21 réponses à ce sujet

[lionalio87]

Unfortunately no! DA:O and Mass effect have almost equivalent system requirements, so if your laptop cannot run DA:O, no way for it to run Mass Effect!!!

[lionalio87]

What is your OS? If your OS is XP, 1 GB RAM is sufficient to run BOTH. But if you run with vista or win7, no chance!!

[lionalio87]

They didn't require the same video card but your graphic card SHOULD work with both of them, in assumption that you must have the lowest settings. But with the Vista OS, you didn't match the minimum requirement of RAM (2 GB for Vista), you only have 1 GB. How awful, but it is still possible for you if you upgrade your RAM, or simply turn back to the "junk" Win XP SP3

Modifié par lionalio87, 18 mai 2011 - 10:21 .

[lionalio87]

Not much thing I can deal in this case since this problem related to the "physical" stuffs of your machine.
The option to upgrade your RAM, normally this can be done without causing any problems to your laptop. But if you are not good at detach the physical accessories of the laptop, ask the experts to help you. I don't recommend you to do this because it takes risks around.
The second option is more simple, you don't have to touch your physical hardware, just install the OS. If you can accept the Win XP SP3, that's good enough (in my opinion, this is still better than Vista, anyway ).
So that's up to your decision. Hope you can play both without buying a new machine!!

[Gorath Alpha]

lionalio87 wrote...

They didn't require the same video card but your graphic card SHOULD work with both of them, in assumption that you must have the lowest settings. But with the Vista OS, you didn't match the minimum requirement of RAM (2 GB for Vista), you only have 1 GB. How awful, but it is still possible for you if you upgrade your RAM, or simply turn back to the "junk" Win XP SP3

The HD 2600 card was only somewhat less effective for its intended purpose than it needed to be. The ATI Radeon DRIVERs, however, were much more often problematic in that time period, which is the opposite of today's situation, when it is nVIDIA stumbling with driver problems so often now, and AMD Radeon's drivers being more dependable.  RAM is both easy to upgrade  for either Desktop or Laptop, and drivers are quite simple to update.  The graphics performance will perhaps somewhat be less suited to enjoying switching on much in the way of eye candy, but should be satisfactory nonetheless. 

It was the little brother card, the HD 2400, that showed up several times when I tried finding the far greater number of instances I thought that I recalled having dealt with when the DAO game was new, and would be too weak to waste a great deal of time on, unless a person's personal sense of what is "right" about game environments is much more lenient than is my own, perhaps somewhat stricter interpretation. 

Both companies used the same numbers in graphics cards names from 2005 through 2009, after which nVIDIA stopped being anywhere nearly as honest, and began using the numbering almost at whim.  AMD still follows the old style, with fewer exaggerations and misleading choices of numbers.  With a Radeon name, the "Hundreds" digit is the key part.  The very first, "thousands" digit represents features and functions available, based on the generation the card is part of, with the HD 5n00 cards being about a year and a half old, roughly the same age as DAO. 

From zero through 200 has alwasy been onboard Chipset video chip numbering, basically the lowest of the low.  There have been "300" numbers both as cards occasionally, but mostly as onboard devices.  The 400s have been the basic business grade of "entry level" discrete graphics.  It is an actual video CARD, but just not a great deal better than the simple IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor). 

The "500" started out as an in-between card, still fairly basic, not really that good for games, but eventually developed into a "Budget" level card for game playing, a minimum that would still usually manage to do the job.  The 600 and 700 cards are/were your "Medium" power Mainline Gaming cards, what most people could expect adequate performance from without paying out an arm and a leg in cost.  VALUE here has been the key, with the cost per frame rate per dollar being better than either the Low End choices, or the HIGH End luxury cards, with their very High End pricing.

800s and 900s have been where the performanace at any cost  enthusiasts have been willing to shell out the big bucks.

Gorath

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 19 mai 2011 - 08:04 .

[Gorath Alpha]

So, David, did you head back to the store to try to swap the PC version for whatever console system you have instead? (And miss learning about video card numbering?)

[SSV Enterprise]

If you can play Dragon Age satisfactorily (for you) then you should be able to play Mass Effect 1 satisfactorily. However, you definitely need to take your laptop to a computer store and get an extra couple gigabytes of RAM put in it. Either that, or downgrade back to Windows XP.

[Gorath Alpha]

The OP has a laptop and has never named the driver dates or identification number for any drivers. If sloppy desktop setup is allowed, and VGA cables aren't screwed down properly, those PCs can have the symptom of dropped color, resulting in a tint or wash of another color covering the screen.

AFAIK, only really ancient graphics drivers are the only cause for the same symptom with good cables, good connectors and ordinary care in tightening the connector screws.

[lionalio87]

provide that you have the right OS, you can open the game, play as you wish, in fact the RAM doesn't affect much on the game, just some unexpected lag somehow, but playable, don't worry.

[SSV Enterprise]

You can't swap the PC version for the console version. Gorath was being condescending and telling you to get the console version rather than try to sort out the problem on your laptop. And if you're limited to 1 GB of RAM with Windows Vista -- the games will start, but they will be terribly slow. Unplayably slow. Windows Vista uses 1 GB of RAM by itself, and the minimum requirement for RAM when playing a game in Windows Vista is usually 2 GB.

Modifié par SSV Enterprise, 19 mai 2011 - 05:04 .

[Ottemis]

I reckon upgrading an old laptop with 'new' ram isn't as easy as it sounds.
Having that muck done in a store is expensive, as is buying outdated ram, if it's at all available.
Doing it yourself can be risky as muck, seeing as with laptops mostly replacing anything means taking the entire thing apart. If you make a mistake somewhere and it breaks or you can't put it back together, you'd have nothing.

I'd say it'd be more viable to try and save up for a new one rather then upgrade it up to an old standard so that it can run games that are already years old as it is. Then again I can't look in your wallet and see what the better option would be.

Modifié par Ottemis, 19 mai 2011 - 06:22 .

[Gorath Alpha]

It's been simple as can be  to deal with the RAM used in laptops the past 8-10 years or so, not any real difficulties there worth worrying about at all.  But the OP simply refused to take the time to learn that DRIVERS are a major part of using graphics cards for games, and even after being directed to a guide covering it still wouldn't even extend himself enough to tell anyone what drivers he is / was using.  This keeps happening constantly with new arrivals acting so certain they know so much more than anyone here does, and therefore that they don't have to read  anything while they actually attempt to comprehend  what is written in the stickie list on top.

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/58/index/531107/1#7431921

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 20 mai 2011 - 02:39 .

[Ottemis]

Don't mind it hun *hug