324 replies to this topic

[Lerris]

Arnie1808, on 17 June 2012 - 12:53 AM, said:

You do know that not all people can afford a laptop like what you have plus you don't have to be a fat headed a-hole and say things like "it's a pittance" & "it'll run on a fancy calculator" This will just make people dislike you

aye, imagined someone saying this in a top hat with monicle, burning 20 dollar bills to light his cigar, maybe it was the word pittance.....

[Zack Delphirian]

Those specs aren't that high...Like everybody said, if you're at all serious about gaming in general and you upgrade from time to time, even on a low budget, you'd have 3 times the specs for this game.

Now I only read ONE person say this but I feel it's completly true : If someone doesn't have the cash to buy a $500 pc every 3-4 years or a $1000+ upgradable pc every 6-7 years, then that person will not spend $60 on a free game to begin with. And it's not being disrespectful to say it, it's basic economics.
It's about priorities of spending, I'm poor, I don't go on vacation far off the world, so I can spend $1500 on my computer to play games, that's my priority. It's personnaland everybody is entitled to one, but it's nice sometimes that a game company focuses a little more on gamers and a little less on "casual players" that seem to be the target for everygame game company out there now.

(sorry if my post is a little bit confused, haven't slept much...)

[CCC Dober]

OP: It's just a matter of time until you have to upgrade. Consider the listed specs as rough guidelines. You don't have to go totally overboard and may just upgrade parts of your current system. I'm still running an outdated Q6600 + 9800 GTX + 2GB RAM and the whole pc was dirt cheap when I bought it 4 years ago for the performance it delivered (like 500 bucks). Hint: best bang for the buck.

Today, I just need to upgrade the RAM and I'm good. I bet you there are comparable offers today like the one I mentioned 4 years ago but with vastly more powerful hardware. They may last easily as long as my system and even longer. The potential costs for upgrades may involve RAM, CPU and GPU. If you buy in on the lower end of a high tech platform (like 6 or 8 cores), then you probably don't need to upgrade the whole system too often, saving you a lot of money over time. Use this information wisely and you don't have to touch your (new) hardware for years to come.

Last hint: don't ever skimp on power supplies or mainboards. They may fry your whole system and set you back by 500 bucks or more. Go for quality, stability and warranty. Replace unreliable/low quality models if you go for the long haul (personal experience).

Good hunting.

[UnseenFury]

My PC is much better than recommended specs and it is 2 YEARS OLD.

I don't know what to tell you, OP, without insulting you.

[Pvt Dancer]

Yeah... leap frogging your computer every couple of years is the way to go for a gamer on a budget. This is why people frankenstien their computers and don't buy Gateway or Dell systems... so you can upgrade as you go.

[Antaumus]

If a game is going to last it needs to be made for the current gen if not ahead of it. F2P has nothing to do with it at all. Every few years this is a new game that your not going to able to run, the minimum specs for mwo are nothing special.

[Oppi]

Paran01ac, on 17 June 2012 - 01:48 AM, said:

My PC is much better than recommended specs and it is 2 YEARS OLD.

I don't know what to tell you, OP, without insulting you.

Well, 2 years might be "old" compared to development speed, but considering the cost of new hardware it's really not that unusual to have an unchanged system for even longer time. I've run games on systems that were 4 or 5 years older than the actual game and it was just fine, and I really don't get the obsession of some gamers with always having the latest hardware. Who in the world can afford this ?

That said, I'll propably have to upgrade my graphics card (Radeon 4800) for MWO, but that's ok. Had it for 3 or 4 years now

[mekabuser]

I can assure you that what were posted as MIn specs are really not .I would be surprised , no shocked if this game didnt run as well, no better than MWLL.
I have run mwll on a crappy dual core that maxed out around 2.7 ghz mated to a kinda crappy gpu , xp and 4 gig ram.
It worked.
It runs well on a e5200 oc to 3.5, a good gpu and xp.
cryengine is a tough mama cpu wise. but once a gain I cant believe its as bad as cryeng 1,2

[Giverous]

LordDeathStrike, on 16 June 2012 - 09:45 PM, said:

i bought my laptop over a year ago now, it has 2 dx 11 video cards (radeon hd 6900s) in crossfire, with 2 gigs of memory on each, a quad i7 @ 3.2 ghz stock, self overclocks itself to 3.6 ghz when it has call too. 12 gigs of ddr 3 ram @ 1333 mhz. ive installed a 120 gig ssd to kill load times, and have a terrabyte of bulk storage @ 7200 rpm. the min/rec of mwo is nothing, its a triffling pittance, itll run on a fancey calculator. if you have a computer for gaming on itll run this game.

I call BS, and im suprised more people havent.

There IS no quad core i7 @ 3.2ghz stock speed that throttles to 3.6ghz. The closest i believe you will find is the i7-2860QM which clocks at 2.5ghz and turbos up to 3.6ghz. Or maybe an i7-2960XM which clocks 2.7 and turbos to 3.7

Im not clued up on AMD cards, only nvidia, but i dont think there ever was a 6900S card. All of that is aside from the fact that the 6900 series only launched in about november last year (not over a year ago).

It looks far far more like you've googled a few specs and thrown a theoretical together. Stop pretending to have a big e-peen. Some people have crazy good machines, they just don't feel the need to tell EVERYBODY they meet about it. The people who shout about it like you are rarely have the hardware to back it up.

May we see a CPU-z screen capture? More than anything im REALLY curious to see which mobile chip stocks at 3.2 and turbos to 3.6

[Adrienne Vorton]

seriously, any gamer should be aware of the fact that the minimum specs of mwo are minimum for all modern games now...
days of 32bit winXP are counted... my PC was at the low end of average when i bought it 3 years ago, and it´s somewhere between minimum and recommended for MWO...

i always take the specs for the latest GTA when it is released, built around the medium specs to run it, and i´m fine for at least 4 years...then i can buy a better gfx and so on..always works for me... i´m not sure if i´ll buy a completely new setup now, or just upgrade RAM and gfx a bit so i´ll be fine for a while again...and wait for the next GTA

Edited by Adrienne Vorton, 17 June 2012 - 02:31 AM.

[Giverous]

Adrienne Vorton, on 17 June 2012 - 02:27 AM, said:

seriously, any gamer should be aware of the fact that the minimum specs of mwo are minimum for all modern games now...
days of 32bit winXP are counted... my PC was at the low end of average when i bought it 3 years ago, and it´s somewhere between minimum and recommended for MWO...

i always take the specs for the latest GTA when it is released, built around the medium specs to run it, and i´m fine for at least 4 years...then i can buy a better gfx and so on..always works for me... i´m not sure if i´ll buy a completely new setup now, or just upgrade RAM and gfx a bit so i´ll be fine for a while again...and wait for the next GTA

lol, love it yeah GTA always uses stupidly high specs for what it is. I've never understood how they make it need so much hardware.

[Adrienne Vorton]

well me neither, but it´s always a good indicator for the next few years

[trycksh0t]

Giverous, on 17 June 2012 - 02:21 AM, said:

I call bullshit, and im suprised more people havent.

There IS no quad core i7 @ 3.2ghz stock speed that throttles to 3.6ghz. The closest i believe you will find is the i7-2860QM which clocks at 2.5ghz and turbos up to 3.6ghz. Or maybe an i7-2960XM which clocks 2.7 and turbos to 3.7

Im not clued up on AMD cards, only nvidia, but i dont think there ever was a 6900S card. All of that is aside from the fact that the 6900 series only launched in about november last year (not over a year ago).

It looks far far more like you've googled a few specs and thrown a theoretical together. Stop pretending to have a big e-peen. Some people have crazy good machines, they just don't feel the need to tell EVERYBODY they meet about it. The people who shout about it like you are rarely have the hardware to back it up.

May we see a CPU-z screen capture? More than anything im REALLY curious to see which mobile chip stocks at 3.2 and turbos to 3.6

I'm pretty certain that was "6900s" as in plural, meaning two of 'em. And the 6900 series launched on December 15th, 2010, not November of last year. As for his CPU, if he's had it for over a year, it's a 1st gen i7, because 2nd gens didn't start launching until 2011. Going by that criteria, and that it's a laptop, I'd say he's running a factory overclocked i7-640m. Make sure your facts are straight before calling people out next time.

Edited by trycksh0t, 17 June 2012 - 02:58 AM.

[CCC Dober]

Tbh, I've never bothered with the req's of the GTA series, even though some ran like **** on my rigs LOL
The environment is incredibly huge, alive and just flatout amazing. Rather easy to see why it's so demanding when you put it all together.

[The Basilisk]

I got a more or less mainstream multimedia PC and I'm allready exceeding the recomended specs.
So whats the fuss about ?
Aspire X1470
AMD A8 - 3820 APU
8GB RAM
Win 7 64bit
Cost 470€
Not comparable to some Prices of true gaming PCs, right ?

[Antagonist]

I'm not sure what you mean, OP. Judging by he poll results there'll be enough people able to play the game...

[Giverous]

trycksh0t, on 17 June 2012 - 02:39 AM, said:

I'm pretty certain that was "6900s" as in plural, meaning two of 'em. And I am going to assume he's talking about the i7-3930K Sandy that runs at 3.2 and turbos to 3.8, he just mistakenly typed in 3.6. Or he could've mistakenly put i7 when he meant the i5 3470 Ivy, which clocks at 3.2 and turbos to 3.6. And the 6900 series launched on December 15th, 2010, not November of last year.

Regardless, the only thing in his post that wasn't quite kosher was a, most likely, mistype on the CPU info, everything else is fine. Might want to fact check before calling people out.

Well, i seem to recall admitting being hazy on the AMD details, but the point still stands that there isn't a 6900 card, and someone bragging that hard about their hardware would have made sure we knew exactly which card he was running.

As for CPU's, this is one area you REALLY should have checked yourself before calling ME out

The ivy cpu's released in may. The laptop models launched after that. It's impossible that he bought it over a year ago. The i7-3930K is a desktop processor, NOT a laptop processor. It also didnt release until the last quarter of 2011, NOT over a year ago.

The specs he listed are bullshit. It's an impossible machine to buy/build

[Jadel Blade]

Same as most people. I far exceed the recommended and I didnt spend alot when I bought this pc nearly two years ago.

Really if you cant afford a system that can play this game then you would be better off getting a job or working a few more hours than thinking about playing a video game. Do that then maybe you could afford it.

[Giverous]

The Basilisk, on 17 June 2012 - 02:46 AM, said:

I got a more or less mainstream multimedia PC and I'm allready exceeding the recomended specs.
So whats the fuss about ?
Aspire X1470
AMD A8 - 3820 APU
8GB RAM
Win 7 64bit
Cost 470€
Not comparable to some Prices of true gaming PCs, right ?

fantastic for the price, sweet little machine

*edit* typo

Edited by Giverous, 17 June 2012 - 02:59 AM.

[SirLANsalot]

Now rememeber this is sitll in Beta, and the current specs they have out will not be permement. Useally in a beta you will aim your "minimum" specs to be a tad on the high side, so when your done they will be more like the reccomended and a new minimum will show up. I see nothing with the current minimum being very high at all, in fact there about normal for todays new games (maybe even on the lower end) with this game being DX9 based. My best guess is the reccemnded or high settings will be useing a DX11 setup? Getting Tessisation on those mechs as you see bits fall off and change as damage is applied would just be iceing on the cake (from vids so far it seems like a variation of Tess).