881 réponses à ce sujet

[duder28man]

I normally don't want to game on PCs. I have a PS3 at home, but I'm teaching in S. Korea for the next year...my PS3 is far, far away. Thought maybe there was a chance for me to play it on my laptop...oh well. Thanks for letting me know before i bought it and cried.

[Lord_Saulot]

duder28man wrote...

I'm pretty sure I can run this game...but does anyone think it will be choppy or anything. I know i cant run it on the recommended settings but will I be able to run it smoothly if i choose lower quality settings? It's a HP G61-632NR Notebook PC, 2.1GHz VISION Technology from AMD with AMD Athlon II Dual-Core Processor for Notebook PCs M320, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4200 Graphics

Thanks

You'd probably have to try the lowest settings, but it is hard to say for sure in that range.  Sorry if that is a disappointment.

[FurousJoe]

duder28man wrote...

I normally don't want to game on PCs. I have a PS3 at home, but I'm teaching in S. Korea for the next year...my PS3 is far, far away. Thought maybe there was a chance for me to play it on my laptop...oh well. Thanks for letting me know before i bought it and cried.

Sorry but with those specs the game is definatly unplayable 

[duder28man]

That's too bad for me. I guess I'll have to wait a year. I'm jealous of all whom are able to play this game when it comes out...

[Peter Klasson]

Should run fine on my:
AMD Phenom ™ II X6 3.2 GHZ with 8 gb, Win 7 64-bit and a Saphire Radeon HD5870 1gb, with a 24¨ BenQ LCD2420 HD
Worried about the small size of the game. DAO took me about 45 hours, I want the same game-time here.

[FurousJoe]

Peter Klasson wrote...

Should run fine on my:
AMD Phenom ™ II X6 3.2 GHZ with 8 gb, Win 7 64-bit and a Saphire Radeon HD5870 1gb, with a 24¨ BenQ LCD2420 HD
Worried about the small size of the game. DAO took me about 45 hours, I want the same game-time here.

Of course it will run fine, I suspect some kind of bragging here 

[Frozenflamekid]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Martanek wrote...

7Gb on HDD? Well, the game must be even shorter than I thought. Considering the VO, the game's length will probably not exceed 30-35 hrs on average. Anyway, it is another proof of the masseffectization process being in effect entirely. How sad.

Oh for the sake of bacon. It is this sort of doom and gloom naysaying that depresses the heck out of me. "Oh, I don't really understand how things work in the industry, but 7GB is less than previous, so it must be bad."

I shall try to explain in 3 main points why Dragon Age II is 7 GB.

1 - We used a different compression scheme in DA II than DAO (something called "ogg" I am told).
2 - 2 less fully VOed langauages
3 - Optimized mesh data, physics and lighting (which I am told reduces the footprint of environments by close to 75%)

I know some will still doom and gloom, but the game is 7GB because we are better at making games. So, now that you have some reasons why the game is 7GB I hope this will calm some of you down.

Is it just me or this guys is an **** ?<_<

[FurousJoe]

Tyrion-Imp wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Martanek wrote...

7Gb on HDD? Well, the game must be even shorter than I thought. Considering the VO, the game's length will probably not exceed 30-35 hrs on average. Anyway, it is another proof of the masseffectization process being in effect entirely. How sad.

Oh for the sake of bacon. It is this sort of doom and gloom naysaying that depresses the heck out of me. "Oh, I don't really understand how things work in the industry, but 7GB is less than previous, so it must be bad."

I shall try to explain in 3 main points why Dragon Age II is 7 GB.

1 - We used a different compression scheme in DA II than DAO (something called "ogg" I am told).
2 - 2 less fully VOed langauages
3 - Optimized mesh data, physics and lighting (which I am told reduces the footprint of environments by close to 75%)

I know some will still doom and gloom, but the game is 7GB because we are better at making games. So, now that you have some reasons why the game is 7GB I hope this will calm some of you down.

Is it just me or this guys is an **** ?<_<

Chris? Well, I'm not sure he's an ass, he just sort of have to make damage control one way or another, it's entirely possible and reasonable he's speaking the truth though, take that as you may.

[Frozenflamekid]

FurousJoe wrote...

Tyrion-Imp wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Martanek wrote...

7Gb on HDD? Well, the game must be even shorter than I thought. Considering the VO, the game's length will probably not exceed 30-35 hrs on average. Anyway, it is another proof of the masseffectization process being in effect entirely. How sad.

Oh for the sake of bacon. It is this sort of doom and gloom naysaying that depresses the heck out of me. "Oh, I don't really understand how things work in the industry, but 7GB is less than previous, so it must be bad."

I shall try to explain in 3 main points why Dragon Age II is 7 GB.

1 - We used a different compression scheme in DA II than DAO (something called "ogg" I am told).
2 - 2 less fully VOed langauages
3 - Optimized mesh data, physics and lighting (which I am told reduces the footprint of environments by close to 75%)

I know some will still doom and gloom, but the game is 7GB because we are better at making games. So, now that you have some reasons why the game is 7GB I hope this will calm some of you down.

Is it just me or this guys is an **** ?<_<

Chris? Well, I'm not sure he's an ass, he just sort of have to make damage control one way or another, it's entirely possible and reasonable he's speaking the truth though, take that as you may.

I agree with the damage control but you will not win yourself many fans (and customers) by being unfriendly to your fanbase...however annoying or technologically uneducated they might be.

[Fadook]

Tyrion-Imp wrote...

FurousJoe wrote...

Tyrion-Imp wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Martanek wrote...

7Gb on HDD? Well, the game must be even shorter than I thought. Considering the VO, the game's length will probably not exceed 30-35 hrs on average. Anyway, it is another proof of the masseffectization process being in effect entirely. How sad.

Oh for the sake of bacon. It is this sort of doom and gloom naysaying that depresses the heck out of me. "Oh, I don't really understand how things work in the industry, but 7GB is less than previous, so it must be bad."

I shall try to explain in 3 main points why Dragon Age II is 7 GB.

1 - We used a different compression scheme in DA II than DAO (something called "ogg" I am told).
2 - 2 less fully VOed langauages
3 - Optimized mesh data, physics and lighting (which I am told reduces the footprint of environments by close to 75%)

I know some will still doom and gloom, but the game is 7GB because we are better at making games. So, now that you have some reasons why the game is 7GB I hope this will calm some of you down.

Is it just me or this guys is an **** ?<_<

Chris? Well, I'm not sure he's an ass, he just sort of have to make damage control one way or another, it's entirely possible and reasonable he's speaking the truth though, take that as you may.

I agree with the damage control but you will not win yourself many fans (and customers) by being unfriendly to your fanbase...however annoying or technologically uneducated they might be.

Thought Chris's post was a pretty reasonable response to wild, baseless, uninformed, and possibly damaging speculation (otherwise known as "the average internet debate").

Modifié par Fadook, 25 janvier 2011 - 11:41 .

[FurousJoe]

Fadook wrote...

Tyrion-Imp wrote...

FurousJoe wrote...

Tyrion-Imp wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Martanek wrote...

7Gb on HDD? Well, the game must be even shorter than I thought. Considering the VO, the game's length will probably not exceed 30-35 hrs on average. Anyway, it is another proof of the masseffectization process being in effect entirely. How sad.

Oh for the sake of bacon. It is this sort of doom and gloom naysaying that depresses the heck out of me. "Oh, I don't really understand how things work in the industry, but 7GB is less than previous, so it must be bad."

I shall try to explain in 3 main points why Dragon Age II is 7 GB.

1 - We used a different compression scheme in DA II than DAO (something called "ogg" I am told).
2 - 2 less fully VOed langauages
3 - Optimized mesh data, physics and lighting (which I am told reduces the footprint of environments by close to 75%)

I know some will still doom and gloom, but the game is 7GB because we are better at making games. So, now that you have some reasons why the game is 7GB I hope this will calm some of you down.

Is it just me or this guys is an **** ?<_<

Chris? Well, I'm not sure he's an ass, he just sort of have to make damage control one way or another, it's entirely possible and reasonable he's speaking the truth though, take that as you may.

I agree with the damage control but you will not win yourself many fans (and customers) by being unfriendly to your fanbase...however annoying or technologically uneducated they might be.

Thought Chris's post was a pretty reasonable response to wild, baseless, uninformed, and possibly damaging speculation (otherwise known as "the average internet debate").

Yeah pretty much that. But what can do you, comes with the territory of having a public internet forum. You should look at the Dead Space 2 armor thread here, now THAT's where you will find baseless, uninformed and possibly damaging speculation. 

[Ryzaki]

Too bad 2 of the languages he claimed were taken out for space were never in the game to begin with. >_>

[Killjoy Cutter]

A game with a smaller installed size because the coding is better, instead of relying on resource bloat and lazy code?



BioWare is awesome, and more programmers need to learn from this example.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Tyrion-Imp wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Martanek wrote...

7Gb on HDD? Well, the game must be even shorter than I thought. Considering the VO, the game's length will probably not exceed 30-35 hrs on average. Anyway, it is another proof of the masseffectization process being in effect entirely. How sad.

Oh for the sake of bacon. It is this sort of doom and gloom naysaying that depresses the heck out of me. "Oh, I don't really understand how things work in the industry, but 7GB is less than previous, so it must be bad."

I shall try to explain in 3 main points why Dragon Age II is 7 GB.

1 - We used a different compression scheme in DA II than DAO (something called "ogg" I am told).
2 - 2 less fully VOed langauages
3 - Optimized mesh data, physics and lighting (which I am told reduces the footprint of environments by close to 75%)

I know some will still doom and gloom, but the game is 7GB because we are better at making games. So, now that you have some reasons why the game is 7GB I hope this will calm some of you down.

Is it just me or this guys is an **** ?<_<

No, he's not being an @** here.  He's responding to silly gamer outrage, panic, and guessing. 

[FurousJoe]

Coru31lion wrote...

I am pretty sure my computer will run the game just fine but the question i have is will my graphics card it is a nvidia geforce gt 430 with 1gb?

Suer it will be fine, maybe not on the highest of high settings, but certainly playable.

[Gorath Alpha]

Coru31lion wrote...

I am pretty sure my computer will run the game just fine but the question i have is will my graphics card it is a nvidia geforce gt 430 with 1gb?

Nobody much is benchmarking that one due to the marketing it is getting.  It is not intended to replace the GT 230 / GT 330 pair of OEM cards.  It's supposed to be quiet, have a very low thermal signature,  and be less capable of running games than the GT 230 was, since it's optimized as an HTPC add-on, not as the current budget model game card.  The fact that DA2 is also going to have console game versions, however, means that the graphics won't escalate particularly far beyond where DAO was**.  Therefore, if you can run that, you can most likely run the next game as well, just slightly less well that you did with its predecessor. 

** I added the asterisks since the two minimum cards named by DAO, one of which was mere pie in the sky, have been eliminated, which points to changes in the "Small" texture files, which previously were accessible to 128 MB cards and didn't require the full extent of the SM-3 "c" pixel shaders. 

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 26 janvier 2011 - 10:35 .

[Pitrus]

Running on a GTX 260 I assume I'll get what I want out of the DX10 option but seeing as the card has no DX11 support, any word on how big the difference will be?



I'm thinking of upgrading it, but as it's still definetly viable for some time ahead it would seem pointless if I barely notice an improvement.

[Yenkaz]

Eh, depends on how much you want to invest, really.

The games that do use dx11 often do not improve much over dx10/9, I would advice on waiting until the GTX260 just doesn't cut it any longer - or when the number of dx11 exclusives start increasing.

Modifié par Yenkaz, 26 janvier 2011 - 11:54 .

[NErWOnek]

dual gtx 460s might show da II in its full glory but the power requirements outweigh the benefits. 2 year old mid segment card with dx 9 will still be playable and that is reasonable simply because not all of us can afford a computer ferrari every year.

[Kourui]

Hmm I'm Sure i can run it at max, i did with DA:O but sometimes i would get mad lag untill i pasued the game and it was gone, then resumed the game and it came back so I'm not sure what that was..

My current Specs (which i played DA:O with also)
i7 920 D0 OC @ 2.8 i think?
6g Ram
Radeon HD 5870

I also look forward to the testing of DX11

Modifié par Kourui, 27 janvier 2011 - 02:17 .

[PSUHammer]

I just used DA2 as an excuse to upgrade from a Radeon 4890 to an Nvidia GTX 570. Woo Hoo!!



Not a huge difference although I can now pretty much everything maxed in any game at 1980x1200 and get 30+ fps. Now to resell the old card on eBay!

[CesUtd]

Will a core2duo e85003.16Ghz run this game fine? I have a Gigabyte 470GTX ddr5 graphic card and 4gb ram. At the moment I can't afford a new computer but open to suggestions. I use windows 7 ultimate 64bit.

[PSUHammer]

CesUtd wrote...

Will a core2duo e85003.16Ghz run this game fine? I have a Gigabyte 470GTX ddr5 graphic card and 4gb ram. At the moment I can't afford a new computer but open to suggestions. I use windows 7 ultimate 64bit.

Yes...that was the processor I had before I just updated to an i7.  I ran DAO and ME2 in full 1980x1200 res with all options maxed and my average fps was 60 (vertical sync on).  Your graphics card should more than be able to handle this game and your processor will not bottleneck it.