Great promise., but quickly fizzles - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Great promise., but quickly fizzles

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Great promise., but quickly fizzles

Jonothon posted 03-22-99 12:16 AM ET
The game has incredible promise. However you very quickly need something more powerful than a 400 mhz, 1 meb ( memory) 10 GIG (hard) machine. It bogs down, takes for every to analyse the situation, then makes really stupid decisions for those assets under automatic control. Some assets under automatic control seem to dissapear and never recover.
It may play differently with more than one person.
If any one can explain this issue for me., please do so.
yin26 posted 03-22-99 12:29 AM ET
Jon,
I have a 450MHZ, 128MB RAM, 16 GIG Hardrive, 21" Monitor, 16MB video rig from Micron. Great stuff. The monitor especially--never skimp on the monitor, I'm telling you.
But even on my system the game becomes bogged down at some point. The units start to move at about half to a quarter of their normal rate, etc.
If I restart the computer, the same number of units (i.e. the same demands on the system) will now work just fine. Obviously, then, system resources are not being handled properly, which, I guess, is a Windows problem. 128MB RAM and the damn thing STILL slows down. Death to Bill Gates...
The other stuff you metioned only helps to clarify that SMAC is a labor of love. It is a very "click-intensive" endeavor that requires a person (I think, anyway) to really get into the spirit of the whole thing. For example, I just started a game as Miriam. After each move, I ask myself: What would a Bible-thumping meglomaniac do next given the current situation. How do I make the others fear me? That kind of thinking helps me forgive the mechanics of the game.
Having said that, I will say that Firaxis has come deathly close to designing a game that requires almost TOO much effort to come to like it.
I stuck it out. But I don't think a lot of other people did or will.
Yin
Spy Hunter
Third Class
yin26 posted 03-22-99 12:44 AM ET
P.S.
I'm glad I stuck it out .
Zoetrope posted 03-22-99 06:40 AM ET
It's true that the OS should garbage collect. (Though if all its garbage were disposed of, what would become of Microsoft?)
By the same token, applications should not leak memory. With every `new' for which there's no `delete', memory shrinks, leading to increased swapping, a decrease in available virtual memory, and eventually a grinding to a halt. (Sounds like the inevitability of entropy, but it needn't be so.)
Incidentally, last night I noticed that when SMAC's CD is in the drive, even though the CD is quiet, the hard drive is much more active, which slows the game.
MoSe posted 03-22-99 10:28 AM ET
>Obviously, then, system resources are not being handled properly, which, I guess, is a Windows problem.
Is that some uneradicable trace of your witty sarcasm, or did an AoE Priest convert you?
I only did a couple of intensive resource consuming programming, that was long time ago under 3.11, C7.0+SDK, but I remember that the resource issue should and could be handled by the programmer. After each deeper testing when my SW jammed (sort of graphical editor in Bliss symbolic language), I found another subfunction where I forgot to trace down the objects I declared and to release them in the end (unforeseen ways to exit were my incubus). Better check your arm before blaming the slanted bowling parquet.
Silt posted 03-22-99 11:44 AM ET
First my specs: P2-300, 64MB RAM, 4MB AGP Velocity 128 Video card.
I have yet to run into a performance issue with this game. Yesturday, unknown to me, I was running SMAC while Word, Excel and Access were running in the background(wife snuck on the system when I wasn't looking). Even with those memory hogs loaded, I didn't see a slow down in SMAC. Might want to check your system for problems.
Silt
Tagurto posted 03-22-99 12:58 PM ET

Windows does reconcile resources that a lazy program does not explicitly deallocate, but only when the program is exited. And, as much as I dislike Windows, I'll have to say that you guys shouldn't be blaming SMAC performance problems on Microsoft. There are MANY other games out there that do a whole lot of processing and run very well on Microsoft OS's, so lets keep that in mind. The bottom line is that SMAC problems are due to the SMAC programmers.
I too have been disappointed with the overall performance and the 'clicky' UI of SMAC. It's been "on the shelf" since a couple of days after it came out. I mean, what's up with a turn-based strategy game running slowly on a PII-266 w/128Megs and good peripherals.
But, the v3.0 patch is out and claims to fix some performance and AI problems, so I'll give it another chance.
Robo posted 03-22-99 08:37 PM ET
no problems with slowness on my Win '98 system. Are you guys using '95 or '98? The only problem I have with the game is it's just too damn easy to beat.
DHE_X2 posted 03-22-99 08:48 PM ET
155 mhz "classic" pentium processor, 60 mb ram, 4.5 gigs total hd space. It runs like a gem.
yin26 posted 03-22-99 08:49 PM ET
Robo,
There's never a point in your game when the units (for at least 4-5 turns) move at about 1/2 their normal speed on the screen?
This happens to me specifically (for one example) if I'm bombarding a city with several units in it. It seems to take the computer longer than usual to cycle through the units in the city and decide damage.
Nothing like that ever happens to you?
I would like to blame SMAC or Windows (take your choice). I find it hard to believe that my new machine is to blame.
And before the usual slew of responses come--I am RELIGIOUS about virus checks, defragging, updating my drivers, etc.
crisp posted 03-22-99 09:32 PM ET
performance is fine on my P1 133 - dunno why Jonothon needs 400Mhz 10Gb guess he must really have shagged his PC
JaimeWolf posted 03-22-99 10:03 PM ET
Maybe it just slows down to the speed that's normal on the P166's (etc.) and so if you have a slow processor you're used to it being that speed and it doesn't get any slower I don't have any problems on my P150 but it is noticably slower than my P200MMX.
James
MoSe posted 03-23-99 05:00 AM ET
Wheee, it's faster (ok, less slow)!
Before 3.0:
Slow units movement
freezed 30 - 100 secs during AI turn
(at first moved AI units, then a complete stop, info display freezed in the middle of a word,...)
sluggish windows switch in base, production, wokshop, ...dialogs.
After:
First run zipping, then decays a little after some reloads of the game, but still 20/30% faster than 2.0
Faster AI turn calculation, and the info display considerably slows, but freezes not.
Generally smoother & faster in the GUI; as for artillery, I couldn't observe before the damage done, now it briefly shows the Unit power points before and after the hit, so maybe it takes longer.
And I'm absolutely a lazy atheist bradipus in defraggginupdatin my PII-333, 128Mb, AGP8mb, you can archeologically scrape through layers of my 8Gb Quantum Fireball SE, like the city of Troy.
Still have the demo on a P133 NT4sp3 32Mb AtiOnBoard at office, simply unplayable.
MariOne
Bdot posted 03-26-99 03:55 PM ET
I am on a 233 Pent II with about 48 RAM. If I have a virus checker going on in the background I do see a slow down but if I don't it's usually ok. At some points my movements is somewhat slow. I have noticed though that the AI are much faster in their turns than with CIV 2. In Civ 2, the AI took forever in all their moves.
sandworm posted 03-26-99 04:09 PM ET
Someone mentioned elsewhere that they updated, cleaned, scanned, and tweaked their entire, relatively high-end system with no positive result until they simply disabled McAfee Viruscan while they played. Problem solved. Mine runs (sort of)fine on a 400/64 PII Win98. The problem is exiting without locking up my whole system. Happens almost every time since I installed 3.0.
JOMT is even more difficult to break when you know what happens when you exit!
fkloster posted 03-26-99 04:17 PM ET
My game runs great. Open wallet and try this.
1)PII 450
2)256MB RAM (Virtual Mem locked @20Min & Max)
3)TNT AGP
4)MX300 w/3.0patch "SEEMS" to work?(splashscreen shows?)
5)21" Mitsu
6)3.0 patch / game runs fast and sounds much better. As yin suggests, periodicaly one must restart computer (for me after about 4 to 5 hours of play) to get everything all "fresh" again.
agoraphobe posted 03-26-99 05:13 PM ET
Unfortunately, C++ and other 3GL languages make garbage collection the programmer's responsibility. There's no such thing as an OS that does garbage collection (as someone mentioned, if there were, Win32 OS's would have to unload themselves everey time they booted up, yuk, yuk).
So there probably have been memory leaks in SMAC, perhaps still, even after 3.0, although I've noticed definitely zippier graphical performance on my low end 133 Pentium. Doesn't mean there aren't lingering leaks, though.
Those that report no problems are probably SO good at the game that they beat it before the leaks pile up Look at it this way: it's "Operating System"'s revenge for SMACs' despoilation of the software environment by lousy players or late-game "builders".
Mo posted 03-26-99 10:29 PM ET
Pentium 166 runs fine with a few slow downs, but nothing drastic enough to ruin the game.
Koo posted 03-26-99 11:46 PM ET
Another thing you should be sure to do is turn off animations... Doesn't matter how fast your computer is, by mid-game it'll kill you to have to watch all your allies' moves.
voodoo posted 03-27-99 05:44 AM ET
I'm playing on a K62 300 with 128Mb of RAM and I never experience any slowdown whatsoever. It may be something to do with the fact that I'm using MemTurbo. I can heartily reccomend this little utility to everyone - and it's shareware so if it doesn't work, it's cost you nothing.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Great promise., but quickly fizzles
Jonothon	posted 03-22-99 12:16 AM ET The game has incredible promise. However you very quickly need something more powerful than a 400 mhz, 1 meb ( memory) 10 GIG (hard) machine. It bogs down, takes for every to analyse the situation, then makes really stupid decisions for those assets under automatic control. Some assets under automatic control seem to dissapear and never recover. It may play differently with more than one person. If any one can explain this issue for me., please do so.
yin26	posted 03-22-99 12:29 AM ET Jon, I have a 450MHZ, 128MB RAM, 16 GIG Hardrive, 21" Monitor, 16MB video rig from Micron. Great stuff. The monitor especially--never skimp on the monitor, I'm telling you. But even on my system the game becomes bogged down at some point. The units start to move at about half to a quarter of their normal rate, etc. If I restart the computer, the same number of units (i.e. the same demands on the system) will now work just fine. Obviously, then, system resources are not being handled properly, which, I guess, is a Windows problem. 128MB RAM and the damn thing STILL slows down. Death to Bill Gates... The other stuff you metioned only helps to clarify that SMAC is a labor of love. It is a very "click-intensive" endeavor that requires a person (I think, anyway) to really get into the spirit of the whole thing. For example, I just started a game as Miriam. After each move, I ask myself: What would a Bible-thumping meglomaniac do next given the current situation. How do I make the others fear me? That kind of thinking helps me forgive the mechanics of the game. Having said that, I will say that Firaxis has come deathly close to designing a game that requires almost TOO much effort to come to like it. I stuck it out. But I don't think a lot of other people did or will. Yin Spy Hunter Third Class
yin26	posted 03-22-99 12:44 AM ET P.S. I'm glad I stuck it out .
Zoetrope	posted 03-22-99 06:40 AM ET It's true that the OS should garbage collect. (Though if all its garbage were disposed of, what would become of Microsoft?) By the same token, applications should not leak memory. With every `new' for which there's no `delete', memory shrinks, leading to increased swapping, a decrease in available virtual memory, and eventually a grinding to a halt. (Sounds like the inevitability of entropy, but it needn't be so.) Incidentally, last night I noticed that when SMAC's CD is in the drive, even though the CD is quiet, the hard drive is much more active, which slows the game.
MoSe	posted 03-22-99 10:28 AM ET >Obviously, then, system resources are not being handled properly, which, I guess, is a Windows problem. Is that some uneradicable trace of your witty sarcasm, or did an AoE Priest convert you? I only did a couple of intensive resource consuming programming, that was long time ago under 3.11, C7.0+SDK, but I remember that the resource issue should and could be handled by the programmer. After each deeper testing when my SW jammed (sort of graphical editor in Bliss symbolic language), I found another subfunction where I forgot to trace down the objects I declared and to release them in the end (unforeseen ways to exit were my incubus). Better check your arm before blaming the slanted bowling parquet.
Silt	posted 03-22-99 11:44 AM ET First my specs: P2-300, 64MB RAM, 4MB AGP Velocity 128 Video card. I have yet to run into a performance issue with this game. Yesturday, unknown to me, I was running SMAC while Word, Excel and Access were running in the background(wife snuck on the system when I wasn't looking). Even with those memory hogs loaded, I didn't see a slow down in SMAC. Might want to check your system for problems. Silt
Tagurto	posted 03-22-99 12:58 PM ET Windows does reconcile resources that a lazy program does not explicitly deallocate, but only when the program is exited. And, as much as I dislike Windows, I'll have to say that you guys shouldn't be blaming SMAC performance problems on Microsoft. There are MANY other games out there that do a whole lot of processing and run very well on Microsoft OS's, so lets keep that in mind. The bottom line is that SMAC problems are due to the SMAC programmers. I too have been disappointed with the overall performance and the 'clicky' UI of SMAC. It's been "on the shelf" since a couple of days after it came out. I mean, what's up with a turn-based strategy game running slowly on a PII-266 w/128Megs and good peripherals. But, the v3.0 patch is out and claims to fix some performance and AI problems, so I'll give it another chance.
Robo	posted 03-22-99 08:37 PM ET no problems with slowness on my Win '98 system. Are you guys using '95 or '98? The only problem I have with the game is it's just too damn easy to beat.
DHE_X2	posted 03-22-99 08:48 PM ET 155 mhz "classic" pentium processor, 60 mb ram, 4.5 gigs total hd space. It runs like a gem.
yin26	posted 03-22-99 08:49 PM ET Robo, There's never a point in your game when the units (for at least 4-5 turns) move at about 1/2 their normal speed on the screen? This happens to me specifically (for one example) if I'm bombarding a city with several units in it. It seems to take the computer longer than usual to cycle through the units in the city and decide damage. Nothing like that ever happens to you? I would like to blame SMAC or Windows (take your choice). I find it hard to believe that my new machine is to blame. And before the usual slew of responses come--I am RELIGIOUS about virus checks, defragging, updating my drivers, etc.
crisp	posted 03-22-99 09:32 PM ET performance is fine on my P1 133 - dunno why Jonothon needs 400Mhz 10Gb guess he must really have shagged his PC
JaimeWolf	posted 03-22-99 10:03 PM ET Maybe it just slows down to the speed that's normal on the P166's (etc.) and so if you have a slow processor you're used to it being that speed and it doesn't get any slower I don't have any problems on my P150 but it is noticably slower than my P200MMX. James
MoSe	posted 03-23-99 05:00 AM ET Wheee, it's faster (ok, less slow)! Before 3.0: Slow units movement freezed 30 - 100 secs during AI turn (at first moved AI units, then a complete stop, info display freezed in the middle of a word,...) sluggish windows switch in base, production, wokshop, ...dialogs. After: First run zipping, then decays a little after some reloads of the game, but still 20/30% faster than 2.0 Faster AI turn calculation, and the info display considerably slows, but freezes not. Generally smoother & faster in the GUI; as for artillery, I couldn't observe before the damage done, now it briefly shows the Unit power points before and after the hit, so maybe it takes longer. And I'm absolutely a lazy atheist bradipus in defraggginupdatin my PII-333, 128Mb, AGP8mb, you can archeologically scrape through layers of my 8Gb Quantum Fireball SE, like the city of Troy. Still have the demo on a P133 NT4sp3 32Mb AtiOnBoard at office, simply unplayable. MariOne
Bdot	posted 03-26-99 03:55 PM ET I am on a 233 Pent II with about 48 RAM. If I have a virus checker going on in the background I do see a slow down but if I don't it's usually ok. At some points my movements is somewhat slow. I have noticed though that the AI are much faster in their turns than with CIV 2. In Civ 2, the AI took forever in all their moves.
sandworm	posted 03-26-99 04:09 PM ET Someone mentioned elsewhere that they updated, cleaned, scanned, and tweaked their entire, relatively high-end system with no positive result until they simply disabled McAfee Viruscan while they played. Problem solved. Mine runs (sort of)fine on a 400/64 PII Win98. The problem is exiting without locking up my whole system. Happens almost every time since I installed 3.0. JOMT is even more difficult to break when you know what happens when you exit!
fkloster	posted 03-26-99 04:17 PM ET My game runs great. Open wallet and try this. 1)PII 450 2)256MB RAM (Virtual Mem locked @20Min & Max) 3)TNT AGP 4)MX300 w/3.0patch "SEEMS" to work?(splashscreen shows?) 5)21" Mitsu 6)3.0 patch / game runs fast and sounds much better. As yin suggests, periodicaly one must restart computer (for me after about 4 to 5 hours of play) to get everything all "fresh" again.
agoraphobe	posted 03-26-99 05:13 PM ET Unfortunately, C++ and other 3GL languages make garbage collection the programmer's responsibility. There's no such thing as an OS that does garbage collection (as someone mentioned, if there were, Win32 OS's would have to unload themselves everey time they booted up, yuk, yuk). So there probably have been memory leaks in SMAC, perhaps still, even after 3.0, although I've noticed definitely zippier graphical performance on my low end 133 Pentium. Doesn't mean there aren't lingering leaks, though. Those that report no problems are probably SO good at the game that they beat it before the leaks pile up Look at it this way: it's "Operating System"'s revenge for SMACs' despoilation of the software environment by lousy players or late-game "builders".
Mo	posted 03-26-99 10:29 PM ET Pentium 166 runs fine with a few slow downs, but nothing drastic enough to ruin the game.
Koo	posted 03-26-99 11:46 PM ET Another thing you should be sure to do is turn off animations... Doesn't matter how fast your computer is, by mid-game it'll kill you to have to watch all your allies' moves.
voodoo	posted 03-27-99 05:44 AM ET I'm playing on a K62 300 with 128Mb of RAM and I never experience any slowdown whatsoever. It may be something to do with the fact that I'm using MemTurbo. I can heartily reccomend this little utility to everyone - and it's shareware so if it doesn't work, it's cost you nothing.