surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
@wqerty
READ BOY, READ!
I'm crying tears of relief that I can run this thing. It was going to have to be 360 if my slightly better laptop couldn't handle it.
READ BOY, READ!
I'm crying tears of relief that I can run this thing. It was going to have to be 360 if my slightly better laptop couldn't handle it.
Thank God these new games are still supporting Windows XP. Steam is the only DRM on this one, amirite?
I guess my Pentium III (500mhz) laptop with 256mb ram, 16mb gfx memory and 10GB SSD will be out of luck this time around.
i'm dissapointed in the lack of third person gameplay I can find.
Considering they said they actually put time into it this time around.
Considering they said they actually put time into it this time around.
Minimum is not to bad. A gaming machine built within the last 5 years will do OK.
This is the specs of a machine I've been using since the end of 2006:
Core 2 Duo E6400
8800 GTS 640MB
Kingston ValueRAM 4GB
I haven't run across a game that was unplayable yet. The only game that I had to turn it way low for was Final Fantasy XIV.
This is the specs of a machine I've been using since the end of 2006:
Core 2 Duo E6400
8800 GTS 640MB
Kingston ValueRAM 4GB
I haven't run across a game that was unplayable yet. The only game that I had to turn it way low for was Final Fantasy XIV.
SO FUCKING PUMPED FOR MAGICAL EXPLOSIONS TO BE INJECTED INTO MY EYEBALLS
Or in other words, I am pleasantly surprised that I outclass the recommended specs, and am grateful for my wise computer component purchases.
Or in other words, I am pleasantly surprised that I outclass the recommended specs, and am grateful for my wise computer component purchases.
Damn quad core recommended huh? I still have my old AMD X2. My GTX 560 sure is more than enough though!
Hmm, I think I may be able to squeeze it out on max settings...
But the question is, do I get a physical copy for the map, or a steam download for the hat?
But the question is, do I get a physical copy for the map, or a steam download for the hat?
I think my rig can handle hit but at the bare min. Maybe I should go ahead and get the xbox version.
Pretty low specs, there. Getting it for Xbox first, then I'll definitely buy it for PC if there's a GOTY edition, if not, I'll probably still get it.
Ah, get to ghetto up the graphics like I had to when I first experienced Morrowind. Will be worth it still.
I can definitely run this, but since it's Steam only, I'll be getting it on a console if I decide to pick it up.
Oblivion and FO3 used .BSA compression to pack their game files, and occupied less than 6GB. The total size of the BSA files in Oblivion is 3.7gb, FO3 was 4.23gb packed in .BSA; of course, unpacked it is a lot more.
Some folk unpack their BSA files if they have slow processors, because the previous games weren't super great at unpacking them on the fly, leading to high CPU demands.
What I want to know is will Skyrim be optimized to use greater than 4gb of RAM in a 64bit OS environment. There were LAA hacks for OB and FO3, but native support would be preferred.
Some folk unpack their BSA files if they have slow processors, because the previous games weren't super great at unpacking them on the fly, leading to high CPU demands.
What I want to know is will Skyrim be optimized to use greater than 4gb of RAM in a 64bit OS environment. There were LAA hacks for OB and FO3, but native support would be preferred.
I'd heard Bethesda utilized their unique data compressing tech to reduce the size of game files, hence the 6GB space requirement, but still, 6GB... I hope there's no performance hitch to this, else I'd have to pull a Doom 3 and find some way to extract the files for easier access.
At any rate, totally looking forward to the release, and if the requirement's any indication, my GT425M laptop may be able to run this at Medium-Max settings, and that means *gasp* portable Skyrim!
Time to say goodbye to listening to lectures.
At any rate, totally looking forward to the release, and if the requirement's any indication, my GT425M laptop may be able to run this at Medium-Max settings, and that means *gasp* portable Skyrim!
Time to say goodbye to listening to lectures.
Also, the fans always make high res texture replacers, see QTP3 if you're hip. People don't buy Bethesda games on PC just to play the vanilla experience after-all.
Can I ask why 6GB is such a strange thing? The size of the game on HD space has nothing in terms of how much gameplay content there is. And the fact everything has only one texture in terms of land (the technology is able to paint snow directly on the original texture) which cuts down the amount of space required. Just chill people, since when is 12-17 gigs was is considered 2011 quality?
I have either equal to or more than recommended specs. More RAM would be nice, I guess. Thing is, recommended is still probably only going to be everything on medium.
Looks like with my core i5 480m, 4GB ram and GeForce 310 1GB im set for minimum, that road trip with my family sure is going to be FUN
Previous BSG games have all been processor-intensive. At one point I had a hot card and a moderate CPU and I was getting shit performance - the CPU is often the bottle neck for people having performance issues with Bethsoft's games.
Now I've got a quad core i7 860 w/HT so I'm not too worried about that.
Now I've got a quad core i7 860 w/HT so I'm not too worried about that.
YESYESYEYS, TIME FOR THE PRE ORDER!
and 6GB game sounds about right, all Bethesda games are for some reason small, Fallout 3 i think it was 4 or 5 GB.
and 6GB game sounds about right, all Bethesda games are for some reason small, Fallout 3 i think it was 4 or 5 GB.
Honestly, most games recommend quad-core by default, but with a decent GFX card paired with a Core 2 Duo or something else with decent single thread performance should smash it.
Putting quad-core as recommended is just a way of making it easy for consumers as most games don't really use multiple threads too much just yet, which is where AMD's new bulldozer CPU is at a disadvantage in games.
AMD 2x won't cut it though. Trust me, I've just upgraded to an Athlon 2 X4 3.0ghz to get away from that.
Putting quad-core as recommended is just a way of making it easy for consumers as most games don't really use multiple threads too much just yet, which is where AMD's new bulldozer CPU is at a disadvantage in games.
AMD 2x won't cut it though. Trust me, I've just upgraded to an Athlon 2 X4 3.0ghz to get away from that.
follow
