安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
Now they give you both a minimum requirement which is actually not the exact minimal requirement and a second, "recommended" requirement that you should actually follow if you want a good experience in the first place (but should go above if you want the "best" experience or are bent on playing every game on ultra 4k...)...
Back in the day it meant you didn't even get the game to run if you were below the minimum. But that was at a time when hardware resources were scarce. Now system resources are plentiful, so it doesn't really hold to the old 'standard'.
Nailed it - with the various hardware configurations out there - its a wonder they don't have a harder time getting things squared away.
As I already alluded too - it prob starts with the core engine specs - then they grow from there.
But that kind of thing takes a lot of trial and error.
You'd need an AMD and Intel platform - with mixture of GPU's - and you need to QA it out to ensure things line up.
Likely uses a closed test to gather specs from all kinds of users to get a sense of performance etc.
Never straight forward to be sure.
All you can do is this, as rule of thumb:
Look at the recommended and minimum specs. If you are far closer to minimum than recommended, then avoid.
That's the best you can do.