Increase stated system requirements

[Devolved Earthen]

They really need to increase the stated "Minimum System Requirements" on the store page.

At the very least it should increase to requiring a graphics card with at least 3GB onboard VRAM. Perhaps SSD or RAID Striped should be a requirement as well.

Both harder to swallow but honest. If it's not honest people will be set up for disappointment, that's why it's called minimum for pete's sake.

But also worth noting that it could be f.ex. a 6th gen GTX or so as long as it has at least 3GB VRAM. No clue what's up with assuming GTX 10 series is baseline. On a budget, sometimes tier matters more than generation, because used parts are a gajillion times cheaper and often function perfectly fine.
I do say a gajillion, that is, not on eBay or Amazon maybe, but at garage sales, swap meets, OfferUp, Nextdoor, et cetera. Again, they often function perfectly fine - with the frequent exception of power supplies. I'd recommend never bothering to fire up a used power supply as you'll probably brick the motherboard. Used power supplies from these sources are most often bad even if they appear to work at first.

[Splattergutz]

It helps their sales to a broader market, maybe.

The sad truth is a player can start this game in it's early stages on a budget end PC and not until they start to build and obtain more items/discoveries will the game start to tank their system. Too late for a refund then!

Unfortunately it raises the question, how much do the devs of Empyrion really care about their customers and is it really just about the dollar?

Lower minimum system requirements = more $$$

[jdrafton]

Even the "Recommended Computer System" is not enough really:

RECOMMENDED:
Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
OS: Windows 10, 64-bit system required
Processor: Quad-Core 3 GHz or better
Memory: 16 GB RAM
Graphics: AMD Vega 56 / NVIDIA GTX 1660 Ti (min. 4 GB VRAM)
DirectX: Version 11
Storage: 15 GB available space
Sound Card: DirectX® compatible
Additional Notes: SSD is highly recommended

I had this system and I had to turn many things down or off to play. However, this game is so much fun that I have upgraded my entire system. 😁 then still turned stuff way down due to lack of optimization.

[ravien_ff]

I have empyrion on a standard disk drive and it plays just fine except for long loading times sadly.

[cwsumner]

The "Minimum" ratings are the ones that allow a game to run, at all. Not guaranteed to run well.

For that see the "Recommended". 8-)

[Splattergutz]

Originally posted by cwsumner:

The "Minimum" ratings are the ones that allow a game to run, at all. Not guaranteed to run well.

For that see the "Recommended". 8-)

I doubt if the consumer would except what's stated above as fair or honest. What is meant by 'run', be able to start the game on the start screen and be left there?

Or even worse, be able to 'play' the game in the early stages then the game refuses to continue. The player is then, under those circumstances, denied two things that are incumbent within Steam;

1 Be unable to obtain a refund.

2 Be unable to complete a game purchased in good faith.

Both instances entitle the player to feel as if they've been ripped off.

[cwsumner]

"Minimum" means play the game but not at max. And not at "screaming" FPS. I don't recall anyone mentioning "left there"...

[Devolved Earthen]

@cwsumner, your comment indicates that you do have pretty high specs and don't really understand the justification for this discussion. Below 40 FPS for 90% of the time with constant additional micro-lag is objectively abysmal performance by any half-serious gamer's standards.

I already exceed the minimum specs by a noticeable margin. Settings on minimum (every setting) and I've set Nvidia control panel to performance, and also tried my own advanced settings tweaks, and even overclocking my skimpy short profile 1050 that's the only thing I can afford for the next couple months.

Maybe I should double-check Userbenchmark to see if my parts are performing under what they should be. No thermal issues but I suppose that's not everything. Any other software-based suggestions you've done to make it run faster?

I'm also curious what specs you have, because whatever you're running must work real well. Mind sharing?

[Devolved Earthen]

Also, "Run, at all" would mean running Skyrim on a light business laptop from 2007 where you get 1 (one) FPS but it still keeps "running." Yes, that was an anecdotal example. Be precise in your speech.

[Devolved Earthen]

Gutz, I guess you hit the nail on the head. I suppose laissez-faire would dictate that since they own the game forever (as long as they're not a dingus and lose their steam account), they'll have the responsibility to know that certain games will be better playable in the future with upgrades. If they like the hobby of gaming, they'll naturally vote with their dollar.

Used PC parts get a bad rap. People bluntly assume they're junk, but nothing bricks the parts except actual abuse. Power supplies get abused all the time. Other stuff is usually just fine.

The inordinate fear around static discharge is almost wholly unjustified. Only larger discharges even have a chance of doing damage, and only if just touch just exactly the right part at the right time. These parts are made to last a decade or more, after all.

And the prices at garage sales are SOO low - they want it gone, today, no matter what. Same with OfferUp or such apps, the easier it is to post, the better. Curb alerts especially.

[Devolved Earthen]

Come to think of it, there's also the fact that some games' requirements increase over time. WoW came out in 2004, for example. One could argue that this game, just like that one, has been in active development for a certain non-negligible period of time.

But there are those who say this game has little left to optimize, it's just a resource hog by virtue of what it's trying to accomplish. Almost everything in it is changeable. This point was made by one of the commenters on the meme in the library page - you know the one when you see it. I wonder if he's right.

[Splattergutz]

@Devolved Earthen I own a fairly top end PC. But that's because I can afford to update when I like.

The problem I have is when gaming developers give incorrect info about minimum requirements it raises a question about their integrity. Is it done intentionally?

The way Empyrion has been developed since I first purchased it back in 2016 with so many bugs and problems still remaining, it appears Eleon are at the very least slack and lazy.

So to answer my own question, I strongly suspect they won't amend the games minimum requirements as it may affect their profit margins.

[Devolved Earthen]

They have a small team and I get the general impression they're just not particularly experienced at coding, especially when it comes to keeping your code organized (disciplined, one might say) and perhaps also when it comes to properly understanding and implementing object-oriented programming.

Personally I don't have that common mistrust of people. Most people just didn't apply themselves as much to the task as we would have wished. Those who care more will do a better job. For example the developers might have PCs with higher specs, and not done much testing of the game for the purpose of determining the minimum requirements accurately - feels like the sort of statistic most developers would be forgiven for thinking they can set rather quickly and then forget.

To be fair, working on the game is more important than re-testing something they (subjectively) consider water under the bridge. That's why I raised the issue in a more vocal forum.

Speaking of how much time has passed, the game must have expanded a good bit, yes? Perhaps it's just more demanding than it was. Maybe this is the fault of lackluster, partially disorganized coding. Or maybe that's just what happens when the game grows. I do notice, just to name one example, that many of the current models and textures are more complex than their iterations from many versions ago.

Maybe, again, they just didn't set the requirements high enough to begin with. Many people think a task is easier than it is until they progress deeper into the complexity of the subject matter. It is the wise who are more deeply aware that they know little.

Either way, 7 years later and from Alpha all the way to 1.9.10, it's high time to re-examine.

Say, as for their profit margins, I'd venture to wonder if they'd be helped more by increasing opinion of those who already own the game - by optimizing, bugfixing, and fulfilling more of the community's wishes - so that its reviews and, much more importantly, its word-of-mouth (or word-of-keyboard) reputation could be substantially improved. Any game that gets redeemed by its developers would easily sway those who were already just convinced enough to buy it, to then give it another go and end up strongly recommending it - as well as the real golden ticket, gifting it to their friends so they could play together.

[Splattergutz]

@Devolved Earthen to answer the one question you raised, yes the game has expanded extensively since 2016.

However, they have allowed some of the most fundamental flaws within the game to remain. The save mechanics in this game are the worst I have experienced. e.g.; You save the game prior to attacking a POI with your SV intact but receive damage during the battle and decide to go back to the previous save to discover your SV has the same damage it just received.

This is just one flaw in the save mechanics alone that has happened to myself on more then once. It shouldn't be necessary to save multiple times to insure the game won't corrupt our saves.

This has never been fixed along with many other things and it is evidence of a company who has a total disregard for their client base. In my experience in business if you follow the dollar and self interest you will always find the truth.(can't recall who made that quote)

That is why I believe they haven't adjusted the minimum requirements.

[vessynessy20]

I have to turn everything to LOW to play and it STILL uses 5 out of 6 GB's of VRAM on my GPU just by running at all. :( I don't have any VRAM left to try to turn on textures or extra stuff. WHY DOES IT USE 5 GB'S VRAM CASUALLY?

[Exop!]

i mean i dont have the best system, still rocking a 6gb 1060. but i found that shadows were the biggest performance drainer