   Since when did games need EXTRA HIGHT performance to run?
King Kong Download Minimum System RequirementsSupported OS: Windows® XP (only) Processor: Pentium® IV 3.0 GHz or AMD 3000+ or betterRAM: 2 GBVideo Card: 3D 256 MB, supporting Pixel shader 3.0 and Vertex shader 3.0Sound Card: DirectX® 9.0C compatible, EAX 3.0DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0CHard Drive Space: 5.4 GBSource.Since when did games need so much ... power?  AMD 3000+?  I only have 2000+.  2 GB ram?  I thought 512 mb was enough, and 1 gb was good 'just in case'.  5.4 GB space?  Surely, I have that, 80 GB.  But on some people this is more than a half of their whole drive...I wonder, if this keeps up, what will the year 2020's games offer?  10 GB ram? 70 GB hardisk space?  DirectX 15?  AMD 20000+?EDIT:Whew...  It was only _HIGH_ res version.  The standard:King Kong Download Minimum System RequirementsSupported OS: Windows® 98SE/ME/2000/XP (only) Processor: 1.0 GHz AMD Athlon™ or Intel® Pentium® III (2.5 GHz Pentium IV or AMD Athlon™ recommended) RAM: 256 MB (512 MB recommended) Video Card: 64 MB DirectX® 8.1 compliant (128 MB recommended) (see supported list*) Sound Card: DirectX 8.1 compliant DirectX Version: DirectX 8.1 Hard Drive Space: 1.5 GB minimum The source is the same site.   
  Wow.  No one has 2GB of memory.  Seriously.  Their user base will be incredibly small.  And it isn't a trivial upgrade either, most 1GB people have 2*512MB.  That means trashing it all and getting 2*1GB.  Their game better be good.Edit:  It's the high res edition.  The low-res one has much more acceptable requirements.   ;  Sweet zombie jesus - pixel shader 3.0 required? Who on earth cuts their potential customers down to a small minority just for the sake of some shinier graphics? Either those are the recommended specs (which still seems high) or it's been a rush job.   ;  You know it is a special "good graphics" version right? The normal version is hereAlso I think what you estimated for 2020 is way below what will be expected in 2012.EDIT: Too late, you edited before I posted.   ;  Its called progress. I have 1.5gb of memory, could easily have 2. Not a big deal for a new game.   ;Quote:Original post by CHollman82Its called progress. I have 1.5gb of memory, could easily have 2. Not a big deal for a new game.Good for you, not all of us can easily upgrade every six months for new games. Heck, most people who play gmes would say "screw it" and stop playing games if it means having to spend an extra $100 for new hardware each new game.   ;Quote:Original post by CHollman82Its called progress. I have 1.5gb of memory, could easily have 2. Not a big deal for a new game.Ok...  So it seems that I am not 'progressing' [grin]!   ;  I have the recommended specs except for the video card and I'd need another 1GB stick of ram. 3.0Ghz processors have been out for over a year right? I don't think it is too much to ask for the high-end version. All this technology has been out for quite some time, so it isn't asking for too much.   ;  Yeah, all I am missing from those specs is the CPU and 512mb of memory. I am still working with an Athlon XP 2000+, I've been reluctant to update it as I haven't seen a need yet...   ;Quote:Original post by nprzI have the recommended specs except for the video card and I'd need another 1GB stick of ram. 3.0Ghz processors have been out for over a year right? I don't think it is too much to ask for the high-end version. All this technology has been out for quite some time, so it isn't asking for too much.The problem is, that not everybody upgrades every 6 months.  If you look really closely, in the next 6 months I bet a game would require 2.5 gb ram.  And (I think [smile]) nobody buys a new computer every 6 months either.   