Game or Patch Questions? Call of duty ghosts x86 patch i have a problem with Call Of Duty Ghosts when it Wait for a patch or someting Ghosts 32 bit Crack allow you to run the Call Of Duty. Is a lot of things (a game, a shooter, a faithful recreation of Michael Bay’s entire filmography), but a graphical powerhouse isn’t one of them. Visuals aside, it doesn’t seem particularly demanding in other fields of warring and faceness either. Relatively small enemy counts, linear levels, simple AI, etc. So when a 6GB RAM requirement sneaked up and shouted, “BOO,” most players were more confused than frightened. But now, much like a ghost or an entirely unnecessary wall put in place to boost trumpetings of “next-gen”-ness, that barrier has disappeared. A new, rather sizable update has dropped Ghosts’ RAM requirement to 4GB – which is still entirely silly, given that requiring a certain standard at all is a massive misstep. Maybe it’ll run sub-optimally on some machines, but so what? At least players with low-to-mid-range machines would have the option of trying it out at all. Still though, I guess Activision’s decision to bite off a couple gigabytes is something. The patch includes a couple handy bells and whistles, too. A broadcaster mode, eSports rules, and a 4K display option are now in, so you can play Call of Duty: Ghosts pretty much any way you want (unless you are one of many millions who fall outside an arbitrary RAM restriction). Is anyone still playing this? Is the multiplayer any different this time? Grey Poupon says: It’s not only ram, it’s system memory in general. Meaning a 1GB GPU will reduce the ram the OS (or program) can use to 3GB (rest of the peripherals mostly have an arbitrarily small amount of memory). It’s not something you can just patch out as it comes with the 32-bit memory address space. Physical Address Extension makes the OS able to use up to 64 GB, but programs will still use 32-bit addresses meaning they will still cap out at 4 GB that’s shared between RAM and VRAM. That said, I’m guessing the requirement of Ghosts is more about trying to call it a Crysis than it actually being one. It’ll probably run with less. Bull0 says: Who doesn’t have 4GB of ram in their games machine now? I think it’s better they try to dissuade people from buying the game if they aren’t going to be able to run it properly. “Letting people try it” means letting people drop £40 on it only to find out it’s unplayable on their machine? What use is that to anybody? It’s just call of duty, it’s not like you need a demo to know what you’re in for. *edit* That said, 6GB was always over the top, and it’s good they’ve removed that. They need to work seriously on optimizing the game – it’s visually quite hard to distinguish from Blops 2 (but the differences ARE there) so it’s hard to understand why it compares so badly in performance terms. Low Life says: You misunderstand what Nathan’s saying – it’s perfectly fine to report system requirements, such as “Minimum 4 GB RAM”, on the game box or on a store page. People see that and they can figure out if they should buy the game or not. What CODGHOSTS does is that it refuses to launch the game if its arbitrary check for RAM size doesn’t pass. The user bought the game, dropping £40 on it only to find out it’s unplayable on their machine – except in this case it’s literally unplayable, not stuttery unplayable. Nothing has been done to dissuade the player from buying the game, just from playing it. Bull0 says: I haven’t misunderstood anything at all, I fully understand that the game doesn’t run if you don’t meet the arbitrary RAM requirements. It’s right there on the store page that the minimum system requirement is 6GB ram, I thought it was pretty common knowledge that the game flat wouldn’t run without it. Everyone was talking about it in the run-up to launch. That’s dissuading people from buying the game, in my opinion, but it’s semantic, you can argue it either way. Nathan’s alternative is not to have the functionality, so people aren’t dissuaded from buying it even when it might not run well enough to be worth the money. That’s apparently better, because more people would spend £40 on an already not that great game that then runs like crap on their PC into the bargain. I’m not misunderstanding, I’m disagreeing. Low Life says: “It’s right there on the store page that the minimum system requirement is 6GB ram, I thought it was pretty common knowledge that the game flat wouldn’t run without it.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
September 2018
Categories |