PSU PC System Requirements on Sega JP site !

[PhotonCat]

http://segadirect.jp/Catalog/CustomPages/CustomDetail2.aspx?File=psu.htm

If you scroll down they list the PC requirements. They are pretty low as I expected.

Heres a re-cap of what they list:
Win 2000/XP
P4 1.6 GHZ
256 MB RAM
8 GB HDD space
Video card needing 64 MB or more.
BB is required and so is a DVD drive.

Although I can see them making the game AMD compatible when it is released in North America.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: PhotonCat on 2005-11-26 14:40 ]</font>

[Eihwaz]

Haha, these system requirements aren't that bad. I mean, damn, my current computer could run PSU (though, I'd have to clean up about 4-5 gigs of space in order to meet the 8 gigs requirements), though the computer I'm planning to get soon could run it better.

I wonder if these requirements are gonna change as the game gets closer to being done?

[Sinue_v2]

BB is required and so is a DVD drive.

I guess we can make the safe assumption that if BroadBand is required for the PC version, that the PS2 version will also be BroadBand only.

[DamonKatu]

I have a good connection its just I need to clean the junk out of my computer and the 8 gig im not sure of. This is a good game but I think this game might hog space even to a powerful computer.

[vox3om]

what do you mean by needing BB???

[DamonKatu]

On 2005-11-26 17:48, vox3om wrote:
what do you mean by needing BB???



Broudband, a 56 kbs connection like earthlink or AOL that makes surfing the internet faster. The game is so big that the connection require a big connection to load properly. Lots of things load over the internet to recieve the information you need from players online to status and other game events.

[DarK-SuN]

Nice requirements, hopefully because they actually made a nice optimization of the PC version's code.

So nice, in fact, that I may not have to resort to my laptop to play PSU, my PC may be more than enough for it (with some effects turned off).

Who am I kidding. http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gif
I'll want to have everything at maximum quality, so I'll use the laptop anyway, just means I'll be able to do quick runs with my PC in case I can't use my laptop at the time.

Alternatively (since it seems the Sega Link ID is shared for PC and PS2 versions of PSU, hinting at cross platform abilities), I'll just use a PS2 version when I can't access my PC nor my laptop.

[F-o-x]

One quick question... is it possible for a US compuer to play JP PSU? Not a big PC gamer so I have no idea if there are regions or anything on PC games like there are on console games.

I've been saying I want it on PS2 but if I can play the JP version on my computer I might consider importing. Then I'll just buy the US PS2 version when it comes out as well ><

[Ryna]

On 2005-11-26 18:21, F-o-x wrote:
One quick question... is it possible for a US compuer to play JP PSU? Not a big PC gamer so I have no idea if there are regions or anything on PC games like there are on console games.

I've been saying I want it on PS2 but if I can play the JP version on my computer I might consider importing. Then I'll just buy the US PS2 version when it comes out as well ><


Theoretically you should be able to play the JP PC version. People were able to do that with the JP version of Blue Burst.

However, it is unknown if the JP and US servers will be linked. As such, you maybe forced to start over when the US version comes out.

[F-o-x]

However, it is unknown if the JP and US servers will be linked.

Ahhh yeah I'd forgotten about that. I'll wait and see about the language option and if the servers are going to be linked or not before I make my decision I suppose.

[Parn]

The only thing that irritates me is our inability to pre-order through Sega Direct, due to their unwillingness to ship internationally. Which means we miss out on whatever extra pre-order bonus they're offering through Sega Direct. Bleh. This sucks, since I'm more than happy to give them my oily, grubby American money.

I wish they'd change their minds... Falcom ships internationally, why won't Sega?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Parn on 2005-11-26 19:09 ]</font>

[vox3om]

[/quote]

Broudband, a 56 kbs connection like earthlink or AOL
[/quote]

HAHA I thought that meant that you need Blue Burst or something. I was like CRAP! http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[DamonKatu]

On 2005-11-26 20:01, vox3om wrote:




Broudband, a 56 kbs connection like earthlink or AOL
[/quote]

HAHA I thought that meant that you need Blue Burst or something. I was like CRAP! http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[/quote]

ROFL ur wacky...but having you around is a blast

[Shade-]

Can any PC junkies guess what kinds of cards would be needed to run a game with those min specs at max settings?

I'd like to run it at 1280 x 1024 With allefects ect on, and have a decent enough framerate. right now I've got a 6800 GT in my rig, which I KNOW can handle a game like this, but I'm considering swapping with my roommate for his 6600 GT and $150-200 to make up the difference. is the 6600gt going to dissapoint me on this? any guesses?

[vox3om]

Well I can't tell you others...but I can tell you that mine will most definitly run it. I have a RADEON X550. I think...I'm running 512MB RAM, 240GB HDD MEM, 3.2GHz processor...and...a piece of crap 15' DELL monitor HAHA http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_ak.gif DELL



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: vox3om on 2005-11-26 20:52 ]</font>

[Alisha]

On 2005-11-26 18:03, DamonKatu wrote:


On 2005-11-26 17:48, vox3om wrote:
what do you mean by needing BB???



Broudband, a 56 kbs connection like earthlink or AOL that makes surfing the internet faster. The game is so big that the connection require a big connection to load properly. Lots of things load over the internet to recieve the information you need from players online to status and other game events.



eh i was under the impression that broadband ment cable or dsl?

[Para]

I thought broadband was dsl and cable o_O

[Shade-]

On 2005-11-26 20:51, vox3om wrote:
Well I can't tell you others...but I can tell you that mine will most definitly run it. I have a RADEON X550. I think...I'm running 512MB RAM, 240GB HDD MEM, 3.2GHz processor...and...a piece of crap 15' DELL monitor HAHA http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_ak.gif DELL




No offense, but my PC trounces yours in every catagory (ok, not necessarily trounces). So the rest of the PC wont bottleneck the game in the least. The 6600gt preforms decently on current PC games like HL2 and BF2 at that resolution on high settings, and with AA/AF on, it runs between 30-60 fps depending on the game. Now, 30 fps might be a little low for an FPS, but a game like PSU I wouldn't think would need much over 30 fps anyway. So I guess I just answered my own question. Unless PSU is going to be as demanding as FEAR (pretty much pushes the 6600gt over the edge) and needing a framerate over 30-ish, the 6600gt should be alright for me.

[ShadowSonic]

32MB laptop graphics card nuuuuuuuuuuuu! ;_;


Guess I won't be getting this game for a while http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif

[Blitzkommando]

Well, it all depends really. On a number of factors as to how well it will run. Firstly, the 6600GT should run it fine, from the graphics side. The main problem is the AI and all the CPU activity that is going to be going on. For examle, I was doing an extremely CPU intensive mod for Half-Life 2 today, about 40 or so AI at once including a helocopter and Strider, both of which are extremely complex in multiple ways. Anyway, with the activity going on, I was getting about 10FPS, with the AI disabled, it shot up to around 60. In other words, I'm not sure how complex the AI is going to be in PSU, or how all the interactivity is going to be, and depending on how well optomized it is, it could be CPU bottlenecking more than graphics.

Which, really, that's what's happening more right now anyway. I mean, the newest cards by nVidia and ATi are far more advanced in processing than the processors themselves. Thus, until you start hitting ultra-high resolutions (greater than 1600x1200) you are going to suffer more from a CPU bottleneck, than from the graphics card bottleneck. Even with the AMD Athlon FX57 you will notice this (Though it takes a lot more to do it with that than say my old P4 2.533GHz). And, based that this game is likely not nearly as graphically tasking as say, FEAR, a processor holdup would be less noticable because the graphics is already so tasking that it lowers the framerate.

This is all speculation, but, seeing that it is seeming more and more likely to be compatable with PS2 I have a feeling this will not be nearly as demanding as other modern games. Heck, I'm pretty sure it will run great on a 2.0GHz P4 with an old 9600 Pro just fine with decent mid-quality settings. I imagine that anything with any hint of modern equipment is going to just tear this game to shreads. Plus, if it is anything like PSOPC or PSOBB were then it will have a 30FPS cap meaning there becomes a point where better hardware won't get any better results because it will all run it at max.

[Shade-]

On 2005-11-26 22:21, Norvekh wrote:
Well, it all depends really. On a number of factors as to how well it will run. Firstly, the 6600GT should run it fine, from the graphics side. The main problem is the AI and all the CPU activity that is going to be going on. For examle, I was doing an extremely CPU intensive mod for Half-Life 2 today, about 40 or so AI at once including a helocopter and Strider, both of which are extremely complex in multiple ways. Anyway, with the activity going on, I was getting about 10FPS, with the AI disabled, it shot up to around 60. In other words, I'm not sure how complex the AI is going to be in PSU, or how all the interactivity is going to be, and depending on how well optomized it is, it could be CPU bottlenecking more than graphics.

Which, really, that's what's happening more right now anyway. I mean, the newest cards by nVidia and ATi are far more advanced in processing than the processors themselves. Thus, until you start hitting ultra-high resolutions (greater than 1600x1200) you are going to suffer more from a CPU bottleneck, than from the graphics card bottleneck. Even with the AMD Athlon FX57 you will notice this (Though it takes a lot more to do it with that than say my old P4 2.533GHz). And, based that this game is likely not nearly as graphically tasking as say, FEAR, a processor holdup would be less noticable because the graphics is already so tasking that it lowers the framerate.

This is all speculation, but, seeing that it is seeming more and more likely to be compatable with PS2 I have a feeling this will not be nearly as demanding as other modern games. Heck, I'm pretty sure it will run great on a 2.0GHz P4 with an old 9600 Pro just fine with decent mid-quality settings. I imagine that anything with any hint of modern equipment is going to just tear this game to shreads. Plus, if it is anything like PSOPC or PSOBB were then it will have a 30FPS cap meaning there becomes a point where better hardware won't get any better results because it will all run it at max.



Considering it has to run the same game engine on a PS2, I'd think that a AMD Athlon 46 3800+ (2.4 gh) would run it just fine (/)

[Mystil]

I do find the DVD drive requirement to be funny.



On 2005-11-26 21:18, Nites wrote:
I thought broadband was dsl and cable o_O



Of course it's a mistake in that post =p. Yes broadband = cable/dsl.

[Blitzkommando]

On 2005-11-27 15:20, Silhouette wrote:
I do find the DVD drive requirement to be funny.
That's a good sign though. It means no more switching discs during install. Many games are going that way because it is cheaper to produce 1 DVD for the work of 5 CDs. That and you can get a simple DVD-ROM drive for, well, free often times.

[kazuma56]

thats cool, but does this mean the PC and PS2 servers are connected?

[uhawww]

On 2005-11-27 17:14, kazuma56 wrote:
thats cool, but does this mean the PC and PS2 servers are connected?



Well, as far as it's conjectured, there's no seperate SEGAlink ID registration for PC or PS2, so it may be less a matter of PC or PS2, as US/EU/JP...
of course, when registering the application when you get it, it may just seperate apples from oranges...no way to tell as of yet...

[Para]

Hmm DVD ROM requirement...

good thing I upgraded my computer got a new DVD ROM http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime1.gif
(not that i never had a DVD ROM before but this one is better http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif)

Well it may be possible to have linked servers between JP and ENG this time because if there are no updates... then there wouldn't be any reason against linking technically. BB JP and BB ENG had to be seperate because different content available. Obviously back then when BB ENG came out... BB JP players should not be allowed to connect because BB ENG didn't have the updates for Episode IV stuff.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Nites on 2005-11-27 18:33 ]</font>

[GaijinPUnch]

I'm going to speculate that they'll be seperate. It's just a hunch, but we've seen characters with kana in their names, and from what I understand, the state of BB-JP and BB-US are polar opposites. That's probably going to affect their decision this time around. Again, just speculation.

[lostinseganet]

These are my specs
Case- Lion Li PL-6 alumuim case
Mobo- tyan tiger MP Rev.3 (dual Processors)
Procs- Dual athlon MP 1600+
Ram- 1 gig PL2100 Registered
Video Card-Geforce 6800 non-ultra (128 megs) AGP
Sound Card Turtle Beach Santa Cruz
Firewire card (4 ports)
USB 2.0 (4 ports)
8 gigabyte WD 8reg cache HDD
Antec Truepaual 350 watt PSU
Ethernet card
CD-ROM Drive
OS- (Microsoft XP)
Everything is ok expect the processors. I have 1.4 when I need 1.6Gz. I hope I can still play it.

[Para]

When AMD processors are rated 1600+
It means that it can run at the same speed of a standard processor that has 1.6ghz.

AMD technology is based on that through the smaller use of pipelines in their cpus... they can achieve a greater clock speed that way where as Intel is the opposite. Both valid ways to make faster processors.

In other words.. you CPU is fine.

[lostinseganet]

On 2005-11-27 21:16, Nites wrote:
When AMD processors are rated 1600+
It means that it can run at the same speed of a standard processor that has 1.6ghz.

AMD technology is based on that through the smaller use of pipelines in their cpus... they can achieve a greater clock speed that way where as Intel is the opposite. Both valid ways to make faster processors.

In other words.. you CPU is fine.


That is not what I have been reading from most other sites. Like this one.
http://www.amdpower.com/sections.php4?op=viewarticle&artid=53

[uhawww]

On 2005-11-28 04:49, lostinseganet wrote:


On 2005-11-27 21:16, Nites wrote:
When AMD processors are rated 1600+
It means that it can run at the same speed of a standard processor that has 1.6ghz.

AMD technology is based on that through the smaller use of pipelines in their cpus... they can achieve a greater clock speed that way where as Intel is the opposite. Both valid ways to make faster processors.

In other words.. you CPU is fine.


That is not what I have been reading from most other sites. Like this one.
http://www.amdpower.com/sections.php4?op=viewarticle&artid=53



Yup.
AMD clock speeds are not directly related to its model number.
My machine has an AMD Athlon64 3200+, and OC'd I'm only pushing 2.4 GHz.
If I remember correctly, the comparative speed really comes from an increased pipeline bandwidth to the CPU (AMD's method of speed and performance increase), as opposed to throwing raw Hertz value at computation.

[DamonKatu]

What types of Graphic cards are recomended? I have a GeFourse 4 moddle in my computer but Im sure their are better GC than that plus some school made this one. But it runs very well.

[Shade-]

*snip other quotes*

Yup.
AMD clock speeds are not directly related to its model number.
My machine has an AMD Athlon64 3200+, and OC'd I'm only pushing 2.4 GHz.
If I remember correctly, the comparative speed really comes from an increased pipeline bandwidth to the CPU (AMD's method of speed and performance increase), as opposed to throwing raw Hertz value at computation.



But run that CPU against a P4 3.2 and your CPU will destroy it (ok, maybe not destroy...) in most catagories. As far as I understand, the modle number isn't supposed to be used as a hard value of the speed, but using it as a comparitive measure is pretty good. Basicly, the AMD 64s will prefrom almost twice as fast as the clock speed when compared to an Intel chip.

Really, I think the industry is realizing that the Intel cards aren't really THAT good. (not in any way saying they are bad) They get these huge numbers, but they are not efficent at using them at all. Whereas the other guys like AMD and other smaller companies are developing processors that outpreform the Intel cards with a fraction of the clock speed. (my friend worked with a processor that was clocked at about 1GH, and it was far superior to a P4 3.2ish GH in the tests they ran.)

[lostinseganet]

But run that CPU against a P4 3.2 and your CPU will destroy it (ok, maybe not destroy...) in most catagories. As far as I understand, the modle number isn't supposed to be used as a hard value of the speed, but using it as a comparitive measure is pretty good. Basicly, the AMD 64s will prefrom almost twice as fast as the clock speed when compared to an Intel chip.

Really, I think the industry is realizing that the Intel cards aren't really THAT good. (not in any way saying they are bad) They get these huge numbers, but they are not efficent at using them at all. Whereas the other guys like AMD and other smaller companies are developing processors that outpreform the Intel cards with a fraction of the clock speed. (my friend worked with a processor that was clocked at about 1GH, and it was far superior to a P4 3.2ish GH in the tests they ran.)


Do you know where I can read some articles that support what you said?

[uhawww]

On 2005-11-28 09:39, lostinseganet wrote:

Do you know where I can read some articles that support what you said?



Good 'ole HardOCP.. (http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTI0)



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: uhawww on 2005-11-28 10:20 ]</font>

[DamonKatu]

(waits quitely and see whats the fuss is all about. HE still unsure what to say)

[Para]

just trust me on that part of about your CPU.
Its fine.

Even if it says it can run at a speed of 2.0ghz its an overexaggeration. The reason why they say 1600+ is because it can run at the same speed as a 1.6ghz and possibly higher (the + indicates this part) but just to be safe, think of it as 1.6ghz.

[GaijinPUnch]

People can fix up benchmark tests wherever they want. There is no magical CPU out there that goes 8x faster than it's competition. If you bought your computer new in the last three years, the CPU is most likely fine. Just spend $200 on a nice medium-end graphics card and you'll be golden.

[uhawww]

On 2005-11-28 22:44, GaijinPUnch wrote:
People can fix up benchmark tests wherever they want. There is no magical CPU out there that goes 8x faster than it's competition. If you bought your computer new in the last three years, the CPU is most likely fine. Just spend $200 on a nice medium-end graphics card and you'll be golden.



In the end, this is the simple truth.
Nearly any P4/Athlon will work, focus on GFX.

[Mystil]

That's a good sign though. It means no more switching discs during install. Many games are going that way because it is cheaper to produce 1 DVD for the work of 5 CDs. That and you can get a simple DVD-ROM drive for, well, free often times.
FFXI is 5 got darn discs -.-. Kudos for DVD. Phew..glad I got a DVD drive.


On 2005-11-28 07:34, DamonKatu wrote:
What types of Graphic cards are recomended? I have a GeFourse 4 moddle in my computer but Im sure their are better GC than that plus some school made this one. But it runs very well.



GF4 is fine. 64MB is usually minimum requirement to run most online games. What matters most in my opinion is RAM. Your OS is going to eat a good bit, so add a high powered game with that and only 250RAM and you may only have 50-70RAM remaining. S L O W.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Silhouette on 2005-11-29 08:01 ]</font>