Since its release, the three-way struggle for Auraxis hasn’t been the only war waged in Planetside 2. The battle for Optimization has been a long fought one, filled with low frame rates and performance issues which have plagued countless players.

On the one hand, who can really blame SOE for the issues? Planetside 2 is a technical marvel, capable of housing two thousand concurrent players on a single persistent continent filled with physics and thousands of rounds of ammo being fired on a second by second basis. The very fact that it even works at all is a testament to SOE’s engineering prowess. On the other hand, as a Free-to-Play game, the entry requirements for playing PS2 at an even moderately decent frame rate are steep, like REALLY steep.

As reference, the current PC I use to play Planetside 2 contains an quad core I5 overclocked to 4.2GHz, 16 gigs of Ram and a GTX670. For most this would be considered a very high-end PC, yet it struggles to maintain 45 FPS in fights involving 40 players and anything beyond that brings the FPS to a sub 30 crawl. Reducing the game’s graphical quality does not appear to have a very noticeable impact on performance.

Back in August, SOE’s president John Smedley, took note of the issues and had the PS2 team shift their priorities to focus purely on optimization. It was according to Smedley “unnaceptable as it stands”. Two of the main issues SOE confirmed they would be tackling revolve around PS2’s poor performance with AMD chips and the implementation of Multicore support.

Since then there has been little word as to how the optimization efforts have been going. However, SOE recently unveiled “Operation: Make Faster Game!” a documentary style series of videos whereby SOE plans to show first hand their efforts to correct the performance problems. The introductory video is fairly dry, filled with lots of technical mumbo jumbo, but the gist of it all is; there are a lot of moving parts and each part has various things that can be done to it in order to improve performance.

SOE isn’t saying how much they expect to improve Planetside 2’s performance, but it is clear the developer is taking the job seriously and wants players to get to know the people behind the efforts as well as get a glimpse at the types of technological challenges and creative solutions that the team discusses and implements.

Michael Dunaway has been part of the MMOBomb team for years and has covered practically every major Free-to-Play title since 2009. In addition to contributing First Look videos and news articles, Michael also serves as the Community Manager for the upcoming MMORPG, Skyforge.


  1. I’m glad they’re being a bit more transparent on these issues. As it stands, a vast majority of the game’s player base have complained about performance on their forums at least once. and they’ve taken some serious flak from the community over whether or not they’ll fix the problems or not. The ignorance of whether they are aware of the problems in-game alone, causes their player base to go into a misdirected rage, even more so when a couple of their development team become confrontational about the issue! Knowing that they are keeping notes on issues as they come along does help to put minds at ease(at least mine anyway), as well as bring them a step closer to not only improving the game itself, but the engine as a whole for future releases.

  2. I wish gaming deves would take into consideration how big gaming has become. It is not just for kids any more. My dad is 65 & plays DDO every Sunday w me for 5 hours when I have the time. I have 6 high end PC’s in my house & we all game online. & I have LAN parties every 3 weeks in my garage. 35-45 people, we are all 30+ years of age. Deves all ready know how big their game is going to be before release so why not smooth things out before that release date. I think open beta for like 1 year should show hard your servers are working & you can smooth out all the bugs then. I think War Frame is taking the right step in the open beta they have. They are pushing the servers as hard as they can & very little lag, if none at all & the graphics are very nice. Game deves should worry about game play & push the envelope & stress the crap outta the servers before release. Gamers will have a better time gaming that way. Since PS2 has so many issues they should go back to open beta status & revamp or shut it down for maintenance.

    • Game devs are full aware of how big gaming is, as well as the varied age groups that now play games.

      Open beta is just a marketing gimick nowadays, notice how open betas these days all make big $$$ whereas a decade ago there was really no financial gain to the publishers/developers until the game went gold. This is why games get pushed out the door like PS2 before they are really polished and run well, simply because launching them into open beta opens the gravy train and by labelling their games as “open beta” the can use this label as an excuse for the game running like crap/lacking polish and still turn a huge financial profit in some cases.

      Also, about warframe, I’m pretty sure the actual action game is hosted peer to peer and not based on a central server that handles all the games. I haven’t looked into this much, but I did notice while playing that sometimes when someone leaves the game “reloads” while displaying the message “host migration in progress” which leads me to believe that the players are hosting the game and not a developer server.

  3. PEople should pay for being right. I said this since OB. The game demands to much for what it is offering or has to few optimization options. I run every game available both on and off line. PS2 was the only game chugging on my system. It was trying to render all that dead space no one uses. Graphic options just made it super foggy. One of the worst graphic options in game I have used…years later…they decide to change it. Guess have to lose a little money, get riddled by hackers, and then decide to make changes XD

  4. Finally i can’t even run PS2, my pc even struggles to get 45 fps on low settings and the gpu is a GTX 660 ti twin frozo and cpu is intel 3-2120. Some times i thing wtf is wrong with my pc but it was the game the whole time

      • its been proven numerous times that intel has faster processing power when it comes to single threaded performance. Although AMD flexes it’s “8-core bla bla bla”, most games and/or application do not use more than one or two cores. Also from personal experiance of owning both chips, Intel chips are rock solid. I have beat the shit out of those chips when it comes to overclocking and transferring them to different mobos and they just wont die. I had an older AMD FX that died out in 4 years (OC’d for 2 of those years). My older i7 is still kicking 6 years later. AND it’s been OC’d for 3 years straight.

        Just take a look at this chart and see what chip dominates the board.

        The one thing AMD has on Intel is price. Thats where they are beat. And it is a pretty significant difference. Like $100 cheaper than Intel.

        But buying Intel means you get longevity and durability. Fact; most businesses with some sort of computer server, use Intel chips. There’s a reason for this.

        • Well Bob, I love my AMD CPU’s & will continue to support them. INTEL has gone way overboard in price 350 for a starter haswell chip, way to much for my blood & all of my AMD’s are overclocked by 25% all most 5Ghz out of a 4.2Ghz. Been overclocked for like 3 years & still runing strong. Also my PC in my chef office is an old school AMD dual core socket AM2+ CPU 2.6 Ghz overclocked to 3.2Ghz & an ASUS Mobo I got from C.L. Been running smooth & I game when I have the time at work. So for me AMD dose the trick & are very strong long lasting chips for the price & performance has never been an issue for me. All of my PC’s Scream.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here