Load Screens (Bring Your Lunch)

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 5:56 am

Fallout New Vegas has it's up's and it has it's downs. The load screens in the game are sometimes unbearable. The longest that I ever had the displeasure of encountering was roughly 2 minutes long. I could understand the load screen time maybe, if the game had graphics that were up to date. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 had better graphics, large maps, and did not have that long of a load time. Bethesda, Obsidian, you guys are slipping in gaming dominance. If the load screens are just as long in the next game I'm not buying and I think I can speak for many other gamers as well. Next time make the game look different from Fallout 3. Hell half of the [Censored] buildings and areas are just pieced together from Fallout 3. Try to do some actual work on the landscape next time.
User avatar
Rob
 
Posts: 3448
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:26 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:36 am

Well, you see, Modern Warfare 2 has a very short, linear first person storyline. Thus they can focus more on graphics to make it. Also, the loading screens are very few in number, each mission is rather small in size, and there isn't as much put into making it. It's a rather generic FPS with good graphics. New Vegas is much, much different. FNV has 400 locations, 163 quests, tons of weapons, weapon mods, factions, compainions, and hundreds of NPCs. You can choose your faction, and pretty much do whatever you want. So, with such a large, open world to play in, of course there's going to be loading screens, and with all that's in this game, I don't care about them. I can deal with a loading screen if I'm going to get immersive gameplay. If you talk about loading screens, don't compare an FPS to an RPG, they're two completely different types of games.
User avatar
lucile
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 4:37 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:16 pm

Well you can't speak for this gamer. I'm for sure buying the next Fallout game they release.


My load times vary. when my ancient computer is working nicely they're in the 15-30 second range, when it's being a senile old fart they've even been known to be infinite. It's my machine, though, not the game itself.


As for the landscape...yeah I'd love to see you do any better. Go on. You have two years to take an existing engine and create something better than NV.

Oh, and MW2 had large maps? The hell are you smoking? I played that abysmal pile of crap. It was horrible in every way. Tiny maps, meh guns, story so thin you need an electron microscope to see it, characters so 2D you wonder if they came out of DOOM, I could go on and on.
User avatar
mollypop
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 1:47 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:54 pm

comparing MW2 to FO:NV is comparing apples to bananas.

MW2 does not have dynamic inventory, it doesn't have freely-movable clutter, it doesn't have dynamically-spawning entities.

When NV loads a zone it has to load EVERYTHING, from the NPCs to the quest states to the position of an apple on a table to the contents of chests.

Graphics are probably the least part of it. Especially because some objects are spawned and then undergo physics collisions immediately.
User avatar
Amanda Furtado
 
Posts: 3454
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:22 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:50 am

If you have a Xbox, turn it off once every 1 and a half hours, then turn it back on and continue playing.

It's a memory leak bug that may happen to you if your playing for an extended period of time. It also happens to internet browsers.

Hope it helps, but im not sure if you have it or why it happens
User avatar
Juanita Hernandez
 
Posts: 3269
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:36 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 7:22 am

OP: you on XboX?

On my dinosaur PC, load is at most 10 seconds for very large areas.

I checked.
User avatar
Emily abigail Villarreal
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:38 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:49 pm

Fallout New Vegas has it's up's and it has it's downs. The load screens in the game are sometimes unbearable. The longest that I ever had the displeasure of encountering was roughly 2 minutes long. I could understand the load screen time maybe, if the game had graphics that were up to date. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 had better graphics, large maps, and did not have that long of a load time. Bethesda, Obsidian, you guys are slipping in gaming dominance. If the load screens are just as long in the next game I'm not buying and I think I can speak for many other gamers as well. Next time make the game look different from Fallout 3. Hell half of the [Censored] buildings and areas are just pieced together from Fallout 3. Try to do some actual work on the landscape next time.

Well, I thought Fallout 3 had graphics that were ahead of its time for a world of that sheer size and magnitude. I think im Happy with it for now, But yeah, If the next one has the same graphics, Than im going to be annoyed..
User avatar
Samantha hulme
 
Posts: 3373
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:22 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:10 am

Next time make the game look different from Fallout 3. Hell half of the [Censored] buildings and areas are just pieced together from Fallout 3. Try to do some actual work on the landscape next time.

I liked the continuity of look and style myself, makes for a consistent experience since it's supposed to take place at roughly the same time as the DC adventures. And I appreciate the landscape quite a bit - the ridges and canyons are fairly well done, the wind/sand effects are good, the sandstorms are terrific. To each his own, I guess.

But YOU KNEW the two games looked almost identical so . . . what?
User avatar
Your Mum
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:23 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 11:23 am

Huh? I played MW2 recently. On PC. The load times were quite long, nothing compared to new vegas. Sorry yo. In the beginning there was something said about how we are the best army, bla bla, ba, and if a few it loads the level. Fallout NV definitely doesn't take that long
User avatar
Barbequtie
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 11:34 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:27 am

Would you seriously not buy a fantastic game because load times can sometimes reach up to *gasp* a couple of minutes? Seems kind of petty, considering what you get in return. I'm on the 360, and the times only get really long when I've been playing for ages. In which case, I turn off, let it cool off and do something productive for a bit then play again.
User avatar
Gill Mackin
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 9:58 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:02 pm

To OP: Get a better PC.

/thread
User avatar
Destinyscharm
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:06 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 4:25 pm

I dunno maybe I'm just patient but load screens are one of the few things in this game I don't have a problem with. They don't seem to take that long to me.
User avatar
Matt Gammond
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:38 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:55 am

for what is know is that xbox is nearing the max of its potential.So chances are u cant expect anything significantly more then what u have atm till prob next gen.Excluding the ps3 of course lol
User avatar
Carolyne Bolt
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 4:56 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 11:31 am

Man, that reminds me of the unbearable load times of Morrowind on the original Xbox.

Thankfully i'm on the PC. The most I've ever had to wait is 10 seconds :P
User avatar
Mark Churchman
 
Posts: 3363
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:58 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 4:13 am

I play on PC with max settings and have never had a load screens longer than a couple of seconds.
User avatar
steve brewin
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:17 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:18 am

I have a low end PC that is below nearly every minimum requirement for the game aside from the gfx card, and my load screens at most last 15 seconds, 30 seconds with detail set to high. Try running a defrag, and making sure you don't have any resource hungry programs running in the background.
User avatar
Rowena
 
Posts: 3471
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:40 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:45 pm

This is why I can't understand why developers are sill developing for 360/PS3. Not to spawn a debate on console vs PC, the hardware in the consoles is what....7 years old now? That's like....5-6 generations behind on the PC video card market.... I'm thinking there are netbooks with better performance than what we get with a 360/ps3. And yes, I own both consoles.

My load times on the PC are at longest; seconds. I'm running an i7, 12 gigs ram, 480gtx blah blah blah complete overkill machine for this game I know. There is something seriously wrong with the OP's PC or he is using a console.
User avatar
Toby Green
 
Posts: 3365
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:27 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:54 pm

This is why I can't understand why developers are sill developing for 360/PS3.


Because there is an enormous audience of console gamers out there, and videogames cost millions of dollars to develop these days, so to ignore that audience would make no financial sense whatsoever.
User avatar
suzan
 
Posts: 3329
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:32 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:43 pm

Been pulling an all nighter on New Vegas tonight. Played from about 11 until 2 until the game crashed on a load screen, so I took a break. Then I've been playing from 2:30 or so until just now (about 4:30, though I think time set back an hour.... Not sure) and the load times are getting ridiculous. Even loading small areas like a barracks room in crimson caravan company is taking upwards of 2 minutes. Not really to big of a deal though, as load times are pretty quick for the most part for the first hour or so of continuous play, and it gives me a reason to get up and use the restroom, or help my brother with his homework, etc... Still, just a few minutes ago when I was playing the last 5 or so load screens before I turned my xbox off wouldn't finish loading until I hit the middle "xbox button" on my controller. The screen would just freeze, not showing the little roulette wheel spinning, then when I hit the button I'd hear the normal noise it normally makes when the menu is brought up then 10 seconds or so later the actual menu would appear and I could turn it off and the game would be finished loading.

Guess I'll start playing again in a half hour or so, see if I can make it another 2 hours or so before I have to shut it off. By then, sun should be up and I can see about finding myself some work...
User avatar
Strawberry
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:08 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:50 pm

Because there is an enormous audience of console gamers out there, and videogames cost millions of dollars to develop these days, so to ignore that audience would make no financial sense whatsoever.


Plus its in a way, easier to develop for consoles, at least when it comes to the hardware. I mean on pc you got a gazillion different setups that can cause all sorts of problems. On consoles its easier to test in a way since one xbox 360 is basically the same as another xbox 360 for example.

I prefer to play on pc though, hardly got time to play all the great games I got for pc already :P
User avatar
BaNK.RoLL
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:55 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:35 pm

[snip]
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 had better graphics, large maps, and did not have that long of a load time. Bethesda,


Oh I see. Did it also have a well written storyline, well written sidequests, well written dialogue and good gameplay features?
Obsidian games are different to Infinity Ward games. If you don't like Obsidian's style, then you look at games skin deep.
As for the loading screens, they should only be slow on the Xbox, which can be rectified by downloading it to your hard drive.
User avatar
Theodore Walling
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:48 pm

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:35 pm

Oh I see. Did it also have a well written storyline, well written sidequests, well written dialogue and good gameplay features?


What does any of that have to do with loading times?


FNV takes "longer to load" than MW2 because there are a lot more variables. If you have long loading times then I would recommend saving your game, turning off your console then starting it back up and re-loading your save. If its still too long for you to deal with then get a PC.
User avatar
Taylor Bakos
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:05 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:11 am

Fallout New Vegas has it's up's and it has it's downs. The load screens in the game are sometimes unbearable. The longest that I ever had the displeasure of encountering was roughly 2 minutes long. I could understand the load screen time maybe, if the game had graphics that were up to date. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 had better graphics, large maps, and did not have that long of a load time. Bethesda, Obsidian, you guys are slipping in gaming dominance. If the load screens are just as long in the next game I'm not buying and I think I can speak for many other gamers as well. Next time make the game look different from Fallout 3. Hell half of the [Censored] buildings and areas are just pieced together from Fallout 3. Try to do some actual work on the landscape next time.


At least its not as bad as Dead Rising. It was a loading screen every 5 minutes that lasted at least ten seconds each time.
User avatar
Lily
 
Posts: 3357
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:32 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 7:01 am

Plus its in a way, easier to develop for consoles, at least when it comes to the hardware. I mean on pc you got a gazillion different setups that can cause all sorts of problems. On consoles its easier to test in a way since one xbox 360 is basically the same as another xbox 360 for example.
That may be true in case of optimization, didn’t help a bit about the bug on all platforms, hence even when the xbox360 got more texture ram than the ps3 the ps3 has sharper textures. In case of loading times on console "Lens of Truth" come do the conclusion that the PS3 version is even slower than the xbox360 version, since you can only do a part install on the PS3 hard drive.

From a technical standpoint, with no exclusions, Obsidian games tend to be badly optimized when they first arrive. Yet surprises me to read when a lead designer of Obsidian like Sawyer shield their code department and saying it's not their fault.

Don't get me wrong though, I like all of their games and I’m sure I will give their Dungeon Siege 3 a try when the reviews are good. But I will not play them before one/two patches arrived.
User avatar
Jaki Birch
 
Posts: 3379
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:16 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 4:03 pm

At least its not as bad as Dead Rising. It was a loading screen every 5 minutes that lasted at least ten seconds each time.

I loved Dead Rising and played it again recently before DR2 was released. I think it's handled way worse on F:NV, especially when you fast travel a lot.

Get to a place, loading loading loading, play one second to enter a door, loading loading loading, play 15 second enter another door, loading loading loading, play and talk for a minute, get again back to the door, loading loading loading, hopefully can fast travel from there, but then again...loadingloadingloading.

I love the comfort on playing console, but F:NV should be played on a decent PC. In case of loading times it reminds me so much on the awesome Vampire Bloodlines, which got into a loadingscreen after every door or pretty much everything.
User avatar
lolly13
 
Posts: 3349
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:36 am

Next

Return to Fallout: New Vegas