Slashdot Mirror
Doom 3 System Requirements Revealed
The Llama King writes "The Houston Chronicle's Computing column has got the Doom 3 minimum system requirements. Biggest eye-opener: 384 MB of memory. Lots of mainstream PCs have been sold with 256 MB of RAM, so upgrades will be in order. RAM chip manufacturers should be salivating about now. You'll also need a 1.5-GHz processor and a GeForce 3 or Radeon 8500 graphics card or better."
is it just me or is anyone else suprised?
even the desktops i order at work come with more than the minimum requirements (1gb ram, 2.4+ processor, geforce 4 (or equiv)).
but i suppose this is minimum requirements...recommended will be much more.
When the first DOOM was released I had a few friends who said that needing a 486 PC just for a game was insane.
They upgraded after playing the game on someone else's PC.
Ooooh, you mean the Doom 3 interactive slide show? That sounds about right then.
How about top-of-the-line Pentium3 CPUs? 1.5GHz definitely means a P4 or a similar Celeron, but weren't the 1.x GHz P4 cpus actually slower than high end P3 CPUs?
So I'm wondering if DOOM3 would work on a high-end P3 system as I have a dual CPU P3 system with a GeForce FX 5200 card.
Banu
Is the Geforce 4 MX supported? I know that origionally Carmak wanted to require programable shaders, is that still the case, or did he relent and support the fixed function pipline that the Geforce 4 MX line inherited from the Geforce 2?
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
How does this equate to an AMD64 chip? I know they can run 32bit apps, but how fast would a 2Ghz AMD64 chip run Doom3 vs a new Pentium 3.2Ghz?
;)) performance.
I still have a 1.2Gig AMD box at home with 512Megs RAM, and I want to know which upgrade path will give me better gaming (and email checking
TIA
CGB
free ipod and free gmail!
I'm betting that playing Doom 3 on the "minimum required" system will be the easiest way to force people to upgrade their hardware.
Hell, I have 1 GB RAM and a GF4600, and I'm fully expecting the performance to be bad enough to force an upgrade on my part...
Wait a year and buy the same system used for two hundred bucks.
Sometimes patience really is a virtue.
KFG
I'll trade my little brother for a Radeon 9800XT before Doom3 hits the shelves! PLEASE!
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
I feel that the world will be an overall happier place if more people have more RAM.
Frankly, even if people may not realize it, they'll be *much* better off having more than 256 MB RAM. Dell etc. are definitely not benefitting their consumers by including only 256 mb ram in these behemoth computers people buy, especially if people are looking into doing serious photo editing, and DV. And if you are running XP, how can you expect to survive with 256? This is so frustrating...
P.S. Half-life 2 requirements, Gabe Newell:
Ideally, one should have a 2.4 Ghz processor, 512 MB of RAM, and a DirectX 9 enabled graphics card to fully partake in the title. Those with less powerful components shouldn't worry about upgrading unless their system specs fall below a 1.2 Ghz processor, 256 MB of RAM, and a DirectX 7 compatible graphics card.
Of course, when HL2 game was due to be publish 25 years ago, these requirements were insane.
------------------
Freedom or Evil: Freevil.net
G. W. Bush says, "You decide!"
486 processor operating at a minimum of 66MHz or any Pentium® /Athlon® processors
8 MB RAM
20 MB of uncompressed hard disk space
100MB of free hard drive space for the
Windows swap file (in addition to install space)
Seems like quite a jump for just one point.
This should be considered a minimum for LOADING the game. I've played most of the first person shooters out there for the last few years. 256MB of RAM, or even 384MB is too little. Even with a nice graphics card your framerates will be very very low. I think if anyone wants to play and enjoy any of the games lately you'll need a minimum of 512, and even at that you'll need a gig to be comfortable. I think id is in a position where they can't raise the bar to 512 because they'd lose out on sales of people buying the game that had less. I think these people will purchase the game and realize they need more and go out and buy it.
That's completely unreasonable, because it would require someone to buy a 256 MB module, a 128 MB Module, and a 2 MB module. What the hell were they thinking?
No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
http://www.linuxgames.com/news/feedback.php?identi ferID=6737&action=flatview/
till I find out what the min requirements for Duke Nukem Forever are.
Doom does use OpenGL, but DirectX version compliance levels are a convenient way to separate generations of cards. It's easier than posting a list of OpenGL extensions that must be supported.
Wait for the Xbox version to come out. An Xbox plus Doom 3 will set you back $200, plus tax. If you don't have anything against Microsoft's console, it's obviously the best choice.
Personally, I'm waiting for the Linux binary, since my Linux box it appears to have sufficient specs. I do regret that binary-only drivers (for my ATI or NVIDIA card) will probably be required.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
Here's a good article on the technology behind Doom 3.
Essentially, it's geared towards a technology set that's already fairly well established. It relies heavily on normal mapping to produce seemingly high-polygon models when they're actually quite low-polygon. This is all done in OpenGL and not DirectX. Personally, I think it speaks highly of the ID developers that they can make an engine that looks so good on so many PCs.
To play Doom, I remember having to boot my 386 without loading the TSRs....
</old man voice>
*hits nearest young'un with cane*
-fragbait
Upgrade for a game? Doesn't that increase the cost of the game? Games are expensive as it is, there's no reason they can't fit it in current common cases.
Games are made for people to play, not that people were made to play games. Games should fit current specifications, rather than demand more.
And then they wonder why sales are dismal.
Game consoles usually stay the same in each model, and games *must* work on them and cannot demand more. That's a good thing. It makes the developers do more with less. On PCs, people seem to do less with more. And that is a real problem.
Have you read my journal today?
Awww, such is the life of the PC gamer! In the old days, people would complain about these things, but the truth is that I think PC gamers live for this! I mean, who here doesn't like having an excuse to go out and seriously upgrade your rig?
Heck, I'm not even planning to get Doom 3, and I get all jittery just thinking about upgrading my old box, which is way overdue. But I've learned to wait until the game comes out and real people play on real systems, before doing any upgrade. That way you can get the right hardware and avoid any unforeseen incompatibilities.
Awww, the life of a PC Gamer...
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
Look, these days, there will be 2 main types of people that will buy this game.
1) Oldskool die-hard Doom lovers. These people have been around long enough that the concept of hardware upgrades is nothing new to them. Chances are they will currently have good enough hardware for Doom 3, or they will take it for granted that they will need an upgrade before they buy the game.
2) Newskool FPS gamer kids. They take their gaming pretty seriously, and having the latest hardware is pretty much a competitive issue to them. If you find any of these guys with less than 512mb of RAM or a 3D card older than a GeForce 3, chances are they don't have the money to buy Doom 3 anyway.
The hardware requirements stated are really light for a game of that genre, especially considering the target market. I think the poster is rather off-target by insinuating that this is a problem.
Today's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. -- Hunter S. Thompson
One thing I really admire about Carmack's work is just how much graphics he can deliver per unit of hardware.
This is not a fluke. The pattern for all his previous engines is that the most intensive parts are coded in optimized assembly. The rest is coded in C. He admits to using some object oriented practices in his code but he still uses C. Even custom scripting support is reasonably efficient.
Id also designs the games themselves to be reasonably efficient. (When was the last time you saw a true outdoor scene in an Id game? Outdoor scenes have so far been modeled as a special kind of interior.)
In contrast the heavier games some people have mentioned use liberal amounts of C++, (which makes sense from a project management perspective) their custom scripting languages slow things down yet more, and they render scenes which are inherently hardware intensive. They can also deliver high quality graphics, they simply need more hardware.
Now I just have to add my voice to those who wish that more thought was put into the content of the games themselves - so many people spending so much fantasy time focused on raw evil is not healthy.
O' my crisp 55 Dollars and my beautiful wife..
I bid thee both farewell, atleast for a while..
Now, to my 55 Dollars this is for ever..
To my lovely wife, this is a short respite..
My hard earned money, gotta let you go..
To fill the Coffers of Carmack and ID-eo
So that he maketh new game engines and new bump mapped creatures
And I, cowering in the dark, salivating at the games new features..
And to my dear wife, I will see you soon
But first I have to kiss my double barrel shotgun and my precious ammo
Before I can warm the sheets next to you
For here cometh the Cyberdemon and I gotta runnoo..
Rapid Nirvana
The Doom games were always a showcase for the engine's technology. It probably won't be for a year or two before developers that license the technology start hitting the full capabilities of the engine. When that happens, I look for the current minimum requirements to go up so plan accordingly for the games that will be built on the engine in the near future if you are going to upgrade your hardware. I think that the current recommended requirement will soon be the minimum when you see the next wave of games built on the technology that iD has created.
The extra memory might be used to store:
* More combinations of black, silver, and brown. Using primary colors would unfortunately require another 512MB.
* More darkness.
* An electrical simulation that emulates poor electrical conditions. This will be used to flicker lights on and off randomly.
* More wasted bullets.
* More random metal plating on the letters of the Doom logo.
* A somersault animation. When the Doomguy jumps, he'll backflip now.
* Crates. Lots of crates. With UAC logos on them for variety.
* Shiny metal pipes. Lots of them. At least one will explode as you walk by it; another will have steam coming out of it for a volumetric effect.
* At least one level will have you walking down a hallway only to hear a.) a human scream, b.) demonic growling, or c.) eerie whistling wind coming from an unseen source.
* A hidden TC of Barney Doom, for old time's sake. Destroy Barney in true 3D now.
* Did I mention black, gray, brown, and darkness?
There's no way in hell. Playing an FPS with a console-type controller instead of a keyboard is roughly equivalent to gouging out your own eyeballs, in terms of pain and frustration.
I remember the first time I tried Doom64 - UGH. Please. I'll stick to Mario, thanks.
Sure, there's bound to be a keyboard/mouse add-on for the XBox, but certainly not a cheap one. Factor in the karma burn for owning (nay, touching) an XBox and your effective cost has climbed far beyond that of a new CPU and some RAM.
...Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.
Churchill
OK. Just want to really quickly disspell some inaccuracies in your post, probably the result of believing Slashdot anti-Microsoft FUD.
try again - longhorn won't be out until at least 2007, and many are saying 2008 or later
Many on Slashdot are saying this -- many who have absolutely no frame of reference and no idea what they're talking about. Microsoft has always said Longhorn would be out in 2006. As far as I know, they're still saying 2006 and they're right on track for 2006, based on the work they've been showing. Expecting a machine to run two years from now is NOT absurd.
the "suggested" specs for a longhorn machine,
What you're talking about...the absurd specs of 4 GHz, terabyte of hard drive, etc...were disspelled as soon as Slashdot "reported" them. Right now, the recommended specs for a development build of Longhorn -- DEVELOPMENT, mind you, not "just running it" but actively writing, debugging and profiling software -- are 1.6GHz and 1GB of RAM, and suggested DirectX 9 support with 64MB of VRAM. Nearly identical speed to the Doom 3 requirements with a nice ram boost.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
Now I'll be able to run Doom 3 and Longhorn on the same system!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."