The optimization is really good

[Harmatia]

My refresh rate is 85. I can't even run my monitor at 60, it hurts my eyes too much. Having a high framerate isn't just important for a smooth picture, it's important for aiming the mouse as well due to reasons I don't fully remember :P

Blah, I miss my CRT.

[Dinkledorf]

wow, you really suck at sniping

LOL, I think Zasz can hold his own pretty well.

[3leggedFreak]

Allthough I love the game and have a lot of fun with it I must say the optimization is horrible. I got a high end rig and can barely keep the fps above 60 on all maps, tweaking it to the max I can cap it at 80fps (with some dips in bad maps). Epic said that the game was going to still be a bench mark a year into the future and todays high end rigs is supposed to struggle on highest settings. I can buy that, but the total failure is that mid range systems get horrible frame rates on settings that makes the game look worse then 2k4 ever did. Can something that looks ugly and run poorly be anything else then badly optimized?

Some here make 60 fps sound like it's enough. I could squeese 3 times more frames per second out of a mid range rig back in -04 when ut2004 was released. 80 fps is the comfort zone for most people with all senses intact, and if you want to be competitive you should keep it between 80 to 120fps. It has been discussed and proved so many times that those "30 fps is enough don't pretend to be pr0 lol"-sayers automatically look like fools.

[bclagge]

Well, enough is a matter of opinion. For some people 30 is enough, who are you to tell them they are fools? I personally prefer as much as I can get which is 60 based on my monitor. But I can afford and have the interest in keeping my computer up to date. Not everyone cares to do.

[bobmcbob]

I mostly have weird mouse lag that makes it so I have to turn details to 1/1.