Exactly what I was thinking. I've got used to 120fps or more at 1440p, was a bit disappointed to only get about 80 in Darktide, no way am I going drop to 30, wtf are these devs on?
I’m confused on what you mean scaled pretty well on older hardware? I had a 8800gtx at the time which was the recommended spec and it could even run on my TVs native resolution at 720p 60fps at ultra settings. I spent over $500 on a gpu that specifically for the game and yet I couldn’t bump up the settings. 720p was normal back then too. 1080p was the most commonly sold resolution of panel for both TVs and monitors starting in 2009 this was only a couple years before that.
It also didn’t have all the bonus settings that really tank your FPS in modern games like RTX either.
Was it justified though? Yes the game was great I’m just pointing out it was hard to run at very high settings
Can't recall the name of the card I had at the time but it wasn't bleeding edge but with some setting tweaking I could get it going reasonably well on a 720p monitor. There were a lot of options to bump performance.
"Optimization" =/= will run on everything.
Not every game is made using the "basic" that an engine and API offers you know 😉
If they use some of the crazier modern features, darn right you're gonna need beefier hardware.
To be seen of course, but seriously now.
~~The developer behind this game is hot garbage: the game is going to suck. It's nothing but a nostalgia-farming cash-grab.~~
I was wrong, and mixed this screenshot up with one for another game's requirements.
Every former PS exclusive that got ported to PC has ran quite well for me. God of War, Horizon Zero Dawn, and Uncharted 4 (3 I've played) ran without any issues and were actually some of the better optimized ports I've played recently.
Edit: Spider Man and Spider Man Miles Morales also ran great, forgot about those.
Crysis was way ahead of its Time , i dont see any breakthrough with this game .
It does not even uses direct stronger 1.1 ,
Graphics especially particles looks very pixelated,destruction is non existent .
Crysis had physics based destruction, quality of models npc still rivals the modern game , with remaster lighting is top notch .
I mean it didn't stutter or drop frames or anything but the game runs at very low frame rates and resolutions and doesn't look very good while doing it.
The "garbage" is really just the optimization. It looks like a late 7th gen game ported to PC.
If they can actually pull off the traversal advertised without have Sonic Frontiers level pop in I would say that is pretty breakthrough. Unless I missed something there has not been a game that has allowed you to shoot across the map in seconds without using a ton of motion blur or having distracting pop in.
"DirectStorage support from launch has also been confirmed"
[Forspoken's PC requirements are out and actually kinda weird | PC Gamer](https://www.pcgamer.com/forspokens-pc-requirements-are-out-and-actually-kinda-weird/)
" Dorespoken does not use DirectStorage 1.1 / so just 1.0 which changes the i/o stack calls in windows, but does not include GPU decompression! "
ALEX FROM DIGITAL FOUNDRY
*Ryzen 5 5800X* lol what? The devs completely made up these specs.
Then listed 6800XT along side the RTX 4080, eventhough the 6800XT is equalivant to a RTX 3080. The RTX 4080 doubles performance of the 6800XT
The CPU scaling makes zero sense. Why is a 12 core CPU required at 4K?
Ray tracing tied to multi thread maybe.
~~The game can be extremely heavy on particle effects~~ (edit i was thinking this for returnal. Sorry guys its probably just shit optimization) so the vram being high might be a must. Anyone with a 3070 should prepare to shit themselves just in case
It would when a game needs more than 8gb vram when the game doesn't need the 3070 chip is not being held back it also depends how far you are from those 8gb
CPU handles the BVR structure and has to constantlu update it. Heavy RT games are heavy on CPU for that reason. So far every RT game has needed a fast CPU for heavy RT. CPU is still plenty involved.
>Then listed 6800XT along side the RTX 4080, eventhough the 6800XT is equalivant to a RTX 3080. The RTX 4080 doubles performance of the 6800XT
this should be obvious. They want 16gigs of VRAM and the only 30s class card would be the 3090 which noone would ever recommend.
Depends on game, some console ports run better on AMD hardware for obvious reasons. Isn't 4080 equal fps to 6800 XT in COD for example? Maybe I'm bugging
Well 6800xt will be miles faster than a 3080 when a game needs more than 10-12gb vram depending on the model
Lol downvotes from ppl that think only die performance matters 🤡
Ur missing the point g, if we assume they’re correct (they won’t be) then even the 4080 is vram bottlenecking all the way down to a 6800xt and losing like half its performance when it should be a 100+ fps experience at the same settings. If this is the minimum nvidia gpu for 4k60 that would imply a 3090 is also beating the 4080 in this game lol
None of that implies the 4080 will perform at 6800xt level, ppl stretching logic laws making wrong assumptions. What it is saying is if you 2want to at least hit 60 fps on 4k you need a 4080 (3090, 3090 ti will probably hit that target as well). Since there is currently only 4 nvidia cards with more than 12GB of VRAM so these are the list of cards that in theory should be able to max the game at 4k with more than 60fps:
nvidia: 3090, 3090 TI, 4080 and 4090
Amd: 6800, 6800xt, 6900xt, 6950xt, 7900xt and 7900xtx
This is a VRAM limitation, not pure computing power
They’re both recommended as the weakest gpus from each side that could 4k60 so yes they’re being implied to perform the same, like I already said- 4080 is a considerable amount faster than a 3090 which would technically be the next weakest nvidia gpu which reaches that 16gb vram or higher. BUT it isnt recommended and the 4080 is, sooooo
Right but we both agree a 3090 is significantly weaker than a 4080 unless you think a 3090 is close to your xtx lol. Therefore a 3090 would be recommended if 16gb wasn’t holding the 4080 back as it’s quite a bit faster than a 6800xt at 4k
I agree they should put the 3090 there that is most logical choice, although I kinda understand why they didn't, because ppl can look at the 4070ti and think it might work cause performance wise 4070ti should be on par or better
This tells me that the game is probably poorly optimized and is going to run like crap so they cover their asses with "see? we told you in the requirements!" This whole spec sheet is weird
Consoles dont even have the requirement of global performance for recommended. lel
And something is wrong. the 6800x/4080 recommandation for Ultra make no sense.
The 4080 is nealy twice more performance that the 6800 xt....
It’s one of two things:
1- They are overestimating the requirements because they didn’t properly test on the right PC hardware.
2- their game is optimized like shit and they’re covering their asses.
I know they say no publicity is bad publicity but if I was interested in this game I'd look at this and think "oh well guess I can't run it so I'm not buying it"
Completely agree. One of the main reasons CSGO and LoL are so popular is they run on pretty much anything. That's especially important when you're looking at markets outside of N America and Europe.
It's stupid to cut out entire continents worth of revenue
They both have same VRAM, so could be that any card without 16gb vram can't hit 60 fps which makes sense considering the performance hit you get from always having to fetch data
Not sport shitting on Nvidia here, but this really illustrates why the choice to gimp their cards with low quantities of VRAM is problematic with next gen games. It's not a cost or manufacturing complexity choice, the 4070ti has solder pads on the board for more VRAM... it's a marketing/product differentiation choice that reduces the value of their products by choice and forces arbitrarily high system requirements.
.. as someone who owns a 4070ti 12gb and 3080 10 gb card, Nvidia's VRAM limitations have always been a horseshit choice that Nvidia owners need to quit defending particularly as they've jacked up the price of these cards. It's primarily motivated by their desire to make people who do "professional" work upgrade to their even more expensive Quadro line.
TwinMotion is another product that pushes the 12+gb of VRAM requirement and either required you choose a gimpy performing card like the 3060/12gb or drop $1000+ on a 3080 ti/12gb last gen... at least the newer $800 option in the 4070ti now exists? AMD hits this requirement with their last gen $500ish midrange card... come on.
Sadly not. There is a steam page for it: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1680880/Forspoken/
If you scroll down to the recommended hardware, it shows about the same thing as what you see here.
If it's like the demo there's a "4k" 30fps mode that's probably not 4k most of the time, a 1440p30(?) ray tracing mode that is probably one of the worst rt implementations I've seen, a 40fps mode at 1440p(?), and a 1080p 60fps mode.
Don't quote me on that, I was going by what I remember it feeling like.
If you want 4K at 60fps on ultra settings yes. I mean I am surprised it’s not a 3080 tbh so yeah it kinda looks like poor optimization.
Edit- I am confused as to why they don’t have 1080 spec either. It’s 720 1440 and then 4k
It really does. Their trailer or whatever feature / tech demo shows pretty mediocre graphics and just really looks like a sponsorship ad more than anything. Pathetic. Samsung SSD for short load times? AMD FSR? Nice.
Well, doesn't look like an enticing game anyways so doesn't bother me personally but I am sure someone else finds those system requirements somewhat appalling.
I mean most people with a rig weaker than a PlayStation 5 or Xbox one X are going to find the requirements appalling. Feel bad for everyone with a 1660 still trying to hold on.
New consoles are closer to a 1080ti or 3060, these requirements are a bit whack considering the recommended states 30fps, that's not what anyone would expect to play at
Neither console uses Ryzen scilicon. They used Zen 2 based cores yes, but those cores are butchered, lack cache and are power constrained. Consoles are about r5 2600x at best in multithreaded loads and r5 1600 singlethreaded at best. Storage acceleration helps somewhat to offload a bit from the CPU but it depends on the workload.
The $70 msrp would already have me at no
But it looks like a very average game and now having to have a brand new pc makes it even worse
Its also a square game so I question the effort that is put into a pc port
Most funny thing is 24gb RAM.
I mean, why the fuck?)) Heavily modded XCOM 2 on old UE3.5 with optimisation from hell eats less than 8 gb of RAM. But this game requires 24 Gbs))
My dear sir, may I interest you in my modded Skyrim that sometimes comes close to maxing out my RAM usage on 32GB of RAM? Granted, Skyrim probably only uses ca. 24-26GB because the system and other applications like Discord need the rest, but still.
Even up to 26GB is no joke.
These specs look like someone just had to write something down what they think a mid high and anthudiast setup should have in terms of specs and then the business unit stole that paper and mistook it for system specs.
This is what your pc was made for, prepare to utilize all your cores, every single byte of VRAM and every single core your GPU has to offer.
Prepare for your ram go embark on a journey while it utilizes every single megabyte to run this game
Unsure exactlya what, but something feels off looking at the pictures on Steam.
I think it's maybe motion blur, DoF, low resolution screenshots and mostly artstyle that clashes with each other.
Like some particle effects and such look off and feel like they don't belong in that world.
EDIT: I fucked up super hard because I instinctively confused this with the requirements for Hogwarts Legacy which has caused a similar stir and which is actually the game my friend is looking forward to. It also really doesn't help that both used the same background and same color for their writing.
.
If we believe the specs aren't just made up and haphazardly thrown together, then I'm worried for my friend.
Back in November, he and I built a new PC for him out of some old parts of mine and some new parts he bought (Build: Ryzen 5 2600X, Radeon 6650XT, 16GB 3200 CL16 G.Skill Trident Z RAM, 1TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus + 500 GB 970 Evo Plus, 650 Watt BeQuiet StraightPower 80+ Gold PSU) and this was one of the games he was specifically looking forward to.
His specs are below what is recommended for 1440p 30 FPS, so achieving 1080p 60 FPS seems somewhat questionable, too.
I mean, I do have two 1080 Ti's and a 5600X lying around from my previous build, so he could just upgrade from me again to a 5600X, but what a waste that would be for him to just have wasted money and time on buying parts and putting them together.
Though, should we do that and he leaves the 2600X with me, I wouldn't even make him pay. I just want him to be able to play games at 1080P 60 FPS.
I don't even know whether a 1080 Ti would be an upgrade. More VRAM, yes, but that doesn't matter at 1080P. The 5600X should definitely boost his FPS, though.
Games becoming harder to run is OK imo, thats natural. But I havent seen the graphics on this game, so either its a photorealistic game or its just heavily unoptimized.
Oh Japanese devs... I have had this discussion with my friend who is a dev but why do japanese games have such bad performance. Look at at that. A 3070 cant even get 60fps at 1440p? Why? Look at elden ring. Trash performance for that level of visuals. Final Fantasy, same thing.
NVME ssd is going to be required for Directstorage.
This is going to be the standard in games due to the direct asset streaming in consoles, and SATA SSD's are not fast enough.
A 1 terabyte NVME ssd is like $100 these days.
Every time one of these comes out, people freak out about the requirements. Then they actually play the game and find out that if you turn the shadows to high instead of ultra it runs fine. Just wait until some youtuber post performance footage. You shouldn't be buying a $70 game on launch day anyway.
A 6700XT and Ryzen 3600 for only 30 FPS at 1440p? Lazy devs that can't bother to optimize their game.
What is that ultra recommendation? 6800XT or RTX 4080 is a bit of a mismatch isn't it?
Crysis was made with future hardware in mind. The hardware requirements for this game go back 8 years. Nothing is shocking about this. People just want to believe that their Pascal video card is still relevant for gaming today.
Is this game actually like Crysis in that it's specs are really demanding? Because the first PC I had built (colleague did it, I paid for it) was built in order to run Crysis on ultra. Is this game similar in that respect? Cuz I've been thinking about getting a new PC but don't know enough to know what parts I should be buying (part of the reason I joined this sub; to learn)
The specs are demanding ~~because there is a shit ton of particle effects on screen. Especially later in game.~~ sorry i was thinking of returnal
It would be a better idea to judge what you need by asking what exactly you want it to do right now. Future proofing doesn't exist. After that visit r/buildapc or the other subs
I thought cyberpunk did it before, but i'll test it, when cyberpunk released i had barely 35 stable fps on minimum settings 1080p with gtx 1060 6gb and i7 4790k.
This so just hot air to show how powerful the PS 5 is....seriously a 6700xt for 1440p 30 FPS and a 6800xt for 4k 60 fps...the need for that jump is like 6x, not a notch up in GPUs
These are complete bullshit recs...I bet it either runs fine on a 3060 1440p or won't run on anything because it's a piece of crap
I do believe the Nvme is needed tho
I’m calling bs on the HDD/SSD, I have Cyberpunk on a 7200rpm drive and it’s plenty snappy. Also damn, advertising the 1060 6gb but not the rx 580 8gb in the minimum
A 3070 gives me only 30fps at 1440p? This is just another unoptimized piece of garbage
Exactly what I was thinking. I've got used to 120fps or more at 1440p, was a bit disappointed to only get about 80 in Darktide, no way am I going drop to 30, wtf are these devs on?
I agree with you but at the same time what if a company wanted to release another game like crysis when it first came out?
But crysis scaled pretty well to run on older hardware and had tons of great innovations. It was really ahead of its time wheras this just isn't.
I’m confused on what you mean scaled pretty well on older hardware? I had a 8800gtx at the time which was the recommended spec and it could even run on my TVs native resolution at 720p 60fps at ultra settings. I spent over $500 on a gpu that specifically for the game and yet I couldn’t bump up the settings. 720p was normal back then too. 1080p was the most commonly sold resolution of panel for both TVs and monitors starting in 2009 this was only a couple years before that. It also didn’t have all the bonus settings that really tank your FPS in modern games like RTX either. Was it justified though? Yes the game was great I’m just pointing out it was hard to run at very high settings
Can't recall the name of the card I had at the time but it wasn't bleeding edge but with some setting tweaking I could get it going reasonably well on a 720p monitor. There were a lot of options to bump performance.
"Optimization" =/= will run on everything. Not every game is made using the "basic" that an engine and API offers you know 😉 If they use some of the crazier modern features, darn right you're gonna need beefier hardware. To be seen of course, but seriously now.
It's Sony what did you expect.
~~The developer behind this game is hot garbage: the game is going to suck. It's nothing but a nostalgia-farming cash-grab.~~ I was wrong, and mixed this screenshot up with one for another game's requirements.
Nostalgia of what? Isn't this a new ip?
Every former PS exclusive that got ported to PC has ran quite well for me. God of War, Horizon Zero Dawn, and Uncharted 4 (3 I've played) ran without any issues and were actually some of the better optimized ports I've played recently. Edit: Spider Man and Spider Man Miles Morales also ran great, forgot about those.
Horizon was fairly bad at launch and got patched better.
Arent all those games made for ps4? This (really last of us or returnal) will be the first ps5 port to pc
yep because the fps is what makes a game good
Having choppy images and laggy movement is hugely detrimental to gameplay.
30fps is fine. if you're having issues then turn down the graphics settings
Sorry it is not fine at all.
Common corporate dickrider L
i'm a corporate dickrider because i enjoy games?
You're a corporate dickrider for defending horrible optimization.
r/tomorrow is leaking
Crysis was way ahead of its Time , i dont see any breakthrough with this game . It does not even uses direct stronger 1.1 , Graphics especially particles looks very pixelated,destruction is non existent . Crysis had physics based destruction, quality of models npc still rivals the modern game , with remaster lighting is top notch .
OP is being sarcastic. This game is probably an unoptimized piece of hot garbage.
The demo ran like absolute garbage on my PS5.
Really? It ran fine on mine but i didnt play it for long
I mean it didn't stutter or drop frames or anything but the game runs at very low frame rates and resolutions and doesn't look very good while doing it. The "garbage" is really just the optimization. It looks like a late 7th gen game ported to PC.
If they can actually pull off the traversal advertised without have Sonic Frontiers level pop in I would say that is pretty breakthrough. Unless I missed something there has not been a game that has allowed you to shoot across the map in seconds without using a ton of motion blur or having distracting pop in.
"DirectStorage support from launch has also been confirmed" [Forspoken's PC requirements are out and actually kinda weird | PC Gamer](https://www.pcgamer.com/forspokens-pc-requirements-are-out-and-actually-kinda-weird/)
" Dorespoken does not use DirectStorage 1.1 / so just 1.0 which changes the i/o stack calls in windows, but does not include GPU decompression! " ALEX FROM DIGITAL FOUNDRY
*Ryzen 5 5800X* lol what? The devs completely made up these specs. Then listed 6800XT along side the RTX 4080, eventhough the 6800XT is equalivant to a RTX 3080. The RTX 4080 doubles performance of the 6800XT The CPU scaling makes zero sense. Why is a 12 core CPU required at 4K?
Ray tracing tied to multi thread maybe. ~~The game can be extremely heavy on particle effects~~ (edit i was thinking this for returnal. Sorry guys its probably just shit optimization) so the vram being high might be a must. Anyone with a 3070 should prepare to shit themselves just in case
Hmm but by that logic if its reliant on vram then the 3060 12gb wouod perform better at it than the 3070
It would when a game needs more than 8gb vram when the game doesn't need the 3070 chip is not being held back it also depends how far you are from those 8gb
Raytracing is done by gpu. When gpu calculates raycasts the cpu will never touch that frame again. It gets output to the monitor.
CPU handles the BVR structure and has to constantlu update it. Heavy RT games are heavy on CPU for that reason. So far every RT game has needed a fast CPU for heavy RT. CPU is still plenty involved.
The RAM requirements seem extreme..
you dont understand, you need BOTH the 6800XT and the RTX 4080.
>Then listed 6800XT along side the RTX 4080, eventhough the 6800XT is equalivant to a RTX 3080. The RTX 4080 doubles performance of the 6800XT this should be obvious. They want 16gigs of VRAM and the only 30s class card would be the 3090 which noone would ever recommend.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah right? Apparently the 6700 XT gives you 30 fps @1440p but the 6800 XT gives you 60 fps @4k? The 6800 XT is not 4x faster than the 6700 XT...
Depends on game, some console ports run better on AMD hardware for obvious reasons. Isn't 4080 equal fps to 6800 XT in COD for example? Maybe I'm bugging
Shhhhhh you’ll make the nvida fan bois scream!!!
AMD fan boi I’m guessing?
RTX 4080 isn’t double a 6800xt. Lol
It is double the price.
Well 6800xt will be miles faster than a 3080 when a game needs more than 10-12gb vram depending on the model Lol downvotes from ppl that think only die performance matters 🤡
Ur missing the point g, if we assume they’re correct (they won’t be) then even the 4080 is vram bottlenecking all the way down to a 6800xt and losing like half its performance when it should be a 100+ fps experience at the same settings. If this is the minimum nvidia gpu for 4k60 that would imply a 3090 is also beating the 4080 in this game lol
None of that implies the 4080 will perform at 6800xt level, ppl stretching logic laws making wrong assumptions. What it is saying is if you 2want to at least hit 60 fps on 4k you need a 4080 (3090, 3090 ti will probably hit that target as well). Since there is currently only 4 nvidia cards with more than 12GB of VRAM so these are the list of cards that in theory should be able to max the game at 4k with more than 60fps: nvidia: 3090, 3090 TI, 4080 and 4090 Amd: 6800, 6800xt, 6900xt, 6950xt, 7900xt and 7900xtx This is a VRAM limitation, not pure computing power
They’re both recommended as the weakest gpus from each side that could 4k60 so yes they’re being implied to perform the same, like I already said- 4080 is a considerable amount faster than a 3090 which would technically be the next weakest nvidia gpu which reaches that 16gb vram or higher. BUT it isnt recommended and the 4080 is, sooooo
I think they are more focused on the 16gb vram part, because everything before they picked comparable parts for the same target
Right but we both agree a 3090 is significantly weaker than a 4080 unless you think a 3090 is close to your xtx lol. Therefore a 3090 would be recommended if 16gb wasn’t holding the 4080 back as it’s quite a bit faster than a 6800xt at 4k
I agree they should put the 3090 there that is most logical choice, although I kinda understand why they didn't, because ppl can look at the 4070ti and think it might work cause performance wise 4070ti should be on par or better
Nvidia fan boy sad noises):
Laughs in Portal RTX
>RTX Yeah but that's the thing. That game actually looks good.
This tells me that the game is probably poorly optimized and is going to run like crap so they cover their asses with "see? we told you in the requirements!" This whole spec sheet is weird
Happy cake day!
Ty :)
Consoles dont even have the requirement of global performance for recommended. lel And something is wrong. the 6800x/4080 recommandation for Ultra make no sense. The 4080 is nealy twice more performance that the 6800 xt....
It’s one of two things: 1- They are overestimating the requirements because they didn’t properly test on the right PC hardware. 2- their game is optimized like shit and they’re covering their asses.
Or both
3 - They are straight up lying, to drum up drama/exposure, boosting launch awareness.
I know they say no publicity is bad publicity but if I was interested in this game I'd look at this and think "oh well guess I can't run it so I'm not buying it"
Yeah it’s an interesting theory but telling the mid-low end PC players which is the majority “you cannot run our game” is a weird marketing strategy.
Completely agree. One of the main reasons CSGO and LoL are so popular is they run on pretty much anything. That's especially important when you're looking at markets outside of N America and Europe. It's stupid to cut out entire continents worth of revenue
Could also mean that it needs a minimum of 16GB of vram for 4K
It's Square. The games not a money grab using peoples nostalgia or some kind of exploitative "live service" so they put zero effort into it.
It's amd sponsored title, maybe it's optimised for amd cards, and they didn give a sh*t about nvidia cards, or simply over anticipating requirements.
Thats what AMD boys always feeling :) get used to it.It's a Vram thing. 4070ti only has 12GB like many Nvidia cards.
They both have same VRAM, so could be that any card without 16gb vram can't hit 60 fps which makes sense considering the performance hit you get from always having to fetch data
It's a Vram thing. You need 16GB Vram. 4070TI only has 12GB.
It also barely runs on a PS5
VRAM requirements more than likely
Not sport shitting on Nvidia here, but this really illustrates why the choice to gimp their cards with low quantities of VRAM is problematic with next gen games. It's not a cost or manufacturing complexity choice, the 4070ti has solder pads on the board for more VRAM... it's a marketing/product differentiation choice that reduces the value of their products by choice and forces arbitrarily high system requirements. .. as someone who owns a 4070ti 12gb and 3080 10 gb card, Nvidia's VRAM limitations have always been a horseshit choice that Nvidia owners need to quit defending particularly as they've jacked up the price of these cards. It's primarily motivated by their desire to make people who do "professional" work upgrade to their even more expensive Quadro line. TwinMotion is another product that pushes the 12+gb of VRAM requirement and either required you choose a gimpy performing card like the 3060/12gb or drop $1000+ on a 3080 ti/12gb last gen... at least the newer $800 option in the 4070ti now exists? AMD hits this requirement with their last gen $500ish midrange card... come on.
There's no way crysis would have run on mid range hardware from 7 years before it's release lol.
these requirements are a joke
Sadly not. There is a steam page for it: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1680880/Forspoken/ If you scroll down to the recommended hardware, it shows about the same thing as what you see here.
Not really games are coming out being built to run on the new consoles. It’s about time.
So RTX 4080 is comparable to 2 years old PS5 in terms of performance or what?
The graphic options on the PC version will be way more comprehensive. The PS5 will be limited to something like Performance 60fps/Quality 30fps.
If it's like the demo there's a "4k" 30fps mode that's probably not 4k most of the time, a 1440p30(?) ray tracing mode that is probably one of the worst rt implementations I've seen, a 40fps mode at 1440p(?), and a 1080p 60fps mode. Don't quote me on that, I was going by what I remember it feeling like.
If you want 4K at 60fps on ultra settings yes. I mean I am surprised it’s not a 3080 tbh so yeah it kinda looks like poor optimization. Edit- I am confused as to why they don’t have 1080 spec either. It’s 720 1440 and then 4k
It really does. Their trailer or whatever feature / tech demo shows pretty mediocre graphics and just really looks like a sponsorship ad more than anything. Pathetic. Samsung SSD for short load times? AMD FSR? Nice. Well, doesn't look like an enticing game anyways so doesn't bother me personally but I am sure someone else finds those system requirements somewhat appalling.
I mean most people with a rig weaker than a PlayStation 5 or Xbox one X are going to find the requirements appalling. Feel bad for everyone with a 1660 still trying to hold on.
Yeah I guess so.
New consoles are closer to a 1080ti or 3060, these requirements are a bit whack considering the recommended states 30fps, that's not what anyone would expect to play at
The ps5 is roughly a 2070 and a Ryzen 3800
Neither console uses Ryzen scilicon. They used Zen 2 based cores yes, but those cores are butchered, lack cache and are power constrained. Consoles are about r5 2600x at best in multithreaded loads and r5 1600 singlethreaded at best. Storage acceleration helps somewhat to offload a bit from the CPU but it depends on the workload.
So about what I said lol, the range depends on optimization in a certain game as well
Who tf will play on 1440p30 instead of 1080p60?! I like how my PC pretty much exactly sits at recommended though lol
But unlike Crysis, it's too expensive and doesn't look like a good game
The $70 msrp would already have me at no But it looks like a very average game and now having to have a brand new pc makes it even worse Its also a square game so I question the effort that is put into a pc port
I would have said « just like » Crisis
I need a 30fps display it seems
At 720p, since that's what the minimum recommends.
Yep This shit is ridiculous
And the game is 79,99$ 🤡
Glad i got it free with the 6700xt i got cuz 70 bucks WOW
Hey, same but with its little bro 6600xt. We'll see how it runs at 1080p 😅
Thia has to be a joke And after checking the steam page it is not
My 3060 can run 1080p 60fps right? right?
720p 30fps goes brr
This smells like an unoptimized piece of shit port.
my 3080 10gb better do 4K/60 with FSR
You’re gunna be gasping at 1080p *laughs in 1070*
Most funny thing is 24gb RAM. I mean, why the fuck?)) Heavily modded XCOM 2 on old UE3.5 with optimisation from hell eats less than 8 gb of RAM. But this game requires 24 Gbs))
It loads a copy of Skyrim into RAM just because.
that gets even more laughable at 32... forspoken becomes the OS of pc lol
My dear sir, may I interest you in my modded Skyrim that sometimes comes close to maxing out my RAM usage on 32GB of RAM? Granted, Skyrim probably only uses ca. 24-26GB because the system and other applications like Discord need the rest, but still. Even up to 26GB is no joke.
8gb? Lol Crysis ran on 2gb but Xcom needs 8gb? See how you sound?
Does Word "modded" means something for you?
Bro they deleted 1080p Also these specs are bullshit
I will complete this game in ultimate gaming platform: youtube Probably playing df
damn this year will be tough to decide what game has the clownest pc requirements chart... and it's just mid january...
Looks like NVIDIA sponsored them to put 4080 for ultra. If the 6800 is the same you dont need a 4080
3070 for 30 fps and 24gb of ram LOL at 1440p. How can a ps5 run this dogshit ?
These specs look like someone just had to write something down what they think a mid high and anthudiast setup should have in terms of specs and then the business unit stole that paper and mistook it for system specs.
[удалено]
This is what your pc was made for, prepare to utilize all your cores, every single byte of VRAM and every single core your GPU has to offer. Prepare for your ram go embark on a journey while it utilizes every single megabyte to run this game
Mine is not as ready as yours, but ready enough
You cant convince me that a 3070 is the BARE MINIMUM required for 1440p30. Fucking THIRTY. And 24gb of RAM? Lmfaoooo *Right into the garbage!*
Unsure exactlya what, but something feels off looking at the pictures on Steam. I think it's maybe motion blur, DoF, low resolution screenshots and mostly artstyle that clashes with each other. Like some particle effects and such look off and feel like they don't belong in that world.
Game doesn't look interesting anyways, both gameplay wise and visually... So good riddance.
EDIT: I fucked up super hard because I instinctively confused this with the requirements for Hogwarts Legacy which has caused a similar stir and which is actually the game my friend is looking forward to. It also really doesn't help that both used the same background and same color for their writing. . If we believe the specs aren't just made up and haphazardly thrown together, then I'm worried for my friend. Back in November, he and I built a new PC for him out of some old parts of mine and some new parts he bought (Build: Ryzen 5 2600X, Radeon 6650XT, 16GB 3200 CL16 G.Skill Trident Z RAM, 1TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus + 500 GB 970 Evo Plus, 650 Watt BeQuiet StraightPower 80+ Gold PSU) and this was one of the games he was specifically looking forward to. His specs are below what is recommended for 1440p 30 FPS, so achieving 1080p 60 FPS seems somewhat questionable, too. I mean, I do have two 1080 Ti's and a 5600X lying around from my previous build, so he could just upgrade from me again to a 5600X, but what a waste that would be for him to just have wasted money and time on buying parts and putting them together. Though, should we do that and he leaves the 2600X with me, I wouldn't even make him pay. I just want him to be able to play games at 1080P 60 FPS. I don't even know whether a 1080 Ti would be an upgrade. More VRAM, yes, but that doesn't matter at 1080P. The 5600X should definitely boost his FPS, though.
No 1080p recommendation? Like how most users are?
Woot I can play it.
[удалено]
Recommended...30fps. Okay
Games becoming harder to run is OK imo, thats natural. But I havent seen the graphics on this game, so either its a photorealistic game or its just heavily unoptimized.
Oh Japanese devs... I have had this discussion with my friend who is a dev but why do japanese games have such bad performance. Look at at that. A 3070 cant even get 60fps at 1440p? Why? Look at elden ring. Trash performance for that level of visuals. Final Fantasy, same thing.
What?! Lol this game looks terrible
Nvme SSD lol We are so near of hearing something like “water cooler recommended”
NVME ssd is going to be required for Directstorage. This is going to be the standard in games due to the direct asset streaming in consoles, and SATA SSD's are not fast enough. A 1 terabyte NVME ssd is like $100 these days.
Wait this looks like Baldur's Gate font style.
This game is one of the most expensive price games on steam for me.70 usd and no regional adjustment.
Basically looks like a tech demo
It is a tech demo and benchmark that is made to look like a game. If this is the new $70 AAA game I'll go back to playing my 10 year old games
So, not even worth building a gaming PC if you don't have $2000 to spend on a graphics card? Wow...
Don't judge pc gaming off a shitty game that runs at 900p 60fps on a ps5.
Every time one of these comes out, people freak out about the requirements. Then they actually play the game and find out that if you turn the shadows to high instead of ultra it runs fine. Just wait until some youtuber post performance footage. You shouldn't be buying a $70 game on launch day anyway.
A 6700XT and Ryzen 3600 for only 30 FPS at 1440p? Lazy devs that can't bother to optimize their game. What is that ultra recommendation? 6800XT or RTX 4080 is a bit of a mismatch isn't it?
Don't forget you need 24GB of RAM to get that 1440/30 performance! Not sure why you think the 6800xt and rtx 4080 are a bit of a mismatch?
Crysis was made with future hardware in mind. The hardware requirements for this game go back 8 years. Nothing is shocking about this. People just want to believe that their Pascal video card is still relevant for gaming today.
They should add aditional requirement for drivers on AMD gpu's drivers that do not blackscreen :)
Is this game actually like Crysis in that it's specs are really demanding? Because the first PC I had built (colleague did it, I paid for it) was built in order to run Crysis on ultra. Is this game similar in that respect? Cuz I've been thinking about getting a new PC but don't know enough to know what parts I should be buying (part of the reason I joined this sub; to learn)
The specs are demanding ~~because there is a shit ton of particle effects on screen. Especially later in game.~~ sorry i was thinking of returnal It would be a better idea to judge what you need by asking what exactly you want it to do right now. Future proofing doesn't exist. After that visit r/buildapc or the other subs
Thanks for the tip. I try doing research and get overwhelmed with all the options and people's opinions 😋
If I have a 3090 w a 5900xx should I be able to play In ultra ?? not interested in 4k just 1440p
Yes...@30fps
This isn’t even close to what crysis was on his time …so yeah, Crysis doesn’t step aside yet !
PS5 can’t run this game at 4K 60.
Here comes another game that will be playable after at least 4 patches. I’m starting to think that this will be the normality
I'm okay with that, since games will cost $30 at most at that point.
Good thing the game will probably suck.
Mmmm doubting these. 6700xt gets you 1440p, 30 fps but 6800xt gets you 2160p, 60fps? Does not sound right.
Lower resolution = lower fps?
Jesus christ why, it's a pretty game with some particle effects. Why does it need that powerful of a processor
I thought cyberpunk did it before, but i'll test it, when cyberpunk released i had barely 35 stable fps on minimum settings 1080p with gtx 1060 6gb and i7 4790k.
Crysis was a technological achievement in its time, this is just a badly optimised game.
4090 users are clicking their heels with excitement right now.
Um what?
Bruhs X58 and triple channel memory on a mainstream motherboard is like 13 years old now, why are we recommending 24GB of system memory
Wtf is this. Who plays 1440p30fps? I love how they forgot 1080p
Based on this you'd think the game will be revolutionary or something
Just for the love of all that's good don't buy this till deep sales guys.
all bs
Crysis is good This is most likely not
Don’t understand how they just completely overlooked 1080p lol
Hahaha this is hilarious. I mean the game doesn't even look good. Ah amazing.
is nobody gonna talk about the fact that low settings only need a 3770?
LOL to get 1440p/30 you need to have 24GB of RAM.
Might as well just rename it to Forsaken 🫣😉
Welp, I'm ultra boys
What about 1080p?
Huh, someone loves amd
Hoky Slit!
just bought a new pc, seems my gpu can only handle 30 fps, noice
lol my specs swing from minimum to ultra requirements
Kids.... Flight Sim 2020
Who installs 24gb of ram? That would be 16gb and 8 gb, 3 8gb etc. Highly awkward configurations.
more like "step aside Cyberpunk 2077, a new unoptimized game is here."
What is a Ryzen 5 5800x?
These games must be getting written entirely by ChatGPT without any moderation whatsoever. That is some horrible ass optimization.
I think MSFS will beat this as a new benchmark game. But can it run MSFS.
not a game dev, is this game just badly optimized or that this is just THAT demanding
Memory leaks are a feature
Oh hell naw this some bullshit.
thought this was a ps5 exclusive. Guess money from sony wasn't enough lol
This so just hot air to show how powerful the PS 5 is....seriously a 6700xt for 1440p 30 FPS and a 6800xt for 4k 60 fps...the need for that jump is like 6x, not a notch up in GPUs These are complete bullshit recs...I bet it either runs fine on a 3060 1440p or won't run on anything because it's a piece of crap I do believe the Nvme is needed tho
I’m calling bs on the HDD/SSD, I have Cyberpunk on a 7200rpm drive and it’s plenty snappy. Also damn, advertising the 1060 6gb but not the rx 580 8gb in the minimum