OC3D Forums

OC3D Forums (https://forum.overclock3d.net/index.php)
-   OC3D News (https://forum.overclock3d.net/forumdisplay.php?f=47)
-   -   Quick News (https://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=65782)

Greenback 08-03-16 06:51 PM

I like how they have done the 3 step specs gives a good balance and a better idea of what you will get if you have a pc in the middle grounds

NeverBackDown 08-03-16 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WYP (Post 896862)
I am really disappointing in these specs. an expected framerate of 15-25FPS for the minimum requirements is unacceptable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by barnsley (Post 896866)
I disagree. They should give people reasonable expectations, if you look at the hardware survey there are still loads of people with that setup and they shouldn't be lied to.

They've used 'minimum' in the proper context, not in the 'if your rig is a bit slower than this it'll still actually play it without crashing' context.

I'm with Barnsley on this. They are being truthful and saying this is the absolute worse you can play the game. It's a minimum for a reason, they are basically saying you need something in between the "minimum" and recommended. The fact they can a game like TW to be playable at all with those terrible minimums is pretty impressive.

Only thing that disappoints me is the fact the ultra specifications are only for 20v20 battles when the game is capable of 40v40. There isn't much more powerful hardware you can get with the specs they say you need. You're going to need to either lower settings or get another GPU, which then begs the issue of if they can support it correctly at launch(and drivers are available)

WYP 08-03-16 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeverBackDown (Post 896869)
I'm with Barnsley on this. They are being truthful and saying this is the absolute worse you can play the game. It's a minimum for a reason, they are basically saying you need something in between the "minimum" and recommended. The fact they can a game like TW to be playable at all with those terrible minimums is pretty impressive.

Only thing that disappoints me is the fact the ultra specifications are only for 20v20 battles when the game is capable of 40v40. There isn't much more powerful hardware you can get with the specs they say you need. You're going to need to either lower settings or get another GPU, which then begs the issue of if they can support it correctly at launch(and drivers are available)

I'm just remembering my time playing Rome Total war (perhaps it was Medieval II) on my first laptop, had fraps on and did everything I could to get the best performance and still I was unable to get it to run at above 25FPS max, even at the lowest res I could run it at.

yeah I could play the campaign map fine, as it didn't care how long I took to decide things but for me the real time battle aspect was unplayable and that really annoyed my, especially since my laptop met the game requirements. Had to be almost constantly paused to get it to work even semi functionally.

I am really glad that they have given potential buyers settings and expected framerates, but calling an expected framerate of 15FPS is too low IMHO. Young me would have tried to return the game.

It wouldn't have killed them to up something to make it be 20-30, upping the GPU to a GTX 460 or a HD 5830 or 5850. Just my opinion. All this hardware is available for so cheap now too.

These days the 30FPS and above argument is made a lot more and gamers expect more than they did in the past. Just my two cents.

I know with strategy games like total war and Xcom there is always the laptop demographic, but TBH I think it wouldn't have hurt them to bump the requirements up a little or to make some lower settings (perhaps lower unit size settings).

NeverBackDown 08-03-16 07:53 PM

Well it is in beta and subject to change as they always say.. so it could be upped. However they are giving you the current most accurate data. Even if they upped the requirements, you could still play the game with these current minimum specs, which they are accounting for here. They didn't say it's playable, just doable. You should be able to know higher end hardware(which is a lot compared to these specs) will perform better. And since that hardware is so cheap, there really isn't an excuse for you to have this hardware if you are into gaming on PC platform at all. Laptop users should always expect to have some trouble. They are vastly less powerful afterall on the GPU and CPU side.

NeverBackDown 10-03-16 04:34 AM

Ashes of the Singularity Launch Day Trailer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0mK7se3fu0

https://www.topd.ch/img/produkte/large/03305803323.jpg

As well as more info on TW Warhammer's specs via there Forum Thread Q&A regarding 64bit/SLI/DX12/Vulkan/Multithreading!!/AMD CPU spec.

https://forums.totalwar.com/discussi...ick-q-a#latest

I am actually upset they specifically mention SLI but not Xfire. It seems once again they will drop the ball for AMD users. SLI isn't supported at launch, but they sure didn't make it seem like they won't eventually support it.

Everything else is a good read though. Most excited for 64bit/Multithreading improvements. Also they didn't say yes or no to the DX12/Vulkan support.. which leaves room for hope:)

ander01se 11-03-16 09:13 AM

http://www.infoworld.com/article/304...ty-update.html

Quote:

If Microsoft's documentation is correct, installing Patch Tuesday's KB 3139929 security update for Internet Explorer also installs a new Windows 10 ad-generating routine called KB 3146449.

Many people -- present company included -- feel that putting an ad generator inside a security patch crosses way over the line. In fact, you have to ask yourself if there are any lines any more.

[ Your one-stop shop for Microsoft knowledge: Everything you need to know about Windows 10, in a handy PDF. Download it today! | Survive and thrive with the new OS: The ultimate Windows 10 survivor kit. | Stay up on key Microsoft technologies with the Windows newsletter. ]
Microsoft lays it all out in black and white in its inimitable, most obfuscatory way.

This month's MS16-023 security patch for Internet Explorer, KB 3139929, says:

This security update resolves several reported vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer. The most severe of these vulnerabilities could allow remote code execution if a user views a specially crafted webpage in Internet Explorer… Additionally, this security update includes several nonsecurity-related fixes for Internet Explorer.

Later in the same KB article, Microsoft lists six "nonsecurity-related fixes that are included in this security update," including this:

3146449 Updated Internet Explorer 11 capabilities to upgrade Windows 8.1 and Windows 7

If you then look at KB 3146449, you see:

This update adds functionality to Internet Explorer 11 on some computers that lets users learn about Windows 10 or start an upgrade to Windows 10.

According to one of my sources, this new user education works like this:

On non-domain joined machines this adds a blue banner when a user opens a "New Tab" saying "Microsoft recommends upgrading to Windows 10"

It's important to note that KB 3146449 is not installed separately. You can't remove it. If you look in your installed updates list, KB 3146449 doesn't appear. Instead, it's baked into the IE security patch KB 3139929. The only way to get rid of the new advertising inside Internet Explorer 11 is to remove the security patch entirely.

AskWoody.com poster Annemarie explains it like this:

On Dutch security-forum http://www.security.nl user Spiff states:

Overigens, na installatie van KB3139929 is geen individuele KB3146449 te vinden in Geschiedenis van updates en in Ge´nstalleerde updates. Het na installatie van KB3139929 verwijderen van KB3146449 is dus geen optie.

Which translates as: after installing KB3139929 there is no individual KB3146449 to be found in Installed Updates nor in Update History. Installing KB3139929 and then afterwards removing KB3146449 does not seem to be an option.
Basically an "upgrade to windows 10" spam function to Win 7-8.

Doomslayer 11-03-16 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ander01se (Post 897147)
http://www.infoworld.com/article/304...ty-update.html

Basically an "upgrade to windows 10" spam function to Win 7-8.

Another reason why not to run Auto Update on Windows 8.1/7

If people think that is bad, It's only going to get worse, Why can't Microsoft understand not everyone wants to upgrade to Windows 10, Some people are happy with older OS.

Hell there would have to be people who would still be using Windows XP & Vista.

xnax2802 11-03-16 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ander01se (Post 897147)
http://www.infoworld.com/article/304...ty-update.html



Basically an "upgrade to windows 10" spam function to Win 7-8.

Punishment for actually using IE :D

ander01se 11-03-16 10:44 AM

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...-Another-Patch

SPS 14-03-16 01:27 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPT4-nRP7Bk

http://sulon.com/blog/sulon-q-sneak-peak


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.