[sling]

MINIMUM SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

• Windows® 2000/XP/Vista
• 100% DirectX 9.0c compatible computer
• 100% DirectX compatible keyboard or input device
• Processor 2.4 GHz Intel processor or 2400+ or higher model AMD processor
• 512 MB RAM
• Vertex and Pixel shader 2.0 compatible hardware with 128MB of texture memory
• 100%DirectX compatible sound card
• 56K + Internet Connection
• 16X Speed DVD-ROM
• 20 Gigabytes Hard Drive Space



Maybe someone should re-evaluate what is considered "minimum." What's listed above isn't going to run the game in any playable fashion. Yes it'll start and you'll see the pretty Vanguard splash screen, but really, is it going to be playable?

I just think it's misleading to say the least. The minimums should yeild an experience that someone, at least one person in the world, might consider enjoyable...or, for lack of a more specific term, "playable."

Just my 2 cents...I'm upgrading tomorrow from a p4m 1.7ghz, 1gb ram, and 6800go 256mb....it's a slide show of a game if there's more than a few trees around.

[NorrinRadd]

Originally Posted by sling

MINIMUM SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

• Windows® 2000/XP/Vista
• 100% DirectX 9.0c compatible computer
• 100% DirectX compatible keyboard or input device
• Processor 2.4 GHz Intel processor or 2400+ or higher model AMD processor
• 512 MB RAM
• Vertex and Pixel shader 2.0 compatible hardware with 128MB of texture memory
• 100%DirectX compatible sound card
• 56K + Internet Connection
• 16X Speed DVD-ROM
• 20 Gigabytes Hard Drive Space



Maybe someone should re-evaluate what is considered "minimum." What's listed above isn't going to run the game in any playable fashion. Yes it'll start and you'll see the pretty Vanguard splash screen, but really, is it going to be playable?

I just think it's misleading to say the least. The minimums should yeild an experience that someone, at least one person in the world, might consider enjoyable...or, for lack of a more specific term, "playable."

Just my 2 cents...I'm upgrading tomorrow from a p4m 1.7ghz, 1gb ram, and 6800go 256mb....it's a slide show of a game if there's more than a few trees around.

When a developer posts minimum settings to play the game thats what they mean. How can they predict what is acceptable. Its very subjective. Those requirements are what allow you to play the game. If your seeing a slide show, the engine is very customizable. Recommended hardware gives you the visual quality that are moderately acceptable to most people. You cant please all the people all the time.

[sling]

Originally Posted by NorrinRadd

When a developer posts minimum settings to play the game thats what they mean. How can they predict what is acceptable. Its very subjective. Those requirements are what allow you to play the game. If your seeing a slide show, the engine is very customizable. Recommended hardware gives you the visual quality that are moderately acceptable to most people. You cant please all the people all the time.

It's very subjective. I still don't think that you can run this game with 512mb of ram. If you spawn in a busy area you'd be hard pressed to move. There will be people that buy the game that have the "Minumum Systems Requirements" meaning "You have to have at least this system to play" and they'll find out that they can't play with those specs. You just can't. It's misleading to say "you can play it on your computer" then when the user sees the 5fps slide show you tell them the rest of the sentence "but you won't be able to play." In other words, to sound like Joe End User, "It will play on your system but you won't be able to play on your system."

[Hailin]

Originally Posted by sling

It's very subjective. I still don't think that you can run this game with 512mb of ram. If you spawn in a busy area you'd be hard pressed to move. There will be people that buy the game that have the "Minumum Systems Requirements" meaning "You have to have at least this system to play" and they'll find out that they can't play with those specs. You just can't. It's misleading to say "you can play it on your computer" then when the user sees the 5fps slide show you tell them the rest of the sentence "but you won't be able to play." In other words, to sound like Joe End User, "It will play on your system but you won't be able to play on your system."

I saw this as well and was a tad surprised. Last night after a long session my comp was using 1768mb of ram. I was like HOLY CRAP! Eq2 on extreme never used that much ever. about 512mb less.

I want vista to hurry so I can slide in 4 gigs lol.

Oh and friend of mine is playing on balanced with some tweaks on a 128mb 9800pro. So yes shader 2.0 with 128mb is fine.

[darrath]

Originally Posted by Hailin

I saw this as well and was a tad surprised. Last night after a long session my comp was using 1768mb of ram. I was like HOLY CRAP! Eq2 on extreme never used that much ever. about 512mb less.

I want vista to hurry so I can slide in 4 gigs lol.

Oh and friend of mine is playing on balanced with some tweaks on a 128mb 9800pro. So yes shader 2.0 with 128mb is fine.

TBH 4 gigs doesn't make any real difference at this time. VG is still a 32bit process and thus accesses only 2GB (yes I know you can things like /3gb to give more but the game still needs to be written to take advantage of it). I've got 4gbs and didn't notice any real change when I upgraded from 2gb.

You do get a little more room for the os to play in so the game can take a full 2gb but the difference is marginal, especially when compared to going from 1gb to 2gb.