CJ_Parker wrote on Feb 21, 2019, 21:48:

Numinar wrote on Feb 21, 2019, 21:32:
It has the thing a lot of Firaxis games have...

Firaxis? Dude? BattleTech was developed by Harebrained Schemes and the engine is Unity so the long loading times are most likely related to their choice of engine. There are quite a few other Unity games with above average loading times even on SSDs.

I mentioned them as a developer that makes games that are great but also never run as well as they should based on how they look (Xcom 2/Civ have similar bugs and frame skipping to BT). I did not mean to infer they developed BT.

To be honest that's the proper oldschool PC dev way, no new amazing deep PC game ran great on the average PC back in the day, part of the fun of upgrading was brute forcing your way through shitty optimisation. Old Origin games were super famous for it, and anything ambitious seemed to be made for the devstations they were created for not the 486/2x66 or Pentium 60 you actually owned.

Nobody I knew could run the largest Total Annihilation maps until years after it released. (64MB ram was for rich people!) I honestly don't miss it but what I was saying was that BATTLETECH, like the Firaxis titles, is worth the pain and missed frames.