So earlier this week Rockstar detailed the system requirements for Red Dead Redemption 2:
Minimum specifications:
OS: Windows 7 - Service Pack 1 (6.1.7601)
Processor: Intel Core i5-2500K / AMD FX-6300
Memory: 8GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB / AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB HDD
Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Recommended specifications:
OS: Windows 10 - April 2018 Update (v1803)
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
Memory: 12GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB / AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB HDD Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
While on paper, outside of the ridiculous HDD space requirement the specs aren't crazy. But after my experience with games like Quantum Break, and playing GTA V I have little faith the game will run THAT well.
Take GTA V system requirements (5 years later):
Minimum System Requirements:
It really irks me what publishers and developers set as "recommended" to play games. Because in actuality its generally not accurate to whats required to enjoy it as it was intended. Or maybe we can go so far to say that what each developer seems to believe is the intended experience doesn't always match with what gamers are looking for.
I like what Gearbox did with BorderLands 3. They put to run at <insert resolution here> and said what you need to achieve it. Personally I think developers need to go further mark which hardware you will need to see achieve specific resolutions with specific graphic preset and set FPS.
Such as ULTRA 1080P at 60
or ULTRA 1440P at 30
ect... no one does this though...
Minimum specifications:
OS: Windows 7 - Service Pack 1 (6.1.7601)
Processor: Intel Core i5-2500K / AMD FX-6300
Memory: 8GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB / AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB HDD
Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Recommended specifications:
OS: Windows 10 - April 2018 Update (v1803)
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
Memory: 12GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB / AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB HDD Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
While on paper, outside of the ridiculous HDD space requirement the specs aren't crazy. But after my experience with games like Quantum Break, and playing GTA V I have little faith the game will run THAT well.
Take GTA V system requirements (5 years later):
Minimum System Requirements:
- OS: Windows 8.1 64 Bit, Windows 8 64 Bit, Windows 7 64 Bit Service Pack 1
- Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (4 CPUs) / AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core Processor (4 CPUs) @ 2.5GHz
- Memory: 4GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA 9800 GT 1GB / AMD HD 4870 1GB (DX 10, 10.1, 11)
- Sound Card: 100% DirectX 10 compatible
- HDD Space: 65GB
- OS: Windows 8.1 64 Bit, Windows 8 64 Bit, Windows 7 64 Bit Service Pack 1
- Processor: Intel Core i5 3470 @ 3.2GHZ (4 CPUs) / AMD X8 FX-8350 @ 4GHZ (8 CPUs)
- Memory: 8GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA GTX 660 2GB / AMD HD7870 2GB
- Sound Card: 100% DirectX 10 compatible
- HDD Space: 65GB
It really irks me what publishers and developers set as "recommended" to play games. Because in actuality its generally not accurate to whats required to enjoy it as it was intended. Or maybe we can go so far to say that what each developer seems to believe is the intended experience doesn't always match with what gamers are looking for.
I like what Gearbox did with BorderLands 3. They put to run at <insert resolution here> and said what you need to achieve it. Personally I think developers need to go further mark which hardware you will need to see achieve specific resolutions with specific graphic preset and set FPS.
Such as ULTRA 1080P at 60
or ULTRA 1440P at 30
ect... no one does this though...