Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
OpenGL to Metal (MoltenVK)
JJBoomer
✭✭✭✭✭
the switch has caused massive performance loss for mac players.
and before y'all start, this is not a pc vs. mac bullcrap thing. Keep that dumb stuff out of it.
My wondering is if this failure of the switch in API will be the catalyst for ZOS to drop mac support altogether, and if they'll offer mac players the chance to transfer their accounts to consoles if that happens.
and before y'all start, this is not a pc vs. mac bullcrap thing. Keep that dumb stuff out of it.
My wondering is if this failure of the switch in API will be the catalyst for ZOS to drop mac support altogether, and if they'll offer mac players the chance to transfer their accounts to consoles if that happens.
0
-
TryangleSoul ShrivenMy computer is an early 2015 MacBook air, completely updated to Mojave. Before the Murkmire patch, on medium settings with all the graphic effects on I was getting between 30-45 fps. After the Murkmire patch, the game is pretty much unplayable at 10-15 fps, and turning down settings to minimum and turning graphic effects off only gains me about 2-3 fps.
I was absolutely loving the game and playing every day, excitedly looking forward to the Murkmire patch, only to log in on launch day to find MoltenVK fps makes the game pretty much unplayable (and I can no longer do the thief and assassin dailies because all NPC's in the game world are persistently "aware").
From a user perspective, I now understand why developers never raise minimum specs but instead only add graphical enhancements, because by raising minimum specs it shuts out community members. I can't speak for anyone else, but if this isn't fixed, I am going to cancel my subscription and not come back.2 -
ssorgatem✭✭✭✭Maybe you could ask Apple to keep OpenGL support instead of removing it or to support Vulkan natively (instead of forcing cross-platform software to use a translation layer, like MoltenVK).1 -
deLioncourt✭✭✭✭My computer can run The Witcher 3 with graphics ENBs at max settings and I get 60-75 fps anywhere I go in that game.
Log in to a much uglier game and get 12fps in their new dlc.
DLC:
Breaks The Game
Nullifies an entire class
Makes everybody angry
Only runs at 15 fps.
Genius.1 -
kamimark✭✭✭✭Vulkan conversions have had decent speed *increases* in other games, so it's just a problem of ZOS not optimizing it yet.
But they should have run it and noticed it had a -80% performance drop and not shipped that conversion until it was ready.
Kitty Rainbow Dash. pick, pick, stab.5 -
Any word on when you are going to fix the MAC platform and how us that are ESO Plus members will be compensated for the lost time because of the upgrade that made the game unplayable for us?0
-
zsban✭✭✭✭Don't think ZOS wants to drop Mac support. The move to use MoltenVK actually sounds like the way forward - on PC we are waiting for Vulkan support in the hope that it will further improve the performance.
What I'd be worried about however are the rumours of Apple making an architecture change again soon - moving away from Intel to Arm... As the game is very CPU heavy, not sure how an Arm cpu would manage to run ESO as it is today. But this is just speculation, and off topic.2 -
Valrien✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Tbh I would just get a proper gaming PC. Mac is great for work and art, but Mac tends to make their OS and architecture so very different that it's very hard to develop for.Valrien Dravic -- Level 50 Dunmeri Sorcerer (EP)
Garahel Dravic -- Level 50 Bosmeri Nightblade (EP)Tamriel Unlimited was a mistake. One Tamriel was a bigger mistake1 -
TryangleSoul ShrivenAs of October 29th Patch v4.2.6, no change in the terrible MoltenVK Mac performance.
I guess ZOS doesn't mind losing business.0 -
Jurand80✭✭✭✭Be glad they are even trying to port the game for 100+ players. Srsly. Be glad you can even run eso on a mac. Throw darts at your false god - apple. There are no dongles for opengl. I stopped playing on my mac.0 -
Kanar✭✭✭✭✭
✭It's a shame they ruined the Mac performance, they shouldn't have wasted dev time on it and instead stuck with opengl.0 -
mairwen85✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Any word on when you are going to fix the MAC platform and how us that are ESO Plus members will be compensated for the lost time because of the upgrade that made the game unplayable for us?
It makes me laugh sometimes how finger pointing so often targets the wrong people.
You are aware that it is Apple who are removing support for the industry standard OpenGL, and forcing their own propriety stuff (generally black boxed) that is the root cause here, right? Just because a 3rd party has created an sdk (no thanks to Apple) to help convert and interpret doesn't mean it'll work perfectly for everything. That's how Apple works, they lock themselves from a specific/common market tool or vendor in favour of their own technology, this usually results in an industry shift where Apple cleans up when others fail to mop up.
You should be happy they are at least attempting to hobble together a conversion when so many other software companies will be more likely to drop support altogether (especially when you consider the relatively small share of the market vs cost & effort).Edited by mairwen85 on October 30, 2018 1:59PM2 -
Kanar✭✭✭✭✭
✭Juju_beans wrote: »
Apple cannot remove it from previous versions of the OS can they? ZOS should have just stuck with openGL and said they won't support Mac OS after whatever version removes openGL.
What happens now when someone has been playing ESO on a Mac that doesn't support this new graphics API? Are they just SOL?0 -
SirAndy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭the switch has caused massive performance loss for mac players.
and before y'all start, this is not a pc vs. mac bullcrap thing. Keep that dumb stuff out of it.
My wondering is if this failure of the switch in API will be the catalyst for ZOS to drop mac support altogether, and if they'll offer mac players the chance to transfer their accounts to consoles if that happens.
Metal is in its infancy, Apple had over 20 years to get OpenGL implemented right. I don't expect Metal to perform reasonably for another 3 years, which is about the same span as the full development cycle for OS level code.
PS: There are two opensource Vulkan to Metal portability libraries. There's a pay for OpenGL ES 2.0 to Metal layer. I think there's a open source OpenGL to Vulkan library somewhere as well. None of that will help ESO though, they already decided to jump on the Metal bandwagon, i'm guessing they didn't really evaluate that move in terms of performance before they decided to switch. I doubt anyone there can think ahead that far.
Edited by SirAndy on October 30, 2018 5:42PM0 -
kringled_1✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Apple cannot remove it from previous versions of the OS can they? ZOS should have just stuck with openGL and said they won't support Mac OS after whatever version removes openGL.
What happens now when someone has been playing ESO on a Mac that doesn't support this new graphics API? Are they just SOL?
The launcher will run and patch but the client itself will not run. I have a 2017 MacBook that I use for eso while traveling and earlier this week it was at 10.12. Updated to 10.14 and it runs now although I'm not sure how well (haven't tested since I did the settings tweak for a spinning camera issue).0 -
TryangleSoul ShrivenBy Apple not supporting OpenGL, it does not mean OpenGL will not run on the OS. While Metal will be better in the long run, for now there is absolutely no reason why ZOS couldn't continue to use OpenGL for Macs while they iron out their Metal implementation. So actually, yeah the finger is pointed at the right people.Edited by Tryangle on October 30, 2018 9:13PM1
-
mairwen85✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭By Apple not supporting OpenGL, it does not mean OpenGL will not run on the OS.
Closed door policy development and a track record of planned obscelessence kind of means that it will, and the clock is ticking.Metal will be better in the long run, for now there is absolutely no reason why ZOS couldn't continue to use OpenGL for Macs while they iron out their Metal implementation. So actually, yeah the finger is pointed at the right people.
Firstly, let's be sensible about how a high profit product would be tested prior to public release. This would not have been pushed out without having been platform tested first. It will have run on a good few Macs before being approved, and QA will have determined a reasonable margin for flaws. The scope of that, is what is in question for this release.
I agree they may have over egged their basket, and pushed this out too early - - perhaps they didn't have a broad enough test bed, not enough variance in their testing hardware, however many other excuses... But the fact remains, this HAD to happen, and soon. As a solution architect, I would have handled technology refresh a lot differently, but I deal with single product, sealed deliverables for clients based on individual enterprise requirements; I am not saying they couldn't have phased it in, taken more care, time to perfect the roll out, but I do also recognise they needed to do this early. With any fundamental change in the underlying technology, you have to take the hit somewhere, best take it before the sand runs out.
They should have offered a UAT, PTS early implementation for public feedback before going live, can't deny that, not saying they've gone the right way about this at all, public information and feedback to manage expectations, disclaimers and renewal of tech specs - - none of which would have hurt the roll out has been skimmed.
However, vitriol and bile directed at a software provider attempting to accommodate uncontrollable changes to your system by your hardware provider doesn't help anyone suffering the side effects. What might help would be bug reports, descriptions of the worst areas for FPS hit, visual effects influence, pattern of behaviour, etc etc
Edited by mairwen85 on October 31, 2018 6:46AM1 -
ssorgatem✭✭✭✭PS: There are two opensource Vulkan to Metal portability libraries. There's a pay for OpenGL ES 2.0 to Metal layer. I think there's a open source OpenGL to Vulkan library somewhere as well. None of that will help ESO though, they already decided to jump on the Metal bandwagon, i'm guessing they didn't really evaluate that move in terms of performance before they decided to switch. I doubt anyone there can think ahead that far.
But they are actually using one of the 2 opensource Vulkan-to-Metal portability libraries: MoltenVK.
OpenGL to Vulkan is useless here, since Apple does not support Vulkan and it's dropping OpenGL...
1 -
TryangleSoul ShrivenBy Apple not supporting OpenGL, it does not mean OpenGL will not run on the OS.
Closed door policy development and a track record of planned obscelessence kind of means that it will, and the clock is ticking.Metal will be better in the long run, for now there is absolutely no reason why ZOS couldn't continue to use OpenGL for Macs while they iron out their Metal implementation. So actually, yeah the finger is pointed at the right people.
Firstly, let's be sensible about how a high profit product would be tested prior to public release. This would not have been pushed out without having been platform tested first. It will have run on a good few Macs before being approved, and QA will have determined a reasonable margin for flaws. The scope of that, is what is in question for this release.
I agree they may have over egged their basket, and pushed this out too early - - perhaps they didn't have a broad enough test bed, not enough variance in their testing hardware, however many other excuses... But the fact remains, this HAD to happen, and soon. As a solution architect, I would have handled technology refresh a lot differently, but I deal with single product, sealed deliverables for clients based on individual enterprise requirements; I am not saying they couldn't have phased it in, taken more care, time to perfect the roll out, but I do also recognise they needed to do this early. With any fundamental change in the underlying technology, you have to take the hit somewhere, best take it before the sand runs out.
They should have offered a UAT, PTS early implementation for public feedback before going live, can't deny that, not saying they've gone the right way about this at all, public information and feedback to manage expectations, disclaimers and renewal of tech specs - - none of which would have hurt the roll out has been skimmed.
However, vitriol and bile directed at a software provider attempting to accommodate uncontrollable changes to your system by your hardware provider doesn't help anyone suffering the side effects. What might help would be bug reports, descriptions of the worst areas for FPS hit, visual effects influence, pattern of behaviour, etc etc
One can frame things however one wants, but the hard fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Mac users (and their money) have left the game.0 -
protofeckless✭✭✭By Apple not supporting OpenGL, it does not mean OpenGL will not run on the OS.
Closed door policy development and a track record of planned obscelessence kind of means that it will, and the clock is ticking.Metal will be better in the long run, for now there is absolutely no reason why ZOS couldn't continue to use OpenGL for Macs while they iron out their Metal implementation. So actually, yeah the finger is pointed at the right people.
Firstly, let's be sensible about how a high profit product would be tested prior to public release. This would not have been pushed out without having been platform tested first. It will have run on a good few Macs before being approved, and QA will have determined a reasonable margin for flaws. The scope of that, is what is in question for this release.
I agree they may have over egged their basket, and pushed this out too early - - perhaps they didn't have a broad enough test bed, not enough variance in their testing hardware, however many other excuses... But the fact remains, this HAD to happen, and soon. As a solution architect, I would have handled technology refresh a lot differently, but I deal with single product, sealed deliverables for clients based on individual enterprise requirements; I am not saying they couldn't have phased it in, taken more care, time to perfect the roll out, but I do also recognise they needed to do this early. With any fundamental change in the underlying technology, you have to take the hit somewhere, best take it before the sand runs out.
They should have offered a UAT, PTS early implementation for public feedback before going live, can't deny that, not saying they've gone the right way about this at all, public information and feedback to manage expectations, disclaimers and renewal of tech specs - - none of which would have hurt the roll out has been skimmed.
However, vitriol and bile directed at a software provider attempting to accommodate uncontrollable changes to your system by your hardware provider doesn't help anyone suffering the side effects. What might help would be bug reports, descriptions of the worst areas for FPS hit, visual effects influence, pattern of behaviour, etc etc
One can frame things however one wants, but the hard fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Mac users (and their money) have left the game.
Can you substantiate that "hard fact of the matter?" Never seen data on this anywhere.
1
