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

Why does COD Ghost require 6GB of RAM

#21cancerstormPosted 10/11/2013 9:02:24 AM
Orestes417 posted...
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.


there are a few i've watched where i found the premise for sex was just too ridiculous and just watched/laughed through the whole thing
---
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/2996/cancerstorm.jpg
#22snkboiPosted 10/11/2013 9:04:56 AM
wow so many n00bs here

the game has 4k textures and assets, the engine is very modified and newly built compared to 360 engine

this is why 6gb, 780, and 8 thread cpu is needed
---
i think it's nice
#23JKatarnPosted 10/11/2013 9:09:57 AM
Mackorov posted...
System requirements are never accurate TC. In fact, most game's so called minimum specs are usually utter bulls***. There are game devs that post super high specs just to give the impression that their game is so high-tech and stuff when it's far from that.

COD Ghost is definitely one of that.


If you're talking about pre-release system requirements - yes, they can be subject to change - but after release, no, you will need those specs to play the game. The developers made the game, they are intimately familiar with the engine/assets and have various debugging tools to monitor RAM usage throughout testing - they are well aware of what is necessary to play a game. Also, there is no need to put an apostrophe before the "s" in games, apostrophes are used when you wish to create a contraction or denote ownership (Jim's hat, there's water over there etc.).
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#24JKatarnPosted 10/11/2013 9:12:49 AM
snkboi posted...
wow so many n00bs here

the game has 4k textures and assets, the engine is very modified and newly built compared to 360 engine

this is why 6gb, 780, and 8 thread cpu is needed


You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about, do you?
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#25snkboiPosted 10/11/2013 9:17:07 AM
JKatarn posted...
snkboi posted...
wow so many n00bs here

the game has 4k textures and assets, the engine is very modified and newly built compared to 360 engine

this is why 6gb, 780, and 8 thread cpu is needed


You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about, do you?


780 is the only video card nvidia has that can supports 4k resolution in the drivers, that's what's recommended for 4k and max graphics
---
i think it's nice
#26Jason_25Posted 10/11/2013 9:24:44 AM
StormKMD posted...
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.


Beautiful - is subjective but they have had their talented artists recreate a real life greek island with an astonishing level of detail. The view distance on Arma 3 only compares to other huge games like FSX, X-plane, and Fuel.

Performance - Was <5 fps on release with any view distance. Now with patches I can run 5000+ m view distance with a good frame rate

RAM - The game uses about 700MB of RAM at startup with the graphical settings I have chosen.

This does not even begin to talk about the gameplay-oriented technical reasons that make the game great. COD is more like super mario with guns designed to give self esteem boosts to teenagers.

I have been playing these games since the original Arma beta so you're going to have to retort with a little better than a childish and unthinking "lol no".
#27Orestes417Posted 10/11/2013 9:41:45 AM
I love the smug dismissal of CoD, really I do. Series is damn good at what it sets out to do, it just does it a bit too often.
---
If they asked how I died tell them: Still angry.
#28DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/11/2013 10:05:38 AM
Orestes417 posted...
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.


You know, there's some pretty good porn out there for the plot. Just never that porn-for-the-sake-of-porn stuff, or anything mainstream.
---
Want that Shield!
Ball and Cup on ps mobile has framerate issues. -stargazer64
#29ShebeskiiPosted 10/11/2013 10:06:10 AM
JonWood007 posted...
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.


Jon, the E8400 is a dual core. You can't expect next gen games running on 6 threads to run on a dual core. Are you thinking straight? You expected CPU minimum requirements to jump by 0.6GHz on the same CPU generation for the next gen consoles?

Do you hear yourself talk? The current consoles have more threading than an E8400 can handle in many situations. I don't think you realize just how much your CPU has aged. It was budget performance on release. It was never a performance part. Phenom II has some serious per core performance issues. I don't see where you're coming from.

BF4 will also run better on release.
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
#30JKatarnPosted 10/11/2013 10:12:29 AM
snkboi posted...
JKatarn posted...
snkboi posted...
wow so many n00bs here

the game has 4k textures and assets, the engine is very modified and newly built compared to 360 engine

this is why 6gb, 780, and 8 thread cpu is needed


You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about, do you?


780 is the only video card nvidia has that can supports 4k resolution in the drivers, that's what's recommended for 4k and max graphics


There's a difference between "system requirements" and what you need to max out a game. Also, there's a difference between texture and screen resolution (assuming your confusing them). Ghost is certainly not the first game to use high resolution textures by any stretch of the imagination (at least on the PC).
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES