Comments on: Mirror’s Edge: You’ll Need This

By: zima

zima — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:49:08 +0000

Xyzzy, Portal runs for me perfectly fine on GF6150LE, but only if you force dx8 mode (the game doesn’t lose much graphically)

By: Lightbulb

Lightbulb — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:07:21 +0000

Not being funny here but that graphics card was what i bought 4 years ago in a £700 (mid budget for then) system. Since you can build that PC for around £300 its not exactly high end is it?

By: The Shed

The Shed — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 10:14:30 +0000

It’s being made for the 360, which is pretty much a low-to-middle-end system so I’m not too surprised.

Hurm, mind that a 360 (or concole in general) doesn’t have to deal with the same amount of guff as a PC does, so it doesn’t require as much power CPU wise. It’s hard to gauge exactly what level a console is versus a computer + OS + all the other shit.

By: Pod

Pod — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:47:43 +0000

People still put their specs in their sigs?

By: Y3k-Bug

Y3k-Bug — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:33:54 +0000

That to me seems like quite reasonable specs.

I built my entire system from scratch last September for about $1300 USD, and it easily out specs those requirements. Kudos to the developers for keeping the needs of the game modest.

That said, I dunno what system they used to run the game at PAX, but my oh my. I want it to look just as good as the playable demo on the show floor. It looks like a realistically done animation show. And I mean that fully as a compliment.

By: dhex

dhex — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:29:51 +0000

the many banners and sigs people create in pc hardware forums showing off their “specs” is something between an anarchistic folk art and the most mundane shop talk you could possibly imagine.

that said: low specs for good games isn’t a bad thing at all. maybe they spent more time making it play well in addition to looking pretty good. (well, it looks good in the demo vids, at least)

By: Andrew

Andrew — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 11:46:31 +0000

Awesome Google algorithm ad-linkage to http://splashbacks.org/default.aspx

I never knew kitchen splashbacks were colour coded for efficient free running.

By: Jetsetlemming

Jetsetlemming — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:14:23 +0000

That is pretty low end.

Also whining about minimum requirements is dumb. ;) They’re based around four things- what CPU features it requires, what OS it can run in, what video card features it uses, and the max amount of memory it’ll take up with all the settings on minimum. Thus, this requires P4, XP/Vista, Shader Model 3 video card(A result of the console development- Unreal Engine 3 itself supports down to SM2), and 1 GB of memory.
How well this runs for you is less a matter of how they wrote the system requirements and more a matter of how low is low for your tastes and if you’re willing to turn shit down.

By: Arnulf

Arnulf — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:04:22 +0000

Nice. Seems rather low-end for today’s standards. Of course, the real meat is always where the recommended specs lie. Sometimes even those are more like the real minimum required specs for a game. The minimum requirements are then more like “you can load this game into your computer and run it, and your computer won’t crash… mostly”.

By: Gene

Gene — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:10:11 +0000

Quite expectable requirements, nothing too demanding. I wonder what engine it uses?
Also, I believe 30+fps is perfectly fine, 20-30 is okay with slow games. I once played civ4 at 10fps and there were no problems ;)

By: kadayi

kadayi — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:25:34 +0000

Well 60 is what you want to average, because invariably you will get dips under it (esp when levels are loading, when there are explosions etc), but it’s far less noticeable, Vs having an average frame rate of 30, where such dips do become glaringly obvious and can hinder game play.

By: Crane

Crane — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 07:59:21 +0000

Can anyone explain why SIXTY FPS is considered the only acceptable framerate? Hell, TWENTY is playable though annoying, and thirty-plus is totally fine.