i7-920 stay winning.
LGA 1366 is everliving.
i7-920 stay winning.
Minimum requirements reference performance targets, not instruction sets. But you already know this, right?It is... minimum Core i3.
The fact older CPUs didn't support the instructions already remove them from the "better" list.
I am not sure if a "Small team of 10 people" will be able to fix this.
It's simply a setting in Visual Studio, unless they actually hand-wrote SSE 4.1 code.
If the game originated on the ps4 - not entirely unlikely.How likely is that?
How likely is that?
LOL shit like this is why I have been moving away from PC gaming over the last few years.
LOL shit like this is why I have been moving away from PC gaming over the last few years.
LOL shit like this is why I have been moving away from PC gaming over the last few years.
A PS3 can't play this game either.
Ignoring old reduntant shit shocker. New APIs ain't there to support old shit, and none of us devs want to double down on code - this is standard.
It will be in the required specs.
Doesn't matter because almost everything supports multiple cores. Be it videos, games, browsing etc.
Regarding updating requirements, it should have been mentioned IN THE FIRST place that SSE 4.1 is hard requirement. We won't have bothered with the game at all.
Ignoring old reduntant shit shocker. New APIs ain't there to support old shit, and none of us devs want to double down on code - this is standard.
It will be in the required specs.
Ignoring old reduntant shit shocker. New APIs ain't there to support old shit, and none of us devs want to double down on code - this is standard.
It will be in the required specs.
My CPU's five years old and runs stuff like this perfectly fine... if MY old-ass hardware can run MGS and NMS, how old do these other CPUs have to be? And how much longer before devs just say "No"? What's going through people's heads that continue to use such old tech and fully expect the latest games to run on it? Upgrade yo shit.
All of these people can play MGS fine as well. This is an artificial barrier which is why it was easily fixed for MGS 5.
Sean?If the game originated on the ps4 - not entirely unlikely.
We don't know that yet.
There's a community fix for the same issue on EDF 4.1. It only took them like a couple days or so.
It's indeed an oversight by NMS devs.
We don't know that yet. The possibility of handwritten sse 4.1 code hasn't been ruled out.
We are going to create an experimental branch with hot fixes for these most common known issues:
SSE 4 for CPUs that do not support SSE 4, it is causing the game to crash on boot (some of these area technically below min spec, but we dont want it to crash!)
Well, there it is.
OP needs another update, it seems.
Amusing.Ignoring old reduntant shit shocker. New APIs ain't there to support old shit, and none of us devs want to double down on code - this is standard.
Amusing.
LOL shit like this is why I have been moving away from PC gaming over the last few years.
don't this game crash every 15 minutes on PS4
don't this game crash every 15 minutes on PS4
This thread was a good read. A lot of clueless people.
Glad the oversight is being corrected.
Lol at "upgrade yo shit".
It's simply a setting in Visual Studio, unless they actually hand-wrote SSE 4.1 code.
So Visual Studio shouldn't be generating any code that won't run on something that doesn't support SSE 4.1 (the wording suggests it will run on anything supporting at least SSE2).The Auto-Vectorizer may generate different instructions than specified by the /arch switch. These instructions are guarded by a runtime check to make sure that code still runs correctly. For example, when you compile /arch:SSE2, SSE4.2 instructions may be emitted. A runtime check verifies that SSE4.2 is available on the target processor and jumps to a non-SSE4.2 version of the loop if the processor does not support those instructions.
i wonder why a game release now must work on hardware not exploiting 10 years old instructions.
it's like saying the game must stay directx9 for gpu....
so much contraction and nonsensence to rant and not take responsability
if your configuration is below minimun spec you're gambling and assuming it can work, don't report your poor assumptions and your lazyness to confirm them on others
It's simply a setting in Visual Studio, unless they actually hand-wrote SSE 4.1 code.
Isn't that handled by the HPU though? Why would your game be handling 3D vector transformations on the COU?Here's the documentation that talks about that setting:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh872235.aspx
The relevant part:
So Visual Studio shouldn't be generating any code that won't run on something that doesn't support SSE 4.1 (the wording suggests it will run on anything supporting at least SSE2).
It's almost certainly hand coded. SSE 4.1 introduced a dot product operation, which would be used extensively in hand-optimised 3D code.
Isn't that handled by the HPU though? Why would your game be handling 3D vector transformations on the COU?
What do people expect with close to 9-10-year-old tech? I think my Fx-6300 is underpowered these days and I run all games at ultra at 1080p just fine and I am still looking to upgrade to something faster.
People really do need to get with the new tech and stop expecting Devs to cater for them at a certain point
What do people expect with close to 9-10-year-old tech? I think my Fx-6300 is underpowered these days and I run all games at ultra at 1080p just fine and I am still looking to upgrade to something faster.
People really do need to get with the new tech and stop expecting Devs to cater for them at a certain point