-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I dunno, HOI is running fine on my laptop which has an integrated graphics card (pure rubbish), 4 gigs of ram, and a 2 core running at 2.1 GHz combined. At least after like the 1.4 patch, prior to that, even the 4 Ghz (also 2 core) desktop with a gaming video card would be choppy especially with the original patch(s).
Point it, after they actually "finished" the game (1.4 patch) instead of a "beta", don't really need a top of line computer to run it. I should stress however, that speed is not everything (despite what intel and other processor companies want you to believe). And unfortunately, unless a game is programmed properly to run on multiple cores, you will not be getting the 'performance' you paid for. That actually is pretty much all I learned in 3 years of wizardry training (ECE).
Point it, after they actually "finished" the game (1.4 patch) instead of a "beta", don't really need a top of line computer to run it. I should stress however, that speed is not everything (despite what intel and other processor companies want you to believe). And unfortunately, unless a game is programmed properly to run on multiple cores, you will not be getting the 'performance' you paid for. That actually is pretty much all I learned in 3 years of wizardry training (ECE).
"/Quote Originally Posted by petester
Interesting. I actually upgraded my computer solely for the original HOI3 prior to release. And then due to the slowness, upgraded to a high quality video card about ver 1.3 so it would actually play properly. Would not have upgraded it it was not for HOI3...
So spent 15X the cost of HOI3 on a computer just so I could play it... And I don't think I was alone!
Your not. That is the reason I bought a new one. [/Quote]
I actually had unexpected twins when HOI3 came out, went and got a extra weekend job down at my local computer store, to purchase laptop ASUS g73H-A1, (runs like a dream!). just to play HOI3 , finally when SF came out.
Interesting. I actually upgraded my computer solely for the original HOI3 prior to release. And then due to the slowness, upgraded to a high quality video card about ver 1.3 so it would actually play properly. Would not have upgraded it it was not for HOI3...
So spent 15X the cost of HOI3 on a computer just so I could play it... And I don't think I was alone!
Your not. That is the reason I bought a new one. [/Quote]
I actually had unexpected twins when HOI3 came out, went and got a extra weekend job down at my local computer store, to purchase laptop ASUS g73H-A1, (runs like a dream!). just to play HOI3 , finally when SF came out.
I think these results, which aren't surprising to me in the least, show that the recent multi-threading addition was sorely wanted by the community.
Computer parts have gone down significantly in price. It's hard for an avid gamer to not make purchasing an i7 computer under $1000 a priority. Regardless of what kind of game you play having a good machine is still a necessity in my own opinion. Others will obviously disagree. Even though software hasn't kept up with the hardware it eventually will get on the same level.
Computer parts have gone down significantly in price. It's hard for an avid gamer to not make purchasing an i7 computer under $1000 a priority. Regardless of what kind of game you play having a good machine is still a necessity in my own opinion. Others will obviously disagree. Even though software hasn't kept up with the hardware it eventually will get on the same level.
I agree. These things tend to go in cycles. I remember when I got Civ 1 and had to wait an hour for the world to be created each time I started a new game. It has seesawed back and forth since then.
Actually, as far as i know, if you're an avid gamer, you should go for an i5 (specifically an i5 2500k). The i7:s are much more expensive, and are only better in heavily multithreaded applications (i.e not games). The 2500k is also unlocked, so it's very easy to overclock.
That's what i'll be going for at the end of this month.
Cheers
There are several likely resons:
1. Steam has more users (currently somewhere between 35-40 million active accounts).
2. People like me who spend lots of time at work and dont want to deal with manual patching of our games (esp. when I have 300+ games), which is often time consuming PITA.
Hi theleif,
well it depends then maybe on the point of view about what is std.
I thought with 4 cores available so long already they are already common usesage for "gaming-PC's"..(First quads are from 2006?)
(I have bought my first one already quite some years ago.. And that was also not the top cpu of that time, more a consumer one...)
But mabye the "common HOI3 gamers" fit more in the direction of "Business-pc/home-pc's" where 2 cores are more common?
Anyway, good to have Multicore support. Even with 2 cores..
Best regards,
Chromos
They could politely ask you for a survey or something to check your pc hardware ( thing like requirementlabs ? )GG can't do the same survey since they are a nice company and don't force us to install creepy software that monitors our system specs and possibly more without our knowledge...
1. they would have to have software installed on users PC
2. it would be same as Steam survey, just with much smaller sample
Steam survey results are available to public, so there is no need for smaller digital distribution services to make their own.
My own (biased) guess would be that Steam simply has a huge customer base advantage over the other download stores, and that customer base is trained to pick up potentially interesting stuff during sales.
It would be interesting to have all the data, number of customers at different times for the stores, number and date of sales, correlation to the forum population etc, correlation to registration time on forum... but I expect Paradox to keep this type of information close for the foreseeable future.
Hi theleif,
well it depends then maybe on the point of view about what is std.
I thought with 4 cores available so long already they are already common usesage for "gaming-PC's"..(First quads are from 2006?)
(I have bought my first one already quite some years ago.. And that was also not the top cpu of that time, more a consumer one...)
But mabye the "common HOI3 gamers" fit more in the direction of "Business-pc/home-pc's" where 2 cores are more common?
Anyway, good to have Multicore support. Even with 2 cores..
Best regards,
Chromos
Fist of all, sorry for the late reply (and thereby maybe reviving a dead thread), apparently i had forgot to activate notification.
So, yeah, multi-core is becoming standard, and is a good thing to have. What the i7:s have that makes them better (and much more expensive) is (this is a very simplified explanation, i know) advanced hyperthreading and other stuff that's basically mostly handy in virtualization scenarios. Basically: multicore=good, multithread=not so much (for a gamer).
The performance increase you get with an i7 in normal day operations and games are generally very small (we are talking less then 10%) so it is, to me not worth the much higher cost.
And what i meant by standard is, "what type of processor the average gamer has". As far as i (and steam http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/?sort=pct) know 2 cores are still the norm.
Cheers
As such i would disagree that all games will consume much more resourses in near future.
The reason is consoles. They don`t update hardware so fast and ince console market probably>PC, you get the idea.
The reason is consoles. They don`t update hardware so fast and ince console market probably>PC, you get the idea.
Do know not everyone uses steam.
So it's only reliable if your audience would be steam users.