Why such high system requirements?

raystantz

I was hoping I wasn't going to have to spend oodles of dough to play this at a decent level but it looks that way.

I can play conan on max right now, but looking at some of the benchmarks and rigs that are getting low scores.. geez.. I'm looking at some serious cash just to play one game.

Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

ArmaniDemon

Originally posted by raystantz

I was hoping I wasn't going to have to spend oodles of dough to play this at a decent level but it looks that way.

I can play conan on max right now, but looking at some of the benchmarks and rigs that are getting low scores.. geez.. I'm looking at some serious cash just to play one game.

 

Take the benchmark scores with a grain of salt. The game is far from being fully optimized. 

Shoju

Because Square Enix are trying to force the people who are still playing WOW on their Commodore Vic20 to get with the times!

jdnewell

Personally I will be waiting until the game releases before I decide if I need to upgrade anything. Once I Install and see how it runs on my computer, then I will consider the options.

I am betting on the game running better than a benchmark. Could be wrong tho.

Mariouz

Because they made a deal with the hardware manufacturers and they said, hey guys make you a deal we will make this game that requires some massive update on hardware, you make money we make money we all win. How about it, and the hardware people came back and where like your on! True story I was there.

 

Let the Conspiracy's begin!

 

Ok maybe not, but if you remember FFXI it also had a benchmark before launch and it was the same deal, now I am not saying that having a great rig wont be a better way to go. I am just saying that your rig dont have to be that great just decent. It is the same with any of the newer games they all will require you to have a decent machine not a Commodore 64 to play it.

Mariouz

Originally posted by jdnewell

Personally I will be waiting until the game releases before I decide if I need to upgrade anything. Once I Install and see how it runs on my computer, then I will consider the options.

I am betting on the game running better than a benchmark. Could be wrong tho.

^^

Agreed.

 

I will be doing the same thing. I got an ok machine and it should run while not top notch it should still be playable, if it is not then I will go out and buy a better machine or upgrade a part here and there.

Loke666

Well, some companies makes games that anyone can play but the problem there is that the graphics is dated when the game comes out. Others have top notch graphics but loses many potential customers because of it.

Most try something in the middle.

The reason for FFs high sys reqs is that they want th game to last longer, and there are quite a few fans on games with high graphics.

Square enix have probably spent a lot of time considering this and decided that this was the best way for them, it all depends on who you make the game for.

aluucards

It has been said many many times that the benchmark is not quite the best thing to go by right now. It is intended to measure hardware that is not even available yet to even get the highest score attainable. It also does not account for multiple graphics cards. It also appears that the game is very GPU dependent.

 

That being said. If you can comfortably hit this min system requirements you should not have an issue.

 

Sure they are the beta requirements, but there probably will not be huge changes.

Operating System	Windows® XP SP3
	Windows® Vista 32-bit / 64-bit SP2
	Windows® 7 32-bit / 64-bit
CPU	Intel® Core™2 Duo (2.0GHz)
	AMD Athlon™ X2 (2.0GHz)
RAM	Windows® XP: 1.5GB or higher
	Windows® Vista / Windows® 7: 2GB or higher
HDD/SSD Space	Installation: 15GB or more
	Download: Space on the hard drive where 'My Documents' is located should be 6GB or more
Graphics Card	512MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 9600 series or higher
	512MB ATI Radeon™ HD 2900 series or higher
Sound Card	DirectSound® compatible sound card (DirectX® 9.0c or higher)
Internet Connection	Broadband Internet connection or higher
Screen Resolution	1280 x 720 or higher; 32-bit or higher
DirectX®	DirectX® 9.0c
Others	Mouse, Keyboard, Gamepad

swalker23

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

Agreed

 

As for the OP, if  you can run AoC on high settings then you have nothing to worry about.  Like others have said don't worry about what the benchmark says.  Wait til the game comes out and play it, if your happy with the graphics and fps then don't upgrade.

Alberel

Originally posted by jdnewell

Personally I will be waiting until the game releases before I decide if I need to upgrade anything. Once I Install and see how it runs on my computer, then I will consider the options.

I am betting on the game running better than a benchmark. Could be wrong tho.

This is the way to go.

The client does indeed run much much better than the benchmark. The benchmark doesn't even give an accurate score so honestly just ignore it entirely, it's not helpful at all.

Most people with a decent computer from the last couple of years will be able to run it fine. Don't expect to run it on max though, the max settings have been designed to exceed what most people's computers will be able to pump out for a few years yet. They're trying to futureproof it for a little while.

Grunty

Because there is always someone who says, "I spent more money than I should have on a computer system. Someone better make a game that uses all that I put in my system."

Then when they do get such a game they say, "I spent more money than I should have on a computer system. Why is this game such a resource hog?"

theinhibitor

historically speaking, games that were initially intended for consoles and then ported over to pc's usually have high system reqs. I remember when halo came out for the computer: it was pretty much unplayable by that days standards. 

im not sure whether ff14 was initially planned just for the ps3 or comp, but it does have pretty high system reqs. one of the main issues is that RAM and CPU power has exponentially increased over the last couple years. Dual core was a nice upgrade but the core i7 and dual channel RAM has increased performance tenfold. now u can get laptops that run wayyyyyy faster than the top of the line gaming desktops a few years back for 500 bucks. 

im guessing SE put time into the equation. since more and more people are buying faster and cheaper machines, most gamers will have a computer that can handle there game in the year that it comes out.

for those that dont have a good enough machine, just buy a new video card for 100 bucks and it should run it. 

Wizardry

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

You are correct,and they are claiming the same thing,however there is one big flaw in their claim.

A good developer will make their games ,so we can adjust the settings,this way you won't alienate low end users,but the hi end standards can still reach to the future.Anyone that has taken the benchmark test,has realized the differences are minute at best,meaning there is very little room between low end and high end.

There is no question that Square has failed when comes to good coding and the crytal tools,i am confident that they will eventually work it all out,but for now ,system req's will be higher than they should be ,especially for the low res version of the game.There is no reason to include hi end lighting effects or hi resolution textures,nor is there any reason to have hi end shadow effects or hi detail player models,that should all be in the hi resolution version or there should be individual settings that allow players to tweak the game to fully match their system.

The bottom line is that Square is struggling with coding,memory use ect ect.The best way to tell if Square is feeding us a lie is to look at the view/rendering distance.If the graphics are dithered badly when looking into the distance,then they have made it for now ,not the future,because if like they said ,systems will advance VERY fast,we SHOULD be able to have very large view distances while maintaining hi end visuals.This is also a DX9 game,they have not coded it for DX10 or 11,so it is not a game designed for the future,but an easy claim to make,when having issues.

Alberel

Originally posted by Wizardry

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

You are correct,and they are claiming the same thing,however there is one big flaw in their claim.

A good developer will make their games ,so we can adjust the settings,this way you won't alienate low end users,but the hi end standards can still reach to the future.Anyone that has taken the benchmark test,has realized the differences are minute at best,meaning there is very little room between low end and high end.

There is no question that Square has failed when comes to good coding and the crytal tools,i am confident that they will eventually work it all out,but for now ,system req's will be higher than they should be ,especially for the low res version of the game.There is no reason to include hi end lighting effects or hi resolution textures,nor is there any reason to have hi end shadow effects or hi detail player models,that should all be in the hi resolution version or there should be individual settings that allow players to tweak the game to fully match their system.

The bottom line is that Square is struggling with coding,memory use ect ect.The best way to tell if Square is feeding us a lie is to look at the view/rendering distance.If the graphics are dithered badly when looking into the distance,then they have made it for now ,not the future,because if like they said ,systems will advance VERY fast,we SHOULD be able to have very large view distances while maintaining hi end visuals.

Lol Wizardry your vendetta of misinforming everyone about this game amuses me to no end. The benchmark doesn't even have any config options so I don't know what you're even trying to prove by using it to differentiate between low and high settings. All the benchmark shows is one static graphical configuration on low and high resolution. On top of that it is entirely unoptimised; the beta client is already 10x better optimised than the benchmark (and yes I'm aware that makes the benchmark useless).

And Square has clearly failed with coding? Please... you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Wizardry

Originally posted by Alberel

Originally posted by Wizardry

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

You are correct,and they are claiming the same thing,however there is one big flaw in their claim.

A good developer will make their games ,so we can adjust the settings,this way you won't alienate low end users,but the hi end standards can still reach to the future.Anyone that has taken the benchmark test,has realized the differences are minute at best,meaning there is very little room between low end and high end.

There is no question that Square has failed when comes to good coding and the crytal tools,i am confident that they will eventually work it all out,but for now ,system req's will be higher than they should be ,especially for the low res version of the game.There is no reason to include hi end lighting effects or hi resolution textures,nor is there any reason to have hi end shadow effects or hi detail player models,that should all be in the hi resolution version or there should be individual settings that allow players to tweak the game to fully match their system.

The bottom line is that Square is struggling with coding,memory use ect ect.The best way to tell if Square is feeding us a lie is to look at the view/rendering distance.If the graphics are dithered badly when looking into the distance,then they have made it for now ,not the future,because if like they said ,systems will advance VERY fast,we SHOULD be able to have very large view distances while maintaining hi end visuals.

Lol Wizardry your vendetta of misinforming everyone about this game amuses me to no end. The benchmark doesn't even have any config options so I don't know what you're even trying to prove by using it to differentiate between low and high settings. All the benchmark shows is one static graphical configuration on low and high resolution. On top of that it is entirely unoptimised; the beta client is already 10x better optimised than the benchmark (and yes I'm aware that makes the benchmark useless).

And Square has clearly failed with coding? Please... you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

I said the benchmark had options for settings?It was built in,they tested us with two versions ,a hi resolution and a low resolution,please when CLAIMING one is misinforming ,don't make a fool of yourself by putting words out there that i never said.My claim was that a good game SHOULD have settings for us,maybe you only read it the way you wanted to read it ,,idk your problem?I also never said it will not have these settings,i am just merely stating what it should have.

How would you know the beta client is 10x better?until the game is released,nothing is finished and there can very well be many changes.You might have also missed the part where i said,i have no doubt ,they wil lwork it all out eventually?Again you were just attacking me,very rude,stick to the topic please.

YES they have failed in coding,pay attention to the media surrounding Sqaure and you will EASILY realize this.A simple ...remember the concurrent release on all systems promise?Hmm maybe you forgot that?it's not happening sorry to say,and they admitted their problems with the crystal tools way back when coding for the FFXIII game and it was also noted on SEVERAL reputable websites,like i said all you needed to do was pay attention.

PLease before attacking someone or calling out BS,don't follow it up with your own false claims or bs...again please?

I was merely answering the op's question,something you did NOT do,so off topic and trolling another user,thanks but no thanks,i don't need it.

aluucards

Originally posted by Wizardry

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

You are correct,and they are claiming the same thing,however there is one big flaw in their claim.

A good developer will make their games ,so we can adjust the settings,this way you won't alienate low end users,but the hi end standards can still reach to the future.Anyone that has taken the benchmark test,has realized the differences are minute at best,meaning there is very little room between low end and high end.

There is no question that Square has failed when comes to good coding and the crytal tools,i am confident that they will eventually work it all out,but for now ,system req's will be higher than they should be ,especially for the low res version of the game.There is no reason to include hi end lighting effects or hi resolution textures,nor is there any reason to have hi end shadow effects or hi detail player models,that should all be in the hi resolution version or there should be individual settings that allow players to tweak the game to fully match their system.

The bottom line is that Square is struggling with coding,memory use ect ect.The best way to tell if Square is feeding us a lie is to look at the view/rendering distance.If the graphics are dithered badly when looking into the distance,then they have made it for now ,not the future,because if like they said ,systems will advance VERY fast,we SHOULD be able to have very large view distances while maintaining hi end visuals.This is also a DX9 game,they have not coded it for DX10 or 11,so it is not a game designed for the future,but an easy claim to make,when having issues.

LOL i need cold hard proof of these coding issues or it didnt happen. Sounds like a ton of BS to me.

Raxeon

Originally posted by Wizardry

Originally posted by Alberel

Originally posted by Wizardry

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

You are correct,and they are claiming the same thing,however there is one big flaw in their claim.

A good developer will make their games ,so we can adjust the settings,this way you won't alienate low end users,but the hi end standards can still reach to the future.Anyone that has taken the benchmark test,has realized the differences are minute at best,meaning there is very little room between low end and high end.

There is no question that Square has failed when comes to good coding and the crytal tools,i am confident that they will eventually work it all out,but for now ,system req's will be higher than they should be ,especially for the low res version of the game.There is no reason to include hi end lighting effects or hi resolution textures,nor is there any reason to have hi end shadow effects or hi detail player models,that should all be in the hi resolution version or there should be individual settings that allow players to tweak the game to fully match their system.

The bottom line is that Square is struggling with coding,memory use ect ect.The best way to tell if Square is feeding us a lie is to look at the view/rendering distance.If the graphics are dithered badly when looking into the distance,then they have made it for now ,not the future,because if like they said ,systems will advance VERY fast,we SHOULD be able to have very large view distances while maintaining hi end visuals.

Lol Wizardry your vendetta of misinforming everyone about this game amuses me to no end. The benchmark doesn't even have any config options so I don't know what you're even trying to prove by using it to differentiate between low and high settings. All the benchmark shows is one static graphical configuration on low and high resolution. On top of that it is entirely unoptimised; the beta client is already 10x better optimised than the benchmark (and yes I'm aware that makes the benchmark useless).

And Square has clearly failed with coding? Please... you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

I said the benchmark had options for settings?It was built in,they tested us with two versions ,a hi resolution and a low resolution,please when CLAIMING one is misinforming ,don't make a fool of yourself by putting words out there that i never said.My claim was that a good game SHOULD have settings for us,maybe you only read it the way you wanted to read it ,,idk your problem?I also never said it will not have these settings,i am just merely stating what it should have.

How would you know the beta client is 10x better?until the game is released,nothing is finished and there can very well be many changes.You might have also missed the part where i said,i have no doubt ,they wil lwork it all out eventually?Again you were just attacking me,very rude,stick to the topic please.

YES they have failed in coding,pay attention to the media surrounding Sqaure and you will EASILY realize this.A simple ...remember the concurrent release on all systems promise?Hmm maybe you forgot that?it's not happening sorry to say,and they admitted their problems with the crystal tools way back when coding for the FFXIII game and it was also noted on SEVERAL reputable websites,like i said all you needed to do was pay attention.

PLease before attacking someone or calling out BS,don't follow it up with your own false claims or bs...again please?

I was merely answering the op's question,something you did NOT do,so off topic and trolling another user,thanks but no thanks,i don't need it.

 there coding is fine look at ffxi. But theya re using crystal tools for the first time for an mmo SO they will be fine

Raxeon

Originally posted by Wizardry

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

The answer is simple...

 

This is a game for the future and not the past.   If you want to design a game that still looks good in 6 or 7 years you'll need to set your graphics mark as high as possible.

You are correct,and they are claiming the same thing,however there is one big flaw in their claim.

A good developer will make their games ,so we can adjust the settings,this way you won't alienate low end users,but the hi end standards can still reach to the future.Anyone that has taken the benchmark test,has realized the differences are minute at best,meaning there is very little room between low end and high end.

There is no question that Square has failed when comes to good coding and the crytal tools,i am confident that they will eventually work it all out,but for now ,system req's will be higher than they should be ,especially for the low res version of the game.There is no reason to include hi end lighting effects or hi resolution textures,nor is there any reason to have hi end shadow effects or hi detail player models,that should all be in the hi resolution version or there should be individual settings that allow players to tweak the game to fully match their system.

The bottom line is that Square is struggling with coding,memory use ect ect.The best way to tell if Square is feeding us a lie is to look at the view/rendering distance.If the graphics are dithered badly when looking into the distance,then they have made it for now ,not the future,because if like they said ,systems will advance VERY fast,we SHOULD be able to have very large view distances while maintaining hi end visuals.This is also a DX9 game,they have not coded it for DX10 or 11,so it is not a game designed for the future,but an easy claim to make,when having issues.

 we can adjust settings just not in the benchmark sorry. ffxi benchmark was the same

Raxeon

Originally posted by Alberel

Originally posted by jdnewell

Personally I will be waiting until the game releases before I decide if I need to upgrade anything. Once I Install and see how it runs on my computer, then I will consider the options.

I am betting on the game running better than a benchmark. Could be wrong tho.

This is the way to go.

The client does indeed run much much better than the benchmark. The benchmark doesn't even give an accurate score so honestly just ignore it entirely, it's not helpful at all.

Most people with a decent computer from the last couple of years will be able to run it fine. Don't expect to run it on max though, the max settings have been designed to exceed what most people's computers will be able to pump out for a few years yet. They're trying to futureproof it for a little while.

 this except ati does have that stuttering issue atm but thats just optimization issue which should be fixed soonish

Wizardry

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/technical-issues-delayed-final-fantasy-xiv-on-ps3--1012.html

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/square-enix-ffxiv-for-ps3-taking-longer-than-they-first-thought--1029.html

 

Lol this is just recent news,don't even have to have paid attention to what Tanaka said in the past.

“We understand the wrath of players and developers are sorry because they did everything they could to have a simultaneous release date, but unfortunately they have encountered many technical problems on the development of the game for PS3. We strive to release the game as soon as possible.”

Here is an excerpt of a site catching Square in a sort of a lie,as they claimed a different story as to why they wern't going to release on Xbox 360.It kind of proves you really can't trust developers ,i am not just singling out Square,this is the case for many developers.

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/square-enix-microsoft-turned-final-fantasy-xiv-down--1018.html

Problem is ,if yo uare a fanbois,you basically turn a blind eye to problems a game might have,that yo uwant to praise,thing is there is MANY who want to know the truth behind these games and the developer they are goign to support.

I plan on buying and playing FFXIV,in case you must know,so there is no vendetta,sorry to say.The specs for this game will be too high,Tanaka has already claimed this,it is not me saying this,his claim is that it is because they built the game for the future,i call lie on that claim,and is why the op also wanted to know whay such high specs as i am sure MANY others also want to know why,getting all upset won't help anything.

 

aluucards

Originally posted by Wizardry

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/technical-issues-delayed-final-fantasy-xiv-on-ps3--1012.html

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/square-enix-ffxiv-for-ps3-taking-longer-than-they-first-thought--1029.html

 

Lol this is just recent news,don't even have to have paid attention to what Tanaka said in the past.

“We understand the wrath of players and developers are sorry because they did everything they could to have a simultaneous release date, but unfortunately they have encountered many technical problems on the development of the game for PS3. We strive to release the game as soon as possible.”

Here is an excerpt of a site catching Square in a sort of a lie,as they claimed a different story as to why they wern't going to release on Xbox 360.It kind of proves you really can't trust developers ,i am not just singling out Square,this is the case for many developers.

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/square-enix-microsoft-turned-final-fantasy-xiv-down--1018.html

Problem is ,if yo uare a fanbois,you basically turn a blind eye to problems a game might have,that yo uwant to praise,thing is there is MANY who want to know the truth behind these games and the developer they are goign to support.

I plan on buying and playing FFXIV,in case you must know,so there is no vendetta,sorry to say.The specs for this game will be too high,Tanaka has already claimed this,it is not me saying this,his claim is that it is because they built the game for the future,i call lie on that claim,and is why the op also wanted to know whay such high specs as i am sure MANY others also want to know why,getting all upset won't help anything.

 

It is because the PS3 lacks the RAM not a coding issue so....yeah.

 

Also, the minumum system requirements for this game are not unreasonable at all. If you do not have a PC that can handle that in this day and age....well that really sucks for you.

eisenryu

I do believe that you will be able to turn the graphics down pretty low. If you have ever played vanguard you can have the game look amazing or you can change it so low that it resembles ES2: Daggerfall. We'll only be able to see at release. If its instanced it will be ven easier to run.

swalker23

Originally posted by eisenryu

I do believe that you will be able to turn the graphics down pretty low. If you have ever played vanguard you can have the game look amazing or you can change it so low that it resembles ES2: Daggerfall. We'll only be able to see at release. If its instanced it will be ven easier to run.

lol love your pic.  Kenpachi Fried Chicken

Raxeon

Originally posted by Wizardry

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/technical-issues-delayed-final-fantasy-xiv-on-ps3--1012.html

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/square-enix-ffxiv-for-ps3-taking-longer-than-they-first-thought--1029.html

 

Lol this is just recent news,don't even have to have paid attention to what Tanaka said in the past.

“We understand the wrath of players and developers are sorry because they did everything they could to have a simultaneous release date, but unfortunately they have encountered many technical problems on the development of the game for PS3. We strive to release the game as soon as possible.”

Here is an excerpt of a site catching Square in a sort of a lie,as they claimed a different story as to why they wern't going to release on Xbox 360.It kind of proves you really can't trust developers ,i am not just singling out Square,this is the case for many developers.

http://www.finalfantasyunion.com/news/square-enix-microsoft-turned-final-fantasy-xiv-down--1018.html

Problem is ,if yo uare a fanbois,you basically turn a blind eye to problems a game might have,that yo uwant to praise,thing is there is MANY who want to know the truth behind these games and the developer they are goign to support.

I plan on buying and playing FFXIV,in case you must know,so there is no vendetta,sorry to say.The specs for this game will be too high,Tanaka has already claimed this,it is not me saying this,his claim is that it is because they built the game for the future,i call lie on that claim,and is why the op also wanted to know whay such high specs as i am sure MANY others also want to know why,getting all upset won't help anything.

 

 they turned down microsoft because microsoft wants closed server for xboxlive. and without playonline you cant get around it, unless microsoft make sit where the youd ont need xboxlive to connect to games. SO i dont know why your using ps3 as an example. it has nothing to do with the pc version

Mariouz

Wizardry you cant handle the truth!

 

Sorry just had to go there. Well you know how it is, its all about the PR man PR if they tell you to bend the truth a little you will be like ok a little white lie cant hurt.... Or you just use some big words that only some will know and others are just like 'Um... yeah what he said.' Every company does it, not saying its ok but it happens, as long as they can deliver a product that works for the most part well great. Most of the other games have run into similar issues so its nothing new for us that play them, while we are dissapointed we still end up playing and hope that they fix the game.