Updated Specs, Features Revealed For 'Call Of Duty: WWII' On PC

[heirdeux]

You can begin the preloading process today.

Updated Specs, Features Revealed For 'Call Of Duty: WWII' On PC : Read more

 

[ern88]

Wonder if it will be good. I'll wait for some reviews before buying it.

 

[TechyInAZ]

90GB!!! That would take me 3 nights to download.

 

[dstarr3]

90GB!!! That would take me 3 nights to download.

Well, I'm sure that'd compress to a mere 2-night download.

 

[mahanddeem]

Frames cap up to 250 seems good. Looking forward to it.

 

[TechyInAZ]

90GB!!! That would take me 3 nights to download.

Well, I'm sure that'd compress to a mere 2-night download.

Oh i thought that was the full download. Ok that makes sense, so it's more like 60GB of something?

 

[dstarr3]

90GB!!! That would take me 3 nights to download.

Well, I'm sure that'd compress to a mere 2-night download.

Oh i thought that was the full download. Ok that makes sense, so it's more like 60GB of something?

Not sure, it varies from game to game. But yeah, the download size is always smaller than the install size because of compression. Download size could be half the install size easy. I've seen games that download 1GB and decompress to 9GB.

 

[artk2219]

You can begin the preloading process today.

Updated Specs, Features Revealed For 'Call Of Duty: WWII' On PC : Read more

I wonder if it will play with any of AMD's FX chips or not, an FX 9590 is roughly like an r5 1400. Actually, those specs are kind of weird, a Ryzen 1600x would ROFL stomp an i5 2400, heck even the r5 1400 would do that, yet that's the minimum spec? An FX 8350 should do the same to an I3 3225 in anything even semi decently threaded, or even an FX 6300 or 6350. Maybe the game is completely unoptimized for AMD hardware?

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1267

 

[ceeblueyonder]

the multiplayer maps are even tinier than ever before.

 

[derekullo]

This will be Activision's 5th Call of Duty's rehashing World War 2 released for Windows (10th WW2 shooter total if you include other systems)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_II_first-person_shooters

The first Call of Duty was in 2003 and with 5 Call of Duty's released since then it breaks down to a WW2 game every 3.4 years, not including either of the Modern Warfare's.

Do we really need a new World War 2 game every 3.4 years (1.7 years)?

Call of Duty:WW2 is almost a pun on how repetitive Call of Duty is seeing how the vast majority of the other titles were also based during World War 2.


On a different note, wasn't the point of gaming on an ultra-wide monitor to get an unfair advantage?

 

[The Paladin]

derekullo : dont like WWII games, dont buy it.. personally I prefer WWII or WWI game over those walk on walls and such unrealistic bling that should always remain on a Xbox.

the point of this game is that the promise that groups and clans can again have private servers with their own preferred gaming rules; Crouch and ADS for example over the commonly Xbox generation run and gun bunny hopping player.

pre-orders months ago, and just can wait to get the clan server running.

 

[humorific]

This will be Activision's 5th Call of Duty's rehashing World War 2 released for Windows (10th WW2 shooter total if you include other systems)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_II_first-person_shooters

The first Call of Duty was in 2003 and with 5 Call of Duty's released since then it breaks down to a WW2 game every 3.4 years, not including either of the Modern Warfare's.

Do we really need a new World War 2 game every 3.4 years (1.7 years)?

Call of Duty:WW2 is almost a pun on how repetitive Call of Duty is seeing how the vast majority of the other titles were also based during World War 2.


On a different note, wasn't the point of gaming on an ultra-wide monitor to get an unfair advantage?

A "realistic" Korean contemporary or 1950s style game would be more appealing right now. And what's with the DX11 only renderer? That's like retro on the tech too.

 

[Th3pwn3r]

Yeah, the first two COD games were fun. After that they all felt like the same garbage mixed into a pile in slightly different ways. I don't think they'll ever stop making them though.

 

[SkyBill40]

I don't see any real reason as to why my 8350 @ 4.5 wouldn't run this... not that I really have any vested interest.

 

[papality]

This will be Activision's 5th Call of Duty's rehashing World War 2 released for Windows (10th WW2 shooter total if you include other systems)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_II_first-person_shooters

The first Call of Duty was in 2003 and with 5 Call of Duty's released since then it breaks down to a WW2 game every 3.4 years, not including either of the Modern Warfare's.

Do we really need a new World War 2 game every 3.4 years (1.7 years)?

Call of Duty:WW2 is almost a pun on how repetitive Call of Duty is seeing how the vast majority of the other titles were also based during World War 2.


On a different note, wasn't the point of gaming on an ultra-wide monitor to get an unfair advantage?

World at War came out in 2008...?

 

[ubercake]

Just like all other Call of Duty titles expect celebrity endorsements and the best in the cut scenes. Game play will be blah.

 

[kookykrazee]

90GB or even half that would take me a week, IF I am lucky with my maxed out 1.5mbps line 🙁

 

[esco_sid]

90GB or even half that would take me a week, IF I am lucky with my maxed out 1.5mbps line 🙁

Prob take me no time at all on my google gig connection haha but wont be getting this game

 

[TechyInAZ]

90GB or even half that would take me a week, IF I am lucky with my maxed out 1.5mbps line 🙁

LOL those are days where you go to your local coffee shop to download the entire game. 😛