Aren't PC requirements a little bit high?

[Lorster]

Why would this require Intel Core i7 if these games are over 11 years old?

[Spazzard]

I'm just guessing it is the only tested specs. When DMC 4 (The original, not the SE) came out that had pretty high recommended requirements, (Core2Duo and 8600GT), which at the time was pretty much the best you could get if you had a laptop, and not much of a step down from the 8800 and a Core2Quad. But it still ran at close to 25-30fps on a Core Solo 1.5ghz on low with 950 intel graphics. I could get nearly 200fps average on that game with a Core2quad and a Radeon 4850 at 1080p on best settings only a year or so later. Hopefully this is the same thing. Capcom have always seemed to be very conservative with min and recommended specs.

If it's a terrible port of these games, like the original DMC 3 was, then that is going to suck, but I'm hoping it will be closer to what we saw with Bayonetta, DMC 4 and SF4. They had amazing performance on anything better than a toaster, but that didn't show on the Minimum and recommended specs page. We all know how well those games run though.


I never bothered with buying DMC 3 on Steam because I played it on an emulator and it ran better than the so-called PC port, plus I could get my 360 pad configured just like the original PS version , which was not happening for me on the official port.


DMC 3 was like playing the original PC port of RE4, or Saints Row 2. just a ♥♥♥♥ show all round.

[DarkJuda On Deck]

Depends.

First case you got studios that don't have a wide variety of systems, so since they can't test it properly, they will just throw the sys requirements equivalent to the present game console's power. So basicaly we can't know for sure how well it will perform, all we can do is hope.
A lot of games don't perform a all like the requirements suggest, like DMC3 (in bad way) or DMC4 (in a good way, I played the whole game on a 7600GO (on a 2006 laptop) which is way below requirements). And basicaly I agree with what spazzard said.


Second case, the game as been tested on a wide variety of of systems, and the sys req are a good representation of how the game it performs. I hope it's not that case. These are PS2 remasters, and even little tablets or smarphones are way stronger than PS2.
How could simple PS2 remasters could ask a lot more than Crysis 3?
FFXII on PC is in that case by the way, it asks more than Crysis 3, which is totally absurd and unaceptable considering they are PS2 games. Every toaster should roll on these games with 200fps or more.

The dream would be that every studio give us proprer sys reqs, like rare as done thore Sea of Thieves, but it's only a dream.

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/stg.ign.com/2018/02/sea-of-thieves-pc-requirements.png

[DarkJuda On Deck]

Originally posted by node357:

it may be an emulator

A PS3 emulator in that case. PCSX2 don't ask nearly as much.
And if it runs through an emulator I don't know why we had to wait 4 months (since it was annonced, the port might have been in the works way earlier).

[DarkJuda On Deck]

Originally posted by node357:

Originally posted by ELYSEE CHIRAC:

A PS3 emulator in that case. PCSX2 don't ask nearly as much.
And if it runs through an emulator I don't know why we had to wait 4 months (since it was annonced, the port might have been in the works way earlier).

i just think between this and RE4, the overhead must be pretty huge to require so much processing power. i have an FX-8350 and HD 7950 and still get frame drops in RE4 in 60 FPS mode. i play it at 30. it just seems unreasonably demanding. and it *feels* like playing the Wii version on Dolphin...

Like a lot of games runing at 30 and having its animations tied to framerate, they use some tricks to get it working at 60 without recoding the entire game. Doing so, you will never get a perfect performance with the game and there is nothing you can do, even if you have 5gHz x 8 cores.

Now, I just tried it to see how it works on my pc, and I noticed that the 8x antialiasing is litteraly doubling the CPU/GPU usage, from 15-30 to 30-60% for my CPU (i5 4690k).,and my GPU usage go from 15 to 25% so... if it's not an emulator, it's very badly optimised. It would've been nice to compare with the original version of RE4, but I heard it was one of the worst port ever made, at the same level as DMC3.

[DarkJuda On Deck]

Wooo so many mistakes in my post -> corrected.

I won't get my hopes up for 144fps. It's not because the originals run at 60fps on PS2 that their animations are not tied to framerate, so I don't think we will get unlocked fps. They are not doing this kind of port.

[Divinus Prime]

Originally posted by ELYSEE CHIRAC:

Wooo so many mistakes in my post -> corrected.

I won't get my hopes up for 144fps. It's not because the originals run at 60fps on PS2 that their animations are not tied to framerate, so I don't think we will get unlocked fps. They are not doing this kind of port.

I’ll be fine with a constant locked 60FPS like RE4

[Sixtyfivekills]

Way too high.


They shouldn't require any more than DMC4: SE, but.... Hell, it requires more than Doom. Either the requirements are seriously wrong, or it's a really, really, really lazy port.

[gamz]

Don't worry!

Same happened to Okami HD system requirements, but game runs perfect even on older hardware.

[Sixtyfivekills]

Originally posted by gamzrck:

Don't worry!

Same happened to Okami HD system requirements, but game runs perfect even on older hardware.

Can't agree.

It worked in 4fps with slow motion on my piece of trash computer. Resolution was 640x480, windowed, everything was set to lowest. Hell, it worked better on an emulator. Meanwhile, DMC 4:SE works at 30 to 60fps on medium with normal resolution for me.


Well, it is my fault for having an awful computer, but come on, it's a game from 2006, of course I'd expect it to be able to run it normally.

[DarkJuda On Deck]

Originally posted by Sixtyfivekills:

Originally posted by gamzrck:

Don't worry!

Same happened to Okami HD system requirements, but game runs perfect even on older hardware.

Can't agree.

It worked in 4fps with slow motion on my piece of trash computer. Resolution was 640x480, windowed, everything was set to lowest. Hell, it worked better on an emulator. Meanwhile, DMC 4:SE works at 30 to 60fps on medium with normal resolution for me.


Well, it is my fault for having an awful computer, but come on, it's a game from 2006, of course I'd expect it to be able to run it normally.

I agree. If the games were coded for windows natively, it could ran at more that 2000fps on current hardware.
Even back on the PS3, it should have no issue to run at 1080p/60fps considering it's about at least 35 times stronger than the PS2 (230Gflops vs 6.2 Gflops).
So why could they just achieve 720p?
Was that an emulation?

So what about the "new" 1080p version? Is that a emulated version of the emulated version?
Where does this madness ends?

[The Mailman Thinks I Am Gay]

I wouldnt worry about it. Usually they pull some bs in reccommended spec in other games too. But when the game comes out, it usually much lower than posted.

Only worry if your comupter was built pre-y2k :^)

[ChuckleNuts]

Would a 750ti be able to run this?

[DarkJuda On Deck]

Originally posted by OwTheEdge™ NL:

Would a 750ti be able to run this?

We will know today if we are lucky.