The Star Citizen Thread v9
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
Not to mention it doesn't even define it's current minimum or recommended specifications.
According to the matrix - I'm below the recommended specs.
Now, according to their chart, recommended is something like an 8 core Ryzen 7 and GTX 1080.
Minimum is something like an i7-7700HQ and a GTX 1060 6Gb.
Acccording to the RSI website, it's
Now - I'm going to put together a rig with those specs and see how it does with a quad i5, 16Gb, 3Gb card, Samsung SSD.
I don't think it's going to be pretty
Meh - spare parts tub is looking a bit empty of 4Gb sticks and I want to keep dual channel, so 32Gb it is. Also, I've got oodles of SSD's so lets bung them in all four ports in a RAID 0 for the lulz!
Last edited:
Haha, that's good. You know what else is good. Trust our funding tracker, trust our roadmap, trust our... performance tracker? Its the most open development ever so I mean, of course I trust it all.
lol, that really looks like a black skinned photo copier in the elevator.
If the client isn't building an accurate picture of its operating environment, then that chart, which is pulling that same data, is completely useless.
It's broken at step one.
Agony I have been her 3 weeks I now realise that folk like you look at a post and comment without looking back at the context to which it was posted. Its a shame.
the original post was--
"Yeah - it really doesn't matter what your specs are, SC runs terribly no matter what hardware you throw at it. Between myself and my friend's equipment we've cobbled together various frankenrigs over the years - and apart from loading times it's not made a shred of difference - performance is still in the bucket."
My reply showed that specs clearly do make a difference, your reply is well- disappointing.
Last edited:
Pretty much!
Mind you - my minimum spec experiment isn't going too badly so far!
Some textures look like they fell out the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down though
Please see our previous posts of good performance g*me play on this forum. It would be silly to keep repeating the same links and images.
I understand the argument about finances,game loops and time of development.
But as for the performance,FPS, graphics quality, any argument saying that is poor that makes people look silly, just look online
Last edited:
Am I now free to reply to any criticism of the ingame play that you make as nonsense, as you are playing on less than minimum specs, and quote this post?
I still respect your opinions on finances/loan issues/CIG corporate competence/ and any of my speelling mistakkes.
Last edited:
With a game that is infamous for having bad performance, for having rather nonsensical and counterfactual dev communication on the causes for that poor performance, and where looking online even now (after they've decreased the load and performance is “good” in comparison) will provide plenty of examples of that poor performance still being a thing…
…it does not make any argument saying that performance is poor look silly, no. Rather, it makes those arguments look consistent with both historical and current observations.
The fact that it is so hideously inconsistent from one player to the next does not make this any less true — quite the opposite: it further highlights that performance is still very much a fundamental problem with the game.
Last edited:
Cobra the online tool has got no idea of my specs, its a poor tool, half thought out and distracting from whoever was chosen to produce it maybe.
I agree it is inconstent, even for me and I exceed recommended specs. Looking at the latest roadmap performance is still iffy, I may buy X4 foundations
The argument often here is that it is always poor, that is not true, they have made progress this year, I think it all might come good
Last edited:
Pretty much!
Mind you - my minimum spec experiment isn't going too badly so far!
Some textures look like they fell out the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down though
I do not recognise your in game image Asp is that from SC if so from when it looks a bit 2013? What is the overlay of specs?
Anyway See you all in a few days, Church tomorrow then 12 hour day work for 4 days.
Last edited:
Lifts are still death traps.. Dont go near them. Also i like how realistic how the player movements and physics are. Total realism. Such immersion.
I've thought about it a few times - but basically nobody wants to watch triple screen output unless they have triple screens themselves.
Plus I can't be bothered
Then your claims are only as believable as those who claim amazing things.
I'm sorry, but are we skeptics likely to trust any data from CIG? One of the issues many of us skeptics have with CIG is that we believe they will lie to suit their purposes.
Yeah, Asp says things like that a lot. I was replying to your comment only, not the history of it.
What? Why? I think i'm missing your point.
I wouldn't
My claims are only believable by those who choose to maybe believe in them, based upon the logs and screenshots that I present.
Now if you'd really like a video, I'll see what I can do - because I'm nice like that
Let us pay!
Our Chris,
who art in Monaco,
Hallowed be thy JPG,
Thy BDSSE come,
Thy vision be done,
In space as it is on Stanton