-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Wars Battlefront Specs Announced
- Thread starter Kezen
- Start date
Enter the Dragon Punch
Banned
970 recommended? i5 6600? 16GB RAM? Time to upgrade
SmartWaffles
Member
Digital Foundry tested the PC beta build, they got 80+fps on a 290X so a 970 should be able to do 1080p60fps easily, sounds like a good PC port.
alexandros
Banned
Nothing out of the ordinary. I'll make an educated guess based on the hardware listed and say that the minimum specs correspond to the console experience (900p @ 60fps?) so the game should be playable on lower-end machines as well.
Daffy Duck
Member
Obligatory can I run this on my 980Ti post.
I'll try the beta for sure to get a feel for this game as even though it's Star Wars I'm not sure it's the Star Wars in Battlefield clothing I wanted. Still we'll see.
I'll try the beta for sure to get a feel for this game as even though it's Star Wars I'm not sure it's the Star Wars in Battlefield clothing I wanted. Still we'll see.
That's a very high target for system requirements. Usually they mean something like highish settings at 1080p/30fps.
They might scare off casual PC gamers with those specs.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
16gb RAM ? What ?
SonicXtreme
Member
Damn so with a 650 ti I shouldn't bother with the game? That sucks, id be ok with playing on low settings
SuperBanana
Banned
And everyone was telling me it's pointless to get 16gb RAM. Ha.
ScepticMatt
Member
Insane memory requirements. Battlefront must have amazing textures.
duckielein
Banned
'#PCMasterrace' :b couldn't resist, sorry.
Anyway, I will wait with my purchase. But these are some high Specs.
Just open a bunch of Chrome windows and any PC game and your totals will be close to 32.
It must not stream as much on PC as it does on consoles which is a good thing.
I welcome games asking for >8gb of system memory.
alexandros
Banned
Just wait and see. Your 650Ti and the 660 are not that far in terms of power, I think you'll be able to play just fine.
These days the min requirements are good enough to play your game on 1080p with decent (low - medium for example) settings.
It's not like back in the day where you could barely play it on the lowest res and settings
Yup.
I was like, you are wrong, for sure! Then I googled.....holy shit, you are right, there is no single player/story mode......
I think you're right Alexandros, the "minimum" specs must not target the lowest possible settings otherwise that would mean the game does not scale lower than consoles. I don't see consoles being equivalent to the lowest PC settings so the most likely possibility is that they are aiming for medium/high settings right at the minimum.
There's value in that.
There's value in that.
I feel yeah. I just upgraded to 980ti this summer from a 2x6950 in crossfire. Win 10 broke that machine...not sure why, Gigabyte motherboard just got very confused on memory management all of sudden. Still sitting on the bench, I will get back to it one day. The upgrade was expensive but it was worth it.
SmartWaffles
Member
Also 16GB RAM at 2015 is not a tall order at all if you are the kind of people who play AAA games day 1 on PC at recommended settings these days...
Are there any games out there that actually uses that much memory?
Portugeezer
Member
16GB is a lot of RAM though, +4GB of VRAM.
Normally games use a lot less than their "recommended" amount however.
It only needs 8GB...
Garrett Hawke
Member
16GB RAM recommended? I wonder why, I remember a site did a test recently to see how much RAM games actually use and usually came out a fair bit under 8GB.
Also I really wish there was some sort of standardisation in terms of "minimum" and "recommended" - it would be nice if it listed framerate and resolution you could expect beside them, at least.
Looking forward to trying the beta on my 970 though
Also I really wish there was some sort of standardisation in terms of "minimum" and "recommended" - it would be nice if it listed framerate and resolution you could expect beside them, at least.
Looking forward to trying the beta on my 970 though
I can't believe EA just leaked Windows 11. Pretty bad imo.
Chris Metal
Member
Probably a lot is audio considering they're using the same audio file stems as used in the films. Depending on how much work they've done, and what compression methods they've used for them, could take up a lot of space. The sound design sounds authentic, they've got that definitely right.
I don't believe the game will "need" 16gb, rather it could ask for more than 8. It's not meant to be taken literally, it's most likely rounded or perhaps put there to avoid the backlash of "why can't I run this game?".
High system requirements are not always justified, sometimes it's just used as cover (Unity).
But hey, no one is forced to buy it day one, just wait for benchmarks of all kinds.
Most Frostbite games I've played first hand ended up using less RAM than their required amount stated. Managed BF3 fine on 2gb despite asking for 4 and BF4 SP played alrightish on 2gb but went to shit on MP. Still 8gb as required is a tad on the high side so be interesting to see what it actually uses.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
My PC is not even a year old and already listed as "recommended" for a game...
My PC is not even a year old and already listed as "recommended" for a game...
It's the case for anybody else at some point.
You never stay at the top level regardless of your hardware.
Just open a bunch of Chrome windows and any PC game and your totals will be close to 32.
true but not the same as just a game doing it
my work PC here (which does not have a good graphic card) has 24Gb of ram.. lol
Gipsy Danger
Member
Easy, except RAM. Sure I'll be fine on 8 but I should really get 16.