-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Shadow of Mordor offers Ultra texture optional download, recommends 6GB VRAM @ 1080p
- Thread starter Regret Truth
- Start date
Salty Hippo
Member
I can't believe that the just released GTX 980 is already obsolete. This is absurd.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
Fervor? LOL right. And by "address" you mean this nugget?
Which promptly was responded to by multiple people. Nothing has changed. The curve for graphical improvement continues to swing and max-out current gpu's (as always). And, as always, you can build a PC that will match the PS4/X1 at this game (and others) for the same price as those consoles. Which makes your "broad context" statement not really make any sense at all.
You can stay happy with the PS4 playing this game at 1080p/60fps @ medium/high equivalent settings without coming misguidedly into this thread as if this news is some sort of prophecy to validate your console purchases.
Looks decent but not enough to match those max-setting specs
imo. Maybe it's just youtube.Barack Lesnar
Banned
I mean, when GTA5 was developed the only versions being worked on were 360 and PS3. With Evil Within and Mordor, the PS4/X1 versions have been developed alongside 360 and PS3, and they're also the primary SKUs. So my theory is that means GTA5 should run fine on 2 gigs. Actually, I'm not even sure that makes sense. Time for bed.
Just needs extra 2gigs of VRAM and that bad boy is enough to max this.
This gen, PS4/X1 are pretty much low-med PC. Thus, it's much easy for developers to do highend stuff and downsize / optimize fit them.
Nothing is set in stone until people actually get to play the game, Watch Dogs had the same problem, people were able to run higher quality textures than what they recommended.
Leafhopper
Banned
Depends on the game.
Agent_4Seven
Tears of Nintendo
Well, I guess WB just saved me 60$. I can't even say how much I love when publishers doing such a nice thing. THANK YOU WB. THANK YOU SO MUCH!
Barack Lesnar
Banned
"...you can build a PC that will match the PS4/X1 at this game for the same price as those consoles."
I doubt that. In fact, I really, really doubt that. Even so, why would you want to do that? That's my point. People aren't paying hundreds of dollars on a card to run at console-equivalent settings.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
there is your problem right there.
GhostTrick
Banned
It's funny because everytime I see that kind of recommended hardware, people panic for nothing and we amways have the same reaction:
"This means I cant play it on my PC"
"Those saying my 500 dollars rig blow consoles away were saying bullshit"
People should learn two things first:
Minimum and recommended settings mean nothing.
It changes from game to game. From situation to situation. I'll take an exemple:
Metal Gear Rising minimum config was about a quad core i5 2400. Last year I had an old dual core C2D CPU. Believe it or not, the game still ran at 60fps most of the time.
These settings depends on what kind of experience developpers expect you to have. And not meeting minimum doesnt mean the game wont start or that you'll need to lower every settings.
Not meeting recommended doesnt mean you cant max out the game either.
As for the other thing to learn:
Max quality doesnt mean console quality. I see a lot of people, sometimes with GTX670 or 770 claiming "This will run like shit on my hardware, I'll play it on my PS4/One."
Before jumping to conclusions, make sure that these settings are equal to console settings.
Ultra textures here requires 6gb of vram...
Do we know for sure that console version use these textures ?
"This means I cant play it on my PC"
"Those saying my 500 dollars rig blow consoles away were saying bullshit"
People should learn two things first:
Minimum and recommended settings mean nothing.
It changes from game to game. From situation to situation. I'll take an exemple:
Metal Gear Rising minimum config was about a quad core i5 2400. Last year I had an old dual core C2D CPU. Believe it or not, the game still ran at 60fps most of the time.
These settings depends on what kind of experience developpers expect you to have. And not meeting minimum doesnt mean the game wont start or that you'll need to lower every settings.
Not meeting recommended doesnt mean you cant max out the game either.
As for the other thing to learn:
Max quality doesnt mean console quality. I see a lot of people, sometimes with GTX670 or 770 claiming "This will run like shit on my hardware, I'll play it on my PS4/One."
Before jumping to conclusions, make sure that these settings are equal to console settings.
Ultra textures here requires 6gb of vram...
Do we know for sure that console version use these textures ?
GHG
Member
Eh. You can get the game for $37 from GMG.
Might still get this to see how my 660 3GB sli setup handles this just for shits and giggles.
And people told me I was making a mistake and should have got a single 2GB 680. Pffftt.
brain_stew
Member
As long as there's decent options that will fit within 4GB then this is only a positive thing.
Users that recently bought 2GB cards are beyond fucked at this point but there's been plenty of posters like myself warning that this would always be the case.
The GTX 770 2GB will rightly go down as one of the worst GPU purchases of all time. What a horribly mismatched card that is. It pains me that many PC GAFers recommended it without qualification when it was clear as day it didn't have any life in it.
Users that recently bought 2GB cards are beyond fucked at this point but there's been plenty of posters like myself warning that this would always be the case.
The GTX 770 2GB will rightly go down as one of the worst GPU purchases of all time. What a horribly mismatched card that is. It pains me that many PC GAFers recommended it without qualification when it was clear as day it didn't have any life in it.
No such thing as future proofing when it comes to PC tech, people!
The sooner you accept that, the happier you will be. You gotta pay to play. Can't afford to keep up to max out games? Then turn down the settings or buy a console.
Anyway, I think the 4GB 970/980 will run this just fine at Ultra. I bet the 6GB is only a recommendation, not a hard requirement. If we wait a few days, we'll find out. No use arguing over it at this point.
The sooner you accept that, the happier you will be. You gotta pay to play. Can't afford to keep up to max out games? Then turn down the settings or buy a console.
Anyway, I think the 4GB 970/980 will run this just fine at Ultra. I bet the 6GB is only a recommendation, not a hard requirement. If we wait a few days, we'll find out. No use arguing over it at this point.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
They're not and no one is saying they are, but high requires 3 gigs. That's an expensive card. And this is a cross-gen game that's releasing in the first year of next-gen. Think about it and what it means for 2015 and beyond.
Chance Hale
Member
4GBs
for 4K
cheezcake
Member
I believe both consoles only have 5-6GB of RAM dedicated to the entire game so no chance.
GhostTrick
Banned
Leafhopper
Banned
2GBs for 1080p.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
Good point definitely. We won't know until the game officially releases I guess. But I'd assume the people spending hundreds on a card will be able to run this (depending on how much, well) above console settings. But time will tell. Obviously PS4/X1 games will continue to improve with time too (which is exciting in it's own right)
GHG
Member
I was going to say... I got 2 660 3GB's for £300 at the start of 2012.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
It's 250 bucks on Newegg. Three gigs isn't going to be enough, anyway. That probably won't even be enough for 2015.
Windom Earle
Member
In case of Watch Dogs... No, not really. Ultra textures are kinda broken though as they mess up the streaming.
Tidus_Great
Banned
we are in the age where console optimization has overtaken PCs even with superior GPUs. a graphics card alone to get 4 VRAM is what 350ish+
GHG
Member
The issue with that card isn't the amount of VRAM. It's more the fact it will run out of gas trying to run next gen titles at higher settings over the next few years.
GhostTrick
Banned
185 dollars on Newegg and you have 3 games with that.
It will, as far as consoles will go.
This wont be enough if you want to max out games of course. But for the rest, as long as consoles will do it. It will. But with better framerates and resolution.
Haha, you cant be serious right ?
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Yeah, true.
So what are we looking at as the ideal price/value ratio 4 gig card out right now?
Is that in Euros? Maybe I'm looking at old prices. I just googled it. https://www.google.com/search?q=HD7...illa:en-US:official&channel=rcs&q=hd+7950+3gb
FinalStageBoss
Banned
and I thought my 770 was good for another year. fuck this shit.
If anything we are getting further away from the age where console optimization does as much.
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
3k for a 12GB card? wow
Krappadizzle
Member
If we awake the beast, we won't know the consequences and it could lead to war.
GHG
Member
Nothing better than the new nvidia 970. Can be had for $330.
Deaf Spacker
Memb
My 4GB 680's are still doing me proud.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
CosmicQueso
Member
I laughed. Out loud. Heartily. Thanks for that.
Trolling all these threads.
Cave Johnson
Member
Yay... back to playing PC games on Medium-Low
Medium-Low on a game targeting high specs isn't something to be concerned about.
Or you can go back playing the original HL at MAX settings to make a direct comparison.
GhostTrick
Banned
I dont think we are seeing the same prices.
I see 120 and 130 euros but thats for used ones.
In summer you could find one at 150 euros brand new because they were clearing old stocks after rebranding.
Search for R9 280 its the new name.
Also worth noting that I bought a r9 290 with 4gb of vram for 220 euros during sales.
Then again, not as expensive as you make it.
Krappadizzle
Member
770 2GB is gonna be fine. It's still an amazing card. Unless your going 4K you'll be splitting hairs with most of what's been released. Stop being so down.
Leafhopper
Banned
This isn't a real post.
Agent_4Seven
Tears of Nintendo
Thx, but nope, I have HD 6870 with 1 GB VRAM and I have no desire to play this game with low quality textures + it seems like this game is only about about killing orks for the most part and I have no interest in killing tons of orks in LOTR game over 30 hours, it;s just f*****g boring as hell.
P.S. PS4 is not an option for me cuz I won't buy this console till at least 2017-2018 for sure.