System Spec Tier and Polls

[𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪]

Create a tiering system for system specs and put games into those tiers based on compatibility. I.e. spec requirement of 3060 or higher and i9 or higher T5, 2060 or higher and i7 or higher T4, etcetera. Each T would be a collection of specs such as RAM and so-on.

Would help people pick their computer parts based on game requirements in general on Steam as they would know based on the Tier what parts in general would help. Individual part picks lacks this cohesiveness and can be more hit and miss.

Users could be polled on what Tier a game seems to fall into so game designers do not have to test several builds to figure it out and users can go by poll numbers.

This could also normalize a more cohesive way of picking groups of computer parts; i.e. I have a T5 computer, you have a T2, thus you will have trouble running x y z games.

This would make it easier for people to figure out where they are at and what they need for games. Would make Steam look forward-thinking to implement a simple categorization system. This will be inaccurate and imperfect as a categorization system, but it could evolve over time with parts and general computer part marketing may incorporate this thinking too.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

As of now, liability is why not. And there are far too many variables to be accurate in any way.

On another note, even Microsoft tried something similar and it failed hard.

Game devs already have statistical info on users who own their game(s)...

https://twitter.com/aldenkroll/status/1331367364806336514

They also have this... https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

[Aachen]

How would such vague data be of any use to developers who want their programs to function?

[nullable]

It's just creating a more complicated mess to try and deal with a complicated mess.

Originally posted by EpycWyn:

This would make it easier for people to figure out where they are at and what they need for games. Would make Steam look forward-thinking to implement a simple categorization system. This will be inaccurate and imperfect as a categorization system, but it could evolve over time with parts and general computer part marketing may incorporate this thinking too.

Looking "forward thinking", it's really important to appear to be something regardless of whether you are or not.... /s

Just what people want an inaccurate and imperfect system with a vague promise that it could evolve or time. How about solve the glaring problems before making promises?

[Mad Scientist]

The gist of this suggestion is not new whatsoever, and has been suggested many times and shown as to why it will not happen; Liability. Steam is a store, users must check the Minimum and Recommended specifications accordingly.

Further; hardware families, generations, and models can be in different tiers than one would expect by a "tier" system and can have less/similar/more performance, so Steam would have to put together a giant list of what outperforms what and put it into tiers; which since sites exist for this very purpose, is extremely counter productive to have yet-another of what numerous sites exist for this sole purpose of hardware comparisons. Steam is a store, it is not a hardware comparison site, hardware/tech reviewer, or resource for such, it is a store.

Let's use an example:

RUST:

Minimum:
Intel Core i7-3770 / AMD FX-9590 or better
10GB RAM
GTX 670 2GB / AMD R9 280 better
SSD is highly recommended or expect longer than average load times.

Recommended:
Intel Core i7-4790K / AMD Ryzen 5 1600
GTX 980 / AMD R9 Fury
16GB RAM
SSD

Notice how these are Developer min/rec? This means this is based off of their judgment of how that game will run with that specific hardware. The "tiered" system is essentially flawed as you can run some games with a low end CPU, but need a higher end GPU whereas in other games you need a higher end CPU and a lower performance GPU would make little difference vs a high end GPU. So the flaw is each game performs differently based on code, optimization, network usage/player count, and interaction with hardware. So each game would need its own "tier" as a tiered system would be drastically different per game or app.

Also special effects such as Ray Tracing use or non use could drastically alter performance making the tier system entirely worthless in judging the performance level to expect, as would the ability to get faster versions of the same hardware; enthusiast model GPUs, higher speed RAM, system overclocking, enthusiast/workstation motherboards that can give a higher CPU overclock etc.

Even screen resolution & Hz rate can drastically change what "tier" the performance would be in, also making the suggestion basically worthless as well. It also doesn't count for where hardware is installed as users installing hardware in the wrong slot; ie a slower slot or slow otherwise at partial bandwidth due to CPU limitations can also drastically alter performance, again making such a suggestion worthless.

Consumers need to look at the Min/Recommended, and research a product before purchasing, it is the consumer that is responsible for seeing if they will meet the expected performance, and a simple YT search will show more accurately, what to expect as there are countless videos of specs vs games and their performance based upon settings, resolution, hz rate etc.

This thread is rehashing other recently dead topics of the same variety. This section isn't meant to be bombarded by a single person as well for their own desires.

[Crazy Tiger]

All canirunit sites give different results, advice and ratings, they don't even match up. Why would a store, who has a commercial stake, add an unreliable system like that?

[Yzal]

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

All canirunit sites give different results, advice and ratings, they don't even match up. Why would a store, who has a commercial stake, add an unreliable system like that?

I've seen so many false negatives, the site says "no you can't run it" yet the game runs at 60+ fps

EpycWin stop trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. It takes maybe 5 minutes to figure out what every system requirement means with help from google.com. Knowing your specs it's basic, they literally tell you if you can run the program or not. They can't be dumbed down, they SHOULDN'T be dumbed down.

People don't wanna bother? then if the game doesn't run it's their fault. It's not games only, EVERY program, even OS has system requirements. Too complex for you? then maybe you should buy a console.

[Count_Dandyman]

To add onto all of this there is no real clear lines of where the different tiers should be drawn given different brands can have wildly different strengths and weaknesses and I lost track of the number of times I have seen people complaining about Prison Architect giving their system that is "so awesome it can run Witcher 3 and GTA 5 on Ultra" trouble because their system is almost entirely focused on graphics while lacking the memory and processing for handling the massed generation, tracking and interactions involved in such a small simple indie game.

[Brian9824]

This really makes no sense, assigning an arbitrary tier that not everyone even agrees to doesn't change the fundamental issues in that no one but the developer really has the ability to know how something runs, and what is important.

Nor does it change the issues of "running" being incredibly vague as everyone has different standards for what minimum performance is.

[Start_Running]

Originally posted by EpycWyn:

Create a tiering system for system specs and put games into those tiers based on compatibility. I.e. spec requirement of 3060 or higher and i9 or higher T5, 2060 or higher and i7 or higher T4, etcetera. Each T would be a collection of specs such as RAM and so-on.

Steam tried to do that when they did their whol;e STeam Machines thing. It didn't work.
Its rather impossible to meaningfully grade pc hardware into tiers.

PC performance and capability is niot simply the sum of its parts.

Would help people pick their computer parts based on game requirements in general on Steam as they would know based on the Tier what parts in general would help. Individual part picks lacks this cohesiveness and can be more hit and miss.

Or they could just look at the game sthey want to play and check out the hardware sopecs.

Users could be polled on what Tier a game seems to fall into so game designers do not have to test several builds to figure it out and users can go by poll numbers.

Yeah and that would be a spectacularly bad idea. ANy time you have users being polled on the honor system, it tnever works

[𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪]

Originally posted by MonkehMaster:

we dont need or want polls, stop spamming the forum with threads about polls.

Maybe I would believe you if you had polled evidence supporting your claim.

[MonkehMaster]

Originally posted by EpycWyn:

Originally posted by MonkehMaster:

we dont need or want polls, stop spamming the forum with threads about polls.

Maybe I would believe you if you had polled evidence supporting your claim.

no need, doesnt matter if you dont believe, the comments in your spammed threads speak for themselves.

[Judgmental Amaterasu]

This thread again.

[Lily McFluffy Butt]

Or you could just look at the recommended specs on the game store page.

[ุ]

OP is a serial poster who basically just floods the forum with random "suggestions", usually stuff that's been suggested several times before no less.

[Frostbringer]

Originally posted by EpycWyn:

Originally posted by MonkehMaster:

we dont need or want polls, stop spamming the forum with threads about polls.

Maybe I would believe you if you had polled evidence supporting your claim.

All the counter proposals to your non-original suggestion, since the same topic was posted earlier this week, and you choosing this post to “defend” your idea is quite telling.