• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Dark Souls 3 PC requirements are out

Solrac said:
why uncharted 4 will run at 30fps if uncharted collection runs at 60 ?
Click to expand...
Dude, you're reaching now.
Console games on a fixed platform have to target a framerate, but on PC that varies wildly depending on the user's machine.
Even if the game runs at 1080p/30 on a 750(not even TI) there is not reason to believe that something like a 970 wouldn't be able to run it at 60 very easily.

The only reason why the game would run locked at 30 in all cases, is if they intentionally locked it at that framerate, but Dark Souls 2 wasn't locked, and they'd have to be absolutely crazy to lock it again for no reason.
 
LiK said:
pretty modest specs but 50GB was unexpected. dem hi-res textures?
Click to expand...

Why would it be unexpected? Bloodborne is almost 40GB and its a pretty small game. Most games on pc have been around 50GB this gen as well so I don't why its unexpected that its 50GB.
 
BernardoOne said:
Not new at all. In fact, if you check any game in the last recent years you'd know that there is no standard for the requirements and they can basically mean anything, so taking conclusions from them is pointless.
Click to expand...

OmegaTreeFish said:
He doesn't have to. There has never been a standard for what these mean. It's completely up to the dev/pub what they deem minimum / recommended and maximum. There is no rule set to follow. And why would there be? What's recommended is completely subjective.

The only one really worth a damn is minimum to give you an idea if you can even run it.

Knowing from history and how bloodborne runs I would say the recommended here is for 1080/30 with who knows what graphic settings. However I very much doubt they will force 30fps. The only time they did that was with dark souls 1 because it was the laziest port known to man. Luckily the man you are "OK what evering" fixed that for everyone.
Click to expand...

Something is getting lost in translation here I think, I know a PC is anything but standard, but what I'm saying is that a game that 'isn't' already locked 30fps, has a base that targets 30, and a max or recommended that targets 60. But DS3 has a base and recommended that are both 30fps........show me examples where the base and recommended both target 30fps? And the actual game runs at 60? If people can't give me examples then it proves my point.
 
DOT DASH DOT said:
Something is getting lost in translation here I think, I know a PC is anything but standard, but what I'm saying is that a game that 'isn't' already locked 30fps, has a base that targets 30, and a max or recommended that targets 60. But DS3 has a base and recommended that are both 30fps........show me examples where the base and recommended both target 30fps? And the actual game runs at 60? If people can't give me examples then it proves my point.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you are going with this. There is nothing to suggest DSIII will be locked to 30fps on PC.

It does not matter at all what system requirements "aim for".
 
DOT DASH DOT said:
Something is getting lost in translation here I think, I know a PC is anything but standard, but what I'm saying is that a game that 'isn't' already locked 30fps, has a base that targets 30, and a max or recommended that targets 60. But DS3 has a base and recommended that are both 30fps........show me examples where the base and recommended both target 30fps? And the actual game runs at 60? If people can't give me examples then it proves my point.
Click to expand...

I'm hardly in a position to fire up a bunch of games, set them to recommended settings on various hardware configurations and tell you the results.

I'm telling you simply from 20 years of playing games on PC that recommended settings has never meant 1080/60 as standard.

And no, not providing examples doesn't prove you right as you havnt provided evidence to prove your point.
 
Kezen said:
That's to be expected, does not change what I said, it should run on very low end specs (first part of my previous statement) and 60fps with console settings should be within reach of a R9 285/GTX960.
Click to expand...

Sorry, thought you was referencing console level GPUs.
 
Kezen said:
I don't know where you are going with this. There is nothing to suggest DSIII will be locked to 30fps on PC.

It does not matter at all what system requirements "aim for".
Click to expand...

Because it's unusual for a game that isn't 30fps locked, to target 30 for high and low settings.
 
Lingitiz said:
Bloodborne was so dark most of the time so it masked a lot of the graphical shortcomings.
Click to expand...

I think you have crushed blacks. Bloodborne does it's dark scenes with a sort of illuminated blue tint to it. I cant rememeber the game being so dark where aspects of it's environment were not visible. At least not most of the time as you say.

Remember the ps4s auto RGB setting doesn't communicate with all tv's, and you have to set it to limited or full specifically in its sound and screen settings. Also calibrate your tv from there. Again bloodborne is not that dark most oft he time. Even its dark scenes it has a sort of Color illumination that allows you to see even during nighttime segments.
It almost sounds like an issue bloodborne would have with the Xbox ones dark shifted color gamut.
 
DOT DASH DOT said:
Because it's unusual for a game that isn't 30fps locked, to target 30 for high and low settings.
Click to expand...

But we don't even know what settings those "requirements" target so how can you deduce the framerate ? Those are console level GPUs so it makes a degree of sense to assume they are intended to allow a 30fps at whatever settings console operate at, but they could also aim for say, medium/low settings at 60fps.

AC Syndicate aimed for 30fps as well on PC, and the game was not locked to that framerate. By the way system specs aiming for 30fps is the direct result of far too many idiots blowing a fuse when they realize that 60fps can become very expensive.

You might as well make the argument that system requirements aiming for 1080p means that the game is locked to that resolution and this is equally false.
 
Hopefully runs solid 30/60fps(if they lock) all maxed with i7-6700k+GTX 780 @ 1440p. Looking at the reqs should be piece of cake.
 
OmegaTreeFish said:
I'm hardly in a position to fire up a bunch of games, set them to recommended settings on various hardware configurations and tell you the results.

I'm telling you simply from 20 years of playing games on PC that recommended settings has never meant 1080/60 as standard.

And no, not providing examples doesn't prove you right as you havnt provided evidence to prove your point.
Click to expand...

Just check some benchmarks, i don't need to, if you've played PC games for so many years, you should already know that a top spec recommendation means 1080p 60 in the last god knows how many years.......have a look.

Kezen said:
But we don't even know what settings those "requirements" target so how can you deduce the framerate ? Those are console level GPUs so it makes a degree of sense to assume they are intended to allow a 30fps at whatever settings console operate at, but they could also aim for say, medium/low settings at 60fps.

AC Syndicate aimed for 30fps as well on PC, and the game was not locked to that framerate. By the way system specs aiming for 30fps is the direct result of far too many idiots blowing a fuse when they realize that 60fps can become very expensive.

You might as well make the argument that system requirements aiming for 1080p means that the game is locked to that resolution and this is equally false.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying, but history tells me what to expect with what devs have provided us as a guide as to what performance to expect. I mean we all know what graphics cards do what against other GPU's, and see gameplay and all the rest, can you honestly tell me a devs top recommendation will only target 30? Hardly ever happens.

roadrunn3r said:
The 6870 and the 750 are quite similar in performance so that's a bit strange. Otherwise great news, it will be as optimized as DS2 which was close to perfect.
Click to expand...

Goes to show how close to console parity it will be, with hardly any tweakables I bet, which means it's hardly out of order to think it could be a locked 30fps on PC. But hopefully it won't be.
 
With recommended this low, I'm gonna have a go at seeing how viable 8k @30fps is. Probably get performance similar to the PS4 at that resolution.
 
DOT DASH DOT said:
Just check some benchmarks, i don't need to, if you've played PC games for so many years, you should already know that a top spec recommendation means 1080p 60 in the last god knows how many years.......have a look.
Click to expand...

Recommended doesn't mean top spec recommendation. Games used to provide minimum, recommended and maximum. Maximum spex is a rare thing to be shown these days.

What your saying might apply to maximum but not recommended. That's simply what the dev / pub recommends to have what they consider a decent experience.

Look at witcher 3. That recommends a gtx770. That's not going to give you maxed out settings at 1080p/60fps.

And that is the problem. With zero context to what settings , resolution and frame rate they are getting at those recommended settings they are almost completely pointless. You say they mean 1080/60. But with what settings? Max? Because you very wrong there. Everything lowest?

What games recommended settings are you talking about that as standard mean 1080/60 and at what settings?

The most common situation these days seems to be recommended = roughly in line with console version.

Most don't bother with a maximum settings spec anymore.
 
DOT DASH DOT said:
I get what you're saying, but history tells me what to expect with what devs have provided us as a guide as to what performance to expect. I mean we all know what graphics cards do what against other GPU's, and see gameplay and all the rest, can you honestly tell me a devs top recommendation will only target 30? Hardly ever happens.
Click to expand...

Yes, it has happened many times in the past : Syndicate, Ryse, GTA 5, COD AW etc..If you look at the recommended specs for those games 30fps at high settings is what you will get.
I don't suscribe to the opinion that "recommended" specs should aim for 60fps, otherwise you are in for a barrage of backlash because, shocking news, not all games can run at 60fps/highish setting on very modest machines.
 
The specs look reasonable on high, but my CPU is a bit older ( i7 860, 4GB, 2.80 GHz) than what is recommended. I wouldnt think a game like this would struggle much since I would imagine the GPU doing most of the work. Or am I totally wrong and might need to upgrade it?
 
I don't understand recommended CPU requirements - and not just in this game.

Here they recommend an FX 8150 or an I7 2600. You would assume that any game recommending an i7 would be CPU bound and require a very powerful CPU. Even if we are talking about the Sandy Bridge i7 here. Yet there is a wide gulf between the performance of the i7 and the AMD chip. Hell, I just built an i5 6600k rig and I know it blows the FX chip away in gaming and is about on par with the i7 in almost every game tested - sometimes it is a bit faster and sometimes just a tad slower.

I seem to remember Witcher 3 recommending an i7 as well, and then when it was tested, it was found to not be that reliant on the CPU. The "I need a new PC..." thread here still recommends i5s if your primary focus is gaming.

So I guess my question is: what is this insistence on devs recommending i7s when benchmarks then show that an i5 is more than enough? I doubt Dark Souls 3 will be the game to break this trend.
 
rogue74 said:
I don't understand recommended CPU requirements - and not just in this game.

Here they recommend an FX 8150 or an I7 2600. You would assume that any game recommending an i7 would be CPU bound and require a very powerful CPU. Even if we are talking about the Sandy Bridge i7 here. Yet there is a wide gulf between the performance of the i7 and the AMD chip. Hell, I just built an i5 6600k rig and I know it blows the FX chip away in gaming and is about on par with the i7 in almost every game tested - sometimes it is a bit faster and sometimes just a tad slower.

I seem to remember Witcher 3 recommending an i7 as well, and then when it was tested, it was found to not be that reliant on the CPU. The "I need a new PC..." thread here still recommends i5s if your primary focus is gaming.

So I guess my question is: what is this insistence on devs recommending i7s when benchmarks then show that an i5 is more than enough? I doubt Dark Souls 3 will be the game to break this trend.
Click to expand...

CPU requirements make little sense in most games. There are games which can justify I7s at some settings but they are not the majority.
 
Mifec said:
This was fixed, I'm more worried about framepacing.
Click to expand...
Sure, the really noticeable things like ladders were fixed, but iFrames are still broken even in SotFS. Plus, I doubt they did anything beyond literally just doubling the durability of everything, or decreasing the amount of durability lost per frame by half.

How's another Dark Souls that runs at 30fps on consoles going to be on PC? They didn't bother fixing the durability bug in Dark Souls 2 until after SotFC came out and console gamers complained.
 
That's considerably lower than I expected, in a way maybe even worrisome. Oh well, I suppose I can take solace in the fact that Dark Souls II had similar low requirements and it looked good. Plus, this probably means I can (nearly?) max it out at 1080/60 on my 3GB Sapphire 280X.
 
Prepare to downsample.


edit: Also just read the thread, some hilarious posts about the specs and target framerates and shit.
 
gogosox82 said:
Why would it be unexpected? Bloodborne is almost 40GB and its a pretty small game. Most games on pc have been around 50GB this gen as well so I don't why its unexpected that its 50GB.
Click to expand...

Please list games on PC that are 50GB without expansions and DLC. I can only think of Wolfenstein TNO. You make it seem like it's common when it's not.
 
LiK said:
Please list games on PC that are 50GB without expansions and DLC. I can only think of Wolfenstein TNO. You make it seem like it's common when it's not.
Click to expand...

GTA5 requires 65GB, Just Cause 3 needs 54GB and Assassin's Creed Unity needs 50GB.

The requirement does not reflect the download size or the space it occupies on your drive which is usually significantly less.
 
DOT DASH DOT said:
Just check some benchmarks, i don't need to, if you've played PC games for so many years, you should already know that a top spec recommendation means 1080p 60 in the last god knows how many years.......have a look.
Click to expand...
I've played a lot of games on PC, every year from back when you had to change your config.sys in order to adjust whether you need more XMS or EMS memory per game to 2015 where you click on a game to launch it.

That's never what recommended specs meant, ever.

There was in fact never, ever, any uniform standard for what "recommended" specs mean.

I really have no idea where you are going in this thread.
 
Durante said:
I've played a lot of games on PC since you had to change your config.sys in order to adjust whether you need more XMS or EMS memory per game.

That's never what recommended specs meant, ever.

There was in fact never, ever, any uniform standard for what "recommended" specs mean.

I really have no idea where you are going in this thread.
Click to expand...

I had to do that to play Rebel Assault 2!

My favorite recommended specs are the ones where they list AMD and Nvidia graphics cards from two generations apart. Or any mention of i7s which you never need and always seem to cause GAF to flip its shit.
 
Durante said:
I've played a lot of games on PC, every year from back when you had to change your config.sys in order to adjust whether you need more XMS or EMS memory per game to 2015 where you click on a game to launch it.

That's never what recommended specs meant, ever.

There was in fact never, ever, any uniform standard for what "recommended" specs mean.

I really have no idea where you are going in this thread.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that's what It means.....I'm saying the recommended, Normally means a 1080p 60 performance target, in most 'not all games' whereas the base config guide would serve a 30fps target. You don't often get a base guide and a recommended both targeting 30fps, which is what is happening with DS3. I don't know how many other ways I can say it. Jesus you know what I concede, every game with base and recommended specs in the past, present and future will only offer 30fps configurations!......wow, I must be playing a different platform or something.

CyberPunked said:
Wow, this guy is doing some speculation!
Click to expand...

Not really, look at the specs yourself, and join the dots. If you think you're gonna get this mega PC port with all the bells and whistles supported, you are surely mistaken.
 
Barzul said:
Is it worth playing Dark Souls 2 or just jump in when this one is released?
Click to expand...

It's a pretty divisive game. Plenty of people love it. Others have a lot of issues with it.

I am one of those that had a lot of issues with it. Saying that, I still put over 40 hours into it and would say its better than a lot of other stuff out there despite this.

The things that annoyed me about it (strange controls, a lot of bad level design / enemey placement and some pretty terrible hit boxes and hit detection) annoyed me through the game. However the things it did really well (character development choices, readily available upgrade materials and some DLC that is way better than the main game) drove me to keep playing.

If I had never played dark souls 1 and bloodborne I would prob have had less issues with it though because I am naturally comparing it to those games.

So yeah, give it a try.
 
rogue74 said:
I don't understand recommended CPU requirements - and not just in this game.

Here they recommend an FX 8150 or an I7 2600. You would assume that any game recommending an i7 would be CPU bound and require a very powerful CPU. Even if we are talking about the Sandy Bridge i7 here. Yet there is a wide gulf between the performance of the i7 and the AMD chip. Hell, I just built an i5 6600k rig and I know it blows the FX chip away in gaming and is about on par with the i7 in almost every game tested - sometimes it is a bit faster and sometimes just a tad slower.

I seem to remember Witcher 3 recommending an i7 as well, and then when it was tested, it was found to not be that reliant on the CPU. The "I need a new PC..." thread here still recommends i5s if your primary focus is gaming.

So I guess my question is: what is this insistence on devs recommending i7s when benchmarks then show that an i5 is more than enough? I doubt Dark Souls 3 will be the game to break this trend.
Click to expand...

Most developers don't usually test their min/recommended specs thoroughly. In this case it's more likely they simply listed them as a failsafe because they are probably better than whatever they used at their offices to test the game.
 
Barzul said:
Is it worth playing Dark Souls 2 or just jump in when this one is released?
Click to expand...

GOTY 2014 is well worth playing, you might hear about how bad it is and stuff but that seems to be a very vocal minority, it got good review scores and I feel most people love it.

I personally consider it the best one so far.
 
DOT DASH DOT said:
I'm not saying that's what It means.....I'm saying the recommended, Normally means a 1080p 60 performance target, in most 'not all games' whereas the base config guide would serve a 30fps target. You don't often get a base guide and a recommended both targeting 30fps, which is what is happening with DS3. I don't know how many other ways I can say it. Jesus you know what I concede, every game with base and recommended specs in the past, present and future will only offer 30fps configurations!......wow, I must be playing a different platform or something.



Not really, look at the specs yourself, and join the dots. If you think you're gonna get this mega PC port with all the bells and whistles supported, you are surely mistaken.
Click to expand...

You don't "target" any sort of framerate on PC. You get what the hardware puts out. System requirements are literally fucking meaningless other than some what is literally the bare minimum for having the game start (DX11, 64-bit, specific instruction sets, etc.)
 
Durante said:
I've played a lot of games on PC, every year from back when you had to change your config.sys in order to adjust whether you need more XMS or EMS memory per game to 2015 where you click on a game to launch it.
Click to expand...

Oh how i don't miss those times at all, thank the Lords for the glorious Watcom compiler and it coming with DOS4GW and developers taking note of it.
 
Akronis said:
You don't "target" any sort of framerate on PC. You get what the hardware puts out. System requirements are literally fucking meaningless other than some what is literally the bare minimum for having the game start (DX11, 64-bit, specific instruction sets, etc.)
Click to expand...

Gosh, I'm quite sure they have a framerate in mind, when they put this stuff together, I get mileage can vary, but I'm pretty sure they have a performance target in mind, or why the bloody hell make any at all. They have to think X Y or Z is achievable with said config.
 
LiK said:
Please list games on PC that are 50GB without expansions and DLC. I can only think of Wolfenstein TNO. You make it seem like it's common when it's not.
Click to expand...

AC: Syndicate, AC:Unity, JC3, GTA 5, Black Ops 3 just to name a few. Its not like its uncommon so I'm not surprised.
 
Good news that it can run on toasters. Its refreshing to see honest and uprfront PC requirements.

I hope this can run on an GTX 750ti or R9 380 in 60fps at the highest settings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dark Souls Demake - Bit Souls Demastered
1
239
Signalis replied
  • Poll
Dark Souls Path Tracing mod, yay or nay?
2 3
123
1K
Gp1 replied
  • Poll
Bungie Reveals Marathon PC System Requirements
2
64
2K
Banjo64 replied
Dark Souls - RTX Remix - Early WIP Test
Trailer Platform Indie 
3
208
skneogaf replied
Super Smash Bros PC port is out
35
158
VGEsoterica replied
Top Bottom