Installera Steam
logga in
|
språk
简体中文 (förenklad kinesiska)
繁體中文 (traditionell kinesiska)
日本語 (japanska)
한국어 (koreanska)
ไทย (thailändska)
Български (bulgariska)
Čeština (tjeckiska)
Dansk (danska)
Deutsch (tyska)
English (engelska)
Español - España (Spanska - Spanien)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanska - Latinamerika)
Ελληνικά (grekiska)
Français (franska)
Italiano (italienska)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesiska)
Magyar (ungerska)
Nederlands (nederländska)
Norsk (norska)
Polski (polska)
Português (Portugisiska – Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugisiska - Brasilien)
Română (rumänska)
Русский (ryska)
Suomi (finska)
Türkçe (turkiska)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamesiska)
Українська (Ukrainska)
Rapportera problem med översättningen
I posted a picture of my system in the third line of post.
Athlon II 640 3.0 GHz
Make no mistake, this is a demanding game.
Well as you can see, now I have 4 hours in game, so I've pretty much have seen how it behaves in the open world. The same.
If you can run the game well, that's not a weak PC, that's what I mean.
Exception is Arma 3, pretty much because of being heavy on CPU and ignorant to GPU.
That's why I really don't understand why the people with much, much newer and stronger builds hesitate if they can run the game at all. That's why I created this topic.
Of course, trying to launch the game on Duron 1100 GHz with Intel HD 2000 is inadequate. I was claiming that the game runs absolutely well on the quite modern, decent, but not top-notch system which is 2-3 years old so most gamers don't need to worry.
Neah, we had people around here crying the game required DX 11 or a quad core, that sort of stuff. You are good, the people really crying were ones with 5-6 year old systems.