Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor - PC Settings Unveiled, Ultra Textures Require 6GB Of VRAM

DSOGaming writes: "Things are quickly getting out of hand. NeoGAF’s member ‘Regret Truth’ has shared an image from Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor that shows the PC settings for it. What really surprised us, however, was the fact that: a) there will be an Ultra Texture Pack available for download in day-one and b) it will require 6GB of VRAM when these Ultra textures have been activated."

[Codey47]

That's 99% of the vibrant N4G community f%$ked then :P

Walk the walk boys and girls.....walk the walk.

Don't listen to the guys trying to make you buy mid range cards to better a PS4 or an Xbone and entice you into PCGaming... I class this as heinous advice. I've said this in the past on numerous occasions.
See the recommended settings on a game and quadruple it in terms of hardware. Because there's always a game on the horizon that'll need such power or you're gunna end up playing a slideshow.

Always go for the latest and greatest...if you can't afford it. Then don't get into PC Gaming it will bleed you dry trying to keep up with the Jones'

[NovusTerminus]

I have 3gigs VRAM... I'm screwed...

[zeal0us]

A lot of people are screwed. Though this makes me wonder is the game unoptimized or is this just a move help Nvidia new graphic cards.

[blackmagic]

I personally applaud them as loud and hard as I can! Here is a company that is giving the pc gaming community exactly what they want, a game that will push their hardware and let you see what it can actually do.

And nobody is 'f%$ked'. There's no rule that says you are forced to buy new hardware the moment any game comes out that requires you to move any setting to anything less than ultra.

Just like consoles, when you buy a pc you acquire a snapshot in time and if you buy a pc that outperforms the consoles today it will continue outperform those consoles for it's entire life even if it can't play games in ultra settings, it still plays them at a higher fidelity than those consoles.

If you built a pc 5 years ago that outperforms the ps3/360 then it still outperforms the ps3/360 today even if it can't play everything in 'ultra' anymore.

[livininsin]

Actually, blackmagic, I built my computer 5 years ago and it still outperforms the ps4 by a large margin which was pretty surprising to me when the ps4 launched.

It's a good pc with dual 2GB 5850's, 3.2Ghz quad core X4 955 and 8 gigs of ram but at the time even AMD was building better parts like the 5870 and 965 not to mention that Intel and nVidia were making parts that even better than that.

Having said that, my 5 year old pc, that cost me about $1500 to build, has more than twice the GPU power of the ps4, about 4.3 TFLOPS. I mean, it's shocking to me that my 5 year old pc can play games at 1080p, 60fps while the ps4 can only muster up 30fps.

This is why I think this gen of consoles is screwed. Seriously, the consoles are having trouble breaking 1080p and 30fps at a time when UHD is hitting the mainstream.

[Deividas]

@blackmagic

ummm....a game that will push their hardware and see what it can actually do?

You do realize a game that actually requires those specs and a game that says they do because of very poor optimization (or like zeal0us stated for sales) are completely different right?

[blackmagic]

You're preaching to the choir livininsin, you are preaching to the choir! lol

@deividas
Textures are just pictures applied to 3d objects and higher resolution pictures take up more space so more VRAM is needed. I can't think of how you would 'optimize' this.

[Deividas]

@blackmagic

Well lets see, the PS3 had 256mb of VRAM in its system yet it can pull of graphics like the Last of Us (yes not same quality but clearly developers found a way to optimize the game to use the most of it) which is a game from only a year ago by the way.

And then we have textures on the PC a year later that require 6GB of VRAM...now that is beyond a massive difference.

What Im trying to say is that because PC's have such a high amount of VRAM available at their disposal that developers would rather just throw high textures in and make people get better cards. If they wanted to and took the time they can sure as hell lower the 6GB VRAM requirement.

[blackmagic]

yeah, they 'optimized' it by using lower resolution textures, fewer different textures on screen at any one time, a narrow color gamut, lower bit count, etc because they only had 256MB to work with.

These guys are 'optimizing' this texture pack for PCs with large amounts of VRAM to accommodate people at the high end of gaming which I HIGHLY encourage and applaud.

You have 3Gb of VRAM? Then select the high texture setting which has been 'optimized' for PCs with 3Gb VRAM. Have 2Gb, then medium has been 'optimized' for you. 1Gb? Low is 'optimized' for you. Less than that? They don't have an ultra-low I guess. I think 2011 AMD made their last retail video card that featured less than 1GB of VRAM, the most powerful one being a whopping 0.7 TFLOPS. Today, AMD and nVidia no longer make a retail card with less than 1GB on it.

To you, 'optimizing' seems to mean that the best settings must be payable on the average PC. I couldn't be happier that this developer has a much more modern view.

[mikeslemonade]

Shadows of Maurdaur doesn't even look that good. They say it's Assasins Creed like. Which I'm not a fan of AC. The games looks bland like Destiny.

This game is overhyped!

[Feralkitsune]

Wait, not being able to max a game these days = screwed? Then fuck are you guys smoking? The only think that requires that much are if you use the uncompressed textures. Low-high will still look amazing, and ultra will only be useful at much higher res than 1080p. The 4k and above.

[starchild]

I guarantee you don't need 6gb for textures equivalent to the console version. The ultra textures will look a lot better than those on the consoles.

So you're not screwed, you just have something better to look forward to in your PC version. :)

[Irishguy95]

**** it, I guess i'll be stuck at just above the consoles quality instead of obliterating it. Oh well.

[Bdub2000]

LOL, this is exactly what I was thinking. Sure, I can't hit Ultra, but it's still higher than any current Gen console. But I do have the option to do it, and the only way a console can hit ultra is by waiting for the next generation in 5-7 years. PC isn't "screwed", we just have the ability to get ultra detail at the expense of a very expensive GPU.

[ShowGun901]

when people compare ps4 vs pc, they always leave out one important factor... price! i have a $1,200 pc (probably low ball estimate), and i cant touch that. my gtx 760 wont come close! and ive payed 3X the price of a ps4! if you game on pc to become part of the "master race", you'd better be able to pony-up about 2 grand... that, in a nutshell, is why the ps4 vs pc comparison is moot. sure your corvette can beat my honda civic, but you paid 3X for it! in this case, 3X isn't even enough!

[brainfart]

You dont have to download that 6gb hd texture pack, its manly for gpus with 6gb or more your gtx760 wil play at high or med with 60fps maybe, so your game will still play better than consoles!

[HighResHero]

I do consoles and PC. I see no reason not to.
I don't like some of the PC DRM but love what it has to offer.
Steam sales for (mostly multiplayer games)
GOG.com and gog sales for amazing DRM free titles (growing library)
Consoles for the exclusives and physical copies of all the awesome titles.

[SteamPowered]

Nobody leaves out price in PC comparisons guy, who are you kidding? Thats the first thing fanboys cry "Oh well at least I didnt have to spend $1200". Whoopdee doo! If price is such a point of contention then stick with your console. Dont bitch because PC blows consoles away and then cry out that its because Pc costs more. If you pay more for a superior product, then you should get superior results. End of story. Quit bitching, keep gaming.

[AD705]

Yeah because buying all next gen consoles the ps4, xbox one, wiiu which costs over 1000 bucks just to play the exclusives across all 3 platforms. Paying for online on PSN or XBL and paying more for games is cheap right? I find it funny how console fanboys always leave out the fact that if you want the full console experience you need to own multiple consoles just to play all those console exclusives they brag about constantly. Don't tell me that I can play every console game just owning a PS4, or and 360, wii, PS1 etc etc... You need to pretty much have all those consoles because not one single console has every game. Besides a pc is much more than a gaming platform. Hell that 1000 pc can even make the games you like to play lol.

[Bdub2000]

It depends on how you look at it... My pc was $1200, but it's better than any current console as far as graphic capability... And honestly, it's only a $400 GPU away from being more powerful than the next Generation of consoles, but I can have that TODAY. If you are satisfied with the current graphical capability of current consoles and don't mind being stuck in that box for several years, then that is your choice, and you saved some money.

I, on the other hand, can afford a master race PC, so that's where I spend my money. So you can enjoy your civic, but don't pretend you don't like my corvette. =)

Also, consoles are awesome, that's not the point I'm trying to make, they get great exclusive content.

[Volkama]

Eh? A mid range card will not run this ultra texture pack, but that doesn't make it worse than a console...

[pompous]

So what if people want to buy a midrange card. It's all about perceived value, your preferences, if you can afford, or even if you can afford is that what you really want. The game will still look good on max settings without ultra textures. If high and medium textures use 3 and 2 GB then those textures alone will look better than most games ultra textures.. Please go screw off with the "always go for the latest and greatest and if you can't afford then don't get into pc gaming" Not everyone needs or wants the top of the line stuff. You don't need the latest and greatest. And even if you did buy a new nvidia 970 or 980 you will be set for this whole gen.. YOU also FAIL to realize that 6GB cards are in the extreme minority as far as what's available to buy. So please think about what you are going to say before you say it..

[user5669510]

ah mid and high is still going to look better than consoles sorry to tell you buddy. i doubt this is true seeing how every req is exaggerated. wasnt people saying this about a ton of multiplats then push came to shove the console version was running more like mid to mid high. i doubt this game is running on high let alone max on consoles. nice try tho. better luck next time on your agenda.

also they could be future proofing the game like crysis did when it first came out. that game can still go head to toe with next gen games. but i doubt it seeing as in the pic he has a 570 and everything is on high except textures. soooooooo yea. try harder

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/w...

i also find it funny that you are trying to shun the people with weaker gfx cards, because they cant play on max. do you shun ps3 or xb360 players because they can still play this or shun people thats playing tlou on ps3. what about next gen only games that can be play on old rigs would you consider that a lost seeing how yall would have to buy a new console while the pc gamers with a rig from a few years wont have to buy anything.

console fanboys = no logic behind comments.

[_-EDMIX-_]

http://www.gamespot.com/for...

Sooooo nope. This isn't unoptimized, its merely a next gen title.

Have you guys seen what PS4 and XONE specs are? Well...those will be 2X to meet on PC.

[Volkama]

I'm running somewhere around 10tflops at the moment, and depending on how you measure the VRAM, I do not meet the 6gb requirement.

In hardware terms I have 8gb VRAM, but typically when discussing actual usage that amounts to 4gb, because of the duplication necessary for a dual card setup.

[tee_bag242]

Same here. I have 2 x 4GB GPU's. Lol apparently not enough but we'll see. I have trouble believing a game that looks as mediocre as this wants 6gb RAM for Ultra as it's the highest requirement ever in the history of gaming.

[Psychotica]

The 6GB requirement is for 4k gaming. It says in the screenshot that the Ultra HD texture pack has to be installed for the Ultra.

[aquamala]

I don't get it. if you're happy with graphics on consoles why do you feel you have to max out settings on PC? consoles won't have this optional Ultra textures download.

[Corpser]

Why do you have to keep up with the jones onPC? A mid range GPU is more than enough to play games in better or equal console settings. Consoles are not playing this game in Ultra PC settings

[Magicite]

6GB?????? So even GTX980 is too low? ROFL!

[Dynasty2021]

"See the recommended settings on a game and quadruple it in terms of hardware."

Proof you know ***k all about PC gaming.

No PC game in history has EVER actually required the recommended specs to get over 60 FPS on max settings.

EVER.

If the game requires anything more than 2GB VRAM, it's a rubbish port or the devs are terrible at coding.

In this and Watch Dog's case - rubbish port due to lazy devs.

6GB of VRAM is an insane requirement and a complete and utter joke, considering there are only a few cards in EXISTENCE that have 6GB of VRAM on them.

Now go back to your 900p ~30FPS world in the basement.

[Vasto]

I have no words.

[Software_Lover]

6gb of vram? WTF is going on. Its like they skipped right over the 3gb cards lol.

I will need to see the difference between this ultra texture pack and the standard highest settings. Not that I'm gonna go out and buy a 6gb card, but it will be interesting.

[Volkama]

3gb cards at least had a brief moment with Titanfall, but nVidia's flagship cards released a week ago with 4gb.

Could be that they're referring to crossfire/SLI configs though. VRAM requirements and quantities get a bit muddy in multi-card configurations (take the "8gb" 295x for example).

I'd be surprised if they have a texture pack that targets beyond the flagship cards and into the extreme enthusiast bracket (Titans, Sapphire's 8gb 290x etc). Surprised and impressed. It's great when PC devs think about future hardware, adds some legs to the game imo.

[BrianG]

The only problem with multi GPU configs, like SLI/Crossfire or even 2 in cards, like the r295x2, is the memory is not shared.

So if I have 2 3GB cards in SLI, I only have 3GB of VRAM, not 6GB. Reason is each card in the system has to render the image so the VRAM is not added together.

This patch seems like it's aimed at only the most enthusiast systems.

[Volkama]

Yes, exactly that. But they're some would consider it 8gb because in hardware terms that's what it is (see 295x listings, it's just an 8gb card on every store).

So it isn't actually obvious what kind of configuration they are referring to with the "user friendly" tip on the menu.

We'll know soon enough when people get playing.

[zugdar]

Calm down. This is Ultra settings for a PC (much higher than any console). As long as it looks great on any setting on my 3 Gb card I'll be happy. As tech improves so do the requirements needed to get that performance.

[zsquaresoff]

This is why I chose ps4 over pc.

No matter what the specs, I can just pop the disc into my ps4 and start playing, instead of worrying about my graphic card.

What pc gamers save on steam sales, they spend on video cards and other updates.

[Eiffel]

The relevancy of this comment is mute considering these are settings to completely max the game, settings your PS4 is incapable of matching. To play this game at the same settings or higher with all the performance perks is nothing to worry about.

[Patrick_pk44]

6GB of VRAM is needed for Ultra, which has better visuals then PS4 and Xbone. But it it's easy as hell to run the game on high, which will be almost identical to PS4, or have slightly better visuals, since PC have more setting to adjust when it comes to graphics. You're trying to make it sound like everyone needs to upgrade their PC on a yearly basis, which is incorrect. Plus the new GTX 970 which can run 99% of current games on Ultra at 60fps+ for $330, which is basically 5 console games that one could get during the Steam sale for under 100. You'll save more money in the long run when you buy a PC, and this is coming from a Sony fanboy.

[sourav93]

So what they're saying is we need a Titan to play this at absolute ultra...Unless someone is lucky enough to have one of those 6GB GTX 780s in hand. Because why optimise...?

[Patrick_pk44]

Yeah, the game isn't optimized. Even the newest cards which are beasts don't even have 6GB of VRAM. It's either poor optimization since developers are lazy, or it was a poor from consoles to PC. At the end of the day, the visuals will still be better on PC.

[Seafort]

This isn't a console port. The ultra graphics setting is for high end PCs only. You will never see the ultra high textures on consoles as they are too weak for them.

The consoles don't even have 6GB VRAM spare just for textures.

I won't be playing on ultra settings but I will be playing on high. I'm guessing the consoles will be on med/high settings.

This is nothing to worry about for PC gaming. This is just a known PC developer future proofing their game in the years to come :)

Now The Evil Within requiring 4GB VRAM for recommended specs is another story :P

[deSSy2724]

You cant tell if its a port just by comparing graphics details/settings on PC and consoles. Many developers confirmed they ported Xbox360 games to PC and the same PC version ofc has much better graphics details/settings. Graphics can be easily tweaked in modern PC tools (softwares ofc) and its relatively easy for developers (game designers, game artists etc) but physics (CPU jobs in general) and porting a code from example PowerPC arhitecture to x86 arhitecure is much more complicated.

[Seafort]

@deSSy2724 Monolith has already confirmed it isn't a console port. It was developed alongside the console versions.

Monolith are PC developers. They've been making PC games since 1999.

Only the Xbone, PS4 and PC was developed by Monolith. The PS3 and X360 was outsourced to another developer that's why they are delayed.

[Feralkitsune]

That does not mean it isn't optimised. The optimised textures ARE THE FUCKING Low-High settings. So to say it's not optimised means you have no idea what the hell the point of graphics settings are.

[sourav93]

Yes I do understand the point of graphics settings. I primarily game on PC and I can tell you, that for what the game looks like in terms of textures, 6GB of VRAM should NOT be warranted.

Watch Dogs Ultra textures required 3 GB, and the textures themselves looked good. Games like MLL and Crysis 3 had amazing looking textures, but 2 or 3 GB of VRAM was plenty for a resolution of 1080p. BF4 only used more than 3 GB if the resolution scale was cranked up to 200%.Heck, Skyrim modded with photo-realistic textures and running about 100+ other mods used "only" about 4GB of VRAM. So you see my point.

But somehow I'm supposed to believe that for ME:SOM 6GB is required for the same texture bump at a 1080p resolution?

[LightofDarkness]

This is likely for 4k resolutions folks, relax. You probably won't be able to appreciate the difference at 1080p.

I just bought SLI 970s @4GB each, so count me out. Although with the dynamic compression used I might just make it.

Plus, people should be rejoicing. This is a game that you can use to bench progress for some time to come. I imagine 8GB will become standard next year.

[sourav93]

Nope. It states clearly on the menu screen that 6GB VRAM is required for Ultra textures at a rendering resolution of 1080p.

[LightofDarkness]

As in, the HD texture pack is for resolutions above 1080p. You can use them at that resolution but you may not be able to appreciate the difference. All of this remains to be clarified anyway.

[Psychotica]

And below that, it says the Ultra HD texture packs has to be installed

[kainslayer]

ffs its a lotr game made by ubisoft you need 32 gigs of vram....or wait 5 months for an official update...or maybe days for an ini tweak ;-p devs nowdays are so lame when going after a famed franchise ,lotr crysis ,etc so it can run good on consoles but pc's need vram for 4k textures dont worry we can always downsample lazy devs and marketing.a..holes

[FsterThnFTL]

8Gb Geforce 980 Ti here I come.

[brainfart]

Dont hold your breath, cause it's no where to be seen!

[FsterThnFTL]

I am expecting it to arrive in November.

[LightofDarkness]

I doubt they'd unveil a Ti edition until AMD show what they've got, which won't be until 2015. Its likely to he a 20 or 16nm part as well, if the recent press material is to be believed.

Its at least 6 months off, regardless.

[sourav93]

If they can price it right, it will sell like hotcakes. Many feel the 980 is a bit underwhelming. The 980ti is rumoured to be 50% more powerful than the Titan Black.

[brainfart]

What people don't realize is its a free dlc download and most likely for folks with $1000 cards.high and med setting willl still look and play better than new gen console.It's still a win situation for pc gamers also depending on your setting you will be playing at 60fps if your card is decent.......console cant!

[pompous]

It's already been said by devs that ps4 is 1080/60 and they have skated or ignored that question when asked about Xbox. And I'm on my phone so I can't link but there is an article out there saying pc matches consoles. Obviously not the optional he texture pack but I'm willing to bet when comparisons come out it will be Damn near close to identicle

[BassMan125]

Just play it in high, done. I believe PS4/XOne isn't running on ultra also. The ultra setting is optional pack, for people who have 1 or more Titan.

[deSSy2724]

PS4 version is maybe comparable to high-ultra settings (without crazy AA, crazy tesselation, crazy HBAO and similar).

[Feralkitsune]

So....not comparable.

[Rick_Ross_Boss]

I call ball crap on this, ps4 and Xbox one only use around 5gb for game memory and gpu ram, no way would you need that much on PC unless it was badly optimized. Watchdogs was another where they said u needed loads of gpu memory but it made no difference if you had 6gb plus because they rushed it out for PC gamers. This was the main reason I sold my PC as it keeps getting royally screwed

[impet25]

6gigs for 1080p? So how much am I going to need for 1440p? I don't mind lowering settings but this vram issue over the latest games is starting to get out of hand. Smh

[_-EDMIX-_]

http://www.gamespot.com/for...

For those who are surprised. Gaming on PC takes 2X that of its console counterparts, thus this is very normal and the ultra setting on PC, is likely what the PS4 and XONE version will look like as its not even 2X of what the PS4 and XONE could output.

When looking for a gaming PC, don't be stupid and read N4G telling you TO MATCH SPECS like some idiot.

PS4 has 1.85 TFLOP GPU, well you'll need a 4TFLOP GPU...to just MATCH PS4! PS4 has 8gigs of ram, you'll need more like 16GB's again...to just MATCH PS4. Thus....when looking to make a beast PC, wait til parts get cheaper so that way you are not spending $800 or $900 JUST to match a $399 PS4.

With my PC build, I'm looking to spend about $1,200 or so but after I see what 5TFLOP or 6TFLOP cards AMD comes out with. Mind you...I'm doing this ending of next year as ending of next year I'll at least have an idea of how next gen PC games are performing. ie Witcher 3, Dead Island 2 etc.

[Rick_Ross_Boss]

Hahaha no you don't. That was more the case when they used power PC cpu's but now it's x86. Sure they have lower api overhead but you can get a ps4/Xbox one performance for dirt cheap these days. I have a gtx 760 in my server which is about 2.2 teraflops and is slightly better than my ps4 at running the same games, which is where it should be

[Seafort]

There is no chance in hell that the Xbone/PS4 can run the ultra graphics settings on the PC.

This is for enthusiast PCs only.

The consoles don't even have 6GB VRAM spare just for graphics.

When neither console can output 1080p/60fps consistently and now you say they can output 6GB VRAM worth of textures reserved for only the most powerful PC graphics cards.

You're living in a dream world.

[starchild]

That's just completely wrong. Neither my GTX 770 nor my HD 7950 are over two times as powerful and they both have beaten my PS4 in every multiplatform game so far. And by quite a lot.

Actual experience beats theoretical guesses.

[DougLord]

Are there any non-mobile video cards with 6gb currently? I know they plan on launching a 980 with 8gb but who knows when.

I think this is awesome. I've been telling people next gen games and 4k will need a lot of gpu RAM. Guess I will wait to get my new PC until I can get an 8gb card.

[Father__Merrin]

consoles are better than pc because of this, the price and ease of use of a £349 ps4 is head and shoulders above a similar spec pc

according to steam user specs only around 1% of pc gamers have extreme hardware

[tee_bag242]

"Better" is a totally subjective word. To assume 'better' means cheaper is more a reflection of you priorities - that's fine, you're entitles to your opinion.
If people consider "better" to mean "looks and performance" then its a blood bath - PC has PS4 licked.

[mysteryraz11]

the more you talk lol the more you make me laugh kid, when someone dislikes or says something negative about the pc you get like they insulted your family, get over it its video games son, dont even know what sick things you do to your pc

[Str8Chaos74]

Except that at a PC does a hell of a lot more than a console. I also love how console gamers never factor in the price of the TV.

[iNFAMOUZ1]

bs, its not true, if i remember, some other games claimed such too, and only ended up using 2 or less, its not true, trust me, its probably a typo or just false claims like 100% of the tim

[aLiEnViSiToR]

Its like they are "forcing" people to get at least GTX960 4gb solid gaming, GTX 970 6gb for good gaming and future GTX980/TITANS with 8+GB VRAM for insane gaming... this would all be cool if these cards were 150, 250 and 350/450 euros but in reality they are not, this wont end well :[

[Gore-Content]

And this is why I'm sticking with consoles.

[aquamala]

why? to not have the option to play the game in highest PC settings?

[kingduqc]

You won't get the option to turn on ultra textures and you will be stuck 1080p 30 fps?

Okay..

[SoCalledMe]

yea just like The Evil Within is using up 4gig of vram on idTech5 engine witch is known for blury textures , and trailer shows nothing immpresive about it ( Crysis 3 uses 2 gigs of vram max texures if u dotn go crazy with MSSA like 8x ) are utelling me that evil within has twice as good textures as Crysis 3 , I bet theres a deal with hardware manufacrures to push dis kind of marketing so trigger happy customers have a reason to buy a TITAN witch price for preformance is bull%^& , its same deal as with recommending I7 processors for games that cant use more than 4 cores propertly , just a hoax wait for Benchmarks

[ATi_Elite]

Let me put all the crying kids to bed and those misinformed into the know.

Using Vram as a determination of a pc graphical strength is bad programming

Gtaiv pc ran like cow dung because it jammed the entire game into your vram

This had to be done on purpose to pesued gamers to get the console version instead of the pc same with evil within and its no pc specs listing.

Seriuosly why even bother making a pc version if you are just gonna piss on pc gamers.

I know my current build can run anything at 1600p but soe are on the fence and this blatant lack of optimization and posting of specs is disrespectful to pc gamers

You just seen the millions at dota2 the millions at LoL the millions at quakecon the millions viewing the nvidia gamers day but to downplay all that PCGamer power we get ports with no specs or outrageous requirements or lame programming from some very good upcoming games.

All done to bash pc gamers and persuade u to buy a console version nothing more nothing less.

Send me a pm of your specs and ill let you know if you can run the evil within as a way to help my fellow pc brethren and im sure i will be able to run mordor with hi texture mod 1600 or 4k because i can run Crysis 3 with reality mod and NOTHING AND I MEAN NOTHING LOOKS BETTER THAN THAT.

So why even bother with lame specs or unrealistic requirements when u r NOT gonna surpass Crysis 3 vanilla let alone its mod.

Thats why all of this is crap

At least TW2 uber sampling had a purpose as it pushed dx9 to the moon and tw2 with uber on is eyeburning

[wannabe gamer]

i think the fact that gta 4 came to pc much later than console makes this statement pointless:

"Gtaiv pc ran like cow dung because it jammed the entire game into your vram

This had to be done on purpose to pesued gamers to get the console version instead of the pc"

[wannabe gamer]

maybe this game actually has real ultra settings that show a difference vs the lower settings. i think a lot of games have ultra but they arent much of a difference. so this could be agreat sign that a dev has actually looked at what they can do with higher tier hardware and done it instead of just saying oh we better add an ultra setting so no one complains.

[quantae06]

Dang!!

[ATi_Elite]

The main thing with vram is to have room to render and apply post processing effects

Vram is increasing due to higher resolutions 1200 1440 1600 and the holy grail 4k so therefore the gpu at higher resolution has way more data to process thus needing more vram

The gods at Nvidia and AMD have already calculated this out and actually cards have more than enough vram for ultra gameplay at 4k (high end cards)

The only issue is does the gpu have enough muscle and stream processors to render data fast enough to get it into vram then onto your screen at 30 or 60 fps.

Now when some game comes out and says you need more vram than Nvidias latest and greatest even offers then you have just committed piss poor programming

Crysis back in 2007 killed gpus because Crysis used every graphics tool available at the time in one game and pushed for photorealistic graphics thus drowning gpus with more info than they could handle

Also DX10 being bloated didnt help either

That was a wake up call as hardware fell behind software.

Todays gpus are MONSTERS that can render graphics and perform gpgpu functions simultaneously but all that we ask for is a little optimization on ports so as not to burn the paint off my wall from all the heat being released by my gpu when it has to use BRUTE FORCE to render crappy code all game long

Just filling up the vram is not optimization just like dumping code unto one core of a 2 or 4 core cpu back in the day was not good either.

[tee_bag242]

Exactly. VRAM us useless if the card cant push out the frames at a decent pace.

[-Einhert-]

I am calling their bluff with this one.

The game does not even look that good so to say you need 6GB VRAM is just insane for what you are getting so yes all the people syaing "oh PC is finally getting a game that can push it" are completely and utterly WRONG.

How is it Crysis 3 looks way better than this game, Skyrim modded looks better and yet they use less VRAM.

Recommended Card is a GTX 660 so....

[rabaker07]

Exactly. I don't want to hear anyone crying about the ultra settings requirements are too high. You want the game makers to dumb down the graphics capability for your cheap and outdated PC? Why? So you can brag to your friends that you can play it on Ultra? This is a boon and something I hope all companies follow in the future. Sure, it sells more high-end cards. Isn't that a GOOD thing? I wish that ultra on this game required 10 GTX 980s strapped to my arse and a terabyte of RAM. And I bet you it will look better than your wildest dream and turn "photorealistic" into a moot concept. If it doesn't. Well then, meh...