But can it play...?

[Sixcess]

Something I haven't heard much of recently is games with insanely high system requirements. I'm talking about games like Doom 3 (back when it was released) or, of course, Crysis - the game designed for computers that didn't exist yet.

So what happened? Do you think it's because we're in the middle of the lifespan of the current gen consoles and developers aren't willing to push pc games because they don't want to outpace and lose the console market? Or is the current gen of pc games such that further major advances simply aren't worth the effort involved? Or something else?

Secondary question: what do you think is the most demanding game of the moment in terms of system requirements?

 

[Danceofmasks]

Hardware tessellation is amazing.
IF games are written for it, it would be some groundbreaking stuff.

However, it isn't going to happen anytime soon, because it's a catch 22:

Games sell more on consoles, so most multiple platform games are coded first for console.
They have to run well (ish, 'cos some devs suck at framerates) on console, so though PC versions are usually superior they aren't making use of new technology.

Since PC versions of games don't require the latest video cards to run well, there's no real incentive to buy them. Why get a brand new card, when my 4 year old card can run a game better than a console?

That means the number of potential customers for games that are built from the ground up for Hardware Tesselation is miniscule compared to the "good enough" PC port market.

Since the market is small, devs aim where there are more customers .. and so .. games sell more on consoles.


So yeah.
No incentive to buy new hardware -> no incentive to code for new hardware -> no incentive to buy new hardware.

There have been times when I've raged and said consoles are holding back the industry .. but that's not what I really think .. 'cos Nintendo Wii keeps getting amazing game after amazing game.

 

[Ranorak]

One of the main reasons WoW sells so incredibly well, is because it's playable on almost anything with a CPU and video card.

 

[Something Amyss]

I wish game devs. would stop pushing graphics so hard.

I prefer the average machine be able to run the game well, than look amazing on a high-end machine and never pass 30fps.

but how else will we know which dev's penis is bigger?

 

[Something Amyss]

One of the main reasons WoW sells so incredibly well, is because it's playable on almost anything with a CPU and video card.

Hell, it plays on my microwave.

 

[Danceofmasks]

I wish game devs. would stop pushing graphics so hard.

I prefer the average machine be able to run the game well, than look amazing on a high-end machine and never pass 30fps.

but how else will we know which dev's penis is bigger?

Trust me. I know. *wink*

[sup][sup]No... No I don't... My life is a lie.[/sup][/sup]

Actually, I think that award goes to Notch.
No one else can make 10 million off of a game while it was still in Alpha.

 

[NeedAUserName]

One of the main reasons WoW sells so incredibly well, is because it's playable on almost anything with a CPU and video card.

Hell, it plays on my microwave.

Yeah, my washing machine plays it when I put clothes in. But anyway, its a pretty tough choice, because naturally developers want to make a game that can get to as wide an audience as possible, whilst still using the best technology available, so they have to find a middle ground.

 

[Something Amyss]

One of the main reasons WoW sells so incredibly well, is because it's playable on almost anything with a CPU and video card.

Hell, it plays on my microwave.

Yeah, my washing machine plays it when I put clothes in. But anyway, its a pretty tough choice, because naturally developers want to make a game that can get to as wide an audience as possible, whilst still using the best technology available, so they have to find a middle ground.

The problem being, a lot of companies are working towards the best technology and saying "to hell with middle ground."

 

[Something Amyss]

I wish game devs. would stop pushing graphics so hard.

I prefer the average machine be able to run the game well, than look amazing on a high-end machine and never pass 30fps.

but how else will we know which dev's penis is bigger?

Trust me. I know. *wink*

[sup][sup]No... No I don't... My life is a lie.[/sup][/sup]

But....But...you're still a pirate, right?

 

[Smooth Operator]

You really don't need anything that goes beyond the Crytek engine, they just need to make good games with it, push the boundaries of gameplay not the damn graphics.

 

[Nexoram]

Surprisingly, the Total War games (Napoleon, Empire) by The Creative Assembly needs a mean computer to run at full settings. It has hundreds, thousands of units battling out and the game engine has to run all of the animations. Weather effects are also very pretty so I reckon this has a high system requirement.

 

[number2301]

You really don't need anything that goes beyond the Crytek engine, they just need to make good games with it, push the boundaries of gameplay not the damn graphics.

High system requirements isn't just about graphics though is it? It allows massive environment, complex physics and complex calculations. Computers aren't fast enough until loading times are eliminated in Football Manager.

 

[Something Amyss]

[sup][sup]No... No I don't... My life is a lie.[/sup][/sup]

But....But...you're still a pirate, right?

No! *removes eyepatch* It's a fake!

*runs away crying*[/quote]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

It's a shame when your heroes fall before your eyes.

 

[crobulator]

Metro 2033 is currently the game with the highest system requirements, methinks.

i7 980x OC'd to 4.5GHz, 12GB DDR3 1600 RAM, GTX 580, max settings at 1920x1080, about 60 FPS, if motherboards.org isn't lying to me (which they haven't yet).

Definitely but it looks incredible though so the new graphics card was so worth it plus mw2 came free with the card.

 

[Vykrel]

this is one of the few reasons i am a console player...

i dont like worrying about "can my system run this game?". thats often the question i see when i look up gameplay for upcoming titles. then they list their computer specs or whatever the hell that gibberish is. just confuses the hell out of me lol, id never be able to understand it

i enjoy knowing that as long as its being released on the 360, i can play it.


also, i suck with keyboard controls

Edit: and people worry too damn much about how friggin pretty the game looks. who cares? as long as the graphics are just good, im fine with it. the gameplay is what really matters

 

[Smooth Operator]

You really don't need anything that goes beyond the Crytek engine, they just need to make good games with it, push the boundaries of gameplay not the damn graphics.

High system requirements isn't just about graphics though is it? It allows massive environment, complex physics and complex calculations. Computers aren't fast enough until loading times are eliminated in Football Manager.

But that is all already covered in Crysis, or let's take Far Cry 2 since it's more open world.
You got a massive world, with incredible graphics, and you only load on startup after that it can all flow, it feels like you are in an actual world with no boundaries.
You could put any game/story in that engine and just go nuts with things you can do.

And to be clear, loading is not a problem of computers anymore, it's the lazy ass game designers, dynamic pre-loading is out there for decades but noone ever uses it, so the need of loading screens in a football manager are a joke.
And I was just playing Blur(racing game) where you sometimes fuck up and haveto restart to get the best score, and when you restart the shitty game loads the level that is already there again... and that is just bullshit in game design, nothing more.