If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Anyone else try the benchmark? I scored a 790 when you need at least 1500 for the game to be playable. And my computer is less than 6 months old. ****.
Disciples of War
Archer - As of yet, beta players say arrows are expensive, so this class is not as good if you're just starting out.
Gladiator - Swordsman/shield.
Lancer - spear.
Marauder - wields large axe.
Pugilist - fists.
Disciples of Magic
Conjurer - Elemental magic. Think BLM/WHM or vice versa.
Thaumaturge - Enfeebling magic. Drain, gravity, paralyze, etc.
Disciples of the Land
Botanist - Chop wood, gather plants, farm, etc. Uses hatchet. Higher attack vs plants.
Fisher - Fishing, uses rod. Higher attack vs. aquarian/amphibious monsters.
Miner - Cave diving, uses pickaxe. Higher attack vs mineral based mobs.
Disciples of the Hand
Alchemist - potions
Armorer - makes/repairs armor
Blacksmith - makes/repairs weapons
Carpenter - makes/repairs wood equipment (bows/arrows)
Culinarian - Food that boosts stats for short periods
Goldsmith - jewelry
Leatherworker - leather armors
Weaver - cloth armors
My guess is, most people will be picking one from each of these disciples and combine them to a certain effect so that depending on their play-style, they can simply switch weapons about to accomplish certain goals.
Like say you wanted to be a Blacksmith, it would probably be best to be a Miner so you can gather your own supplies, along with a disciple of war/magic of your choice so you could defend yourself against tough enemies.
Or if you were a culinarian, it would make sense to be a fisherman/botanist too.
Leatherworkers would need animal hides, so a war class that did well against certain beasts to accompany it (say you need dragon hides, you pick Lancer)
If you're an archer, it'd make sense to be a carpenter/botanist so you could craft your own ammo on the field for relatively free.
Phoenix, I heard that a lot of the problem with the benchmark is that it runs in windowed mode so really hampers your performance when it is being run. A more accurate benchmark should be released later (I read) which gives you an option to run the test in full-screen.
I heard some people were getting 800-1200 in the benchmark, but in Beta, fullscreene'd they were playing just fine.
Never ran the test before until now, since I was always looking at FF14 stuff at work:
Window's Score: 5.9
Processor: 6.6 (AMD Phenom x3 2.6ghz)
Memory: 7.5 (4GB DDR3 1333mhz)
Graphics: 7.4
Gaming Graphics: 7.4 (Radeon 1GB HD 5770 / Direct X 11)
Hard Drive: 5.9
High (1080p) Resolution Score: 2553
Low (720p) Resolution Score: 3478
This game look amazing even on "low" resolution. I can't wait to see it will all of the settings jacked up high.
Anyone else try the benchmark? I scored a 790 when you need at least 1500 for the game to be playable. And my computer is less than 6 months old. ****.
Yeah I heard similar complaints about the benchmark, I even heard it was designed based on the Alpha, and since then they have made many perfomance improvements.
Not really a "gaming" computer but by no means a clunker either. I can run Mass Effect 1 and 2, Crysis, Fallout 3, TES IV etc. all flawlessly, even the benchmark video ran fine for me.
It's funny because I meet all the "minimum" system requirements excpet for the VRAM and a few of the recomended requirements yet a still score only half of what they say the minimum score should be. I have also heard of other people with similar configurations to me (albiet with i5/i7 processors but the same 256MB VRAM) scoring only about 1000 and still being able to play the beta fine, so I figure the benchmark might be a bit off.
Synthing items takes a little longer than in 11, but it seems like you have more control over success rates with the multiple options on how to create an item.
Yeah I heard similar complaints about the benchmark, I even heard it was designed based on the Alpha, and since then they have made many perfomance improvements.
Not really a "gaming" computer but by no means a clunker either. I can run Mass Effect 1 and 2, Crysis, Fallout 3, TES IV etc. all flawlessly, even the benchmark video ran fine for me.
It's funny because I meet all the "minimum" system requirements excpet for the VRAM and a few of the recomended requirements yet a still score only half of what they say the minimum score should be. I have also heard of other people with similar configurations to me (albiet with i5/i7 processors but the same 256MB VRAM) scoring only about 1000 and still being able to play the beta fine, so I figure the benchmark might be a bit off.
If you have the non-GT version of that card, it doesn't have any VRAM. It borrows it from the main memory. Also, VRAM is not the most important feature of a video card. I got a gaming computer 7 years ago with a 256mb ati card, but it couldn't run **** today.
I do suspect that the benchmark was not fully optimized, however, I bet that you'll barely be able to the run the game. Laptops are not meant for gaming.
Synthing items takes a little longer than in 11, but it seems like you have more control over success rates with the multiple options on how to create an item.
Aion had Crafting XP too, but after level 25 the XP gain was barely noticeable in terms of what you needed to level up. Hopefully the craft XP gain will be at least beneficial for a medium-high level character.
It's funny because I meet all the "minimum" system requirements excpet for the VRAM
Minimum Requirements: NVIDIA GeForce 9600 512MB or ATI Radeon HD 2900 512MB and DirectX 9.
That's most likely the problem, you need at least a 512MB card since the game is so graphics intensive.
From what I've read, FFXIV has no '/heal' option, which is forcing mage players in the beta to return to a nearby Aethryte to regain MP. There are mp restoring potions but they're somewhat expensive (though less expensive than in FFXI).
It's still beta, but I'm interested to see if they adjust this somehow later on. It's obvious that the developers still want mages to be ever-mindful of their MP gauge, otherwise they'd have just thrown in MP regen somewhere. And an interview quote:
Eorzeapedia: TP seems to be abundant while fighting monsters in FINAL FANTASY XIV, however MP seems to be lacking. Will there be alternative methods of MP regeneration to assist casting classes without having to rely on an Aetheryte or a 30 minute abilities to replenish it?
Yasu: Very specific questions!
Tanaka: That is the game design at the moment, so on purpose MP does not recover automatically so you have to do some sort of action to make it recover.
I thought I heard that by killing monsters you would regain MP.
At least I thought in one of the interviews he was talking about a massive PvE dungeon and the goal was to kill things and move deeper efficiently, and you would regain MP for your progress as you went into the dungeon. Maybe it doesn't apply to solo play, though.
Downloading the beta now, benchmark wasn't a problem, despite my computer being 2 years old.
Update: FFXIV beta client refuses to work with ATI cards for some reason, and always crashes to a BSOD
Went onto the beta forums, and nobody seems to know why. Looking through the beta forums, looks like theres tons of game-breaking bugs and glitches. I expect this to be delayed till 2012
Comment