Computer System Requirements for SC2

[Kelly's Heroes]

I'm curious what the computer system requirements will be for this game.

Any idea?

[Kelly's Heroes]

Anyone want to hazard a guess? :confused:

Or do I need to break Enigma to find out?

[JerseyJohn]

I venture Pentium III minimum blah-blah

but ...

Pentium IV recommended ultra-blah-blah-blah capability for best results.

SC, as we all know, has very modest minimum requirements, but this looks like it requires a fairly fast system and a large memory if you create scenarios using the largest map.

[ April 16, 2004, 08:21 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Kelly's Heroes]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

I venture Pentium III minimum blah-blah

but ...

Pentium IV recommended ultra-blah-blah-blah capability for best results.

SC, as we all know, has very modest minimum requirements, but this looks like it requires a fairly fast system and a large memory if you create scenarios using the largest map.

Those system specs keep climbing. . .

Matrix's WaW (which is turn-based mind you) will require a 128MB video card and 512MB of RAM. . . :eek:

So we may have to do some computer upgrading as well. . .

[Yohan]

Originally posted by Kelly's Heroes:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

I venture Pentium III minimum blah-blah

but ...

Pentium IV recommended ultra-blah-blah-blah capability for best results.

SC, as we all know, has very modest minimum requirements, but this looks like it requires a fairly fast system and a large memory if you create scenarios using the largest map.

Those system specs keep climbing. . .

Matrix's WaW (which is turn-based mind you) will require a 128MB video card and 512MB of RAM. . . :eek:

So we may have to do some computer upgrading as well. . . </font>

[Kelly's Heroes]

Originally posted by Yohan:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Kelly's Heroes:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

I venture Pentium III minimum blah-blah

but ...

Pentium IV recommended ultra-blah-blah-blah capability for best results.

SC, as we all know, has very modest minimum requirements, but this looks like it requires a fairly fast system and a large memory if you create scenarios using the largest map.

Those system specs keep climbing. . .

Matrix's WaW (which is turn-based mind you) will require a 128MB video card and 512MB of RAM. . . :eek:

So we may have to do some computer upgrading as well. . . </font>

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

I like SC in that it is a modest game with a file size footprint that almost should be called a toeprint.

I have a 40 gig hard drive, so what, I am not overly impressed with flashy games that insist on all manner of pretty graphics that think my hard drive is endless.

I am also eqipped with an 800 celeron with a 256 meg ram set up and I have a 32 meg radeon 7000 PCI video card.

I am NOT planning on replacing any of this in the next 5 years.

If Combat Leader won't run on this machine, I will stick with Steel Panthers, a game with no real flaws worth comment.

If Gary's need global game won't run on this machine, I won't buy it.

If SC2 won't run excellently, I won't buy it either.

I am also unlikely to change my mind.

My current stash of wargames includes SC for grand strategy, TOAW for Operational WW2 till present.

I have all the Panzer General series for simple easy Operational.

I have Steel Panthers for tactical. And I just recently got HTTR for a more localised operational fix with the novel real time that counts for something.

I have a tank driving sim in the form of Panzer Commander, and I have Squad Assault for a 3d thing (although I tend to just fiddle with it when I visit a buddy with a better machine as mine just doesn't quite cut it).

I ain't suffering here for wargames.

The idea of me spending a lot of money upgrading the video ram or processor is, well, stupid.

As it currently stands, my computer is already able to do everything I want it to do.

I am not worried that SC2 will be moronically enhanced beyond a 800 Celeron, but if it should happen, I will make the logical choice, and just shut up, go away, and play something else.

[Arngrim]

OT

To kelly's Heroes:

You mentioned in another thread that Matrix were releasing EiA as a computer game.

Is this Empires in Arms, the Napoleonic boardgame that will be converted?

If so: Pretty please will you mail me a link, can't find Matrix via google.

Cheers

Arngrim

Edit: typo's due to drooling

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

Can't find Matrix ?

That's like totally weird

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=26

That's their EIA forum (if this is the first person to get that to ya ).

Or their main home page is...

http://www.matrixgames.com/

[Kelly's Heroes]

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:

I like SC in that it is a modest game with a file size footprint that almost should be called a toeprint.

I have a 40 gig hard drive, so what, I am not overly impressed with flashy games that insist on all manner of pretty graphics that think my hard drive is endless.

I am also eqipped with an 800 celeron with a 256 meg ram set up and I have a 32 meg radeon 7000 PCI video card.

I am NOT planning on replacing any of this in the next 5 years.

If Combat Leader won't run on this machine, I will stick with Steel Panthers, a game with no real flaws worth comment.

If Gary's need global game won't run on this machine, I won't buy it.

If SC2 won't run excellently, I won't buy it either.

I am also unlikely to change my mind.

My current stash of wargames includes SC for grand strategy, TOAW for Operational WW2 till present.

I have all the Panzer General series for simple easy Operational.

I have Steel Panthers for tactical. And I just recently got HTTR for a more localised operational fix with the novel real time that counts for something.

I have a tank driving sim in the form of Panzer Commander, and I have Squad Assault for a 3d thing (although I tend to just fiddle with it when I visit a buddy with a better machine as mine just doesn't quite cut it).

I ain't suffering here for wargames.

The idea of me spending a lot of money upgrading the video ram or processor is, well, stupid.

As it currently stands, my computer is already able to do everything I want it to do.

I am not worried that SC2 will be moronically enhanced beyond a 800 Celeron, but if it should happen, I will make the logical choice, and just shut up, go away, and play something else.

I fully agree Les.

It's bad enough that Matrix's WaW (a turn-based game) will require a 128MB graphics card and 512 MB of RAM. These are system requirements, BTW, that not even the most graphic intensive 3D First Person Shooter, requires a person to have, in order to play :eek:

But I find it interesting that no one from Battlefront has commented on the system requirements for SC2.

If SC2 is aimed just at wargamers (via online only availability), then with sky-high system specs for SC2 (which this seems to indicate), they will lose a lot of their customers, because few people (especially wargamers) will spend hundreds of dollars on a computer upgrade just to play one game.

Wargamers are a vocal bunch.

I also expect that Battlefront will lock this thread too

[ April 17, 2004, 11:28 AM: Message edited by: Kelly's Heroes ]

[JerseyJohn]

"I also expect that Battlefront will lock this thread too"

Kelly, you evil influence, laughed like hell at those photos you posted but that's what got the other one locked -- as I correctly called in that last post.

-- Naturally I rightfully claim complete innocence in the matter.

My other call was wrong, the F. B. I. hasn't come for me yet. Bunch of slackers.

Mainly it's off-topic photos that get things locked. If they'd have been baby pictures of someone like von Rundtstedt or Patton, then who knows, perhaps ...

I doubt they'll lock this as long is keeps discussing the thread topic.

If you want to post things like those baby photos you ought to do it at Comrade Trapp's site, it was set up to have things that would be locked up at BF, we even have our own online psychiatrist!

Here's the link:

< Comrade's Haven for the Sanity Challenged >

As for the subject at hand, I've narrowed my estimate down a bit, I think it will require half a gig free RAM and P-IV @1700 clip to operate smoothly, but probably it will also run, in a chunky manner, at much lower capabilities.

[ April 17, 2004, 11:34 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Kelly's Heroes]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

"I also expect that Battlefront will lock this thread too"

Kelly, you evil influence, laughed like hell at those photos you posted but that's what got the other one locked -- as I correctly called in that last post. My other call was wrong, the F. B. I. hasn't come for me yet.

Mainly it's off-topic photos that get things locked. If they'd have been baby pictures of someone like von Rundtstedt or Patton, then who knows, perhaps ...

I doubt they'll lock this as long is keeps discussing the thread topic.

If you want to post things like those baby photos you ought to do it at Comrade Trapp's site, it was set up to have things that would be locked up at BF, we even have our own online psychiatrist!

Here's the link:

< Comrade's Haven for the Sanity Challenged >

As for the subject at hand, I've narrowed this idea down a bit, I think it will require half a gig free RAM and P-IV @1700 clip to really operate smoothly, but probably it will also run, in a chunky manner, at much lower capabilities.

JerseyJohn:

Heheh

Glad you and others had a good laugh.

I thought that thread needed a little levity. It was starting to get a bit heavy.

A thread is locked because of baby pics? The most innocent of God's creation?

Personally, I expected that thread to get locked long before I posted those baby pics. I think they were just an excuse to lock it.

Any who, it was worth it to give my fellow wargamers a hearty chuckle

Thanks for the link. I'll have to pay a visit and see what's happening.

As to system specs: If we are looking at very high system requirements, then SC2 will only be playable on the most cutting-edge computer. This will mean either a major upgrade or a new computer altogether.

Yet, from the screenshots of SC2, it really doesn't look that graphic intensive a game. Compare screenshots between the maps of SC2 and CivII and they look very similar. Even maps in Civ II which were 256x256 in size would run on a simple Pentium computer.

Cheers!

[ April 17, 2004, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: Kelly's Heroes ]

[JerseyJohn]

Excellent, looking forward to seeing you there.

-- Babies, innocent? Well, sure, except to Stephen King -- remember that one where he had a killer baby crawling around the house with a knife. If he had a site I guess the only things being locked would be posts that weren't quite deranged enough to meet his standards.

Yeah, you're probably right about the graphics, after seeing a few things run like sludge I went out a couple of years ago and bought a new computer that's still pretty good at least for now, paid cash which was good because a week later I was invited to be unemployed in this wonderful ever expanding economy -- but that's one for the general forum, my point is people should go out and buy a new computer before they're downsized!

I felt the expanded AI and also the greatly increased volume of data would put a real burden on system resources. It would be better if it didn't but I can say the same about pigeons refusing to fertilize my yard with gold nuggets.

It will be interesting to get a hint from Hubert about all this. No, not the gold dunging pigeons, the other thing.

[Kelly's Heroes]

You're right. I forgot how evil babies can be. Those goos and gaaaws are all an act. They are slyly plotting behind the scenes. . . just biding their time. . .

Sorry about you being laid off. At least now you can enjoy your new computer It's their loss anyway. . .

If you look at screenshots of SC2 and even Matrix's WaW, you'll notice that the maps are not that cutting edge. Especially, when you compare the terrain to games like CivII and AoE.

The only reason that they would be more graphic intensive would be because they are perhaps moving to 32 bit or even 64 bit resolution.

Doing this (in my mind at least), doesn't really seem to have improved the look of the maps or the game. It jacks up the computer requirements exponentially, without adding much in the way of eye candy.

Any way you look at it, it will require mega computing power to run. . .

[ April 17, 2004, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: Kelly's Heroes ]

[Hubert Cater]

But I find it interesting that no one from Battlefront has commented on the system requirements for SC2.

I guess this would be a question I need to answer

Ok, not sure how we got into astronomical spec numbers here, but the base system that I have been using for minimum requirement testing is a 500 Mhz CPU, with 16 MB Video Card and 128 MB of RAM, so anything around there should be fine.

Note: this is on Windows 9x/ME systems as 2000/XP systems require a little more than that by default... well XP does for sure!

Hope this helps,

Hubert

[Kelly's Heroes]

Originally posted by Hubert Cater:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

But I find it interesting that no one from Battlefront has commented on the system requirements for SC2.

I guess this would be a question I need to answer

Ok, not sure how we got into astronomical spec numbers here, but the base system that I have been using for minimum requirement testing is a 500 Mhz CPU, with 16 MB Video Card and 128 MB of RAM, so anything around there should be fine.

Note: this is on Windows 9x/ME systems as 2000/XP systems require a little more than that by default... well XP does for sure!

Hope this helps,

Hubert </font>

[Les the Sarge 9-1]

Cool HC thanks for commenting, I was not expecting our game to go rediculous, but I don't making rash assumptions either.

As for locks, hmm, I will only say what I said elsewhere, a lack of moderators being moderators (without worrying about being moderators) while potentially annoying, is also better than what happened to Wargamer (which currently holds no interest for me any more).

[JerseyJohn]

Hubert

Excellent -- as always we never lost faith!

Kelly

That's pretty much what happened, I was planning to start something on my own anyway and the new computer with all the extras purchased in a fit of insanity were put to immediate use. The money isn't as good as it was before and there are no benefits, but I get to sit at the monitor all the time and squint at the screen. Occasionally I ask the boss for a raise and she just glares at me over supper. Babies, damn right, they've been perpetuating the woes of the human race since, hmmmm?

[Herr Kruger]

To Hubert :

All I can say is ... thank you! My system is a PIII 450 Mhz with 192 MB RAM and a 32 MB ATI Rage Fury. Hopefully I'll be able to play!

J Kruger