Acceptable load times?

Did you even read the whole thread before posting an accusation? I suggest you do. Good day to you Sir.

 

Ah my bad.
Switch people in my head.

Non the less:
Which fight?
If it is the post that is link in this thread my answer stays the same: PreAlpha.

 

I think everyone here should do this: type /bug and copy your system specs. And then time how long it takes to load whichever scene in SPO. That limits the variability to some degree.

 

I have several different, anything from Intel 4th generation I7 CPU with dual GTX Titan in SLI configuration to first generation I3 cpu with some old nVidia GPU. ALL computers get more or less exact loading times, only thing that makes a small difference is on the systems where SotA are installed on a SSD.

 

I will just say that I know it won't happen but it would be cool if they put the forums on the loading screen so we can check up new threads.

At least until optimization.

 

Load times are pretty bad for quality of game play. Game needs better optimization. Honestly though i think the game would be better with NO loading screens at all. There are way to many. Leaving town, enter map, entering dungeon, leaving dungeon.... Gets a bit annoying.

 

loading is absurd so far....hopefully cause it's not optimized

 

I'm running this on an SSD, and still get like 10-20 seconds just to load in my basement in my own house - going down...and takes up to 60 seconds going back up. Would be handy if the game kept data on areas of your own house and didn't have to pull them out every time you changed from house to basement and vice versa.

Would appreciate some work being done on load times at some point for sure, hopefully soon as possible, but given this is still pre-alpha I'm not worried at this stage

 

Please keep in mind that this is still Pre-Alpha, as lolli mentioned. Loading times are some of the secondary concerns that the developers are having to deal with right now.

That said, there's a lot you can do to try and trim down a couple of seconds on your end. While much of the loading is going to be on the server end, having an SSD as lollie has suggested, will definitely help. It may still take up to a minute to load, but that will be tweaked on the server end.

While you've probably done this as well, just in case, I would also ensure that your video card drivers are updated. Outdated drivers can be a significant determinant to performance, especially for a pre-release game!

 

I completely disagree! Game is one steam now and get heavy beatings on a lot of forums with loading times being the main issue many have. So right now there is a lot of potential new backers that stay away from the game due to the loading times. But agree that it's a alpha and we do not need to see 10 sec loading times next release but we do need to see improvements and that should be a main priority now before too many spread the word about poor loading times.

Things that using open alphas are a risk, extra so if you use steam. It's rarely a game that get a bad reputation recover fully and I would hate that happening to SotA.

 

Don't get me wrong, they are all important factors! Load times I'm sure are being worked on in tandem, but priorities are all across the board for them, so they are not always number one for this.

 

Right now actually would be the best time to lobby for this. R14 is a polish release and should be focused on fixing bugs and addressing the top stability/performance issues.

With that, so I was doing some timing tests last night...and noticed something interesting.

The first number is usually the highest as it has to load new objects. The subsequent numbers rely on those already in memory so they don't have to reload from disk. Holtrot for some reason did not benefit from the initial load, but my client might have started acting strange at that point (see note below).

User Specs:
OS: Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (6.1.7601) 64bit
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600K CPU @ 3.40GHz (8) System RAM: 16365
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series GPU RAM: 4064
SotA.PreAlpha.Win.64.199.Date.12.19.14

All times in seconds and playing in SPO mode. For each scene, enter from the overworld map, leave the scene and re-enter.

Braemar - 19.2, 18.5, 18.7, 18.8
South Valeway - 13.4, 10.2, 9.9, 10.3
South Ravenswood - 21.0, 14.2, 14.6, 14.4
Deep Ravenswood - 22.0, 15.9, 16.6, 15.6
North Ravenswood - 19.7, 14.0, 13.7, 13.6
West Ravenswood - 20.1, 12.7, 13.1, 13.4
Valemark - 18.7, 17.9, 18.3, 18.1
Kingsroad - 17.0, 13.2, 13.0, 12.9
North Valeway - 17.5, 14.1, 13.9, 15.2
Holtrot - 19.9, 20.3, 20.3, 20.9
Owl's Head - 55.5, 41.2, 39.7, 38.0
Greymark Forest - 21.0, 18.3, 17.7, <crashed>

Restarted client:
Greymark Forest - 11.5, 9.1, 8.4, 8.7
Owl's Head - 44.4, 30.1, 27.8, 28.0
Kingsport - 19.0, 14.9, 15.0, 15.0
Ardoris - 54.6, 51.3, 54.0, 55.5

If you're noticing load times more than "normal", quit and restart the client.

This data is really for us to have a discussion, btw. The devs already have telemetry for every client and how long each scene takes to load. All that data is already being sent to their servers.

 

I wonder if the number of other players in the area has an effect on load times?

 

I have found that logging off on the world map and then logging back in on the overworld map very short.

 

Yes, it does. So all the timing I did above was in SPO. It will of course increase in OPO due to the number of other players in the scene.

The overworld map (Hidden Vale) usually takes only a few seconds to load if some data is already cached. On a cold start (quitting the client completely and starting on the overworld map for the very first time) it can take about 12 seconds on my machine. Subsequent times were around 6 seconds but I've seen it as fast as 2-3 seconds when doing the tests above.

 

Thing is that when players stop playing and start hitting the boards with the message that the game are unplayable due to loading times there is a problem. I'm a huge fan and currently don't play due to loading times make me too frustrated to play, what do you think a "normal" (not a huge fan) player would do? Yes it's a alpha but labeled by devs as a playable one and I do not really agree and I'm far from alone.

With that said, yes there is several other things that also needs to be fixed and I do not in any way suggest that loading times should be the only priority but it must be moved up to the top. I would accept skills, combat, well more or less whole game of worse state that it is in now and still play but still I do not play due to loading times.

 

Agreed. It's in a semi-playable state, but it's pre-alpha. And it will get bad reviews because they decided to throw it out there on Early Release just like most other companies who put it out on Steam Early Access do. But at least this isn't a cash-grab attempt (at least I am hoping not), but they are just trying to broaden their market a bit. I still think it's a horrible idea for ANY company to put out their product too early, especially a pre-alpha, but even alpha, on Steam Early Release. Wait until Beta IMHO. Get your combat and majority of bugs out of the way.

 

Agree, agree and agree! BUT once you introduce the game to the public you need to listen to what they say, and then I don't mean this forum, and fix the problems everyone complains about first and what you (dev) think is wrong are secondary.

Problem is that this forum are quite unpopular.. Just look how many that actually post here.

 

Locked for moderation.