This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why does COD Ghost require 6GB of RAM

#11ShadowGomamonPosted 10/11/2013 3:36:59 AM
Sergei_Dukanov posted...
the fish ai is probably whats hogging most of it.


Your game will have 10fps, but the fish will look and act LIFELIKE!
#12TheC0ndemnedOnePosted 10/11/2013 4:45:53 AM
Serious answer: map sizes, among other things.

Though, knowing CoD, I doubt the maps will be big. Or very good.
---
http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs/55488_o.gif
http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/
#13Jason_25Posted 10/11/2013 8:12:29 AM
TheC0ndemnedOne posted...
Serious answer: map sizes, among other things.

Though, knowing CoD, I doubt the maps will be big. Or very good.


Arma III has a beautiful huge map with stellar performance (after the latest patches) that can run on as little as 1GB RAM.
#14SinisterSlayPosted 10/11/2013 8:18:40 AM
Someone here has less than 6 gigs of RAM?

Windows 7 only needs 512mb of RAM for itself (and if Windows 8 is lighter, it should need even less, but I doubt it)
So even those of us on 8gb of RAM have plenty of wiggle room.

Your computer might run like a brick s*** house for a few minutes after you close the game because of all the swap file, but that's minor.
---
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence
#15JonWood007Posted 10/11/2013 9:24:56 AM
I get the impression they're just poorly optimizing PC ports of next gen games.

I mean, look at BF4. Runs like crap while not really looking that much better than 3.A few extra effects that strain the CPU and boom, half the fps of the previous game.

Watch Dogs REQUIRES something similar to my phenom II just to RUN.

COD has reasonable CPU requirements, but outrageous GPU, RAM, and HDD ones.

All the while the games only look marginally better and only warrant a linear, progressive system requirement to run in reality. But because they're developing for next gen consoles, screw optimization! We're just gonna make games twice as demanding!

I could see, say, a phenom I X4 (note the I, first gen) or like an E8400 being a reasonable CPU requirement going into next gen. I mean, that's the next linear step from the 2.5 GHz core 2 duos of recent years.

I could see 4 GB continuing to be the minimum standard, with 8 becoming more highly recommended.

I could even see more basic DX11 cards becoming the minimum requirements, like, say, a 5750/5770 or a gts 450 or something.

But what they're talking about requiring for a good performance is just outrageous. There's no reason to simply double requirements overnight because there's a next gen console coming out, when current gen games run fine. I get the impression devs are just being lazy with the PC ports. Console is where the money is, so they make the game for console first, port it to PC, and "oh, dangit, it doesn't run on PC well? Oh well, I guess you gotta buy a PS4 or a new $1000 PC! Lol. "

Console devs have been making statements about needing like 2-3x the hardware to get the same performance out of a console as a PC, and now it seems like they're throwing their weight around on that opinion just to make a point. Even though the games totally don't look that much better than the likes of BF3, Crysis 2, and the Witcher 2. No. But now they run like crap while having little to show for them.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 8 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HDD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HDD | W7 | 1366x768
#16StormKMDPosted 10/11/2013 9:27:42 AM
Jason_25 posted...
TheC0ndemnedOne posted...
Serious answer: map sizes, among other things.

Though, knowing CoD, I doubt the maps will be big. Or very good.


Arma III has a beautiful huge map with stellar performance (after the latest patches) that can run on as little as 1GB RAM.


No...lol. No.
---
MSI 660 GeForce 2GB | i5 3570K | AsRock Z77 Pro3 | Seagate Barracuda 500GB | Ballistix 8GB | Corsair CX430
#17clschneider1990Posted 10/11/2013 9:32:47 AM
because people are still too stupid to realize that CoD has been the same game for the past 5 years and they think it is getting better when it is not changing at all.

Same game that plays itself for you

Same easy campaign mode even on the hardest settings

Same "God mode" implemented in the game (regen health)

Same moronic AI that stands there and lets you kill them

Same 10 year olds screaming how they all had sex with your mom last night

Same zombies

Same checkpoint every 4 1/2 steps to prevent any kind of penalty from dying so the kids can't get their "self esteem" lowered from not being able to play a game that requires skill and you can lose hours of data with one mistake.
---
GT:EchoesOfMercy
#18xKynOxPosted 10/11/2013 9:37:46 AM
crappy port with no optimization.
#19Orestes417Posted 10/11/2013 9:43:57 AM
clschneider1990 posted...
because people are still too stupid to realize that CoD has been the same game for the past 5 years and they think it is getting better when it is not changing at all.

Same game that plays itself for you

Same easy campaign mode even on the hardest settings

Same "God mode" implemented in the game (regen health)

Same moronic AI that stands there and lets you kill them

Same 10 year olds screaming how they all had sex with your mom last night

Same zombies

Same checkpoint every 4 1/2 steps to prevent any kind of penalty from dying so the kids can't get their "self esteem" lowered from not being able to play a game that requires skill and you can lose hours of data with one mistake.


Playing CoD for the campaign is like watching porn for the plot.
---
If they asked how I died tell them: Still angry.
#20sonicteam2k1Posted 10/11/2013 9:48:39 AM
Orestes417 posted...
Playing CoD for the campaign is like watching porn for the plot.


but once you get to the action it's pretty darn good
---
See The Game Collection
http://www.gamespot.com/users/nights_team2k7/games_table?mode=own