RazorDragon said:
Captain_Tom said:
errorpwns said:
Captain_Tom said:
DevilRising said:
Well, obviously, the Wii U is so low tech, it can't actually handle Minecraft. Obviously.  |
As much as I hate the Wii U, I have to admit that that statement is pretty uneducated (When it comes to minecraft):
-Minecraft is easy to run, but only on modern PC's.
-It usually requires a decent amount of RAM (At least 2-3GB).
-Thus the 360 version is severely nutored (And I fear the PS3 version will be worse).
-While the Wii U (should) handle MC better than the PS3/360, it really won't habdle it much better than the Vita...
|
Aside from the fact that the Vita is less powerful than the 360 and PS3? If it can handle it better than the PS3/360 it can handle it much better than the Vita. Also it would seem as if the comment you replied to was sarcasm.
|
All MC relies on is RAM. That's about it. A $30 GPU and 6 year old mid-range CPU can max it out at 120 FPS as long as the PC has 3GB of RAM. If it has 2 though, it will be more than cut in half.
Also I know that comment was sarcasm, but what that comment fails to realise is that MC graphics are decieving. It does have very real system requirements.
|
PS Vita has the same amount of RAM as the 360, so I'm not sure I actually understood your comment. About a 6 year old mid-range PC maxing it out at 120FPS if it has enough RAM, no way, the game is much more CPU bound than anything. You can max it with a 2GB Geforce GT 610 if you want at 60FPS, but you need a powerful CPU to make it happen. 120FPS, you need at least a mid-range current GPU.
|
LMAO my sub $300 netbook runs it fine with a dual core E-350 at 1.6 GHz. Yeah I forgot AMD's Brazos line of cpus were beasts! Wow...
Edit: Oh and the Vita has 25% more ram than the 360...
