Thread: benchmark 2.0

Courel has spoken! Can't wait

Originally Posted by Rukkirii

I know that these version 2.0 benchmark threads have been popping up on occasion and we've finally obtained confirmation for you guys, thank you for your patience.

Yoshida wanted to let you know that we will be releasing an awesome benchmark for version 2.0 and to look forward to it!

Wonderful, we get confirmation. I don't suppose there's a point on the development timeline for this you could *ROUGHLY* peg for when it will come around?

Originally Posted by Jashynvald

Wonderful, we get confirmation. I don't suppose there's a point on the development timeline for this you could *ROUGHLY* peg for when it will come around?

They said they had 2.0 clients running already, so... think of your most realistic expectation, and then add 6 months to it.

Originally Posted by Rau

They said they had 2.0 clients running already, so... think of your most realistic expectation, and then add 6 months to it.

June 2015?

Originally Posted by Sephrick

June 2015?

Why do you keep posting?

Originally Posted by Rukkirii

I know that these version 2.0 benchmark threads have been popping up on occasion and we've finally obtained confirmation for you guys, thank you for your patience.

Yoshida wanted to let you know that we will be releasing an awesome benchmark for version 2.0 and to look forward to it!

when? do you have an approximate date?
thank you for that info rukkirii!
PD: nice avatar! but i think i have to fear you now D:

Originally Posted by Rukkirii

I know that these version 2.0 benchmark threads have been popping up on occasion and we've finally obtained confirmation for you guys, thank you for your patience.

Yoshida wanted to let you know that we will be releasing an awesome benchmark for version 2.0 and to look forward to it!

Is it going to be the least bit accurate this time? The last one tended to substantially underestimate the capabilities of many system configurations, awarding low scores recommending very low settings when the game actually runs very well on those systems with medium or high settings.

Originally Posted by Lerend

Is it going to be the least bit accurate this time? The last one tended to substantially underestimate the capabilities of many system configurations, awarding low scores recommending very low settings when the game actually runs very well on those systems with medium or high settings.

I am hoping this is the reason behind use of the word awesome. Namely that the 1.0 one was not.