Filter games by system requirements

[Sai!k0]

I just ask to add a filter that categorizes the games into: *Low Requirements", "Medium Requirements" and "High requirements", with this filter, it will be more easier to find games according to our PC Hardware.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

sound nice but sometime you can get a game that ask for something like a very fast graphic card but yet would still work on a relatively cheap CPU , sometime it's the other way around.

technically you can have a game that doesn't need a lot's of performances but still a large quantity of RAM .... so it's would have to be a set of filters and not just one filter.

[FFL2and3rocks]

That information is just plain text, it can't be sorted that way. If developer were asked to go back and select that information for all of their games, many will most likely not even bother, just like they didn't bother creating images for the new library.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

accurate in any way.

Try using the search function. This is brought up many times.

It is just a variation of the "System Spec Check."

https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/search/?gidforum=882959061469928464&include_deleted=1&q=System+Spec+Check

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

And once Steam Cloud Play is up, it won't matter for most games.

[Supafly]

I'd prefer a Block new Threads about things already discussed to death. Use the search function!


It won't happen for all the reasons mentioned in them.

And who exactly decides what specs/requirements fall into which category? Who keeps them updated? What about those that were low and years later new hardware means low is now very low? and years later when very low is now really really low? Years later low = can run on a toaster?

You can't use generic and vague classification methods for ever changing hardware and expect them to stay static.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

other thing that can happen is even if two cpu are equal on paper sometime they will perform very differently on various games.

some games get better performances from cpu having more cores and other games work better with fewer but faster cores , sometime it's things that even the developers might not have the time to test out if they don't have these hardware at hand when they write the system requirment.

[Crazy Tiger]

OP should do a google search, simply google "gamename + canirunit" for a game that has minimum specs comparable to your computer. You'll find various canirunit sites. Now compare the results, you'll notice that all sites make different judgements on whether that game can run on your PC.

It's impossible to be accurate. And that's from just comparing hardware, you also have software that has a major influence on how everything performs.

That's why Valve won't do something like this.

[El Berl]

A lot of games have misleading system requirements. For example, Arma III's minimum requirements were written back in 2013 and the game has had a lot of requirements creep since then. Those specs won't cut it unless you slam the settings down to where you might as well get the 480p 40-pound CRT outta mom's basement.

It's also impossible to write accurate system requirements for the game, since so much of it is community content with different levels of optimization. I imagine there are plenty of other games like that out there. Sims 3 for instance actually runs better on period-accurate hardware from when it was new than top-end stuff today.

[nullable]

Additionally what is low, medium and high requirements is a constant moving target. And whatever Steam might decide lot of people would disagree with because they have competing opinions.

However what makes this system impossible is there's no standardization in system requirements. Developers put in whatever they want, the consequence is human beings can still interpret system requirements, but it's really garbage data with no ryhme or reason as far as data processing is concerned. So it makes doing work on that data to get meaningful results and categories pretty challenging and error prone.

And even when system requirements are thorough for a particular game, what does the minimum and recommended requirements represent for example? Does minimum target medium settings, 30 FPS, 1080p? Or low settings, 720p, 60FPS? Developers are all over the place and it's all preference. Yeah the minimum will run the game but you don't have much insight into how it will run the game. So should a game fall into the medium requirements or low requirements? It's really hard to define because so much of the information you'd be relying on to sort that doesn't have a definitive meaning.

[Start_Running]

Originally posted by Sai!k0:

I just ask to add a filter that categorizes the games into: *Low Requirements", "Medium Requirements" and "High requirements", with this filter, it will be more easier to find games according to our PC Hardware.

Define: Low/Mediium/High

I'l guarantee whatever you defiine as low, someone will defiine as medium. and what you define as high will be someone else's low.

[El Berl]

Originally posted by Start_Running:

Originally posted by Sai!k0:

I just ask to add a filter that categorizes the games into: *Low Requirements", "Medium Requirements" and "High requirements", with this filter, it will be more easier to find games according to our PC Hardware.

Define: Low/Mediium/High

I'l guarantee whatever you defiine as low, someone will defiine as medium. and what you define as high will be someone else's low.

Exactly. If I may use the example of Arma again, you can technically run A3 on a fifteen year old gaming computer if you slam the settings down to the absolute minimum, including halving the rendering resolution. However, it will be extremely difficult spotting targets with a resolution that low, thus making you very non-competitive versus other players.

Technically "low" settings and "playable" indeed by some definitions, but unplayable if you're looking to have an objectively reasonable experience.

[VIZCARRY]

GAA