Linky
Well, aside from the Nvidia Titan, there is no graphics cards with 6 gigs of vram.
And the titan is slower than 780, 780ti, 980 and 290x
So yeah.
Time to sell a kidney or six.
Or you could just not play it on ultra settings.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hama wrote: Linky
Well, aside from the Nvidia Titan, there is no graphics cards with 6 gigs of vram.
And the titan is slower than 780, 780ti, 980 and 290x
So yeah.
Time to sell a kidney or six.
With a 4 card SLI setup, you can have the equivalent of 8 gigs of graphics RAM. That's of course you're willing to spend about 10 grand on the kind of system you'd need to build to have it work.
Fabius Maximus wrote: Or you could just not play it on ultra settings. I will let this blasphemy pass.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Will never understand how or why games are made with such over the top requirements. It's almost as if they are made for future generations to enjoy, not the current one.
They are made to look good. And sometimes looking that good requires stuff not yet out, but what will be out in a year or so. Because dev companies often get insider info on new tech being developed, like a new shader or something similar.
Crysis is a prime example. When made, it wasn't possible to run it on ultra on any gaming rig at the time.
Hama wrote: They are made to look good. And sometimes looking that good requires stuff not yet out, but what will be out in a year or so. Because dev companies often get insider info on new tech being developed, like a new shader or something similar.
Crysis is a prime example. When made, it wasn't possible to run it on ultra on any gaming rig at the time.
That's a lot of the point, I suspect. The higher end you make your "ultra" version, the longer your game will last before becoming outdated.
That said, not interested in this one, even if it would provide an excuse to buy a fancy new computer.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Hama wrote: Crysis is a prime example. When made, it wasn't possible to run it on ultra on any gaming rig at the time. Crysis is also known as the world's most expensive tech demo (at that time).
I don't understand the desire to always have to play games at maximum settings. If the game is good, graphics are only a nice accessory. If the game sucks, even the greatest graphics in the world will not save it.
Fabius Maximus wrote: Hama wrote: Crysis is a prime example. When made, it wasn't possible to run it on ultra on any gaming rig at the time. Crysis is also known as the world's most expensive tech demo (at that time).
I don't understand the desire to always have to play games at maximum settings. If the game is good, graphics are only a nice accessory. If the game sucks, even the greatest graphics in the world will not save it. Especially if the not quite maximum settings are as good as what you'll play instead.
Because I love my games to look beautiful, and the way they are meant to look.
Crysis actually had a pretty decent story.
Hama wrote: Because I love my games to look beautiful, and the way they are meant to look.
Given that the ultra's an optional extra download, I suspect the "high" setting is as much the way it's meant to look as anything else.
You obviously never played Skyrim on ultra with textures weighing more than the original install of the game.
So that obviously means Shadows of Mordor are at less graphically optimal settings on the consoles.
I'm still in the air if Shadows of Mordor will even be a good game.
Well of course. Even a year ago, a "next gen" console was inferior to a mid high end gaming PC. My battlefield 4 looked far better than what I saw on PS4 and XB1.
That gap will just widen as time passes.
GreyWolfLord wrote: So that obviously means Shadows of Mordor are at less graphically optimal settings on the consoles.
I'm still in the air if Shadows of Mordor will even be a good game.
Reviews have been very good.
Recent threads in Video Games
|
