Arcania - Sys Reqs Update

ah rats, I have a core 2 duo 6600. I think there are still many of that CPU gen. around, so hopefully they'll find a way to patch around their issues. I have had no CPU related problems with other games, so I'm quite surprised that this is the source of their perf issues. Well, at least they're re aware of it. I'll try the demo when it arrives to see how that runs.

aries100 said:

That is not true.

Click to expand...

I was clearly referring to the expansion,Gothic 3:Forsaken Gods.And here's where I got the "promised" part from.

E6850

Well I'm pissed. I have a E6850.

Pass, can't support a publisher who steals IPs especially from one of the best independent RPG makers around today.

Too right Acleacius, Bethesda owns this IP lock, stock, and barrel!

They've updated the system requirements on the website:

PC Minimum Requirements

* OS: Microsoft® Windows® XP / Vista / Windows 7
* Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.8 GHz / AMD Athlon II x2 @ 2.8 GHz
* Memory: 2 GB RAM
* Graphics:GeForce 8800 GTX
* DirectX®: DirectX 9.0c or higher
* Hard Drive: 9 GB HDD Space
* Sound: DirectX 8.1 compatible sound card


PC Recommended Requirements

* OS: Microsoft® Windows® XP / Vista / Windows 7
* Processor: Intel Core I7 @ 3 GHz / AMD Phenom II x4 @ 3 GHz
* Memory: 4 GB RAM
* Graphics: GeForce GTX 295
* DirectX®: DirectX 9.0c or higher
* Hard Drive: 9 GB HDD Space
* Sound: DirectX 8.1 compatible sound card

I just get by the minimum, though the recommended seems absurdly high. I know the GTX 295 isn't new anymore, but it's still a top of the line card in terms of performance, if not features.

They recommend a card that uses internal SLI? Are they insane? SLI/crossfire recommendations don't give any meaningful comparison for others to use as a benchmark.

DPB said:

the recommended seems absurdly high.

Click to expand...

I agree. 3 GHz i7 for the CPU??

I wonder how long it will be before another game surpasses those recommended specs.

This must the most AI / script heavy game ever, i can't see any other reason for that CPU recommendation, either that or the coding is just plain terrible

Gonna be interesting to see how my old C2D (@ 4.2GHz) holds up.

It is indeed because of the *recommended* requirement why i question the *minimum* requirement with some concern, is there a wide differential bandspread performance between the two? - - yes? - - then the minimum has to be reasonably expected to deliver *acceptible* performance with no screen lag or choppiness? - - why then is the *recommended* needed, if at all?

Is the *recommended* that which the developers use and the *minimum* just guesswork? - because somewhere there will be a minimum that does work and a minimum that does not work acceptibly (in relation to the absurdly high rec' setting)

Wulf said:

then the minimum has to be reasonably expected to deliver *acceptible* performance with no screen lag or choppiness? - - why then is the *recommended* needed, if at all?

Is the *recommended* that which the developers use and the *minimum* just guesswork?

Click to expand...

Come on, this ain't rocket science . The differentiation between minimum and recommended is based on the graphical settings that you can apply from within the game (switch resolutions, apply AA/AF/AO, shadows on/off etc. etc.).

The minimum reqs mean that you can play the game with acceptable performance on the lowest resolution and the lowest detail settings if you own a computer that matches said min reqs.

The recommended reqs mean that you can play the game with acceptable performance in prevalent high(er) resolutions (at the moment this would be 1680x1050, 1920x1080, 1920x1200) on the highest level of detail that the game allows if you own a machine that meets the recommended reqs.

Arcania is supposed to have a very scalable engine so the spread between min reqs and recommended reqs is naturally pretty high.
Also, I believe that JoWooD is playing it safe this time. They can't really afford another PR disaster and lure players in with low system reqs, then face the shitstorm from angry players who get a slide show.

The message given here is clear: You need a high end system to enjoy Arcania to the fullest. They don't want to hear complaints from people who can't get Arcania to run reasonably well on their notebooks with low to mid end discreet gfx chips or even IGPs.

Similar to every other Gothic. Gothic 3 was a beast not too many years ago. Hardly anyone met the required specs.

Maylander said:

Hardly anyone met the required specs.

Click to expand...

Same with almost any newer games by Origin.

Moriendor said:

The minimum reqs mean that you can play the game with acceptable performance on the lowest resolution and the lowest detail settings if you own a computer that matches said min reqs.

The recommended reqs mean that you can play the game with acceptable performance in prevalent high(er) resolutions (at the moment this would be 1680x1050, 1920x1080, 1920x1200) on the highest level of detail that the game allows if you own a machine that meets the recommended reqs.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's how it's *supposed* to work, but how many games have we seen where the listed requirements didn't match up in reality?

It seems that some developers think "acceptable performance" includes a less than 30fps framerate, with stutter.

For example, the "recommended" requirements for Crysis are listed as a Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz, 2GB RAM, and Geforce 8800GTS or similar. That's a complete joke, as those won't even come close to running Crysis on its highest detail levels.

JDR13 said:

For example, the "recommended" requirements for Crysis are listed as a Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz, 2GB RAM, and Geforce 8800GTS or similar. That's a complete joke, as those won't even come close to running Crysis on its highest detail levels.

Click to expand...

I had that same rig only with 2.66 Core Duo CPU and the thing was working great, without AA but everything else on max.

toltec7 said:

I had that same rig only with 2.66 Core Duo CPU and the thing was working great, without AA but everything else on max.

Click to expand...

Right. A 8800GTS can manage what? 10fps at enthusiast level?

kalniel said:

Right. A 8800GTS can manage what? 10fps at enthusiast level?

Click to expand...

yeah, i'm lying over such a trivial thing. you're right, i'm wrong.

Moriendor said:

The message given here is clear: You need a high end system to enjoy Arcania to the fullest. They don't want to hear complaints from people who can't get Arcania to run reasonably well on their notebooks with low to mid end discreet gfx chips or even IGPs.

Click to expand...

Me and my notebook with a mid end discreet gfx chip will be standing to the side, not complaining.

Dhruin said:

Me and my notebook with a mid end discreet gfx chip will be standing to the side, not complaining.

Click to expand...

Hehe, well, my personal "old sk00L" opinion on the matter is that notebooks to gaming is like when an Italian brings a knife to a gun fight... wrong tool for the job and all that .
But, seriously, I know that the reality is completely different, of course. The only reason the big PC builders (Acer, Dell, Lenovo etc.) aren't all out of business yet is sales of mobile computers as desktop replacements. And they are selling more notebooks every day while the number of desktops is dwindling.
So, yes, a game with demands like Arcania is completely ignoring the realities of the market but as others have pointed out, I guess it's kind of nice of JoWooD to at least issue a clear advance warning instead of letting mobile gamers find out the hard way that Arcania just wasn't made with laptops in mind.

toltec7 said:

I had that same rig only with 2.66 Core Duo CPU and the thing was working great, without AA but everything else on max.

Click to expand...

Maybe at low resolutions, i.e. 1024x768 or less. Otherwise… you're full of shit.

That's actually the exact same specs I had before my last upgrade. A Core 2 E6700 and a Geforce 8800GTS (BFG overclocked edition). I could run Crysis at 1280x1024 with "high" settings, but any attempt at max settings ("very high") resulted in a slide show.


Even with my current system, a Phenom II 965 (3.4GHz Quad core) and Geforce GTX 470, Crysis isn't totally smooth at max settings @1920x1200.