Dragon Age PC System Requirements Pretty Hefty

[odisious15]

For $850.00 I was able to build a system with;
-8 gigs of DDR3
-AMD Phenom II x4 955 3.2 ghz.
-640GB HDD
-Nvidia 9800GT 1024MB

Plus a really nice modular PSU and an aftermarket heat-sink along with a host of other fixins.

So really there isn't much reason to hold back on certain software/hardware requirements so long as the game benefits and takes advantage of the increased demand on hardware minimum specs.

While I too am a card carrying member of the PC Gaming Master Race, we must remember that one could buy an xbox360 And PS3 for right around that price. For those strange people who don't live in front of their computers, or who have a more limited budget, it can be a tough choice.

It is interesting and a little ironic to me that the "recommended specs" for Dragon's Age are almost exactly the specs of the machine I built in April 08 (spent about $1000). They're not quite pulling a <a href=http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/10/15/ target=self>Crysis on us, but the game still asks for some relatively new hardware.

Also remember that console games sell for $59.99 while PC games go for $49.99 on average, so if you have a decent library of games you will have spent more for either console over time then what you would spend on a PC. Also note that I use my PC for more than gaming, which elevated the total cost due to need for much more memory than one would normally want.

While yes the consoles almost always can run the games designed for them without much trouble, they usually have to have many graphical aspects turned down. (Note that I do not judge a game on what it looks like, just an observation.) While PC software can almost always be scaled down or up either within the program or by editing the game files directly to get the best performance on a wide range of systems.

I'm not saying that the PC is superior to all consoles nor am I saying that developers should continually up the bar for system requirements. I just think that so long as these increased requirements are made devs should be making sure that they are taking advantage of the extra power they have to work with, and at the same time making sure that their engine is optimized so it's not just wasting resources.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Wanna know why WoW continues to be the dominant MMO on the planet with absolutely NO new contenders even capable of knocking it off it's throne?

Look at these recommended specs.

WHO the hell has a system like that? Worse, who the hell wants to go update their system to play a game that may or may not find it's servers shutdown (another failure) within a year?

I can play WoW on just about any pc i can buy in a store, off the shelf straight out of the box, no need to update any graphics cards, no need to buy new ram...

And the game STILL does everything that Dragonage will attempt to do.. only it wont require $300-400 in upgrades to reasonably play, even at those minimum specs I'm wagering you exclude right off about a good 60% of the mainstream/casual PC gaming market, who it just so happens comprises the majority of those 11.5 million subscribers WoW claims to have, although I'm still waiting for Blizzard to clarify if those "Subscribers" are a.) currently ACTIVE accounts, b.) new/original accounts or just second accounts, c.) includes every 10 day trial account.

 

[raskyred]

How can people not have at least 20 gigs available? I have a 300 gig HDD and a terabyte external that I use to store all my music and video, leaving my 300 for games/documents/downloads. Big ass hard drives are cheap.

And yeah, most of his money went to the shiny case and wiring. Had he built himself he could probably have two terabyte-drives in a raid 1

 

[jamesworkshop]

Wanna know why WoW continues to be the dominant MMO on the planet with absolutely NO new contenders even capable of knocking it off it's throne?

Look at these recommended specs.

WHO the hell has a system like that? Worse, who the hell wants to go update their system to play a game that may or may not find it's servers shutdown (another failure) within a year?

I can play WoW on just about any pc i can buy in a store, off the shelf straight out of the box, no need to update any graphics cards, no need to buy new ram...

And the game STILL does everything that Dragonage will attempt to do.. only it wont require $300-400 in upgrades to reasonably play, even at those minimum specs I'm wagering you exclude right off about a good 60% of the mainstream/casual PC gaming market, who it just so happens comprises the majority of those 11.5 million subscribers WoW claims to have, although I'm still waiting for Blizzard to clarify if those "Subscribers" are a.) currently ACTIVE accounts, b.) new/original accounts or just second accounts, c.) includes every 10 day trial account.

i thought dragon age was single player only? just checked wikipedia and it is

Windows XP Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows XP with SP3
CPU: Intel Core 2 (or equivalent) running at 1.4Ghz or greater
AMD X2 (or equivalent) running at 1.8Ghz or greater
RAM: 1GB or more
Video: ATI Radeon X850 128MB or greater
NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT 128MB or greater
DVD ROM (Physical copy)
20 GB HD space

Thoses are really low IMO sub 2Ghz CPU over 5 years old graphics cards, 1Gb of ram

 

[Markness]

For $850.00 I was able to build a system with;
-8 gigs of DDR3
-AMD Phenom II x4 955 3.2 ghz.
-640GB HDD
-Nvidia 9800GT 1024MB

Plus a really nice modular PSU and an aftermarket heat-sink along with a host of other fixins.

Only in America*

*This is both a cliche and an actual serious statement.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Wanna know why WoW continues to be the dominant MMO on the planet with absolutely NO new contenders even capable of knocking it off it's throne?

Look at these recommended specs.

WHO the hell has a system like that? Worse, who the hell wants to go update their system to play a game that may or may not find it's servers shutdown (another failure) within a year?

I can play WoW on just about any pc i can buy in a store, off the shelf straight out of the box, no need to update any graphics cards, no need to buy new ram...

And the game STILL does everything that Dragonage will attempt to do.. only it wont require $300-400 in upgrades to reasonably play, even at those minimum specs I'm wagering you exclude right off about a good 60% of the mainstream/casual PC gaming market, who it just so happens comprises the majority of those 11.5 million subscribers WoW claims to have, although I'm still waiting for Blizzard to clarify if those "Subscribers" are a.) currently ACTIVE accounts, b.) new/original accounts or just second accounts, c.) includes every 10 day trial account.

i thought dragon age was single player only? just checked wikipedia and it is

Windows XP Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows XP with SP3
CPU: Intel Core 2 (or equivalent) running at 1.4Ghz or greater
AMD X2 (or equivalent) running at 1.8Ghz or greater
RAM: 1GB or more
Video: ATI Radeon X850 128MB or greater
NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT 128MB or greater
DVD ROM (Physical copy)
20 GB HD space

Thoses are really low IMO sub 2Ghz CPU over 5 years old graphics cards, 1Gb of ram

I thought I read somewhere that it had Coop or online?

 

[KSarty]

Recommended System Requirements
OS - Windows XP / Vista
Processor - Intel Core 2 DUO @ 2.2GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+
Memory - 2.0 GB RAM
GPU - NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS/640 or similar

I'm confused, that isn't very hefty at all. I had a better build than that (with the exception of my video card) over 3 years ago.

I thought I read somewhere that it had Coop or online?

It might have co-op, but that doesn't make it a mass market MMO. And in all seriousness those specs really aren't that impressive.

 

[high_castle]

This is why I have a console. I'd having to play something this epic on a lower quality. The nice thing about consoles is that the system requirements always stay the same. Sure I lose the toolset, but I have very little free time on my hands anyway, and that time's devoted to playing games, not modding them.

 

[Mongodyr]

Wooo, I can run it.

 

[belgariontheking]

Or I don't need 4 GB to play GAMES. That's not logical. I do meet the recommended (I had to OC my CPU for Prototype, so I know this), but requiring people to own a 64 bit CPU and having 4 GB of RAM (and 20GB on HDD) is insane.

The third I'll agree on, the first I'll express my sympathy (though disagree - Core 2 has been around for ages) but these days I really don't think anyone has any excuse not to have 4GB of RAM. The stuff's so cheap it's frightening.

1. Changing the OS.
2. Incompatability of 32bit programs on a 64 bit OS.
3. No games use 4GB RAM. RAM is not like CPU or GPU power - you have either enough, or not enough RAM. Having more than you should have won't change anything, it will be empty, not used. Better CPU and GPU ALWAYS make your PC/games go faster.
4. 4GB costs about $80, which isn't that little for a 17-year old.
5. Did I mention I would have to reinstall both Windows XP and Windows 7 to actually use that 4GB to the max?


edit: $80 in Poland is 230 PLN. That's a bit, considering I get 30-50 PLN a month.

1. they never said they require 64bit at all. When they say 4 GB RAM, they do not mean that this game alone will take 4GB. I don't know where you got that. They mean that if you have 4 GB of RAM on your machine, this game will play smoothly.

2. I have been running a 64 bit OS for years and have met absolutely zero 32 bit programs that wouldn't run on it. It's called emulation, look into it.

3. You completely fail to understand what a computer is. You're right about RAM. Having a couple gigs of unused RAM is great because you never want to run out. However, I'm running a quad core Phenom processor and a 9800GTX+ GPU. It runs all my games at >60 fps. If I got a better CPU/GPU, I could run them at a whopping 100 fps! whoopie, considering the eye only sees at 30 fps.

4. 4 GB of RAM shouldn't cost $80, unless you're using Canadian (fake) dollars. Check this, for example:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227199

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010170147%201052315794&name=4GB%20(2%20x%202GB)

That's desktop memory and laptop memory will probably cost more, but if you're gaming on a laptop, you're doing it wrong.

5. If you need to do that, you're doing it wrong. Ask someone who knows something about this to help you. Why are you using a beta operating system to run games and complaining about it on a website. You made your bed, now sleep in it.

 

[belgariontheking]

I mean, what kind of OS requires you to have more RAM to run games and apps than the previous version? Cruel and unusual, if you ask me...

What kind of operating system requires less? Newer operating systems do more, they require more resources to do more. What did you expect?

 

[ErGo]

Well there's another game I cant play... oh great.

 

[Abedeus]

Or I don't need 4 GB to play GAMES. That's not logical. I do meet the recommended (I had to OC my CPU for Prototype, so I know this), but requiring people to own a 64 bit CPU and having 4 GB of RAM (and 20GB on HDD) is insane.

The third I'll agree on, the first I'll express my sympathy (though disagree - Core 2 has been around for ages) but these days I really don't think anyone has any excuse not to have 4GB of RAM. The stuff's so cheap it's frightening.

1. Changing the OS.
2. Incompatability of 32bit programs on a 64 bit OS.
3. No games use 4GB RAM. RAM is not like CPU or GPU power - you have either enough, or not enough RAM. Having more than you should have won't change anything, it will be empty, not used. Better CPU and GPU ALWAYS make your PC/games go faster.
4. 4GB costs about $80, which isn't that little for a 17-year old.
5. Did I mention I would have to reinstall both Windows XP and Windows 7 to actually use that 4GB to the max?


edit: $80 in Poland is 230 PLN. That's a bit, considering I get 30-50 PLN a month.

1. they never said they require 64bit at all. When they say 4 GB RAM, they do not mean that this game alone will take 4GB. I don't know where you got that. They mean that if you have 4 GB of RAM on your machine, this game will play smoothly.

2. I have been running a 64 bit OS for years and have met absolutely zero 32 bit programs that wouldn't run on it. It's called emulation, look into it.

3. You completely fail to understand what a computer is. You're right about RAM. Having a couple gigs of unused RAM is great because you never want to run out. However, I'm running a quad core Phenom processor and a 9800GTX+ GPU. It runs all my games at >60 fps. If I got a better CPU/GPU, I could run them at a whopping 100 fps! whoopie, considering the eye only sees at 30 fps.

4. 4 GB of RAM shouldn't cost $80, unless you're using Canadian (fake) dollars. Check this, for example:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227199

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010170147%201052315794&name=4GB%20(2%20x%202GB)

That's desktop memory and laptop memory will probably cost more, but if you're gaming on a laptop, you're doing it wrong.

5. If you need to do that, you're doing it wrong. Ask someone who knows something about this to help you. Why are you using a beta operating system to run games and complaining about it on a website. You made your bed, now sleep in it.

You necro'd the thread... WHY?!

1. Too bad your PC doesn't see more than 3.25 if your Windows XP is x86. So what's the point of buying more than 3GB if you still would have to change OS? And CPU?

2. Well that's super-awesome, still not going to use emulators just to run programs. I'd rather run everything flawlessly.

3. Yes, I've been living in denial for all these years... Unused RAM is a wasted RAM. Unless you are running Photoshop or converting stuff, you won't need those couple of gigs. MORE RAM DOESN'T SPEED UP THE PC. Unless it's already clogged with programs. That's why my laptop was running fine 4 years ago, now it's super-slow. It's more useless programs that consume the memory.

4. Didn't I say that it's 230 PLN = $80?! Do I REALLY have to repeat myself? And where did I write I'm using a laptop to play games?

5. Bla bla bla I feel like I'm talking with myself.

 

[belgariontheking]

I'll say it again: If you've built a computer within the last year, you'll likely have more than enough to run this game smoothly. If you haven't built or upgraded within the last year, then you really can't expect to keep up with every game that comes out. There will be plenty you can handle, but this happens to be one you won't. It's the way gaming works, and the way it's worked for decades.

 

[Dommyboy]

Better be a fucking good game for this requirement. Hopefully it's not poorly optimized either, like GTA4.