February 6, 2013 at 12:34 #199
Is there any word on the system requirements for AoW3, yet? 🙂February 6, 2013 at 12:40 #200
The game is not going to be a system’s hog. We’ll support a wide range of quality settings. I think a 512 MB graphics card is minimum though. We’ll post more info on this later!February 6, 2013 at 12:45 #204
Thank you for the reply!February 6, 2013 at 13:05 #207
Lennart, did you invest in making the game multithreaded? I can imagine that using all cores of a multicore processor can be a great help for the AI.February 6, 2013 at 15:05 #220
It’ll be a great help for anything, not just the AI. Glad to hear that the game is not a huge resource hog, though, because that means that it will be easier to run on high detail without bringing even a powerful computer to its knees.
Still need to get a new computer this year, and not just for this game. Current rig is six and half years old and not getting any younger…February 6, 2013 at 15:13 #223
Ten9; yep our engine is fully multi-threaded. Really helps the AI.February 8, 2013 at 10:36 #485
Lennart, I have another technical question about AOW3 concerning system resources, just out of curiosity.
I was triggered by a blog item from Brad Wardell about -among other things- 64bitness in pc games. I assume AOW3 will still be a 32bit game. This is understandable as there are still too many 32bit machines out there.
Do you plan to have a 64bit build? Does being constrained by a 3Gb memory limit hamper you in the amount of races and models you can have at any time in the game?
I can imagine that having multiple races, and thus multiple 3D models and textures, will be a real burden for only 3Gb of memory, especially later in the game.
Now that the processing speed constrained is mostly tackled, the next real technical bottleneck for games like AOW3, seems being 32 bit, to me.
Going to 64 bit will probably mean a huge jump in possibilities for 3D turn-based strategy titles.
Could you share your view on this?
ten9February 8, 2013 at 16:41 #561
Ah yes. I’m actually thinking of spending money on my machine so I can play this game well.
Is there any recommended video card? Maybe tell us which ones are in your dev PCs? 🙂February 8, 2013 at 17:17 #569
64 bit – bad idea.
In Sword of the Stars 2 – refused 64 bits. Many mistakes were based on “raw Libraries” (according to the developers) + problem with multiplayer – Interoperability with 32 bit and 64 bit (departures due to synchronization). Do not notice any difference between 32 and 64 (on game speed. exceeding 4 GB of memory rarity (on xp it will be 3.24 GB minus consumption by the system))February 8, 2013 at 19:42 #598
Kubera, from your mail I understand that the developers of ‘Sword of the stars’ had trouble with allowing both 64 bit versions of their game and 32 bit systems in one multiplayer session. Is that correct?
Anyway, early adopters will always take most of the pain, so yes I’m not surprised that they’ve found problems in some of the standard libraries.
It does not change anything to the fundamental memory limit games are starting to experience from supporting 32 bit systems. There is a limit on the number of unit models and textures you can keep in memory and for a lot of games we’ve reached that limit.
Imo it is the next big jump the gaming industry is going to make.
ten9February 8, 2013 at 20:35 #608
The other two key issues:
1) 64 bit for a long time will yield 32 bit for stability. not only multiplayer
2) 64 bit do not give a performance gain (or do not feel). the main advantage – more memory (which few have needed. except in the case of memory leaks)February 8, 2013 at 20:48 #611
The more important question!
Which versions of DirectX are supported?
9 – normal
10 – can be a problem on older graphics cardsFebruary 8, 2013 at 21:06 #614
Well, considering system requirments I think the Starcraft 2 system where you could practically turn everything off for performance on low end machines is a nice idea. I myself have a performant PC, but lurking on AOW forums I came to understand that many in the fan base have old PCs and it will be nice if they could be spared some or all the expence of upgrading and play the game they love right away.February 8, 2013 at 22:15 #626
I too was wondering about the DirectX requirements. And I’m also wondering about the OS requirements. Will it run just as well on win7 or is this going to be win8 mainly?February 8, 2013 at 23:00 #630
the problem may be with windose 8
think windose 7 in any case would be good. I hope, too, and XP (DX9 т_т)February 8, 2013 at 23:51 #636
I hope it runs on OpenGL instead of directx, so more platforms can be supported, like LinuxFebruary 9, 2013 at 08:18 #649
The game pioneer and id Software’s co-founder John Carmack has already expressed some concerns regarding the viability of Linux as a gaming platform. Now he has published a comment on Twitter, in which he said that improving Wine is a better way for Gaming on Linux than porting games to the OS.February 9, 2013 at 08:43 #650
Perhaps, but Valve seems to disagree with him . They have ported steam and are porting their games. Also paradox interactive ported Crusader king 2 and making EU4 natively for linux. just like wasteland 2, planetary annihilation, project eternity and others 🙂February 11, 2013 at 10:58 #963
Please tell me. The game is designed for Windows XP (DX9)?February 13, 2013 at 14:37 #1322
That;s actually a very good question Kubera. I suspect many Aow players will have older Oss, and some will have Windows 8, so how will this all mesh for AoW3?February 13, 2013 at 14:59 #1329
I expect the game to be developed for Windows 7/8. This is for the reason that those are the modern operating systems. Vista was, essentially, a half-finished beta of Windows 7 and Microsoft killed it off as soon as they could. Compared to Windows 7, it is in almost all respects a turd. Windows XP is completely outdated in every respect, technically obsolete compared to the newer systems.
From that standpoint it makes absolutely no sense developing for Windows XP, but to develop for Windows 7 and then make it (more or less) backwards compatible for Vista and XP. Older machines (six years and older) won’t even be able to run AoW3 without massive hardware upgrades and probably not at all if they don’t have at least double core processors.
It’s a brutal truth of the computer market that sooner or later you WILL have to upgrade an old computer and expecting modern software developers to bend over backward to accommodate six year old hardware for high performance applications (especially graphically high performance or processor intensive software) is unrealistic and presumptuous.
I personally have an old computer, six and a half years, with a first generation Intel Core2Duo processor (E6600), 3 GB of RAM, ATI HD5750 graphics and running Windows XP. I do NOT expect that rig to run AoW3 unless on minimal or at least greatly reduced graphical settings and I expect that it would also run a lot slower than on a modern (say, i5 or i7 based) machine because of the way the AI is set up to take advantage of multicore processing.
If you have an older machine that you have been keeping alive with bits of string, ingenuity, voodoo rites, prayer, some duct tape and obscure occult rites because it is good enough for AoW1 and AoW2, you should look at the release of AoW3 as an opportunity. An opportunity to upgrade to a new machine that, if not quite top notch, is at least mid-performance modern and has a chance of running the game.
The old machines might be quite all right basic web surfing, online banking, email and text processing, but gaming machines have a shorter lifespan in their primary function and a significantly faster upgrade cycle due to growing requirements. Nature abhors a vacuum and as new processing power and performance becomes available, software will expand to fill that vacuum, with the holdouts left out in the cold.
I’m sorry if that’s a bit harshly put, but it’s the reality. I see it every day at work, dealing with computers up to ten years old desperately trying to run modern software with their original hardware configuration. Not happening, so you need to cut out all but the essentials and find the lightest programs you can for them and even then the days of their machines are numbered. I can postpone their needs for six months to three years, depending on the machine.
Gamers and modern games? Just upgrade already. It’ll be cheaper and less time intensive in the long run.February 13, 2013 at 19:48 #1383
>I’m sorry if that’s a bit harshly put, but it’s the reality. I see it every day at work, dealing with computers up to ten years old desperately trying to run modern software with their original hardware configuration. Not happening, so you need to cut out all but the essentials and find the lightest programs you can for them and even then the days of their machines are numbered. I can postpone their needs for six months to three years, depending on the machine.
I know what it is. When computers with 128 mb RAM you put Windows 7 (Pentium 3). It’s cruel. Not always have a setup with a flash drive. Not everywhere is DVD ROM. harddisk 19 GB . Because licenses are sold only under Windows 7 (no downgrade)
But you may well have a new computer with XP (downgrade).February 13, 2013 at 20:39 #1388
Anyone who installs XP on a new computer for non-professional reasons (such as needing it to run legacy software in order to do a job) is in no position to complain about lack of support or other problems. Support for XP has been fairly good on account of the corporate market, but it’s going to run out next year at the latest (since Microsoft will discontinue it) and the problems of keeping XP’s obsolete structure and other things supported for software that was developed for more advanced machines will soon enough be unsustainable in the long run.
I do not have any sympathy for the argument that XP should receive the same level of support as newer operating systems.February 13, 2013 at 21:41 #1398
I can’t see them only supporting Windows 8.February 13, 2013 at 21:56 #1406
Hi, the PC game should absolutely run from Vista and up. Not sure at XP at this point.
Regarding 32/64 bit and mem allocation. We had some issues hitting 32bit memory limits, but this quickly got resolved by adding some smart content streaming mechanisms. For Overlord we had had to work with 512MB shared console memory so we have some experience working with low spec machines.February 14, 2013 at 08:13 #1447
thanks for the reply.February 14, 2013 at 08:55 #1453
People with old computers,
You expect developers to cater to people who are 6+ years behind in the market??
Upgrade or stay in Direct X 9 land. It’s as simple as that.
In my local computerenthusiast forum, we constantly complain about games being consoleports. Those games have Dx 9 technology and therefore work perfect on 5+ year old computers which means there’s no reason to upgrade. That in turn might hurt highperformancemodels of processors & graphicscards.
Hi Lennart! Fan of the old days here 🙂
Not surprised to see you hit the 32bit wall. Brad Wardell talks about that memorylimit quite often. I hope that you only had to sacrifice big maps and not diversity of units & artifacts (amongst other things).
I’m sure you know that soon, 64bit will be popular enough that you can skip 32bit forever! The January Steamsurvey says that 55.55% of all Steamusers have Win 7 x64 as OS!
What would be needed to run AoW III in ALL its glory on max settings on 1920×1080 (the most popular resolution I believe) ?February 14, 2013 at 10:31 #1456
I’m still hoping I will manage to avoid Windows 8 like I avoided Vista.February 14, 2013 at 11:09 #1461
Windows 7 is ok with a little customization. Windows 8 is still to raw (as all new Microsoft products) for my taste.February 14, 2013 at 11:45 #1470
I thought that, but I had to install Windows 8 and I realized that it performs better than any other.
Damn, I’ll have to crack it XD
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.