Support NeoGAF

[~Kinggi~]

I imagine if you have a 2gb card, then the faster the clock speed the better so it can swap the memory out faster.

In fact, all the false prophets in those damn pc threads saying dont bother with 4gb cards said the reason was mainly because the cards arent fast enough to utilize the memory well enough and would provide marginal improvements over a faster 2gb card.

 

[Dictator93]

I imagine if you have a 2gb card, then the faster the clock speed the better so it can swap the memory out faster.

In fact, all the false prophets in those damn pc threads saying dont bother with 4gb cards said the reason was mainly because the cards arent fast enough to utilize the memory well enough and would provide marginal improvements over a faster 2gb card.

waiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit a minute. That is not exactly how it works.

 

[~Kinggi~]

waiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit a minute. That is exactly how it works.

Yeah? im confused by your post.

 

[Chance Hale]

A lot of the people saying not to bother with 4GB cards did so in reference to older cards. There is no point of buying a 4GB 660 because no game that would actually use that much memory is going to run well on it.

 

[Dictator93]

Yeah? im confused by your post.

I typed too quickly and forgot to type "not" and then edited.

Having faster vram (it is only marginally faster in most cases) really does not help with texture swapping really. The limiting factor is moving from HDD, to RAM and VRAM.

Having more, even on a mediocre GPU allows you to pump up the texture res even if other effects need to be turned down. People hyping down more than 2GB was not the best idea. Honestly though, devs should be implementing good texture streaming anyway to maintain texture quality while having texture streaming/pop problems. A far better situation than just hitching and scratcing the HDD for textures constantly.

 

[Smash88]

What really irks me is that the requirements are 4GB of RAM and 4GB of VRam.... it is making me think this is not optimized.

With that being said, my GTX Titan will carry me through this. *hugs Titan*

 

[Tain]

Interesting and just a little validating!

I assumed we would see high VRAM requirements in ports sooner than later, and figured 3 gigs was not going to be enough for 100% port assurance.

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

Ah well. Hope 6gb cards will hit the sweet $500 mark in two years!

 

[~Kinggi~]

I typed too quickly and forgot to type "not" and then edited.

Having faster vram (it is only marginally faster in most cases) really does not help with texture swapping really. The limiting factor is moving from HDD, to RAM and VRAM.

Having more, even on a mediocre GPU allows you to pump up the texture res even if other effects need to be turned down. People hyping down more than 2GB was not the best idea. Honestly though, devs should be implementing good texture streaming anyway to maintain texture quality while having texture streaming/pop problems. A far better situation than just hitching and scratcing the HDD for textures constantly.

Thanks for clarification.


Also i too am finding 4gb of ram for recommended kind of insane. Doesnt make a whole lot of sense when games are recommending 8 regularly now.

 

[ebullientprism]

For this game? It looks just about average at best. The gameplay looks great but the graphics are average at best.

I could understand if Witcher or something similar had those requirements. The visuals here dont really justify that kinda hardware requirements.

 

[diaspora]

Interesting and just a little validating!

I assumed we would see high VRAM requirements in ports sooner than later, and figured 3 gigs was not going to be enough for 100% port assurance.

It depends. 3GB on dedicated GPUs like the 7950 and 7970 and beyond are probably more than enough purely due to the significantly higher memory bandwidth versus consoles.

 

[Matt2thefuture]

Agreed with what alot of people said. Evil Within looks fine, but nothing that should be those specs...bad port?

 

[Zoned]

This game doesn't even look next gen, more like ps3/x360 upscaled. Pretty sure it's gonna be a total mess like Cod ghosts.

 

[~Kinggi~]

I dont know a lot o people are saying game doesnt look so hot but a lot of the village scenes and stuff look great imo. We havent seen everything.

 

[Daingurse]

4GB of VRAM? Luckily I just bought a Gigabyte GTX 970!

Still, pretty beefy specs for a cross gen game. Hope it looks good on PC, games looks cool.

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

Agreed with what alot of people said. Evil Within looks fine, but nothing that should be those specs...bad port?

Just an iD Tech 5 title.

 

[iavi]

Id tech 5 can't die fast enough

 

[NEO0MJ]

Is there a difference list between the PS3 and PS4 versions yet?

I assume it's just resolution and maybe framerate?

Textures, resolution, model detail, AA, effects, shadows, and lighting will probably be the differences between them. Both will run at 30 FPS, though who knows which will be more stable.

I dont know a lot o people are saying game doesnt look so hot but a lot of the village scenes and stuff look great imo. We havent seen everything.

Plus the game improves a lot with each showing.

 

[Seanspeed]

Their statement is "Note: We do not have a list of minimum requirements for the game. If you’re trying to play with a rig with settings below these requirements (you should plan to have 4 GBs of VRAM regardless), we cannot guarantee optimal performance."

"If you're trying to play with less than 4GB of vRAM, you're gonna have a bad time."

Basically tells me that the port aint gonna be great. They are not putting any extra effort into optimizing memory usage for PC's and might not have very good scalability to lower-end machines.

Pretty disappointing to hear, even if I do have a GTX970 coming tomorrow.

That said, after playing the game today, I'm definitely getting it still. It truly did feel like a love letter to classic survival horror.

I dont know a lot o people are saying game doesnt look so hot but a lot of the village scenes and stuff look great imo. We havent seen everything.

It did actually look fairly good on the PS4. Nothing mind-blowing, but full of pretty high quality assets.

 

[diaspora]

It did actually look fairly good on the PS4. Nothing mind-blowing, but full of pretty high quality assets.

I can't agree. I've only had 20 minutes hands on with the PS4 version, but it doesn't look much better than a PS360 game in 1080p.

 

[thuway]

Honestly the requirements are not going to bring anyone to their knees. If Wolfenstein was anything to go by, you might have to lower the texture resolution a tad, but anything above 2 GB and you should be covered.

On the flip side anything OTHER than RAM requirements should destroy this game.

 

[-MD-]

On the flip side anything OTHER than RAM requirements should destroy this game.

?

 

[hey_it's_that_dog]

?

I think he might mean that other than the high ram reqs, most people's PC specs will be more than adequate.

 

[Seanspeed]

I can't agree. I've only had 20 minutes hands on with the PS4 version, but it doesn't look much better than a PS360 game in 1080p.

I don't think the game uses the assets to best effect overall and not *everything* is great, but this is complete hyperbole. There's plenty of absolutely next-gen assets being used.

 

[SlasherJPC]

I don't think the game uses the assets to best effect overall and not *everything* is great, but this is complete hyperbole. There's plenty of absolutely next-gen assets being used.

Welcome to neogaf. I see this crap all the time. Enjoy your stay!

 

[elohel]

Hopefully the extra GB means there are a few better textures here and there.


670 is more than two years old at this point, and 4GBs of ram is somewhat low.

Edit: To clarify I didn't mean video ram in the second part

Edit 2: Just to make it completely obvious I was talking about system memory. Many want 8.

I really don't think many people have a 4gb card do they?

I'm really out of the loop lol

 

[~Kinggi~]

I really don't think many people have a 4gb card do they?

I'm really out of the loop lol

According to steam around 1.6% of users have a 4gb graphics card. Someone posted that earlier.

 

[gstaff]

What really irks me is that the requirements are 4GB of RAM and 4GB of VRam.... it is making me think this is not optimized.

As noted in the blog post, this is the recommended requirements to play the game as the developer's intended it to be played. It's not saying you couldn't get it to run with less, but it's strongly recommended.

 

[SneakyStephan]

I knew people who insisted that you wouldn't need more than 2 GB of VRAM for 1080p were nuts.

It's the models, shadow maps, textures, light maps, and everything else that takes up the space, not just the frame buffer.

The reason you never needed more two years ago was that everything was designed for Xbox 360 and PS3.

all the pc exclusive games with fancy graphics didn't need (anywhere near) 4GB either... and most of the decent pc ports used 4x-8x higher res shadow maps, 4-8x higher res textures etc all the same

 

[Chance Hale]

I really don't think many people have a 4gb card do they?

I'm really out of the loop lol

Read the edits man ;-;

 

[FoneBone]

As noted in the blog post, this is the recommended requirements to play the game as the developer's intended it to be played. It's not saying you couldn't get it to run with less, but it's strongly recommended.

As said elsewhere, it just seems like an odd combination - the RAM requirements seem weirdly low (with games like Watch_Dogs and Shadows of Mordor recommending 8GB), while the VRAM requirements seem unusually high (AFAIK this is the first game to recommend 4GB).

...how many people even have 4GB of VRAM but only 4GB of RAM? Not many, I'd bet.

Anyway, would you be in a position to know if the game is playable (even on low settings) on 2GB cards?

 

[Gbraga]

As noted in the blog post, this is the recommended requirements to play the game as the developer's intended it to be played. It's not saying you couldn't get it to run with less, but it's strongly recommended.

So I can assume the "you should plan to have 4GB regardless" means there's some very atmospheric stuff on the PC version that uses a lot of VRAM, and not that you need 4GB to even run it decently?

Also, do the consoles versions have said stuff?

 

[Witchfinder General]

According to those specs the game will either look incredible or it's an unoptimised mess. Thankfully my PC can handle it either way.

 

[Odrion]

I knew people who insisted that you wouldn't need more than 2 GB of VRAM for 1080p were nuts.

It's the models, shadow maps, textures, light maps, and everything else that takes up the space, not just the frame buffer.

The reason you never needed more two years ago was that everything was designed for Xbox 360 and PS3.

Yup, lol. I remember when people said that it was foolish to expect a "spec rec bump" during this generational shift. "It's different this time, the consoles are not as powerful as top of the line computers this time!"

 

[gstaff]

So I can assume the "you should plan to have 4GB regardless" means there's some very atmospheric stuff on the PC version that uses a lot of VRAM, and not that you need 4GB to even run it decently?

Also, do the consoles versions have said stuff?

I actually don't have specifics there. I've been playing on PS3 and Xbox One to date.

 

[spons]

You really should have 4 GB of VRAM to run it.

In the blog comments by Bethesda staff here. Not good.

 

[~Kinggi~]

In the blog comments by Bethesda staff. Not good.

Youve gotta be fucking kidding me. So not one now, but two comments.

Can i get a refund from GMG since i preordered?


-The comment was in response to the question

why 4gb VRAM ? can i run it with 2gb Vram or no?

 

[2San]

In fact, all the false prophets in those damn pc threads saying dont bother with 4gb cards said the reason was mainly because the cards arent fast enough to utilize the memory well enough and would provide marginal improvements over a faster 2gb card.

Feel free to point to a game that needs the additional vram. I still haven't seen any game where a GTX 760/770 with 4GB vram performs better than with 2GB at 1080p. Next to something like modded Skyrim.

Yup, lol. I remember when people said that it was foolish to expect a "spec rec bump" during this generational shift. "It's different this time, the consoles are not as powerful as top of the line computers this time!"

No in the PC thread most post say future proofing is impossible; however, CPU wise the fast majority did agree that something like a 2500k and above should last you a good while.

 

[Gbraga]

I actually don't have specifics there. I've been playing on PS3 and Xbox One to date.

Ok, fair enough, thanks anyway.

In the blog comments by Bethesda staff here. Not good.

Youve gotta be fucking kidding me. So not one now, but two comments.

Can i get a refund from GMG since i preordered?


-The comment was in response to the question

why 4gb VRAM ? can i run it with 2gb Vram or no?

Well, damn, there's that. I'm actually surprised they had the balls to make a port that won't even run on most decent rigs, but I hope it's justified and when people get it later on for their new 4GB cards, they're impressed by it.

I guess I'll stick with PS4 only, then.

 

[somedevil]

Youve gotta be fucking kidding me. So not one now, but two comments.

Can i get a refund from GMG since i preordered?


-The comment was in response to the question

why 4gb VRAM ? can i run it with 2gb Vram or no?

Yeah some comments scare me:

You really should have 4 GB of VRAM to run it.

The game is on the older consoles, but the PC release is intended as a next generation experience

So only under 2% on steam can enjoy this next generation experience!! Are they trying to sabotage people buying the pc version?

 

[~Kinggi~]

Someone should update the thread title to 'need 4gb to run it' for the lulz.


This is real badddddddddd

 

[Superflat]

 

[User 479360]

40gb? Thank God for physical. That'd take forever to download. (Forever = 20 hours)

 

[lukeskymac]

I refuse to believe that any game that can't manage to get good textures on 3GB of VRAM @1080p isn't fundamentally poorly made.

Spoiler

Yes Watch_Dogs, that means you.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

So 4GB VRAM is the minimum. lol

I guess japanese devs and PC are still a bad combination lol

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

Well, good thing I sprung for this 4GB 770. I've been selling tons of cases, cards, etc for this game.

 

[Lime]

Idtech 5 is pure garbage. What a waste of time and resources for not only id, but also all of the developers who unfortunately had to work with such a subpar engine.

 

[Gbraga]

I refuse to believe that any game that can't manage to get good textures on 3GB of VRAM @1080p isn't fundamentally poorly made.

Spoiler

Yes Watch_Dogs, that means you.

I find it hard to believe that you couldn't run it even on low settings with 2GB, but I'm not willing to risk that much money on it, I guess I'll just cancel my Steam pre-order, get it on PS4 and then double dip in the near future when I upgrade my card to a 970.

 

[2San]

I refuse to believe that any game that can't manage to get good textures on 3GB of VRAM @1080p isn't fundamentally poorly made.

Spoiler

Yes Watch_Dogs, that means you.

It could be like Titanfall where you had extreme or something textures, but the game doesn't really look worse with high textures.

I hope if the game actually uses 4GB of VRAM the textures actually look the part.

 

[~Kinggi~]

So serious question, does GMG do refunds? I already paid 45$ for this but this bullshit is straight up cray cray.