• 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.

Dying Light system requirements [Updated]

T

The Shogun

Banned
For these specs to be accurate it either is

A) An unoptimized mess

or

B) Has insane graphics.

Either way my 780ti is starting to sweat bullets. For sure upgrading with the next set of Nvidia cards when they release.
 
Interfectum

Interfectum

Member
lyrick said:
This is pretty much bullshit, but whatever.

PC's today have a lower operating system footprint and are using the same rendering techniques as their console counterparts. If the console versions are running at minimum PC Spec, the PC version will probably be extremely unoptimized in comparison.
Click to expand...

That's the problem though. Most developers aren't going to sink in tons of development time for a PC version as they usually don't sell near as well as their console counterparts. So to make up for that lack of optimization the PCs are going to have to brute force performance through system power.

We got spoiled last gen because a modest PC could brute force anything a 360 could do. That's not the case anymore.
 
K

Kezen

Banned
lyrick said:
This is pretty much bullshit, but whatever.
PC's today have a lower operating system footprint and are using the same rendering techniques as their console counterparts. If the console versions are running at minimum PC Spec, the PC version will probably be extremely unoptimized.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised by the 16gb "recommendation" but I strongly doubt it uses as much, it's very common for system requirements to be inflated for whatever reason.

Unity does not "need" a 680 to run, far from it but 2gb will severely compromise visual fidelity, the same card with 4 can run Unity very well. FXAA/Ultra textures/ high environment/high shadows + 1080p = 30-60fps.
 
N

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
Kezen said:
I don't know of any game actually using 8gb of system memory in spite of every release recommending it for years.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I kind of expected to have to upgrade to 16 GB pretty quickly after I made my newest computer two years ago, yet I swear my system never is at more than like 4-5 GB load, if even.
 
TomcatTheLion

TomcatTheLion

Member
I have to admit I had a good, long laugh when I saw 16GB RAM was recommended.

Is there going to be some super ultra setting in the game or something?
 
Q

Qassim

Member
Kezen said:
I don't know of any game actually using 8gb of system memory in spite of every release recommending it for years.
Click to expand...

Remember, they're recommending you have this amount of memory for your system because they have to take into consideration the potential for other things to also be using your memory at the same time. They're not suggesting they require all 8GB of memory dedicated to the game.

I get over 8GB memory usage in Dragon Age: Inquisition.
 
A

ashecitism

Member
We don't know what settings recommended mean, also recommended != required. It might be the case that if you have that much it's going to use it. Also, never 100% trust these reqs, a lot of time they're inflated. These threads are always the same, geez.
 
C

ClaptoVaughn

Member
It's ok, lil' 680. You ran Unity better than expected, and folks told you otherwise. Remember Shadow of Mordor? That was good times. Shh. It'll be ok.

* loads shotgun *
 
K

Kezen

Banned
Nirolak said:
Yeah, I kind of expected to have to upgrade to 16 GB pretty quickly after I made my newest computer two years ago, yet I swear my system never is at more than like 4-5 GB load, if even.
Click to expand...
I feel confident 8gb is going to be plenty sufficient for years to come but I've been wrong before. I would not rule out 16gb being a requisite in the near future. The real issue now is video memory, 2gb just won't cut it anymore and 4 will most likely be needed for max textures at 1080p. It's so easy to consume a lot of VRAM if your assets are less aggressively compressed.

The Shogun said:
For these specs to be accurate it either is

A) An unoptimized mess

or

B) Has insane graphics.

Either way my 780ti is starting to sweat bullets. For sure upgrading with the next set of Nvidia cards when they release.
Click to expand...

There is a third option : high targets for system requirements. See Unity.
 
C

CyanideFuse

Member
Kezen said:
I feel confident 8gb is going to be plenty sufficient for years to come but I've been wrong before. I would not rule out 16gb being a requisite in the near future. The real issue now is video memory, 2gb just won't cut it anymore and 4 will most likely be needed for max textures at 1080p. It's so easy to consume a lot of VRAM if your assets are less aggressively compressed.



There is a third option : high targets for system requirements. See Unity.
Click to expand...

It depends upon what is deemed not cutting it. I am sure a lot of people will merrily go on with 2GB cards as long as they don't fall into the must-have v.high or ultra settings camp.
 
L

Levyne

Banned
Welp, I am pretty much AT the recommended with a 4770k, 780, 16gb ram

upgrade incoming next year I guess.
 
Begaria

Begaria

Member
Specs like this makes my impatient for my planned PC upgrade next year.

*shakes fist at Student Loan* GET PAID OFF ALREADY. Just ten months to go (out of 7.5 years)
 
B

Bricky

Member
I have a feeling they are just pulling these recommendations out of there asses these days.

I mean just look at the gameplay. It looks... graphically unimpressive for a next-gen only game to say the least. This would have to be the shittiest, most technically unoptimized clusterfuck in the history of PC gaming to ever utilize the specs they recommend for the best experience. They would literally need to put in an option to just keep hundreds zombies and like half the open world loaded at all times if they request that much RAM at the highest settings.

There better be a damn big difference between consoles and PC or I'm afraid we're looking at an even bigger mess than Dead Island was.
 
Q

Qassim

Member
Exceeding 8GB (out of 16GB) in Dragon Age: Inquisition. I don't close regular applications down when I'm playing games, because there's no need to (e.g. Chrome, Origin, Steam, Mumble, Afterburner, IRC, various sync clients, etc).

They're not putting 8GB minimum required because they think their game requires all 8GB of memory in your system, but they can't predict how much of your memory is already taken up.

DAI_8GB.png
Click to expand...
 
D

Durante

Member
I think it's incredibly silly that they are specifying the type of memory. Why specifically state "DDR3"? Will I be fucked with my DDR4 memory? Do they want to prevent someone who somehow has 16 GB DDR2 from getting the wrong idea?

Very silly.
 
K

Kezen

Banned
Qassim said:
Exceeding 8GB (out of 16GB) in Dragon Age: Inquisition. I don't close regular applications down when I'm playing games, because there's no need to (e.g. Chrome, Origin, Mumble, Afterburner, IRC, various sync clients, etc).
Click to expand...
That explains it. I always run the bare minimum of software in the background when I'm playing so my memory usage never goes above 4-5gb (7gb available to games).
 
bee

bee

Member
for 4k maybe, a lot of games give me total system ram usage of around 7.5gb at that resolution, awfully close to my 8gb total
 
C

Camp Freddie

Member
With those minimum requirements, why even bother doing a PC version?

The PC market is huge, but the vast majority of gaming PCs will not have a 7870 and i5-2500 or better.

Most gaming PCs are entry-level i3s with low end cards.
Even new gaming PCs are more likely to have a 750ti or 260X than the sort of stuff recommended to the GAF hardcore.

I checked the standard gaming PCs at CCL (a popular white box company) and you're looking at a brand new £800 box in order to meet the minimum specs. I know that PCgaf could build one for less, but most PC gamers are not that hardcore.
 
S

Seanspeed

Banned
OnionPowder said:
I'll take that bet. See you on release
Click to expand...
Did you want to officially put the $10 on the table or are you just making conversation?

Need to know if I'm gonna be pressed for the money if I'm wrong or if I can press you if not! ;)

Bricky said:
I have a feeling they are just pulling these recommendations out of there asses these days.

I mean just look at the gameplay. It looks... graphically unimpressive for a next-gen only game to say the least. This would have to be the shittiest, most technically unoptimized clusterfuck in the history of PC gaming to ever utilize the specs they recommend for the best experience. They would literally need to put in an option to just keep hundreds zombies and like half the open world loaded at all times if they request that much RAM at the highest settings.

There better be a damn big difference between consoles and PC or I'm afraid we're looking at an even bigger mess than Dead Island was.
Click to expand...
I don't agree its not graphically impressive. Has great lighting, good draw distance, and the foliage all blows around very realistically(by video game standards). Its not agraphical powerhouse, but I think it looks quite next-gen.
 
Q

Qassim

Member
Camp Freddie said:
With those minimum requirements, why even bother doing a PC version?

The PC market is huge, but the vast majority of gaming PCs will not have a 7870 and i5-2500 or better.

Most gaming PCs are entry-level i3s with low end cards.
Even new gaming PCs are more likely to have a 750ti or 260X than the sort of stuff recommended to the GAF hardcore.

I checked the standard gaming PCs at CCL (a popular white box company) and you're looking at a brand new £800 box in order to meet the minimum specs. I know that PCgaf could build one for less, but most PC gamers are not that hardcore.
Click to expand...

The minimum requirements have to start to raise eventually, if no games ever demanding more than the lowest common denominator, the hardware market would crash and burn.

Fewer people would buy more powerful hardware if there was no reason to do so in the form of demanding games.
 
S

Seanspeed

Banned
abracadaver said:
I just checked if its cheap to upgrade from 8 to 16 for me. The 8GB RAM I bought 2,5 years ago for 45€ now costs 80€. What is this?
Click to expand...
There was a fire that closed down one of the largest producers of RAM last year, creating a price hike that we still haven't recovered from yet.
 
B

Bricky

Member
bee said:
for 4k maybe, a lot of games give me total system ram usage of around 7.5gb at that resolution, awfully close to my 8gb total
Click to expand...

Hmmm... this makes sense. I can see these recommendations taking in account the fact some people have 4K monitors and, because it should be included as a default setting in games by now, adjust optimal specs to that.

But my gut tells me this is just a case of shit optimization.
 
J

jim2point0

Banned
bathsalts said:
A 780 huh, game better look fucking bananas.

and 16 gig of ram? wtf, is that if you want 3 instances of photoshop open in the background?
Click to expand...

From what I've seen so far, it doesn't. At all.

The Shogun said:
For these specs to be accurate it either is

A) An unoptimized mess

or

B) Has insane graphics.

Either way my 780ti is starting to sweat bullets. For sure upgrading with the next set of Nvidia cards when they release.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm going with A. I've seen no evidence of B.
 
C

Camp Freddie

Member
Qassim said:
The minimum requirements have to start to raise eventually, if no games ever demanding more than the lowest common denominator, the hardware market would crash and burn.

Fewer people would buy more powerful hardware if there was no reason to do so in the form of demanding games.
Click to expand...

Hardware in new PCs is improving, as it always has, but this is asking way too much.

The 750ti and 260X are relatively new cards aimed at the budget gaming market. They apparently can't even run this game to an acceptable standard on minimum settings.
If your computer is more than a couple of years old then forget about it unless it was a bleeding edge system..

That's just crazy. Even Crysis would run on the budget gaming GPUs of it's day.
 
B

BaronMonstro

Member
The cherry on top is that the game doesn't even look very impressive graphically.

What exactly is the game doing that justifies these requirements?
 
V

Vulcano's assistant

Banned
Rendering video with a shitload of layers in After Effects at 2.5K resolution is the only thing I've done that comes near using 16GB of ram, I can't imagine something running at a playable frame rate that at the same time has enough things going on to use that amount of ram.
 
B

Bricky

Member
Seanspeed said:
I don't agree its not graphically impressive. Has great lighting, good draw distance, and the foliage all blows around very realistically(by video game standards). Its not agraphical powerhouse, but I think it looks quite next-gen.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this isn't impressive. It isn't bad, but at this point this is the bare minimum of what an AAA next-gen exclusive engine should look like.

In fact, smaller things like this girl's face for example are just laughably bad.
 
SerTapTap

SerTapTap

Member
If this isn't bullshit or a technical train wreck I am legitimately fascinated to find what they need over 8gb of ram for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Alone in The Dark Pc Requirements Revealed
Platform
3
479
Elysium44 replied
The Callisto Protocol - PC Requirements
2
912
GymWolf replied
Tekken 8 PC requirements: Requires 100 GB available storage space
News Platform
16
2K
Spukc replied
The Callisto Protocol PC System Requirements Revealed
News Hardware
9
940
tusharngf replied
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut PC cross-play and system requirements revealed. PlayStation overlay, cross-play, and Trophy support!
4 5 6 7 8
357
13K
IDappa replied
Top Bottom