100 réponses à ce sujet

[Razir-Samus]

does the game simply not run? or does it run and you get awful performance? if the former... that's a bit unfair ain't it?

[Danit]

no, i bought the game at 11am (10 hours ago) but they don't offer refunds for DA on origin, and i just want the game to work...

they do

[reaver616]

does the game simply not run? or does it run and you get awful performance? if the former... that's a bit unfair ain't it?

It gets the "this is the sign it makes when autosaving" part then its just a black screen with a mouse cursor. So no, it just flat out doesn't work

[reaver616]

You far from being the the only one who paid money for this game and can't play it because of this bug. And it is nothing but a bug, because there is no reason whatsoever for any software to just crash on a certain number of CPU cores. If they really had thought that four cores are necessary, they would have told their users so with a simple message box. But in reality, there is simply no technical reason for it. Of course a software can run slower on less cores, but with proper programming that respects some general standards of programming, it does not require a certain number of CPU cores to function, and certainly not to at least start and play some intro video.

The main problem here is as usual EA and their policy of ignoring bugs and not communicating in the least with their paying customers. Even if they really didn't plan to fix this bug, they could at least say so.

EXACTLY! If i managed to actually get to play the game, i'm sure it would run fine, so i don't understand it. Its not like my specs are THAT BAD that they can't even support to run at them at all; i actually have pretty good specs other than my processor...

[Pootmatoot]

People are running on aged quadcores and dualcores with hyperthreading that have half the grunt of some top-end dual and triple cores that can't even start it.

 

There isn't any technical reason for this, and defending either sloppy coding/the DRM requirements is pretty daft...

[Deamo]

You mean swap in a new CPU to his existing rig? That might be a bit much, even assuming his mobo can take an upgrade.

 

Installing a new CPU is not complicated. It looks complicated, but isn't. Especially not today where you can watch a 4-5 minute video on youtube showing how to do it properly.

 

Since he has a dual core I'm going to assume his motherboard is also older model and supports only LGA775 socket. There are lots of LGA775 quad cores on amazon for $100 and under. Cheaper even if you buy from ebay (but those are OEM and you'd need to buy your own seperate fan & heat sink. Boxed version from amazon etc spares you that hassle). He can easily turn his old PC into a very functional quad core gaming rig for well under $100, the price of a new game basically. 

 

All it takes is a few minutes of watching instructional video how to do it. I think people are far too easily intimidated by the insides of their computer.

[Pootmatoot]

Installing a new CPU is not complicated. It looks complicated, but isn't. Especially not today where you can watch a 4-5 minute video on youtube showing how to do it properly.

 

Since he has a dual core I'm going to assume his motherboard is also older model and supports only LGA775 socket. There are lots of LGA775 quad cores on amazon for $100 and under. Cheaper even if you buy from ebay (but those are OEM and you'd need to buy your own seperate fan & heat sink. Boxed version from amazon etc spares you that hassle). He can easily turn his old PC into a very functional quad core gaming rig for well under $100, the price of a new game basically. 

 

All it takes is a few minutes of watching instructional video how to do it. I think people are far too easily intimidated by the insides of their computer.

 

 

Except that most people with a dualcore with a modern computer (and not an ancient dualcore desktop) have the CPU soldered into their ultrabooks, because 70% of the ultrabooks released this year have dualcore CPUs. And ultrabooks are the only growing PC market.

 

They can run every other AAA his year on High settings. It's like Netflix releasing a series that only plays on Linux. It's totally batty from a marketing perspective, and makes zero technical sense.

 

If a game can run on 2008 quadcore and not a 2014 - far more powerful - dualcore, it have absolutely zero to do with processor requirements and everything to do with slapshod coding and/or DRM encryption/decryption requirements.

[reaver616]

Installing a new CPU is not complicated. It looks complicated, but isn't. Especially not today where you can watch a 4-5 minute video on youtube showing how to do it properly.

 

Since he has a dual core I'm going to assume his motherboard is also older model and supports only LGA775 socket. There are lots of LGA775 quad cores on amazon for $100 and under. Cheaper even if you buy from ebay (but those are OEM and you'd need to buy your own seperate fan & heat sink. Boxed version from amazon etc spares you that hassle). He can easily turn his old PC into a very functional quad core gaming rig for well under $100, the price of a new game basically. 

 

All it takes is a few minutes of watching instructional video how to do it. I think people are far too easily intimidated by the insides of their computer.

I have a triple core processor, not a duel core. And its not the troubles of installing a new processor keeping me back, its having to spend another £50 - £100 which i don't have because i'm a full time college student...

[SofaJockey]

so it is Bioware´s fault that you dont know how many cores your CPU have? they said "minimum is quadcore", you dont have a quadcore, that simple.

 

This.

Minimum means not less than.

[AlanC9]

People are running on aged quadcores and dualcores with hyperthreading that have half the grunt of some top-end dual and triple cores that can't even start it.
 
There isn't any technical reason for this, and defending either sloppy coding/the DRM requirements is pretty daft...

Was anyone defending the programming? I thought the standard response was that it's not sensible to expect a game to run when you're below the stated requirements for the game. Maybe it will run, maybe it won't, but acting butthurt when it doesn't is silly.

[AlanC9]

They can run every other AAA his year on High settings.

You sure about "every"?

[Kentaris]

You are far from being the the only one who paid money for this game and can't play it because of this bug. And it is nothing but a bug, because there is no reason whatsoever for any software to just crash on a certain number of CPU cores. If they really had thought that four cores are necessary, they would have told their users so with a simple message box. But in reality, there is simply no technical reason for it. Of course a software can run slower on less cores, but with proper programming that respects some general standards of programming, it does not require a certain number of CPU cores to function, and certainly not to at least start and play some intro video.

The main problem here is as usual EA and their policy of ignoring bugs and not communicating in the least with their paying customers. Even if they really didn't plan to fix this bug, they could at least say so.

No the Main problem is people like you don't know how to search for and read information..the Min specs have been out for months now... and if you can't find it there it's printed right on the side of the game's case if you bought a hard copy. so it's hardly a bug it's people tying to run a new game on 5-10 year old computers..

[Hax_the_unjust]

Might there be a patch allowing triple core processors to run the game, or will bioware just give me a middle finger and a smug smile?

Because i think its pretty f***ing disgusting that they failed to mention that duel core and triple core processors straight up REFUSE to run the game. I was so looking foward to the game for months, and the 6 hours of installing was agony...and then to find out i straight-up can NOT run the game with a triple core processor was crushing. All just seems so ridiculous, too, since i ran Shadow of Mordor at 60 FPS

 

I agree this game is horribly optimized.  I run mordor on max settings flawlessly... but dragon age I am forced to run on low but still crashing A LOT and getting bugged.  It saddens me greatly because like you I have waited for this title for a long time.  I loved the first two games in the series and this game seems better in terms of story and things to do just sad I can't run it properly. 

[Deathangel008]

EXACTLY! If i managed to actually get to play the game, i'm sure it would run fine, so i don't understand it. Its not like my specs are THAT BAD that they can't even support to run at them at all; i actually have pretty good specs other than my processor...

a PC is only as powerful as the weakest part is.
 

I have a triple core processor, not a duel core. And its not the troubles of installing a new processor keeping me back, its having to spend another £50 - £100 which i don't have because i'm a full time college student...

Athlon II X3 or Phenom(II) X3? there are quadcore-versions of both which shouldnt be very expensive now, though i wouldnt spend money for buying a 6 years old CPU...

-
@ all: stop crying because a game doesnt run on dualcore-CPUs in 2014. since at least 8 years we have quadcores, and since 3 or 4 years only low-end office CPUs have less than 4 threads. this is called "technical progress"...

[AlanC9]

no, i bought the game at 11am (10 hours ago) but they don't offer refunds for DA on origin, and i just want the game to work...

They don't? Plenty of people have said they got refunds; check the other threads. EA Tech Services actually tell you to ask for a refund when they hear you've got a dual-core, apparently.

[AlanC9]

@ all: stop bitching about a game doesnt run on dualcore-CPUs in 2014. since at least 8 years we have quadcores, and since 3 or 4 years only low-end office CPUs have less than 4 threads. this is called "technical progress"...

This isn't quite true. A fair number of people have been giving the G3258 a shot. Hard luck for them if the 4-thread thing takes off, but OTOH it's a cheap chip anyway.

[Hax_the_unjust]

If you go with a new AMD I would go with the Athlon X4 860k($80-$90) its a good one and allows you to get a FM2+ M/B to prepare you for possibly the next set of CPUs in that line up.  Intel tho if you can, love AMD deals but you can't beat the performance of a intel CPU.

[Deathangel008]

This isn't quite true. A fair number of people have been giving the G3258 a shot. Hard luck for them if the 4-thread thing takes off, but OTOH it's a cheap chip anyway.

imo the G3258 is nothing but a "gimmick". i cant imagine that any "serious gamer" would buy/have bought a dualcore without HT in 2014, thats just, sorry, stupid.

 

[darkmanifest]

I know you probably don't want to hear this but the best solution at this point is for you to buy a quad-core. The older Core-Ixx are very cheap nowadays and perfectly affordable.

 

There's no guarantee that will help, either.  I have a quad-core that meets minimum requirements and running DA:I puts it through torture, to the point of freezing and crashing (there is no reason this game should be using 100% of my CPU at start, or ever).  Ironically the only way to get it to run is to limit it to using 3 of my cores (just like OP's triple core) instead of all 4, so there's something else going on here.  I'm irritated enough by this, can't imagine how pissed I'd be if I'd bought a quad-core specifically for DA:I only to find the problem still goes beyond my PC, which is what a fair number of people are discovering.  There really seems to be something wrong with how the game itself interacts with CPUs, I'd wait for a patch before committing to new hardware.

[Hax_the_unjust]

There's no guarantee that will help, either.  I have a quad-core that meets minimum requirements and running DA:I puts it through torture, to the point of freezing and crashing (there is no reason this game should be using 100% of my CPU at start, or ever).  Ironically the only way to get it to run is to limit it to using 3 of my cores (just like OP's triple core) instead of all 4, so there's something else going on here.  I'm irritated enough by this, can't imagine how pissed I'd be if I'd bought a quad-core specifically for DA:I only to find the problem still goes beyond my PC, which is what a fair number of people are discovering.  There really seems to be something wrong with how the game itself interacts with CPUs, I'd wait for a patch before committing to new hardware.

True.  That's the bad thing about minor upgrades to a machine when you're unsure.  I am due for a upgrade and I know it so I am about to upgrade... but if you're not due and you feel your game isn't running as perfect as you wish?  Upgrading from mediocre to mediocre isn't always the best option.  There is that grey area with PC parts then there is office parts and cutting edge high end gaming parts that punch your wallet in the gut.  I would only upgrade if you know what you're doing and know for a FACT its a cure all.

[DeathByIcecream]

Er, hello, Origin Great Game guarantee?

 

https://www.origin.c...-game-guarantee

 

There you go, your "50 pound" is right back in your wallet where it belongs. You can repurchase the game again if:

 

• Bioware/EA somehow manages to "fix" the issue, allowing you to play the game on your current hardware.
• You upgrade your PC.

Rather simple, isn't it? Lol, if the money is as big a deal as your making it out to be then perhaps a little research into getting a refund would do you some good next time? There's also the obvious precaution of making sure you can run the damn game before you buy it, regardless of whether or not you "should" be able to. It's hardly anyone's fault but yours if you didn't pay attention to the minimum requirements. In fact, refunds on digital games is amazingly generous, especially since you can repurchase them at a later date. Oh but of course, you didn't know about the refunds, because you couldn't be bothered to look it up.

[dataBlast]

Was anyone defending the programming? I thought the standard response was that it's not sensible to expect a game to run when you're below the stated requirements for the game. Maybe it will run, maybe it won't, but acting butthurt when it doesn't is silly.

 ^ This.

 

Bioware have clearly stated that quad core is the minimum requirement.

[Etragorn]

Triple core? Outside of the Xbox 360, that is an odd number of cores to have in a CPU.

[Myusha123]

Minimum requirements mean minimum.  You're below even the lowest requirements. You can blame a bug all you wish or only those who support your anger. But the truth is, it was your mistake, and you will likely have not regain your money. And you'll likely have a game you can't play unless you upgrade your computer. A game, many people attest, on the computer has a horrible interface. 

I don't see much happiness in your future. 

[Draninus]

There is definitely something up with the CPU loads being caused by this game.  I run a Athlon X4 760K, which is a 3.8 GHz quad-core AMD chip.  I'm also running an ASUS R9 270X.  Admittedly, the CPU is definitely on the low end of the scale, however, the odd thing is I have had the graphical settings everywhere from high/ultra to low and the percent of CPU utilization seems to remain fairly constant.  Right now with the 14.11.2 beta drivers and Mantle, I seem to average 85% CPU utilization in game, with roughly 75%-80% at the initial start screen.

 

Something else that seems very odd to me is the game actually uses more CPU in game with the 14.11.2 beta drivers from AMD that are supposed to be  semi-optimized for Inquisition.  AMD claims a 5% increase in performance in game with these drivers.  I have experienced the opposite.  I was averaging around 70% CPU utilization with older 14.4 AMD drivers and not running Mantle.  The odd thing is that previously I was having issues getting through the initial start-up screen (95-100% CPU utilization, would lockup about 50% of the time), however now that is less of a problem.  So my problem areas seem to have flip flopped a bit.  Like I said above, this is running Mantle too.  Previously I was running older 14.4 drivers from AMD and of course couldn't engage Mantle (that is a separate issue altogether for AMD owners).

 

Due to this, I suspect there is something more going on with the way this game interacts with our hardware.  Although I do think that it is always best to go with the required hardware specs from the manufacturer, I think in this game it is more a case of poor optimization at this point.  I'm not entirely surprised by this however, considering the sheer size of this game and the fact that it is running Frostbite 3.  Additionally, all of the caves/dungeons I have entered  thus far have been loaded into the same game area as the main game.  While awesome for immersion reasons, this also eats up a ton of extra resources.  Hopefully Bioware will provide a few patches to help this issue as well as AMD/Nvidia releasing additional drivers.