of turd this game is. From the robotic female voiceover to moronic 30fps hard lock, the game disgusts me. Just feels and plays like themed or skinned version of 2010 Most Wanted.

 

Playing this game requires absolutely no skill. Criterion/Ghost games makes sure of that by giving us a feeling of playing Russian Roulette. Crash crash ..bang bang and if you are lucky, you come first. No matter how much you upgrade your car, AI will catch up with you even if their car is obviously slower. My friend regrets spending so much money on it.

 

Need For Speed Series is Dead now. :(

NFS was dead years ago, no one really noticed. This is just another example of a good game, being taken and destroyed so EA can milk it.

[Athernar]

Athernar, you are not referring to temporal stability - you are referring to a game that keeps up with ever-changing and faster technology.  I haven't run into a single piece of software - game or not -- that can do so without a constant litany of patching - and most users will tire of the software (again, game or not) that has to be constantly patched to remain (in your words) temporally stable - as it is, most folks, even in FOSS, consider the patch litany a necessary EVIL.   (They do it, but don't like it.)

 

Technology is advancing faster than most gamers, programmers or users would like - and that is the case today.  Merely keeping up with the advances is a GPB - which is why I am no longer a programmer, as I would have little time left for a life if Ii had to both keep up with the state of technology art AND write code eight hours a day.  For consoles, it WAS easier in the last two generations - however, next-gen (PS4 and XB1 in particular) is so close to PC in terms of specs and such that I would wager that the more enterprising are already looking to do some of the same things with them that they are doing with PCs - and which developers will have to keep up with.

 

Athernar, do you write programs?  Have you done software development for ANY platform?  What sounds easy - from the outside - usually isn't when it gets down to the nuts and bolts.  The complexity of software is already at the point where a complete rewrite is threatening to become easier than a parade of patches.  (And i'm referring to PC and console development - not mobile development, where the rewrite has already replaced the patch all too often.)

 

Strangely enough yes, I am a programmer. Which is part of the reason why I can see through the paragraphs of irrelevant waffle trying to cover up the fact you were and still are, completely wrong.

 

So please, keep the waffle to yourself. Because writing code that is free of magic numbers and doesn't make rookie-level assumptions that frametime is static is neither hard, complex or at all related to the nonsense you ramble on about above.

[U2K]

 Finally got around to playing it, feels like 10fps, even thought frame rate says 35-40. game menu is confusing, music sucks, can't skip movie scenes, can't change the controls. Worse game i ever played lol .

Should be ashamed to release a game like that.

[MorganX]

I managed to play this for some time and ...

 

Wow what a utter piece of turd this game is. From the robotic female voiceover to moronic 30fps hard lock, the game disgusts me. Just feels and plays like themed or skinned version of 2010 Most Wanted.

 

Playing this game requires absolutely no skill. Criterion/Ghost games makes sure of that by giving us a feeling of playing Russian Roulette. Crash crash ..bang bang and if you are lucky, you come first. No matter how much you upgrade your car, AI will catch up with you even if their car is obviously slower. My friend regrets spending so much money on it.

 

Need For Speed Series is Dead now. :(

 

Wow, I"m and arcade guy so it's my favorite NFS. Best graphics, best control, best performance. I don't mind the 30fps. I prefer to actually see everything in an arcade racer. 60fps on a PC is a twitch fest in my opinion. Some people call that skill. However, I do find the sweet spot to be 50fps. This game screams on a GTX 760 and i7 3770K on Ultra settings.

 

You can get 40, 50, or 60fps by adding this suffix to the game shortcut: -GameTime.MaxSimFps 50 -GameTime.ForceSimRate 50

 

BTW, I think the voice is perfect for a digital assistant, lol. Very well done. We clearly have different tastes :P

[threetonesun]

Well its a good thing i have all the older versions, jewel cases, etc. I'm abotu to play NFS porshe unleased in about an hour. Even this game is better than all the newer ones.

 

Porsche unleashed was the best NFS, whole series went to crap after that. 

 

I still remember playing the first one so many years ago and being blown away by how much fun it was. That's all they really need, get some good cars, some decent roads, and have the cops come after you. Everything else is fluff.

[MorganX]

 Finally got around to playing it, feels like 10fps, even thought frame rate says 35-40. game menu is confusing, music sucks, can't skip movie scenes, can't change the controls. Worse game i ever played lol .

Should be ashamed to release a game like that.

 

Normally I'm always for options, but  the gamepad settings are perfect so it doesn't bother me, I wouldn't change them, not sure what I'd change them too. There aren't that many controls. You can config the keyboard.

 

I agree on skipping cut scenes though pressing "A" allows you to skip some of them, "B" or ESC does not work at all for skipping.

 

See previous post for framerate. I have seen some think the game is slow if they have Motion Blur on, could be their GPU. I find it unplayable at 60fps but I like 50. My nephew would live the 60fps twitch fest. If I want that I'll play Geometry Wars.

 

Plays flawlessly here, Windows 8.1 x64, Nvidia GTX 760, i7 3770K.

[U2K]

 Maybe its just my computer, q6600, gtx 550 ti, 4gb ddr2 memory, win7. Maybe this NFS is one of those games that required certain hardware features to run good. Its the only game that does that though, because every other new game i can run just fine. I am upgrading soon though, so i will see how it works out again, but the game is pretty terrible. Only worth 9.99 IMO

[Andre S. Veteran]

I haven't run into a single piece of software - game or not -- that can do so without a constant litany of patching - and most users will tire of the software (again, game or not) that has to be constantly patched to remain (in your words) temporally stable -

What? The concept of "temporal stability" as Athernar put it, only applies to time-based simulation software, which is largely limited to games and media players. Excel, for example, is not a time-based simulation and the concept of temporal stability doesn't even apply to it. I'm not even sure what your point is, but as for Need For Speed Rivals' tying of framerate and simulation speed, it's clear that this is just poor design.

[PGHammer]

What? The concept of "temporal stability" as Athernar put it, only applies to time-based simulation software, which is largely limited to games and media players. Excel, for example, is not a time-based simulation and the concept of temporal stability doesn't even apply to it. I'm not even sure what your point is, but as for Need For Speed Rivals' tying of framerate and simulation speed, it's clear that this is just poor design.

Athernar's concept of temporal stability is a game that can keep up with hardware advances (or changes) - right now, that's done with patches (the same way it's done with all software, including all of Office, not just Excel, or Windows, or Android, or iOS, or what-have-you).  I simply said that the rate of hardware advances alone (not to mention malware and other security issues) is such that the complete rewrite is threatening to replace the patch.

 

Tying of framerates and simulation speed is designed/meant to address the wide range of hardware configurations - especially in terms of PCs.  Otherwise, what will look good an a *standard* (the developer-target) configuration will look bad between it and the minimum and awful at the minimum - that has been indeed the state of PC gaming, If the developer sets that *standard* too low, the high-end gets ticked off for not taking advantage of those high-end-only features (Crysis 3, for example) - if they target the high-end, for most folks, a game becomes unplayable (the original Crysis, for example).  What do we, as gamers, want?

[PGHammer]

 Maybe its just my computer, q6600, gtx 550 ti, 4gb ddr2 memory, win7. Maybe this NFS is one of those games that required certain hardware features to run good. Its the only game that does that though, because every other new game i can run just fine. I am upgrading soon though, so i will see how it works out again, but the game is pretty terrible. Only worth 9.99 IMO

I have pretty much the same configuration, but on Windows 8.1.  Like BF4 (same engine) it really is aimed at higher-end hardware (both CPU and GPU); however, like BF4, it is at least playable on our lower-end hardware - which can't be said for most games with the same specs.  I'm upgrading to i5-4670K, which should solve the CPU issues at least - though gaming is NOT driving this upgrade (virtualization, and Hyper-V in particular, is).

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Games are not constantly patched to slow themselves down on newer hardware, if that's what you mean.

That said, I'm still not sure what you actually mean, or how it has anything to do with how badly NFS is written.

[MorganX]

I have pretty much the same configuration, but on Windows 8.1.  Like BF4 (same engine) it really is aimed at higher-end hardware (both CPU and GPU); however, like BF4, it is at least playable on our lower-end hardware - which can't be said for most games with the same specs.  I'm upgrading to i5-4670K, which should solve the CPU issues at least - though gaming is NOT driving this upgrade (virtualization, and Hyper-V in particular, is).

 

What GPU do you have? The current x32 performs so well, flawlessly, at 1080p even at 60fps on a 3770k/GTX 760 all settings maxed, I would think it would scale down acceptably for most mid-range or higher systems. This is how games should be done, great graphics, but not overdone for the sake of overdoing it and bringing even a high powered system to it's knees for no playable or visible reason other than screen tearing and frame skipping which are completely absent in this game. Not even a hiccup.

[MorganX]

I will say the x64 version (native for me) does perform and look noticeably better. I shouldn't assume everyone is running Windows x64, though I don't know why anyone on 8.x would be running x32.

[Andre S. Veteran]

Athernar's concept of temporal stability is a game that can keep up with hardware advances (or changes) 

No, you missed his point entirely there; that's what I was pointing out in my last post. It was simply the idea that a time in a game should be stable in respect to framerate, i.e. if framerate varies, time keeps elapsing at the same pace. I don't understand what your point about patching has to do with the topic.

[spaceelf]

I don't know why anyone on 8.x would be running x32.

I understand it for tablets, but not much else.

[Athernar]

Athernar's concept of temporal stability is a game that can keep up with hardware advances (or changes) - right now, that's done with patches (the same way it's done with all software, including all of Office, not just Excel, or Windows, or Android, or iOS, or what-have-you).  I simply said that the rate of hardware advances alone (not to mention malware and other security issues) is such that the complete rewrite is threatening to replace the patch.

 

Tying of framerates and simulation speed is designed/meant to address the wide range of hardware configurations - especially in terms of PCs.  Otherwise, what will look good an a *standard* (the developer-target) configuration will look bad between it and the minimum and awful at the minimum - that has been indeed the state of PC gaming, If the developer sets that *standard* too low, the high-end gets ticked off for not taking advantage of those high-end-only features (Crysis 3, for example) - if they target the high-end, for most folks, a game becomes unplayable (the original Crysis, for example).  What do we, as gamers, want?

 

None of that is even remotely similar to what I've been talking about or for that matter, what the original topic was. How you managed to think otherwise I have no idea, as that doesn't make any sense.

 

It's really quite simple. If portability was a design goal from the outside, relying on a static framerate as a time reference is the polar opposite action any competent developer would take, because variety of hardware means variety of performance. So you do the smart thing and base your reference on time itself, rather than making the assumption every frame occurs precisely N times at X interval.

[Andre S. Veteran]

Tying of framerates and simulation speed is designed/meant to address the wide range of hardware configurations - especially in terms of PCs.

Certainly not - this approach requires fixing the framerate which makes the game much less adaptable to varying configurations. There's really no advantage to it from the consumer's perspective. Perhaps it was a convenience for the developers, although I'm also having a hard time seeing how exactly, but it's only a limitation and an annoyance for gamers, regardless of the hardware they're running the game on. If the hardware is good enough to run the game at a faster framerate, they're wasting the extra power; if the hardware is too slow, the game will actually slow down resulting in an absolutely intolerable experience.

 

Allowing a variable frame rate is key to scaling across hardware configurations - you're suggesting the opposite.  :huh:

[spaceelf]

The only reason I can think of to fix the framerate is to keep the netcode from running into any problems, since the online experience is a big part of it.

 

I see a lot of people complaining about servers being laggy on BF4 when its probably just their own stupid computer being overtaxed.

 

I'll have the game downloaded in another four hours or so.  We all know I'll love it, but I'll let you know anyway. :D

[spaceelf]

Wow.  Now that I've played it I don't really know why anyone cares if its 30fps or not.  Everything looks really nice.

 

The Speedlist setup is a little weird, but early impressions are very positive.  Though the tutorial bits could be shorter.  (People who like tutorials: you are weird.)

 

It's already very different from Most Wanted.  I liked MW but I had major complaints about how the multiplayer was handled.

I love Frostbite 3 already, can't wait to see what they do with Mantle!

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

You shouldn't be basing the netcode off the FPS either, that leads to even more issues.

[spaceelf]

You shouldn't be basing the netcode off the FPS either, that leads to even more issues.

I didn't mean to imply it would.  It'd just free up more CPU resources for it.

[MorganX]

Wow.  Now that I've played it I don't really know why anyone cares if its 30fps or not.  Everything looks really nice.

 

The Speedlist setup is a little weird, but early impressions are very positive.  Though the tutorial bits could be shorter.  (People who like tutorials: you are weird.)

 

It's already very different from Most Wanted.  I liked MW but I had major complaints about how the multiplayer was handled.

I love Frostbite 3 already, can't wait to see what they do with Mantle!

 

If this is what a bad next gen port to PC is like, I want some more. Can't wait for next year's Star Wars Battlefront using Frostbite.

[PGHammer]

None of that is even remotely similar to what I've been talking about or for that matter, what the original topic was. How you managed to think otherwise I have no idea, as that doesn't make any sense.

 

It's really quite simple. If portability was a design goal from the outside, relying on a static framerate as a time reference is the polar opposite action any competent developer would take, because variety of hardware means variety of performance. So you do the smart thing and base your reference on time itself, rather than making the assumption every frame occurs precisely N times at X interval.

Athernar, that STILL means a reference HARDWARE platform, that can actually keep up with that reference standard in terms of frames per second (not all hardware can, which is, in fact, the whole selling point for hardware upgrades).  Hence the "variety of hardware" PROBLEM.  For consoles, that is indeed easier, since consoles within a given brand (PS4, for example) are not supposed to vary at all.

 

However, PCs vary, and vary widely - which makes such a reference-standard problematical, even though said standard is higher than it was with last-gen (PS3).  If you do what you are suggesting, exactly what is the difference from the way ports had previously been done?  While it may satisfy those closer to the high end, it leaves the minimum-end folks (such as myself) out in the cold (which is precisely the "sin" the original Crysis committed).  What exactly ARE your hardware specs (on your gaming hardware), Athernar?  I do have a point - the majority of folks complaining have higher-end hardware.

[spaceelf]

the majority of folks complaining have higher-end hardware.

I'm not really complaining about it, though I think it's silly as hell...my sys is 'high end'...but also five years old and pretty easy to beat with mid range current stuff.

 

I'll be finally replacing it with Kaveri next year it seems.

[chrisj1968]

Again, I'm asking what sort of NFS game do you want?  I've heard similar complaints about all the non-sim NFS titles (including all three Hot Pursuit titles).  If you want a response that is not tied to the wide variety of PC hardware, then you want a console game played on a console; let's face facts - consoles don't vary a whit, while PC game performance varies all over the place because PC hardware varies all over the place.  I'm not saying that it isn't a console port, because it is - however, the only way around that issue (it's far from unique to this game, or any other multi-platform game) is to have it basically target consoles exclusively - and nobody wants that.  Not a single PC-exclusive NFS title has ever performed exactly the same on every PC out there - why anyone expects this one to be any different is beyond me.  Either the performance must vary because the hardware does - or else you are playing on the one hardware platform that doesn't vary at all - a console.  Game development is still a business.

 

why are you asking for peoples opinions and then asking what people want? you asked people what they thought of the game.. now you seem.. to criticize them for speaking out? ask what you really want and not some vague question how they like BRAND-X then ask them to answer your question about what kind of game they want.. will ya?