Increasing minimum system requirements over time

[Shame]

This may come as a controversial idea to the game's playerbase, but for the purposes of making the game better, more interesting and fleshed out, while allowing majority of the players to still play the game, I think the system requirements should go up over time, may be every decade or so if Hello Games are interested in having this as a game that they update in the long run. I for one would love to see something like the physics mechanics of liquids and gases you see in Oxygen Not Included. Constructing contraptions as opposed to simply making aesthetically-pleasing bases would certainly draw more attention to the game in the long run and expand the possibilities within the game, because who doesn't like the idea of building amazing automated systems in an amazing-looking game? However the limiting factor for implementing such mechanics on at least a small planetary scale (planets in NMS are much smaller than real life counterparts) at most optimal rendering would probably be the low required processing limits.

Hello Games could look at the statistics for what the majority of players have in terms of computer specifications to determine whether to up the processing limits at the time or not. Regardless, from the looks of it, you shouldn't expect to be fine even when doing digital work like 3D modelling or simulation programming without at least a $750 desktop PC or a $1500 laptop these days. 8GB ram and other components, which complement that are simply the minimum that will get you through processing a lot of the standard software today without much of a hassle, while going lower gets you into the potato processing category.

I know there are plenty of people who can't afford even machines like this today. Consoles are becoming more expensive every new generation, and the binary computer limits are a big part of the problem. With NMS in particular, the processing limits set are a major setback, preventing this game from reaching its full potential. And if this is done tactically, people can make sure the game is still available to run for the vast majority of people interested in it. Otherwise, I see the game living only so long as these requirements are the standard and be out-competed by similar future releases, which do things NMS could never do due to its old and low system requirements. Consoles would be most impacted with this change, as the game would become unplayable on older consoles, resulting in players who played it on PS4 now suddenly requiring PS5 or a different machine akin to its processing capabilities to continue playing it on the latest update.

Very curious as to what people think of this approach to the future of the game. Would you be okay with this game requiring you to have 16GB ram or so and other better components in 2026?

[tkwoods]

Gibberish...

[Shame]

tkwoods님이 먼저 게시:

Gibberish...

tl;dr: the idea is for Hello Games to increase minimum system requirements over time for the game, so better mechanics, like the elemental physics systems seen in games like Oxygen Not Included and more could be possible.

This system requirement increase could be done every decade or so. For PC players it means upgrading or getting a new computer, while for console players it means getting a newer console to play the later versions of the game.

Your thoughts?

[Dirak2012]

The system requirements have already been raised from release.

I'm no longer able to play on my PC since the changes in the Desolation update. I had to move to xbox so the game is no longer a sideshow.

[Shame]

Dirak2012님이 먼저 게시:

The system requirements have already been raised from release.

I'm no longer able to play on my PC since the changes in the Desolation update. I had to move to xbox so the game is no longer a sideshow.

They have? I must have not noticed then. It doesn't look like there has been too much change, other than may be the recommended requirements being now the minimum requirements, as there appears to no longer be anything in recommended section and both requirement types have had 8GB ram for as long as I can remember. On the ram side 8GB has always been the minimum though. If you played with 6GB ram and/or with an incredibly poor graphics card, processor or something like that, then you would simply have need a better computer. Consoles with the same processing power aren't going to be any cheaper than if you got a PC instead, but I digress.

[tkwoods]

Your logic is based on several assumptions about HG that:

1 - Don't necessarily reflect reality, like looking at user statistics.

2 - HG controls hardware.

3 - Current systems render complete planets.

HG will develop the game so people can purchase and enjoy it. So they will react to the market not try and purposely limit who can play the game.

[Shame]

tkwoods님이 먼저 게시:

Your logic is based on several assumptions about HG that:

1 - Don't necessarily reflect reality, like looking at user statistics.

2 - HG controls hardware.

3 - Current systems render complete planets.

HG will develop the game so people can purchase and enjoy it. So they will react to the market not try and purposely limit who can play the game.

1) What about user statistics? That they don't look at them? From what I have heard, they do, and when they are developing a game with a playerbase of this size, they really should.

2) This doesn't assume that. Obviously system availability is bound to change unpredictably, but if they look at statistics and expectations, they can make good decisions regarding this. I mean apparently they have already increased the system requirements a bit, so this idea isn't completely off the table.

3) This isn't entirely how this would work. Parts of certain planets, like the core and the basic physics terrain has to be at least processed for the most part throughout the planet so you don't fall in them. Physics rendering can extend only within visible proximity and processing only from bases and local areas, slightly further than rendering of them. Current system requirements couldn't handle this for sure, but with better hardware components, you could start implementing something like this.

4) Yes, that is a point I address with this idea. But they also implement mechanics basically none asks for, but they know they must have to make a better experience, it's what game design is all about. If the game is lackluster, and the only way they can make the game more exciting for players is to make systems which require better hardware, and it is within reason to do it, then they should, right?


If you read and only understood the tl;dr you will be missing a bunch of points I addressed.

[tkwoods]

Still gibberish...

--edit---

System requires will always increase over time.

[Shame]

tkwoods님이 먼저 게시:

Still gibberish...

Well, I can't give you good counter-arguments or explain my points well if answers to your points are simply going to be gibberish you can't understand, so I guess that's that.

[tkwoods]

Shame님이 먼저 게시:

tkwoods님이 먼저 게시:

Still gibberish...

Well, I can't give you good counter-arguments or explain my points well if answers to your points are simply going to be gibberish you can't understand, so I guess that's that.

You don't have a good opening argument. You stated you wanted thoughts not an argument or debate. I think your idea is gibberish... not based in reality or on correct assumptions.

[luZk]

System requirements has already increased a little has it not?

[Dirak2012]

I was below the minimum specs, but I could still get 20-30 fps out of the game from Foundation to the Mech update, then with Desolation it dropped to single digits, so it was no longer playable.
All I'm saying that something changed in the game that made it more demanding, that's all I know.
I'm not complaining.

[NLxAROSA]

luZk님이 먼저 게시:

System requirements has already increased a little has it not?

Not just a little, due to the Vulkan update, certain cards that were able to run the game at launch are no longer able to run it.

Being locked out of a game you purchased sucks, but then again, when you're playing games on PC you know that 'minimum requirements' mean the game will run like crap at 10x10 pixels.

PC gaming means updating (or turning settings down) over time. Get a console if you want specs to remain the same.

[Shame]

tkwoods님이 먼저 게시:

You don't have a good opening argument. You stated you wanted thoughts not an argument or debate. I think your idea is gibberish... not based in reality or on correct assumptions.

I made an argument for my opinion, but wanted to hear others' as well, whether it aligns, goes against it or is simply different. I still don't understand exactly what you mean by "based on reality" or I guess "gibberish" as well now. How is all this entirely unrealistic exactly? And what exactly makes my opening argument bad?

Also system spec requirements cannot exceed that of the PS4 or Xbox One hardware right now, otherwise they will alread be going into the requirement of PS5 and Xbox X. My question here really is whether people are ok with that idea, or should HG make content that is only as in-depth as the current minimum specs and console specs allow?

[Dirak2012]

Content has nothing to do with specs.
Lately devs have become lazy, solving all their problems with more space in HD and more horse power, instead optimizing their games.
With enough work even a game with as much content as The Witcher 3 can be ported to the Switch, which is much less powerful than the Xbox one.
So, I don't believe that more features need more power.

[luZk]

Shame님이 먼저 게시:

tkwoods님이 먼저 게시:

You don't have a good opening argument. You stated you wanted thoughts not an argument or debate. I think your idea is gibberish... not based in reality or on correct assumptions.

My question here really is whether people are ok with that idea, or should HG make content that is only as in-depth as the current minimum specs and console specs allow?

It would make absolutly now sence for HG to abandon PS4 or XBOX1 imo.