Will they Optimize This Game?

[evilsoul.4259]

Cheap Ice lake - zen 2 with 8 10 cores and the shiny Volta(not cheap) gpu's coming out next year

whats the future of gw2?

Will we be able to use all the potential of a 5.0ghz desktop in the future for this awesome game?

right now playing in a toaster gives almost the same fps as the best cpu in the market :S

 

[Sylent.3165]

Extremely unlikely. I'd actually say nearly a 0 percent chance.

 

1. It's a massive massive cost and an insane amount of work that they wouldn't profit off of if they got a better engine and upgraded graphics

2. If you have a duo core processor or a 50 core processor makes no difference as games run only off of one core. (Some games I think can do 2)

3. If you can run this game fine now an upgrade wouldn't help.

 

 

Very few games actually out require a true gamer pc. Other then playing games on ultra settings like bdo or battlefield one.

 

I have a quad core processor myself that's 4.1 ghz, 16gb dd3 ram and I was running a GeForce gtx 760 but recently upgraded to a 1060 for another game. Saw 0 difference in gw2 of course.

 

Truth is upgrading your pc for this game is not worth it now or in the future. Maybe for gw3

[NapalmDest.1786]

> 2. If you have a duo core processor or a 50 core processor makes no difference as games run only off of one core. (Some games I think can do 2)

 

Actually, very few games (or applications) are designed around using a certain number of cores. Most applications utilize multi-threading.

 

In multi-threaded applications, a thread is created (or grabbed from a pool of threads) to do some task. Normally, the developer doesn't dictate where a thread is executed, this is done by the Operating System itself via the CPU Thread Scheduler.

 

You can actually see how many threads Guild Wars 2 has via the Task Manager in Windows (may have to add the column under the 'Details' tab). Right now, Gw2-64.exe has 52 threads. Those 52 threads are probably not all sitting on one or two cores.

 

Multi-threading can be a very complex task. Almost certainly, there will be a few threads that are doing most of the work. Most likely, that is the case in GW2. It is not that GW2 only uses one or two cores, it is that one or two threads are doing a lot of work. GW2 is multi-threaded.

 

 

[TEKnowledgy.1760]

Game engine is actually just a heavily modified gw1 engine (that game released in 2005) made for single and 2x core cpus 4 core will always be optimum on it. Don't expect gw2 to change. Like 2nd guy said most likely a 0% chance.

[OriOri.8724]

> @NapalmDest.1786 said:

> > 2. If you have a duo core processor or a 50 core processor makes no difference as games run only off of one core. (Some games I think can do 2)

>

> Actually, very few games (or applications) are designed around using a certain number of cores. Most applications utilize multi-threading.

>

> In multi-threaded applications, a thread is created (or grabbed from a pool of threads) to do some task. Normally, the developer doesn't dictate where a thread is executed, this is done by the Operating System itself via the CPU Thread Scheduler.

>

> You can actually see how many threads Guild Wars 2 has via the Task Manager in Windows (may have to add the column under the 'Details' tab). Right now, Gw2-64.exe has 52 threads. Those 52 threads are probably not all sitting on one or two cores.

>

> Multi-threading can be a very complex task. Almost certainly, there will be a few threads that are doing most of the work. Most likely, that is the case in GW2. It is not that GW2 only uses one or two cores, it is that one or two threads are doing a lot of work. GW2 is multi-threaded.

>

>

 

We've been flat out told by the devs that the main thread is almost always the bottleneck in terms of performance, meaning only 1 thread is the problem. So adding more cores won't help efficiency. Changing how the game is programmed to be better at using multiple processors also won't help since that single thread is the cause of the bottleneck most of the time.

[nosleepdemon.1368]

> @OriOri.8724 said:

> > @NapalmDest.1786 said:

> > > 2. If you have a duo core processor or a 50 core processor makes no difference as games run only off of one core. (Some games I think can do 2)

> >

> > Actually, very few games (or applications) are designed around using a certain number of cores. Most applications utilize multi-threading.

> >

> > In multi-threaded applications, a thread is created (or grabbed from a pool of threads) to do some task. Normally, the developer doesn't dictate where a thread is executed, this is done by the Operating System itself via the CPU Thread Scheduler.

> >

> > You can actually see how many threads Guild Wars 2 has via the Task Manager in Windows (may have to add the column under the 'Details' tab). Right now, Gw2-64.exe has 52 threads. Those 52 threads are probably not all sitting on one or two cores.

> >

> > Multi-threading can be a very complex task. Almost certainly, there will be a few threads that are doing most of the work. Most likely, that is the case in GW2. It is not that GW2 only uses one or two cores, it is that one or two threads are doing a lot of work. GW2 is multi-threaded.

> >

> >

>

> We've been flat out told by the devs that the main thread is almost always the bottleneck in terms of performance, meaning only 1 thread is the problem. So adding more cores won't help efficiency. Changing how the game is programmed to be better at using multiple processors also won't help since that single thread is the cause of the bottleneck most of the time.

 

The expectation would be that whatever is blocking the main thread is moved into its own thread, or distributed across several threads. Of course that would require a massive rewrite or they would have done it already!

[EdgarMTanaka.7291]

I can imagine that in time GW2 will systems will be updated, but it won't be an instant overhaul. Instead we will get small performance enhancer with updates during GW2 lifetime.

 

I am not sure but for example I think the grafic seems to be upped with PoF and with the latest update we got a little better 4k support. So some day we may have better performance too.

[deltaconnected.4058]

> @nosleepdemon.1368 said:

> > @OriOri.8724 said:

> > > @NapalmDest.1786 said:

> > > > 2. If you have a duo core processor or a 50 core processor makes no difference as games run only off of one core. (Some games I think can do 2)

> > >

> > > Actually, very few games (or applications) are designed around using a certain number of cores. Most applications utilize multi-threading.

> > >

> > > In multi-threaded applications, a thread is created (or grabbed from a pool of threads) to do some task. Normally, the developer doesn't dictate where a thread is executed, this is done by the Operating System itself via the CPU Thread Scheduler.

> > >

> > > You can actually see how many threads Guild Wars 2 has via the Task Manager in Windows (may have to add the column under the 'Details' tab). Right now, Gw2-64.exe has 52 threads. Those 52 threads are probably not all sitting on one or two cores.

> > >

> > > Multi-threading can be a very complex task. Almost certainly, there will be a few threads that are doing most of the work. Most likely, that is the case in GW2. It is not that GW2 only uses one or two cores, it is that one or two threads are doing a lot of work. GW2 is multi-threaded.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > We've been flat out told by the devs that the main thread is almost always the bottleneck in terms of performance, meaning only 1 thread is the problem. So adding more cores won't help efficiency. Changing how the game is programmed to be better at using multiple processors also won't help since that single thread is the cause of the bottleneck most of the time.

>

> The expectation would be that whatever is blocking the main thread is moved into its own thread, or distributed across several threads. Of course that would require a massive rewrite or they would have done it already!

 

Assuming it is even possible. It's no secret that the lowest points in FPS happen when there are a lot of players and a lot of skills being fired. As an example: the client receives three commands for a player - start casting a skill, cancel it, and within milliseconds start casting something else (coalesced because of a network latency spike or whatever). If we dispatch processing the first skill to worker thread#1, the cancel to thread#2, and the third skill to thread#3, what happens? Nobody knows. Chances are the skills need to load some effects so the cancel would finish first. Then, since thread scheduling is done by the OS, roll the dice between playing skill#1 or skill#2. But what if you're watching 4k netflix on your other monitor and the CPU decides to prioritize decoding a block of video, switching out the cancel command, and making it complete last? Things in the game world would start to happen that make no sense. Add to it that you can't guarantee a max execution time and you add to that a possibility of random lag and skips under heavy load. Sure, you can try to optimize this with a "parser" thread to create a command list, reading ahead and telling another thread to fetch effects while the "world stepping" thread goes through the commands. But what if the OS decides to make fetching take longer than it would if it was inline? Threading out those tasks has now ended up costing you performance instead of improving it.

 

TL;DR: No, I wouldn't expect any significant client performance improvements. Video game workloads, especially those with hundreds of 'actors' or agents, are too sensitive to timing and execution order to benefit from more cores or threads.

[maddoctor.2738]

Older mmorgps, at least most western ones, solved the problem of timing with a global skill cooldown, this meant that at least for player actions the client/server communication happened at slower intervals, meaning higher performance. In Guild Wars 2 this timing is really low, so as to not be noticeable, unless you are a freak with insane reflexes. I don't know how low that timer is, but perhaps a tiny delay in skill execution would help so the server and the client don't have to communicate with each other as often as they do now.

[Ohoni.6057]

And here I am also following a certain mobile game where people are talking right now about spending hundreds of dollars to gamble for the chance of getting a catgirl mage. In the grand scheme of things, I'm still fine with ANet's monetization strategies. Could be a little better here and there, but ultimately "less evil than most."

[Berelious.3290]

Another thing about the GW2 engine is that they specifically designed it so that it would work on the common computer. That way most of the general public could play it without having to get a state-of-the-art machine.

[deltaconnected.4058]

> @maddoctor.2738 said:

> Older mmorgps, at least most western ones, solved the problem of timing with a global skill cooldown, this meant that at least for player actions the client/server communication happened at slower intervals, meaning higher performance. In Guild Wars 2 this timing is really low, so as to not be noticeable, unless you are a freak with insane reflexes. I don't know how low that timer is, but perhaps a tiny delay in skill execution would help so the server and the client don't have to communicate with each other as often as they do now.

 

I used skill timing as an example to show why execution order matters in context of the more expensive events that happen in-game. This applies to everything else your character does as well - movement, interacting with objects in the world, etc. Skill X damage depends on mobs health which depends on skill Y's and Z's damage before it which depends on where monster moved which depends on checking if monster can move there which depends on if the monster is stunned which depends on etc etc. Workloads with a lot of dependencies on previous results are simply impossible to execute in multiple threads.

[troops.8276]

> @Berelious.3290 said:

> Another thing about the GW2 engine is that they specifically designed it so that it would work on the common computer. That way most of the general public could play it without having to get a state-of-the-art machine.

 

That's amazing, I thought they just modded the gw1 engine because cost. I wonder if anyone in any industry has ever thought of that?

[TEKnowledgy.1760]

> @troops.8276 said:

> > @Berelious.3290 said:

> > Another thing about the GW2 engine is that they specifically designed it so that it would work on the common computer. That way most of the general public could play it without having to get a state-of-the-art machine.

>

> That's amazing, I thought they just modded the gw1 engine because cost. I wonder if anyone in any industry has ever thought of that?

 

it probably was but most devs reuse engines for many different reasons anet has always tried to cater to more than 1 type of gamer. Be it a casual to a more pc master race. Lot of other mmos that have done the same over past 12 years. Its a good way to increase profits. Now ya know tech has multiplied in innovations compared to 2005 and even in 2007-8 when they started work on gw2. Redoing an engine then implementing it into a game can cause alot of problems for many reasons and really might not be feasible at all depending how anet programed the game from the very start.

 

Only game i can think of where development re-done the engine or had planned to was apb i dont even know if they ever completed that project to be honest.

[Marthkus.4615]

MMOs with long lives do create more advance versions with time.

 

How you evolve with time makes or breaks an MMO.

 

For the most part GW2 has already messed this up with how LS1 is gone. And the fact ANET didn't just continue GW1 shows a history of short term MMOs. But the fact that gliding and mounts are usable in old content shows some willingness to update.

[TEKnowledgy.1760]

> @Marthkus.4615 said:

> MMOs with long lives do create more advance versions with time.

>

> How you evolve with time makes or breaks an MMO.

>

> For the most part GW2 has already messed this up with how LS1 is gone. And the fact ANET didn't just continue GW1 shows a history of short term MMOs. But the fact that gliding and mounts are usable in old content shows some willingness to update.

 

eh think you going bit off topic here lol