By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Starcraft 2. System requirments LEAKED!

Bored4life on 22 May 2008

I Gb RAM

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!



Prediction:
Disney will make KH3 with Nintendo.Yes,KH3 will be a Disney/Nintendo crossover.

Save the industry,Kill a Hardcore gamer

Stopped buying Ubisoft games.Will not buy Red Steel 2.Let them struggle on HD. Click here for a solution:CLICK
ALERT: I have also exposed a UBI'Z'OFT viral marketer in THIS thread.Read my posts, see the set up and watch how everything crumbles on page 8. Please learn from this experience.

Around the Network
shio on 22 May 2008
Spotacus said:
shio said:
Gnizmo said:
shio said:
 

how are they high? The specs are even lower than what alot of games are coming with out today, let alone when SC2 comes out.

Seriously, if all you need to play is a Geforce 7 card, then you could even play with 5 year old GPUs (it won't though, because of lack of support of newer shaders and such)

My brother's 5 year old PC should be able to play it if it's true (gonna be 6 years old when SC2 is released, probably)


Read my full post before you respond to it please. The last sentence should tell how I feel about the system requirements. Blizzard is notorious for releasing games that can be played on anything made in the same decade. For them it is a little high, but the game will run well on minimum settings.

Dude, if those specs are real, you can even run SC2 on a 6 year old GPU if it came out TODAY! God, just look closely at the specs.

What GPU are you talking about? If the minimum specs are are a Geforce 7 card, then you can only run it on a GPU that isn't even 3 years old yet (June of 2005 for the first card in the 7 series). The minimum specs are way too high if you look at other graphic intensive RTSes of late and especially when you are dealing with Blizzard.


.... you need to do better research. Do you know how crappy the low-end Geforce 7 cards are? I mean, they're Integrated GPUs, and most Geforce 6 cards easily outrun them.

And ATI Radeon 9600/9800 series are 5 years old (2003) and quite better than the low-end Geforce 7 cards.

EDIT: Ok, so it's not 6 year olds ('only' 5), but it's still quite low. And knowing Blizzard, they will try to make itlook as good as possible.



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg
Gnizmo on 22 May 2008
shio said:
 


.... you need to do better research. Do you know how crappy the low-end Geforce 7 cards are? I mean, they're Integrated GPUs, and most Geforce 6 cards easily outrun them.

And ATI Radeon 9600/9800 series are 5 years old (2003) and quite better than the low-end Geforce 7 cards.


 Just a question, are you familiar with how well extremely low-end machines typically run a Blizzard game? I am not trying to be a smart ass here but you seem to be reacting to the situation in an incredibly dense manner. These are low system requirements for 99% of game developers. Blizzard though, not so much. It is more a testament to how well they code than anything else.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

playnext3 on 22 May 2008

thats not a big configuration for me i have the double



shio on 22 May 2008

@Gnizmo:
I am familiar yes, I've bought every Blizzard title since Diablo 2.

The specs are extremely low. What some people don't realise is how crap the low-end Geforce 7 series cards are (some of them are even graphics integrated). Some low-end Geforce 6 series cards are even better than a couple of them (my previous Geforce 6200se w/ Turbocache 256mb, for example)

The only 'bad' part about the specs is the 1gb RAM, but even then RAM is so cheap today. I'm sure you can get 512mb RAM somewhere for $10 or so.

Anyway, the specs are unconfirmed, and I remember there was an article saying only a 128mb vram card was necessary for Starcraft 2, but that's also unconfirmed.



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg
Around the Network
Gnizmo on 22 May 2008

Then we are in agreement I suppose. They are extremely low, and nothing to complain about. Still an oddity given the company releasing it, but the game will also run extremely well on a system that just meets the minimum specs.

By the by, my reason for saying it is high for blizzard is solely based on the ram. The video card seems in-line for when the game is released. I would bet you can get it to run well on a slightly worse card. I do wonder what speed the processor should be though.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

epsilon72 on 22 May 2008

Those specs seem way too high. I call BS on this. Blizzard is not Crytek; look at World of Warcraft.

@shio: Geforce 7, low end? Tell that to my old 7800gtx! (that card still runs everything out today quite adequately)

Man, looking at those specs again, there's no friggin way they are true, unless Blizzard wants to totally reverse their design philosophies (which I doubt would be the case.) 



ikilledkenny on 22 May 2008

I should be able to run it, though I'll probably need a new graphics card.


ironmanDX on 22 May 2008

YAY I can run it! but i need more than 1 gig of ram to play it well.............



Gnizmo on 22 May 2008
ironmanDX said:
YAY I can run it! but i need more than 1 gig of ram to play it well.............

 No you won't/ Blizzard minimum specs are the minimum to play the game well. Unlike most PC developers they actually tell you straight up what you will need to get a good play experience. You may have to turn some stuff down, but it will run well.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229