GamingPH.com

Ragnarok X Next Generation PC Client Review, Is it Good? (ROX PC Client)

Erwin Bantilan

In a bid to expand their horizons and cater to a wider audience, Ragnarok X Next Generation, a two-year old mobile MMORPG, has taken a bold step forward with the launch of a new PC client. This new development extends the game’s presence to a whole new platform.

However, not everyone is happy with this move. Some members of the gaming community have voiced their disappointment, stating that the new PC client isn’t, in reality, a genuine PC client. This has sparked a debate over the legitimacy of this new release, raising concerns that it may not provide the optimized, seamless experience that PC gamers are accustomed to.

It is an Emulator

The issue with this PC version is that it’s not a native game build specifically for Windows. Instead, it uses an Android emulator with the game pre-installed and some PC enhancements. Android emulators are software that mimic an Android system on a desktop.

Some players were already using other emulators to play on PCs. The reactions to the new PC version were mixed. Players expected a game built for and directly playable on PCs, where they could make use of their graphics card and lower the CPU usage, not via an official emulator.

Another problem is that you need to enable virtualization for their PC version to work.

But is it Good?

While this article has addressed some initial mixed reactions, it’s equally important to also consider the potential benefits of this official emulator could bring to Ragnarok X Next Generation gameplay.

So, in this article, we will review it as not as a PC Client, but an emulator and how this could potentially improve the gameplay compared to other third-party emulators.

Better User Interface for PC Experience

The game now proudly presents its own dedicated launcher, where all updates are gathered in one spot. This simplified method reminds us of the original Ragnarok Online launcher, and it’s similar to those seen in other MMORPG games.

We’ve also noticed that the launcher employs adb (Android Debug Bridge) to deliver updates to the emulator. This means there’s no longer a need to deal over updating the apps from Google Play for major updates, which simplifies the process significantly.

Unlike other emulators that bombard you with ads upon opening their app, the ROX PC Client displays its own dedicated loading screen. It does away with the extra Android OS launcher that usually shows other apps. What’s more, it gets rid of annoying pop-up ads, providing a cleaner and more focused to ROX content.

Another notable upgrade is the removal of the mobile joystick UI, which usually sits in the bottom left corner for character control – giving it a more authentic-like PC feel. This is likely because the APK installed on this emulator are different from the mobile version.

Closing the game now immediately turns off the emulator, without the need to go through other launchers or menus. This smooth exit process reinforces the idea that it’s very much “like” a native PC app. Starting the game is nearly instant, bypassing the emulator’s loading screen and its launcher.

The settings aspect is also more streamlined, showcasing only crucial options on your screen, which is a welcome change. However, upon closer inspection, it appears that these settings bear a resemblance to a specific emulator – the LDPlayer.

Since this is an LDPlayer, it actually still has the default LDPlayer functionality such as:

Image Comparison

Let’s take a look at the graphics of the two platforms side by side. In the following screenshot from the ROX PC Client, you can see that the image quality is similar to that of LDPlayer. However, a noticeable difference is the absence of shadows in the ROX PC Client version. This may be the reason why the game feels much smoother than the LDPlayer.

Contrastingly, the following screenshot from LDPlayer shows the shadow effect clearly.

Expanded Zoom Out Limit

One of the standout features of the ROX PC Client is the expanded zoom out limit. The screenshot below, taken from the ROX Client, illustrates how you can now take in much more of your surroundings in a top-view format. This capability is particularly vital for increasing field awareness during gameplay.

The following screenshot from LDPlayer demonstrates the limited zoom out capacity.

Performance Benchmark

It’s clear that the ROX PC Client is built on the LDPlayer emulator, as they both utilize Android 9, which is similar to the latest OS installed in LDPlayer and most especially its settings interface.

However, the developers have made an effort to enhance the experience by removing unnecessary app components. This could potentially lead to smoother gameplay on PCs. But the real question is – does this streamlined version truly outperform the original LDPlayer? Or perhaps, does the ROX client operate more efficiently? To find definitive answers to these questions, a direct performance comparison through benchmarking the two programs will be necessary.

For a thorough comparison, we created a fresh instance of both LDPlayer and the ROX Client. To eliminate any residual effects, the computer was restarted before each benchmark test, and we only recorded performance data three minutes after game launch.

The following are the specifications of the PC used for these tests:

For the benchmark test, we check the Graphics and CPU performance by conducting several scenario in the game and see how the two does:

Regarding the game settings, we ensured that every in-game setting was pushed to its maximum. This includes the highest quality for graphics, effects, and resolution. On the emulator side, we maintained the same settings for both platforms: a resolution of 1080p, along with the allocation of a 4-Core Processor and 4GB of RAM.

AFK Grinding Benchmark

For the AFK Grinding test, our character auto-battling monsters in Vally of Gyoll where it eliminates Gibbet, a monster with AoE effect that requires graphics rendering power.

The ROX PC Client showed stability in total GPU usage when compared to the original LDPlayer. The ROX PC Client averaged a GPU usage of 26.9 percent, slightly less than the LDPlayer’s average of 27.4 percent. This stability in GPU usage could likely be due to improvements made to the game’s APK, specifically tailored for the PC platform.

As for Dedicated GPU Memory or VRAM usage, the difference between the two platforms is minimal. The ROX PC Client used an average of 585.1MB, while the LDPlayer needed a bit less, averaging at 582.1MB.

The most crucial metric to examine is the System GPU Memory usage, which uncovers the actual resources that the game is utilizing within the graphics card by offloading from the GPU memory to system memory.

This process is more apparent during graphically intense moments. During the test, the green spikes observed in the graphs correspond to instances where Gibbet fires its explosion effect (AOE) – a high demand graphical event that requires additional resources. Here, the ROX PC Client consumed an average of 142.7MB of System GPU memory, whereas the LDPlayer used significantly more, with an average consumption of 171.2MB.

When it comes to the CPU, and Memory performance, the results are virtually the same. The ROX PC Client showed a minimal CPU usage of 0.32%, closely matched by the LDPlayer, which used slightly less at 0.29%. Both utilized the same amount of memory at 1.3GB.

Prontera Dance Arena Benchmark

For the next stage of the test, we positioned our character in Prontera, right in the heart of the bustling 2nd Anniversary event’s dance area. This vibrant scene, filled with scrolling text on screen, puts a significant load on the emulators, providing a stable stress test.

Unexpectedly, the ROX PC Client registered a higher GPU usage than the LDPlayer under these demanding conditions. The ROX Client reached an average GPU usage of 28.34%, while the LDPlayer posted a slightly lower average of 25.79%. In terms of VRAM usage, the ROX Client consumed 1.1GB, while the LDPlayer used slightly less at 981MB. However, System GPU usage remained similar for both platforms, sharing nearly identical memory use at around 163MB.

As for CPU and Memory usage (Not on the graph below), the ROX Client required slightly more, at 2.4GB of RAM, while the LDPlayer utilized a more modest 2GB. Despite this disparity in memory usage, CPU usage remained identical for both emulators at a negligible 0.23%.

Sealed Island Benchmark

We then ran an instance of the ‘Sealed Island’ for about 3 to 4 minutes. We observed that the drawing graphs, especially VRAM, were similar for both platforms, demonstrating a near-identical workload – but differing usage.

Yet again, the ROX PC Client showed higher GPU usage compared to the LDPlayer, indicating it might be utilizing the GPU more intensively in this specific scenario.

In terms of CPU and Memory (Not on the graph below), the ROX PC Client consumed 1.7GB of RAM, a notable increase compared to the LDPlayer’s 1GB usage. However, mirroring previous tests, CPU usage remained identical for both platforms, averaging out at a minimal 0.33%.

Boss Hunt Benchmark

For our concluding test, this isn’t a comparison as conducting a side-by-side test is challenging due to the varying MVP/Mini and the number of characters present on the map. So, we will solely evaluate the performance of the ROX PC Client during a Boss Hunt. In this specific test, we set our sights on the Mini Boss, Angeling.

The results show, there are significant spikes during the boss hunt where CPU usage climbs to 1.9% and RAM Usage reaches up to 2.4GB. GPU Usage also rises to 26.5%, VRAM to 1.2GB, and System GPU Usage to a whopping 457MB. It’s important to note that these spikes aren’t exclusive to the ROX PC Client and should be observed similarly when using the LDPlayer.

Over Time Usage

An important part of the review we’d like to emphasize is the difference in GPU usage between a freshly installed LDPlayer and one that’s been used over time with extra apps installed. It appears that the GPU usage of these emulators tends to increase over time, as the system becomes more populated with apps and data. In the long run, the LDPlayer might progressively demand more resources, potentially surpassing the usage levels observed with the ROX PC Client.

One key advantage of the ROX PC Client is its exclusivity; it doesn’t allow for additional app installations. This limitation could actually be a strength in terms of performance longevity, as it minimizes the risk of the system becoming bogged down over time with excess applications, thus preserving its original efficiency.

However, we should note that we haven’t yet tested the ROX PC Client over an extended period of, say, a month or more. So it’s uncertain whether it will maintain its current resource usage or possibly mirror the LDPlayer’s trajectory and increase GPU usage over time.

Future tests are required to see how the ROX PC Client’s performance and resource usage change over time as more data is accumulated. We’ll update this review in a month if our results remain consistent.

Conclusion

After conducting these tests multiple times, we consistently obtained similar results. It appears that the ROX PC Client tends to utilize more GPU resources compared to the freshly installed LDPlayer – but for some instance, it does less like AFK grinding. This could be due to the additional enhancements incorporated into the pre-installed APK in the ROX Client. When comparing the two emulators side by side, these enhancements actually seem to improve the performance despite the increased GPU usage.

Though we certainly didn’t get a native build of Ragnarok X Next generation for PC, the enhancements in the ROX PC Client or let’s just call it ROX emulator are still noteworthy and may offer a better gaming experience for players in PC. This is particularly beneficial for those who predominantly play ROX on third-party emulators. While it does consume slightly more resources, the ROX PC Client could provide a superior gaming experience due to these enhancements. We recommend gamers to give it a try and experience the difference themselves.
Exit mobile version