For those of us that are eager to play Creeper World 3, some of us, (maybe not many) might not think their computers are up to snuff enough to play it.
I'm talking computers whose cards don't even have hardware T&L.
Basically, what might the minimum or recommended requirements be? I'm thinknig possibly a full thing with ram video memory, OS, sound card, cpu, basically all the essentials and framework :)
Virgil did build a low-end system to test, but T&L is ..well, in most cards for the last 6+ years or so. I've no idea what the Unity engine will do if it does not encounter it. Basically, everything after the GeForce- or Radeon7500-line of cards has hardware T&L, with the notable exception of the early Intel Graphics cards.
You can buy a card that will swing it for probably no more than $15 at Newegg.
Best thing to do is to post your complete system specs here. Download Piriform Speccy (http://www.piriform.com/speccy) and post what that report for your system.
I just found this very interesting statistics page from Unity. http://stats.unity3d.com/web/
Notable is how developers seem to have much better hardware/software than the players they build for. :)
Quote from: Grauniad on September 01, 2013, 08:43:00 PM
I just found this very interesting statistics page from Unity. http://stats.unity3d.com/web/
Notable is how developers seem to have much better hardware/software than the players they build for. :)
Well, they are developers; of course they need good hardware, it's their tools of trade!
I cannot believe there are people with ~1GB of total memory. Don't computers have much higher built-in hard drives?
CW3 definitly looks more CPU-intensive with its advanced graphics and the additions to the CW engine, so I ASSUME (to graunidad asking me how I know :P ) the requirements might be higher then CW1 or CW2.
There are a number of factors at play here. The Unity3D engine is *much* more efficient that Flash- or AIR-based engines. In addition Unity#d can use a graphics card which Neither Flash nor AIR could do. However, Virgil did use some of the savings in CPU cycles to render creeper more often, and the improvements in graphics to do a few other things to add lots of eye-candy to the game.
Then there is the consideration that maps became much, much larger. I'd think that on a 1-1 comparison (same map size) a CW3 map would be much less CPU-intensive to run than a CW1 map.
Quote from: Grauniad on September 02, 2013, 02:14:26 PM
I'd think that on a 1-1 comparison (same map size) a CW3 map would be much less CPU-intensive to run than a CW3 map.
I think you'll want to look at that one again.
Quote from: Kingo on September 02, 2013, 01:33:41 PM
I cannot believe there are people with ~1GB of total memory. Don't computers have much higher built-in hard drives?
Memory (i.e. RAM) and hard-drive (storage) are two entirely different things. And yes there are people out there with computers that are 4-6 years old (when 1GB of memory maybe wasn't top of the line, but not too shabby either) or people that for various reasons use netbooks that very rarely exceed 1GB (at least until recently).
Quote from: Ronini on September 02, 2013, 02:50:56 PM
Quote from: Grauniad on September 02, 2013, 02:14:26 PM
I'd think that on a 1-1 comparison (same map size) a CW3 map would be much less CPU-intensive to run than a CW3 map.
I think you'll want to look at that one again.
Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I think I'm happy with my assertion.
Quote from: Grauniad on September 02, 2013, 02:53:14 PM
Quote from: Ronini on September 02, 2013, 02:50:56 PM
Quote from: Grauniad on September 02, 2013, 02:14:26 PM
I'd think that on a 1-1 comparison (same map size) a CW3 map would be much less CPU-intensive to run than a CW3 map.
I think you'll want to look at that one again.
Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I think I'm happy with my assertion.
I can say for a CW3 map on average size runs at full frames per second on my new Laptop. CPU: 1.9GHz 4GBs Ram and the Intel graphics card. The large maps lagg the crap out of the system but most maps don't.
Quote from: Grauniad on September 02, 2013, 02:53:14 PM
Quote from: Ronini on September 02, 2013, 02:50:56 PM
Quote from: Grauniad on September 02, 2013, 02:14:26 PM
I'd think that on a 1-1 comparison (same map size) a CW3 map would be much less CPU-intensive to run than a CW3 map.
I think you'll want to look at that one again.
Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I think I'm happy with my assertion.
See underlinings. How can the same be different?
Quote from: Ronini on September 02, 2013, 03:51:09 PM
See underlinings. How can the same be different?
You busting my chops for a typo? :) Fixed.
Thank you. Could have easily been the other way round, so clarification is very appreciated.
WEll here's my specs, mind you selkirk college had this computer before me and donated it as they had upgraded and had alot of old computers to deal with.
Operating System
Windows XP Professional 32-bit SP3
CPU
Intel Pentium 4 520
Prescott 90nm Technology
RAM
512MB Dual-Channel DDR2 @ 199MHz (3-3-3-8)
Motherboard
Dell Inc. 0K5146 (Microprocessor)
Graphics
Acer A181HV (1024x768@75Hz)
Intel 82915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Family (Dell)
Intel 82915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Family (Dell)
Hard Drives
37.3GB Seagate ST340014AS (SATA) 51 °C
Optical Drives
TSSTcorp CD/DVDW SH-S182F
DTSOFT Virtual CdRom Device
Audio
SoundMAX Integrated Digital Audio
Ofcourse it runs CW2 and 1 without a problem, but I imagine I'd need to upgrade eh? Trying my hardest to do that anyways, but you know... with something this old, I might aswell jsut get a new computer. That's what everyone in my life tells me atleast xD
The only problem I've ever had with Unity, is nothing save for my inability to play Dead Frontier 3D which updated to the Unity 3D engine awhile back. Only problem was it can't do opengl.
Do you actually have a CRT display device?
Edit: No amount of looking lets me into the capabilities of a 10-year old computer and integrated graphics. All I can say Is that I wish you the best of luck. :)
I have a laptop that is a few years old, and designed for office use. Its is not a gaming rig. I am a beta tester and have no issues playing CW3. I would say to wait for release and play the game before going out and spending money to upgrade your system.
Fortunately anymore if you want a Decent gaming rig you can build them for VERY cheap. We're talking like 5-6hundred dollars for a good gaming rig. With the release of AMD's new APU's you can get a Processor and what amounts to a nearly full powered GPU on the same chip for pennies compared to what it used to cost. If you want some builds or whatnot let me know and I'll link you some stuff.
Here's the "official" word from Virgil:
The main factors in performance are the fill rate of the GPU and the memory in the system. GPU memory doesn't really matter... I don't use very much of it. System memory get's jammed on because of all the data structures I have to keep up with and the modifiable textures I have to hold in system memory. GPU feature wise, I don't use anything fancy... there are no fancy shaders that use anything 'newer' like T&L. DirectX9 is the minimal DirectX required by the game.
I'll write all of this up into a 'System Requirements' by the time of the release. But as usual it will just be general guidelines. The demo will be recommended for all to try first since it is free and can answer definitively if the game won't run well or at all.
Quote from: Batstar on September 03, 2013, 07:46:26 AM
Fortunately anymore if you want a Decent gaming rig you can build them for VERY cheap. We're talking like 5-6hundred dollars for a good gaming rig. With the release of AMD's new APU's you can get a Processor and what amounts to a nearly full powered GPU on the same chip for pennies compared to what it used to cost. If you want some builds or whatnot let me know and I'll link you some stuff.
We have a useful "Builder's Corner (http://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?board=28.0)" forum right here. :)
Additionally, if one keeps an eye on Newegg, it's easy to score a decent mid-range gaming machine like this one for about $400 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.1419065).
For the system specs that JF-T listed.... hmmmm :)
The game will probably 'run'. That's a maybe, though. DirectX9 is a requirement and 2G is the minimum recommended system RAM. With only 512M of ram, the game will almost certainly want to swap on maps of any size. In my system I have 8G, and I have 1-2G free at any time because of all the dev tools I run. When I run the game it will use around 500M minimally during a mission. On a system with less memory it might not do that, but the trade off will be more aggressive garbage collection which will slow things down.
The GPU and CPU are also of large concern in JF-T's specs as well. CW3 maps tend to run in the neighborhood of 20000 cells large (that's a rough average for the story maps.... they go up to 65535 or higher for DMD and custom maps). CW1 maps were all 3360 cells. CW1 updated the creeper every 4 frames (if I remember right). CW3 does it every frame. CW3 has real time unit motions, target tracking, and a giant list of other things it does. There is digitalis, runners, CRPL cores, modifiable terrain (in real time)... All of these things want CPU time and they can also place demands on the GPU.
All that said, CW3 should still run fine on hardware that is way, way below the latest top end system gaming specs. Many business systems and many 'older' systems are just fine. My own desktop is 4 years old. So I don't want to give the impression that you need some monster gaming rig to play CW3. But, CW3 does want 'more' than the previous games because it delivers so much more.
My best advice will be to try the free demo that I will make available. If the demo runs super slow or not at all, then you will know your system needs to be paid a visit from the 21st century :)
Hahaha, AWeosme V, G and everyone else (not neccesarily of the alphabet... jsut kidding Hahaha) For the... well way more answers than I expected. I'll give the demo a shot once it's released... and then I'll get myself more RAM if needed, then I'll give the demo another shot... 500 times in a row xD
But yeah... thanks you guys, really kinda helps to have such helpful people here :)
Quote from: JF-T on September 03, 2013, 11:28:49 AM
Hahaha, AWeosme V, G and everyone else (not neccesarily of the alphabet... jsut kidding Hahaha) For the... well way more answers than I expected. I'll give the demo a shot once it's released... and then I'll get myself more RAM if needed, then I'll give the demo another shot... 500 times in a row xD
But yeah... thanks you guys, really kinda helps to have such helpful people here :)
If you do end up needing to upgrade, I'd really strongly consider just getting a new system at this point, unless you just absolutely can't afford it at this point in time and need to stretch your old system out as long as possible. I certainly wouldn't put any significant amount of money into trying to upgrade that old of a system. There are some very reasonable deals out there for low end computers that would still blow the doors off of what you have right now.
I dould be even more specific than asmussen. Do not put any more than $25 into that system. More than that is a waste of money.
Will keep that cloesly in mind G, I bet I could probly jsut build my own computer if it absolutely came down to it for probably firt cheap compared to getting 'em all and shipping it across canada or something.
NCIX is Canada's answer to Newegg. Prices are good and they often have specials same as Newegg. Don't hesitate to ask if you need advice.
Memory Express is also an excellent option here in Canada. I usually go between NCIX and ME depending on the better deal and whether shipping is free or not.
Newegg has an Canadian site as well and i've heard awesome things about NCIX too. I've got a buddy in Nova Scotia and he buys from both of them.