System requirements are out!

Of course I can! Just did! So did you. /2

It isn't an equal comparison, but it is a comparison.

Both companies have venerable game titles whose essential gameplay has not changed since their very beginning. Both companies have published improvements over the years. Both companies have been successful.

One company has chosen to constrain system requirements. The other company has chosen to use graphics that require new hardware for each release.

Neither company has needed to invest significantly in AI (yes, it's not real AI.)

So, comparison achieved.

I'm not saying that one company is right and the other is wrong; both games are successful. The different strategies are deliberate.

Of course, I do wish Civ hewed closer to Blizzard's model, since I find that simpler graphics usually enhances gameplay (on Galciv2, for example, I *always* used the ugly, strategic graphics rather than the pretty ones, because the former showed more information and was much easier to read). But that's just me.

Meanwhile, Blizzard has managed to continually refresh and improve WoW, despite retaining "ancient" code. Gotta admire that! (Ancient code under continual use also has the virtue of having been debugged.)

So Firaxis gets a "sigh, but I understand" while Blizzard gets a 21 gun salute.

Different genres? Not sure that matters here; for all I know, Civ might have done even better were development resources devoted to something other than eye candy, which is not what I suspect keeps the game successful. Of course, Firaxis has given this far more thought than I, so I am probably wrong.

That's fair. But modern integrated graphics are not likely to run Civ7.

Anyway,

Ken

 

With everything else being up to spec, would I be able to run the game on Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4510U CPU @ 2.00GHz?

 

Yes, you should be fine.

 

You will run at 1920*1080 though not at any close to max-specs. CPU is fine for turn crunching, i'd say roughly medium across the board without any bells and whistles like AA, HDR, etc, maybe...as long as it has 2GB Video memory. My Desktop GTX680OC is significantly more powerful card and that struggles to do 1080p on Max settings and it wont do Civ6 on 1080P Max settings(It just makes it into recommended settings being only slightly faster than a desktop GTX770.) You gotta be careful with mobile cards. It may have the same numbers as the Desktop Versions but that "M" can make a big difference.

 

How important is the DX11 aspect of the requirements?

Does this mean that a high end DX10 card will be unable to run the game outright?

 

Based on both Minimal and Recommended requirements having DX11, it's very likely you'll be unable to play the game without it.

However, high-end DX10 card with latest drivers usually becomes DX11 card.

 

All it took to fix a post win 10 upgrade wrt be and Civ v was to verify the local files on steam. Then they would play.

 

Yes, it clearly means that any card whichever doesn't support dX 11 will not work (well... not sure if it'd fail to launch or jus text randomly crash or bsod the computer).

 

Thx.

Yeah, I'm not sufficient enough with this stuff, to tell if how my setup 'fits in' with the system requirements announced.

Civ V runs smoothly, apart from the end game, where the turn crunching starts to become noticeable. This machine can run a game like World Of Tanks at 1080p with most settings at max, 60 fps. It starts to struggle with a game like Cities Skyline, when your city has grown really large. At that time, I start to lower some of the graphics settings.

 

So my GPU is at 94% of recommended (GTX-670) but my CPU (AMD FX-4100) is only at 54% of recommended on tier 5 of Tom's guide. Sticking with Socket AM3+ and 95W I could get an FX-8320E for 92% or an FX-8370E for 99%, both of which in tier 4.

The question is would it be worth $167 or $200 to do so (plus the hassle of messing with my difficult to install CPU cooler)? I have always played Small maps, not enjoying the bigger sizes, would I even notice the difference?

 

If you don't mind playing smaller maps I would wait till the game is released to get a better idea, play a few games then decide if an upgrade is needed.

 

Quick question guys. I have a GPU problem, everything else is way over recommended specs. I have only integrated GPU which won't work, so I need to buy one. I see 2 choices:

ASUS GeForce GTX950/2GB/STRIX which costs 160 Euro, or anything better, which costs 200-250 (GTX 960 is roughly 200, GTX 1060 is roughly 250-300). It effectively makes Civ for me 300-500% more expensive, since I don't need GPU for anything else. So if possible, I'd like to buy cheapest one with guarantees the game to run smoothly.

GTX950 seems be at 87% of recommended SR. I don't have a clue what it means. Is that ok? If not, what it means? Might it slow down the game? Or some graphics might just not be clear enough?

Thanks.

 

Sansa,

If you can, I recommend you wait for a week or two after the game is officially released before buying a graphics card.

Recommended specs are like the pirate's code, and cannot be fully trusted. "Running smoothly" is pretty subjective too. And at what resolution? What gfx settings?

So unless you just buy something high end, you will not know what the minimum really is until you hear from people who have run the actual software. Then you can make decisions based on their reports, and get a card that you know people actually like.

Finally, if you have an i5-6600, you *can* run the game right off the bat. It might run very slowly, but it ought to work, albeit at lower resolution and graphics settings than you might prefer. So you'll at least be able to install the game, run it, and see how far off you are, based on your feelings and on benchmarks along the lines of http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-530.148358.0.html.

Time is on your side.

Anyway,

Ken

 

Sansa, what card do you have now? and as Ken said, wait till the game comes out and try it for a bit, may well work good enough to play for a bit, and if you buy through Steam you may be able to return it.

 

If you buy through Steam, you will be able to return it. There are stipulations, like I believe no more than 2 hours played, but now any game on Steam is refundable if purchased through Steam. Just gotta read the rules. Basically no different than returning a shirt from WalMart.

 

How do they test if you wore the shirt for more than 2 hours at walmart ?

 

Thanks folks. Though my issue wasn't fixed with these specific replies...it did make me revisit the situation. Which I hadn't done in a while. A complete reinstall fixed the issue...just in time for them to collect dust when I get Civ 6.

 

Thank you for you reply! I didn't know the difference was substancial. I hope it runs pretty enough, cause I lack the greens to upgrade my GPU atm.

 

I don't have any, just one integrated in CPU.

Thanks Ken. That sounds like a good advice, however, I really want to have good gaming experience right from the start, I'll be able to play 24/7 first week so I want to enjoy it. I am ready to invest as much as needed, I just don't want to waste money. So the major information I got from your post is that I can't rely on recommended specs nor game-debate test. I guess I will just have to gamble and buy something reasonable.

 

Just wait for info from youtubers. Also GTX 1050 Ti is supposed to be launched in mid October - might be enough for the game (at least for 1080p).