[Oreo]

Developer Treyarch has just revealed the minimum system requirements to play Call of Duty: World at War. The game is sheduled Q4 2008.

* CPU: AMD 64 3200+ / Intel Pentium 4 3.0GHz +
* Memory: 512MB (XP) or 1GB (Vista)
* HD Space: 8GB
* Graphical Card: Nvidia 6600GT/ATI Radeon 1600XT or higher (Shader 3.0 or better) with 256MB memory

-----


Again, a load of BS minimum requirements.. am sorry, but im pretty sure it will run like crap on that system. They shouldn't be allowed to suggest such low requirements.

[wafflehammer]

/agree

i think they should calculate the minimum to run by if it can get all medium settings at like 40fps on a good res....because anyone knows if you played at a game like that with a P4 on lowest it'd lag like crap lol

[vernong1992]

Originally Posted by Oreo

Developer Treyarch has just revealed the minimum system requirements to play Call of Duty: World at War. The game is sheduled Q4 2008.

* CPU: AMD 64 3200+ / Intel Pentium 4 3.0GHz +
* Memory: 512MB (XP) or 1GB (Vista)
* HD Space: 8GB
* Graphical Card: Nvidia 6600GT/ATI Radeon 1600XT or higher (Shader 3.0 or better) with 256MB memory

-----


Again, a load of BS minimum requirements.. am sorry, but im pretty sure it will run like crap on that system. They shouldn't be allowed to suggest such low requirements.

+ 1...

I wonder how my card would do on it... (actually my HD 3200 OC is around 6800gs level... so thats still not so good)

[gurusan]

I wonder what engine it uses....CoD4 was based on the aging Quake 4 engine....

[Oreo]

It uses the same CoD4 engine, but with a few extra things on top to make it look nicer.

My dad tried to play CoD4 what a 4200X2 and a the top 6800 (forgot what it's called) with 2gb ram. LOL - pretty bad fps. (Ok, he could of got an ok ~25 fps at 800x600 and the lowest settings)


So i admit, they do say minimum requirements. But they should do, "minimum requirements for a normal resolution and it be enjoyable."

[vernong1992]

6800 Vanilla? 6800GS? 6800GT? 6800 Ultra?

[Jorsoft]

They say "minimum" to appeal to lowest common denominator. if those reqs are too high then people who don't know any better may not buy the game at all, costing them sales. The publisher would much rather sell the game to some one and have it run like crap at lowest settings than not sell that copy at all. I can't believe they only said 512mb of ram, tho,for XP. The OS alone barely runs on that! That's pretty evil!

Recommended reqs, tho, can be a problem, because they seem to grossly under estimate those.

[ricanflow]

I never look at minimum or recommended reqs, benchmarks/demos give real world performance.

[Oreo]

Originally Posted by jorsoft03

They say "minimum" to appeal to lowest common denominator. if those reqs are too high then people who don't know any better may not buy the game at all, costing them sales. The publisher would much rather sell the game to some one and have it run like crap at lowest settings than not sell that copy at all. I can't believe they only said 512mb of ram, tho,for XP. The OS alone barely runs on that! That's pretty evil!

Recommended reqs, tho, can be a problem, because they seem to grossly under estimate those.

Most definitely.

There recommended gives you 20 to 30fps at low to medium settings.

Originally Posted by vernong1992

6800 Vanilla? 6800GS? 6800GT? 6800 Ultra?

6800Ultra Overclocked, i beleive.

[vernong1992]

Originally Posted by Oreo

Most definitely.

There recommended gives you 20 to 30fps at low to medium settings.



6800Ultra Overclocked, i beleive.

OH SHIP!!

You should be getting better performance than me then!