Gaming Space Engineers (now in BETA)

[SolarLiner]

The German Telekom tried the same, but the customers fought back and sued them successfully, also the nick name "Drosselkom" was pretty hard for the former monopolist.

People in the US are suing Comcast pretty hard for this ... Didn't stop them from expanding the "test area" from Texas to several other areas...

(But that's a discussion for the basement rather ...)

 

[Dantassii]

I started with dial up which only operated at half speed because of the way the phone lines were put into the development I live in (26k baud). I then graduated to dual channel ISDN because DSL wasn't available, but ISDN was 5x the cost of DSL even though it was only 1/10th as fast. Then DSL finally became available and now I'm 3 Mb/s down and 1Mb/s up.. with a 50 Gb/month cap before I start paying extra (I don't know what the extra is.. but I'm afraid to ask). Sadly, I'm paying only $10 LESS now than I paid for my dial-up....

Dantassii
HUMONGOUS shipbuilder

 

[Lucy]

Had a bit of a play with planets last night. Memory is at quite a premium in the starting scenarios - especially while loading. I got a few ugly notes from Windows before the scene loaded, but it ran fine once it had done so. When I tried closing out one world and loading another it crashed. I have 8G RAM.

 

[Dantassii]

I've switched back to FXSS (did I spell that right?) instead of MSAA2x (did I spell that right also?) and put all the video settings to the lowest possible values, and although things look a bit clunky, thge FXSS video bug introduced 3 weeks ago appears to have been mostly fixed. I'm now able to mess around with the Earth-like planet. Landing is easy... unless you need to get back into your starting ship. If you don't place the landing ramp just right, you can't get back into your ship without using your jetpack, and your fuel load lasts about 3 seconds in an atmosphere.

Now to re-learn how to start a scenario from the surface of a planet instead of next to an asteroid.

Dantassii

 

[Mandella]

Does that still exists? :blink:

Yep. My satellite service is capped at 15 Gigs, although I do have an unlimited window late night.

Do people still not understand that something like half of the US and (apparently) Canada are not yet wired for broadband?

 

[Dantassii]

Do people still not understand that something like half of the US and (apparently) Canada are not yet wired for broadband?

Since the US government is trying to redefine what broadband means (at least 25Mb/s up and down, and that's a minimum, not a 'up to but not exceeding' maximum) I doubt anyone in the USA is going to have broadband soon... except those few cities that have decided not to wait for the corporations to provide it and have provided 50 Mb/s service inside the city limits.

Dantassii

 

[Izack]

Also at four times the price!

Eeeexactly. 20GB per month for $80. Satellite connection so ping no smaller than 3000ms at any moment. No possible alternatives other than a package from the same company with 50GB/month that costs as much as unlimited fibre-optic in other regions (and remains disconnected 50% of the time due to factors such as light breeze or trees having leaves in the warm months). It's fantastic. :rant:

And yeah, I'm having similar problems as Dantassii. Planet-containing scenarios are eating up all of my 8GB of RAM and crashing after only a few frames of slideshow.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Can't even run a planet scenario. Says I don't have DX11 or something like that... Any ideas to help with that?

 

[Hielor]

Can't even run a planet scenario. Says I don't have DX11 or something like that... Any ideas to help with that?

Get a card that supports DX11 and run an OS that supports it?

 

[MaverickSawyer]

... :dry:

Yeah, not gonna happen til this GP laptop bites it. Which... could be a while. :shifty:

Here's hoping they refine the Planets code enough that normal computers can run a world with planets.

 

[Dantassii]

And yeah, I'm having similar problems as Dantassii. Planet-containing scenarios are eating up all of my 8GB of RAM and crashing after only a few frames of slideshow.

I've discovered that turning down your Video selections reduces the amount of RAM. If you have all the bells and whistles turned on, you'll probably need 128Gb of RAM for it all. With everything set at its minimum settings, it seems to run smoothly on 8Gb of RAM. That being said, with everything at its minimum settings, it is still quite impressive.

Now to figure out how to build large bases on a planet... can't use the jet pack to fly around welding stuff....

Dantassii

 

[Lucy]

... :dry:

Yeah, not gonna happen til this GP laptop bites it. Which... could be a while. :shifty:

Here's hoping they refine the Planets code enough that normal computers can run a world with planets.

Your problem here isn't code refinement but that Space Engineers is trying to use the DX11 renderer, but your hardware doesn't support the features that DX11 requires to operate. You could optimise the dinglehoppers out of that code and it still wouldn't be able to run on a card that doesn't support DX11.

I thought there was an option in the settings to select a different (DX9?) renderer, but I am not sure.

 

[Dantassii]

I thought there was an option in the settings to select a different (DX9?) renderer, but I am not sure.

You can still use the DX9 renderer, but Planets are a DX11-only feature. I doubt they will backfill it to DX9 since they really seem to want everyone to migrate to DX11. Since DX12 is due out any day now...

Dantassii

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Joy. :dry:

 

[Izack]

Weird. The game is eating up all my RAM even in scenarios without planets, made before the update. Task Manager tells me it's using less than 2GB, but about 5GB gets cached on top of that. I do hope the game becomes playable again. This is why I hate being forced to always use the current version, though I suppose I shouldn't gripe about that in an early access game.

 

[orb]

This is why I hate being forced to always use the current version

Well, you can use version 01.104 from before multiplayer tweaks and hydrogen thrusters being added, which is contained in the 'old_multiplayer' beta branch.

 

[Dantassii]

Weird. The game is eating up all my RAM even in scenarios without planets, made before the update. Task Manager tells me it's using less than 2GB, but about 5GB gets cached on top of that. I do hope the game becomes playable again. This is why I hate being forced to always use the current version, though I suppose I shouldn't gripe about that in an early access game.

I believe someone has noted that the patch on Thursday was larger than the original download of the program before Planets were added. This leads me to believe that they have added so much new code to the build that they may have turned on debugging for the entire build again so that when it crashes they get the most diagnostic information possible. Once they have better confidence in the code base, they will probably make a clean build w/out debugging and that will consume quite a bit less RAM than what they have now.

At least that's what I would have done under the circumstances.

Dantassii
38 computer languages in 38 years of software development.. C3PO's little brother.

 

[Lucy]

I believe someone has noted that the patch on Thursday was larger than the original download of the program before Planets were added. This leads me to believe that they have added so much new code to the build that they may have turned on debugging for the entire build again so that when it crashes they get the most diagnostic information possible. Once they have better confidence in the code base, they will probably make a clean build w/out debugging and that will consume quite a bit less RAM than what they have now.

At least that's what I would have done under the circumstances.

Dantassii
38 computer languages in 38 years of software development.. C3PO's little brother.

I would wager the bulk of that update was assets, rather than code itself, which is typically not very heavy. You may have a point about the debugger, however. But I am finding it difficult to play at the moment with only 8G of RAM (and moaning that I need to buy more )

 

[Dantassii]

I would wager the bulk of that update was assets, rather than code itself, which is typically not very heavy. You may have a point about the debugger, however. But I am finding it difficult to play at the moment with only 8G of RAM (and moaning that I need to buy more )

I had the same issue until I turned down the graphics levels to the bare minimums. I would suggest anyone who is having RAM bottlenecks try that solution. I also switched back to FSXX (sp?) from MSAA2x(sp?) and they appear to have fixed the video driver issue from 3 weeks ago. That could speed things up as well.

On FB I suggested to someone that they turn down all the graphic settings to their lowest value, then slowly bump up 1 setting at a time until they start seeing a performance issue. Bump it back down 1 setting then go to the next setting. Discover the maximum settings that your rig can handle that way.

Dantassii

 

[Lucy]

I had the same issue until I turned down the graphics levels to the bare minimums. I would suggest anyone who is having RAM bottlenecks try that solution. I also switched back to FSXX (sp?) from MSAA2x(sp?) and they appear to have fixed the video driver issue from 3 weeks ago. That could speed things up as well.

On FB I suggested to someone that they turn down all the graphic settings to their lowest value, then slowly bump up 1 setting at a time until they start seeing a performance issue. Bump it back down 1 setting then go to the next setting. Discover the maximum settings that your rig can handle that way.

Dantassii

Too much like hard work, I want more RAM