Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The game should run on a toaster

13»

Comments

  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,399
    From a post by Brad in 2015:

    "I made a big mistake with VG, always pushing the envelope, always trying to take advantage of the latest tech, etc.  And then when we had to launch early, we launched an un-optimized game even the most powerful of machines couldn't handle.  Now take vanilla WoW, on the other hand -- it was polished and ran great on just about any machine at launch.  

     

    Of course, I can't announce the official specs for Pantheon -- far too early for that -- but I can say this:

     

    1. The machine I currently program the game with and play test the game with I bought for around $1k, and that was well over a year ago:

     

    i5-4400 3.10 ghz

    16 gigs 800mhz DDR3 (I think 8 gigs will be fine -- 16 gigs is better for me running all of the tools, Unity, Visual Studio, SQL manager, etc.)

    GTX 960 with 2 gigs video ram (I do think you'll want/need 2 gigs as we're using high rez textures and multiple layers of textures -- at least on the 'fantastic' setting -- see below)

     

    I also have another, older machine with a 750TI.

     

    2. Both of these machines run our current build at 30+ FPS.  

     

    3. I plan on keeping this machine as my dev-pc as long as possible, to make sure we don't somehow get to a point where you need an expensive machine to run the game.

     

    4. Our lead programmer, Daniel Krenn, is very meticulous and wise.  At least once a month we stop and do optimizations.  This is in stark contrast to previous projects I've headed, and I'm a huge believer that this is the way to go.  

     

    5. There will indeed be a 'slider' (already is -- is part of Unity) that allows the user to select between 'fastest' and 'fantastic' visuals.  We are running on fantastic and making sure the game runs (and looks, of course) great on that highest setting." 



    svannShaighMrMelGibson

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • Panther2103Panther2103 Member EpicPosts: 5,569
    It's true, try and please everyone and you can loose them all. 

    BUT most players have low end computers (look at World of Warcraft and GuildWars 2). 
    I may stand alone on this but I like lots of players, at least a million or two.
    That GW2 comment sounds a bit like a bait, as that game looks really great. I think Pantheon will run on older computers, and that's a good thing. Make a game that looks okay for modern standards, and have it optimized to run on older equipment, get the largest audience possible. 
  • svannsvann Member RarePosts: 2,218
    Even EQ doesnt necessarily run well on a toaster.  People complain all the time about lag in pok where lots of people congregate for buffs.  Presumably people that run eq on a toaster.
  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,399
    Ring wars. The Bazaar. Zones with that many people in them kicked my computer's butt in EQ back in the day. You have to remember that EQ was advanced for its time. Plus computers and ISPs were not all that great back then. 
    MrMelGibson

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • Nightbringe1Nightbringe1 Member UncommonPosts: 1,335

    If the graphics don't run at least as smooth as Guild Wars 2 on my daughters $300 laptop I most likely will not be playing.

    While my desktop will almost certainly be able to handle the game, I won't be purchasing new computers for my wife or daughter when both of their computers work perfectly fine for the games we currently play. (DDO, EQ, EQ2, Guild Wars 2, Rift).

    DullahanKylerandcutbi001

    Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
    Benjamin Franklin

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited January 2018
    It is unreasonable to expect a pc game still years away to run well on a $300 laptop of today.
    Kylerandcutbi001


  • Nightbringe1Nightbringe1 Member UncommonPosts: 1,335
    Dullahan said:
    It is unreasonable to expect a pc game still years away to run well on a $300 laptop of today.


    It is equally unreasonably to expect people to drop a couple thousand dollars to play one new game when the market already has a half dozen regularly updated games that they still enjoy.

    As much as I wish EQ had better graphics, I'm not replacing multiple machines when I still enjoy playing EQ.

    This is one thing that games like WoW, Guild Wars, and Rift did get right. They set the minimum system specs low enough that literally anybody can log in and play if they turn the video settings down.

    Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
    Benjamin Franklin

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    Dullahan said:
    It is unreasonable to expect a pc game still years away to run well on a $300 laptop of today.


    It is equally unreasonably to expect people to drop a couple thousand dollars to play one new game when the market already has a half dozen regularly updated games that they still enjoy.

    As much as I wish EQ had better graphics, I'm not replacing multiple machines when I still enjoy playing EQ.

    This is one thing that games like WoW, Guild Wars, and Rift did get right. They set the minimum system specs low enough that literally anybody can log in and play if they turn the video settings down.

    Couple thousand dollar computers are not expected. Based on what they've said, the game already runs okay on a 5 year old (nvidia 700 series) computer. That hardware would only run a few hundred bucks today, but the equivalent laptop would be considerably more expensive.

    That kind of requirement is not unusual, and if a Guild Wars 3 were to come out in a few years, it would likely be the same.


  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    Dullahan said:
    Dullahan said:
    It is unreasonable to expect a pc game still years away to run well on a $300 laptop of today.


    It is equally unreasonably to expect people to drop a couple thousand dollars to play one new game when the market already has a half dozen regularly updated games that they still enjoy.

    As much as I wish EQ had better graphics, I'm not replacing multiple machines when I still enjoy playing EQ.

    This is one thing that games like WoW, Guild Wars, and Rift did get right. They set the minimum system specs low enough that literally anybody can log in and play if they turn the video settings down.

    Couple thousand dollar computers are not expected. Based on what they've said, the game already runs okay on a 5 year old (nvidia 700 series) computer. That hardware would only run a few hundred bucks today, but the equivalent laptop would be considerably more expensive.

    That kind of requirement is not unusual, and if a Guild Wars 3 were to come out in a few years, it would likely be the same.
    While it wasn't unusual for games to expect customers to purchase new systems in order to meet the game's minimum requirements, the environment isn't the same.  Customers are more wary of companies asking for new hardware, and frequently, the desire to play a new game isn't high on the reason a customer will give to buy a new component.  Five years old may sound reasonable, but how many potential customers are going to upgrade their 9 year old system for a game?  Or asked another way, how many paying customers is VR willing to push away from their product?

    Times are very different from 1999, when I did upgrade a computer to play EQ1.  I'm not likely to ever upgrade-to-play again.

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,874
    If we base it on what we factually know...remember from the EQ/VG days,this will likely run badly or not optimized.
    I am willing to cut developers some slack and can wait a few months for updates to make games reasonably playable but not much longer than that and ONLY if the game is high end and requires some actual effort to optimize.

    If it just a ho hum average game ,then i expect it to run very well right from day 1,no waiting.
    Devs know or should know if they put any effort into their testing and work as to how many polys per viewing area and will it work for the average gamer.

    So we will see but i get the feeling ,same old Eq/VG days incoming,let's hope not.


    svann

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    Mendel said:
    Dullahan said:
    Dullahan said:
    It is unreasonable to expect a pc game still years away to run well on a $300 laptop of today.


    It is equally unreasonably to expect people to drop a couple thousand dollars to play one new game when the market already has a half dozen regularly updated games that they still enjoy.

    As much as I wish EQ had better graphics, I'm not replacing multiple machines when I still enjoy playing EQ.

    This is one thing that games like WoW, Guild Wars, and Rift did get right. They set the minimum system specs low enough that literally anybody can log in and play if they turn the video settings down.

    Couple thousand dollar computers are not expected. Based on what they've said, the game already runs okay on a 5 year old (nvidia 700 series) computer. That hardware would only run a few hundred bucks today, but the equivalent laptop would be considerably more expensive.

    That kind of requirement is not unusual, and if a Guild Wars 3 were to come out in a few years, it would likely be the same.
    While it wasn't unusual for games to expect customers to purchase new systems in order to meet the game's minimum requirements, the environment isn't the same.  Customers are more wary of companies asking for new hardware, and frequently, the desire to play a new game isn't high on the reason a customer will give to buy a new component.  Five years old may sound reasonable, but how many potential customers are going to upgrade their 9 year old system for a game?  Or asked another way, how many paying customers is VR willing to push away from their product?

    Times are very different from 1999, when I did upgrade a computer to play EQ1.  I'm not likely to ever upgrade-to-play again.
    Well then you're not likely to have a computer that supports software and games going forward. Enjoy your voodoo 2, spinning disks and dial up on that 17 inch crt.
    Kyleran


  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 3,677
    It would be absolutely awesome if it looked as good as ESO and was playable on similar modest hardware. Still surprised by how well that game runs, same goed for FF14.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    delete5230
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    Dullahan said:
    Mendel said:
    Dullahan said:
    Dullahan said:
    It is unreasonable to expect a pc game still years away to run well on a $300 laptop of today.


    It is equally unreasonably to expect people to drop a couple thousand dollars to play one new game when the market already has a half dozen regularly updated games that they still enjoy.

    As much as I wish EQ had better graphics, I'm not replacing multiple machines when I still enjoy playing EQ.

    This is one thing that games like WoW, Guild Wars, and Rift did get right. They set the minimum system specs low enough that literally anybody can log in and play if they turn the video settings down.

    Couple thousand dollar computers are not expected. Based on what they've said, the game already runs okay on a 5 year old (nvidia 700 series) computer. That hardware would only run a few hundred bucks today, but the equivalent laptop would be considerably more expensive.

    That kind of requirement is not unusual, and if a Guild Wars 3 were to come out in a few years, it would likely be the same.
    While it wasn't unusual for games to expect customers to purchase new systems in order to meet the game's minimum requirements, the environment isn't the same.  Customers are more wary of companies asking for new hardware, and frequently, the desire to play a new game isn't high on the reason a customer will give to buy a new component.  Five years old may sound reasonable, but how many potential customers are going to upgrade their 9 year old system for a game?  Or asked another way, how many paying customers is VR willing to push away from their product?

    Times are very different from 1999, when I did upgrade a computer to play EQ1.  I'm not likely to ever upgrade-to-play again.
    Well then you're not likely to have a computer that supports software and games going forward. Enjoy your voodoo 2, spinning disks and dial up on that 17 inch crt.
    Wow.  You are so off-base with your assumptions that it barely warrants a response.  The 1999 relic sits next to my current machine, and is still quite capable of running the internet and even EQ1 or other games that don't require graphics shaders.  I've had a 23" monitor for almost 10 years now, running 1920x1080 on both machines, and that is only limited by environmental conditions.

    But, here's your response.  Ffuff!

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • AdamantineAdamantine Member RarePosts: 4,430
    I would prefer if not.

    I dont own any toaster.
    Please set a sig so I can read your posting even if somebody "agreed" etc with it. Thanks.
  • Kayo83Kayo83 Member UncommonPosts: 399
    Depends what you mean by toaster. What we referred to as toasters with WoW isnt a toaster now. There has to be some progress. WoW didnt run on a Pentium Pro either and those werent even 10 years old in 2004. Any game now should expect a 5-8 year old rig.

    And thats because tech hasnt really been skyrocketing as much as it was at the turn of the century (relatively). Maybe because the focus now is now more on efficiency and getting everything as compact as possible. One of the comments I heard most from people about PS3 to PS4 was how minor the visual improvements were to the untrained eye. My rig is about 7 years old and runs Destiny 2 well enough too, not even min spec.
    Mendel
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    Kayo83 said:
    Depends what you mean by toaster. What we referred to as toasters with WoW isnt a toaster now. There has to be some progress. WoW didnt run on a Pentium Pro either and those werent even 10 years old in 2004. Any game now should expect a 5-8 year old rig.

    And thats because tech hasnt really been skyrocketing as much as it was at the turn of the century (relatively). Maybe because the focus now is now more on efficiency and getting everything as compact as possible. One of the comments I heard most from people about PS3 to PS4 was how minor the visual improvements were to the untrained eye. My rig is about 7 years old and runs Destiny 2 well enough too, not even min spec.
    The only issue I ever had with compatibility and game specs was when GPUs started providing hardware shaders and every game and it's brother required them.  4xAGP cards never had this feature, and many (if not most) motherboards with a 4xAGP slot did not have a PC-IDE slot for graphics.  The only update path was a new motherboard, with a new graphics card, and probably new memory, oh, and the drive interface changed.  So, upgrading was basically, 'buy a new computer'.  I did.

    I'm not aware of any similar hardware dependency that games require.  I'd expect any setup that's post-2005 to be able to handle any new game.  Maybe slowly with all the graphics options turned down, but I'd think no one that didn't have a dinosaur for a computer would be okay.  Those with dino-computers should know.  Simply check for fossilization.

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited January 2018
    Even with minimum specs, games with higher graphical fidelity will always require greater graphics processing power, memory, and memory bandwidth. That's just the way it is.

    Insisting that games remain compatible with old hardware is to insist that games do not improve graphically.

    ... and oh the irony of those who claim Pantheon must innovate to be successful then complaining about hardware requirements that accompany graphical improvements.
    svannGyva02dcutbi001


  • nate1980nate1980 Member UncommonPosts: 1,943
    It's true, try and please everyone and you can loose them all. 

    BUT most players have low end computers (look at World of Warcraft and GuildWars 2). 
    I may stand alone on this but I like lots of players, at least a million or two.
    Actually, Blizzard has improved WoW's graphics every expansion. You need a decent rig to run it. Not anywhere near top of the line, but certainly average. Average today is light years beyond what WoW catered to in 2004. 

    I have a top of the line computer that can run at 4k settings with max graphics at 60+ fps, so I'd love to seem them push graphics capability, but as long as the game runs smoothly and is fun, I honestly could care less about how good it looks. Hell, I just got finished playing Morrowind and was happy to play it with all it's jaggedness glory.
  • TricitumTricitum Member CommonPosts: 2
    A computer today, that is decent. Dosent cost to much, everone have money for it, or buying a used decent computer. Most computers that are decent cost less then a modern toaster does
    svann
    The owner of the swedish fansite of Pantheon, https://www.pantheonsverige.se
  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 6,512
    Tricitum said:
    A computer today, that is decent. Dosent cost to much, everone have money for it, or buying a used decent computer. Most computers that are decent cost less then a modern toaster does

    This is true if the games are coded well.  

    WoW, GW2, ESO, FF14. Not an expert, but it seems the "good looking cartoon's" has a better chance of being coded well. 

    In fact anything above a $300 Bestbuy laptop should run most mmorpg's
  • TricitumTricitum Member CommonPosts: 2
    edited January 2018
    Tricitum said:
    A computer today, that is decent. Dosent cost to much, everone have money for it, or buying a used decent computer. Most computers that are decent cost less then a modern toaster does

    This is true if the games are coded well.  

    WoW, GW2, ESO, FF14. Not an expert, but it seems the "good looking cartoon's" has a better chance of being coded well. 

    In fact anything above a $300 Bestbuy laptop should run most mmorpg's

    Its not so much about the "cartoon" grapich, as it is with good coded and good way of how they make the textures file.
    if they do it high resultion in multiplay files to make something like breastplate armor, or use one big high res file to draw multiple different "picture" from one large texture by specifying different u,v coordinates to select each individual "picture" from the composite texture.

    Most gaming companys use multifiles to draw something, wich limit the performace, insteed of useing one big "texture file" to draw from.

    Every time you switch your currently texture you incur a penalty,
    sometimes a very big one if the system runs out of memory and starts paging textures.
    So the more things you can draw with one texture file the better.
    If you never switched texture files, you had incur 0 penalty.
    The owner of the swedish fansite of Pantheon, https://www.pantheonsverige.se
  • HachlathHachlath Member UncommonPosts: 55
    edited January 2018
    Hope it's going to work better than VG. 
  • GolelornGolelorn Member RarePosts: 1,392
    Hachlath said:
    Hope it's going to work better than VG. 
    Same. 

    I am fine with a game taking a lot of system resources if the game is optimized well. I bet VG was just spaghetti code that no one could work out or optimize.
    Hachlath
Sign In or Register to comment.