Middle-earth: Shadows of Mordor
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
RenegadeRocks
Legend
I don't get why such an amazingly deep IP is given to a studio like this one? No offence to them, but this should be in the hands of the best of the best of the industry so that it can get the treatment like Halo, GOW, Last of Us, Beyond etc. I mean, they know the name will make sure it will sell, then why not pump millions into it and hire the best studio in the world to make it? Make a true LOTR game, like the official King Kong game which was fantastic and a true homage tot he movie.
It's Warner Brothers. They own a few key IPs (DC Comics/Batman, LEGO, LOTR, Harry Potter) and they'll milk them to death with every game they commission. Check their games page. Quality and artistic integrity doesn't enter into it, although some games end up very good.
Few weeks ago devs from Monolyth talked about how oldgen versions of the game will not get as advanced AI and procedural generation of "named" enemies that will be present in nextgen. I suppose PC will get everything that nextgen version offers, which is maybe reason for high CPU requirement.
I think that we have come to time that devs cant create games that max out nextgen potential using CPUs that are quadcore. Their workstations are most likely moving to 8-threaded machines.
I think that we have come to time that devs cant create games that max out nextgen potential using CPUs that are quadcore. Their workstations are most likely moving to 8-threaded machines.
It takes an i7 to match a 6-7 core Jaguar at 1.6-1.8GHz? Even an i3 should suffice.
Do you really think that i3 can match nextgen CPUs, when it is well known that DirectX is severely blocking multithreading even for oldgen PC ports, draw-calls are severely limited and large driver thread causes entire CPU to stall?
With Mantle and eventual DX12 addoption, lowend CPUs and modern quadcores will get chance to match and surpass Jaguar cores. But until then, high sysreqs will be common.
DavidGraham
Veteran
Yes it can, First consoles have 6 cores only (two dedicated to the OS). Second an i3 could overpower jaguar by clock speeds alone. Not to mention the advantages of better IPC and caches. Of Course An ideal situation would be a Core i5, 4 Cores running at 3.2 GHz are a bruteforce compared to Jaguar. In that sense a Core i7 is untouchable. In fact in the world of gaming having a faster single threaded performance is always better than having a multi-threaded one, due to the inherent latency that is tied to multi-threading.
Thread numbers shouldn't matter as long as you've got enough raw power available. A CPU with 4 threads each 3 times faster than the jaguars should be more than enough to exceed the performance of 8 jaguar threads if properly optimised, let alone the 6 threads available to games. And of course there's the fact that all i7's have 8 threads already, so if it were purely a threads issue there would be no need to recommend such a high end i7.
Nope I reckon this is a draw call issue but there's also a question to be asked of whether the developers made much effort to optimise draw call usage on the PC or just decided to go with the console code and brute force through it.
Either way if draw calls are the problem, DX12 or Mantle should certainly resolve the issues to the point were a fast i3 should be plenty to match the console CPU's.
I agree. Mantle/DX12 will lower CPU sysreq significantly.
Yes an i3 performs better than the next gen consoles in games even with additional D3D overhead. Modern i3 is vastly superior to the console CPUs especially in single thread performance which is still very much important even on the consoles with thinner APIs.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
Well, consoles take full advantage of Jaguar vector units, is not like games code is full of "if elses". And in this (vector unit), Jaguar is quite a beast. This along the mentioned gpu API advantage, plus ( and this is the most important ) programmers hand tunning every bit running even in CPU registers memory ( see Naughty Dog notes about programming in PS4 ) is what gives these tiny cpus their advantage.
Last edited by a moderator:
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Middle-earth: Shadow of Modor PC System Requirements:
Minimum:
OS: 64-bit: Vista, Win 7, Win 8
Processor: Intel Core i5-750, 2.67 GHz | AMD Phenom II X4 965, 3.4 GHz
Memory: 4 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 | AMD Radeon HD 6950
DirectX: Version 11
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Hard Drive: 25 GB available space
Recommended:
OS: 64-bit: Win 7, Win 8
Processor: Intel Core i7-3770, 3.4 GHz | AMD FX-8350, 4.0 GHz
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 | AMD Radeon HD 7970
DirectX: Version 11
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Hard Drive: 40 GB available space
I cant wait to see PC sysreq for nextgen-only games [Arkham Knight, AC:U, Division, Witcher...]
I don't understand why the "
", because this shit invokes only one emotion in me. This crappy game with ugly graphics can't be so demanding. No, hell, no.
Do you realise how many people have such gaming rigs and how many- much lower specced PCs? What are they going to do? All of them?
I think this is simply a stupid circus. And I don't understand their weird logic to torture the PC market in this way!
Its always like this. Consoles come out and push the PC crowd to two big rounds of upgrades. First, with very high prices for people that want to futureproof, and then year or two later wave of cheaper hardware for majority of gamers.
At least this time we will get Mantle/DX12 support to lessen the strain on CPUs.
"Glorious PC Master Race" meme started in early 2008 as a reflection of cheap PCs being finally able to surpas 720p focused consoles [and pride that Witcher 1 is "pushing the limmits" of gaming]. Now we are entereing into a time when we will have to work hard to again achieve such state. Fun times.
At least this time we will get Mantle/DX12 support to lessen the strain on CPUs.
"Glorious PC Master Race" meme started in early 2008 as a reflection of cheap PCs being finally able to surpas 720p focused consoles [and pride that Witcher 1 is "pushing the limmits" of gaming]. Now we are entereing into a time when we will have to work hard to again achieve such state. Fun times.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's a bit different this time since modern PC GPUs have such high power limits. It wasn't like that back in 2005. Also consider that Intel CPUs are immensely better now than they were then, and Intel CPUs will never be used in a console. Even 3 year old Intel CPUs are fast.
A 2 year old mid-high end PC (like mine) can easily best the new consoles; the same couldn't be said for a 2003 PC vs the Xbox 360.
A 2 year old mid-high end PC (like mine) can easily best the new consoles; the same couldn't be said for a 2003 PC vs the Xbox 360.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
This is the first time for me to see so insolent system requirements.
At least in the past they were somehow more conservative, while I could agree that real requirements were higher than the written ones.
Now, seems they 'pre-insure' themselves with it.
DavidGraham
Veteran
Victorizations or not, all the supposed advantages are hammered away by the clock speed, IPC, caches and even memory bandwidth advantage of the PC CPUs. It is not like developers do not optimize for PCs either. it may not be 100% efficient optimizations, but a 90% or 80% is more than enough with the more powerful PC CPUs. API advantage is present but is very small.
Yes it is a common practice nowadays, Thief and COD Ghosts are among the best examples for that. And the final game always ends up requiring and utilizing far less powerful hardware.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Best or worst?
