Page 2 of 4
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 6:55 pm
by EvilDragon
Yes, but both ME and 2000 suck ass compared to XP with tweaked services and stuff.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 7:07 pm
by Validus Razgriz
EvilDragon wrote:Yes, but both ME and 2000 suck ass compared to XP with tweaked services and stuff.
Win 2000 is a good OS. The only Windows that suck are Vista, ME, and any pre-95 version. I'm currently waiting to see a general release of Windows 7 before I buy a new gaming rig.
...and this is coming from someone who uses Ubuntu Linux on their main computer.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 8:02 pm
by EvilDragon
Hey. Win 3.11 were the most stable Windows. Ever.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 9:11 pm
by Pato2747
Windows XP Pro
Intel Dual-Core @1.8 GHz
1 GB RAM (Heavily used with ~600 MB when idle)
GForce 8500 GT.
Plays wonderfully.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 10:07 pm
by A Simple Fox
EvilDragon wrote:Hey. Win 3.11 were the most stable Windows. Ever.
So very true. I NEVER EVER EVER had a single problem with my 3.11. I surfed all over the internet on AOL 3.0. I never had a firewall or antiviral on it. same with my 95 and 98. Things went downhill quick with my XP, and I don't even want to talk about my vista...
Now I don't go anywhere without 2 firewalls and my anti-virus on "search and destroy" mode. Times have changed i guess.
That's it! I'm taking my 3.11 out and booting it back up. If anyone wants any paperwork from me they better have a floppy drive!
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 11:25 pm
by Validus Razgriz
EvilDragon wrote:Hey. Win 3.11 were the most stable Windows. Ever.
I was using a Commodore Amiga 500 with Amiga OS 3.1 at the time that operating system was out. I still have that computer and it still works flawlessly.
I checked out Win 3.1 a few years ago. Wasn't too impressed with it, even considering when it was made. I would have prefered just using MS-DOS 6.22 by itself at the time.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:30 am
by K_Amelia
Sorry to necro this thread, but I think I might just be able to beat the saddest specs yet . . .
Pentium III 850mhz
384mb Ram
40gb HD
Win2k Pro
Geforce 4 420MX on a 2x AGP slot.
I know it sucks, and it isn't set up for sound, but it DOES run the demo fairly well, although the installer took a LONG time to start.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:49 am
by Nightdragon
Windows Vista Home Premium
Intel Core 2 Duo T5550 @1.83 GHz
3 GB of RAM
32 bit operating system
Works fine on my laptop. Can't remember exactly, but I know its no more then 2 years old. Still, I wish I could have XP instead of Vista...oh well, it was a present, so I'm not going to complain.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:17 am
by simpleDvorak
Laptop:
Vista, Home Premium, SP2. (Because I'm too lazy to install the Windows7 Beta, even after I downloaded it.)
4GB RAM
Intel Core2Duo T9300 2.5GHz
DirectX 10
nVidia GeForce 8600M GT
Desktop:
XP, Professional, SP3.
1GB RAM
DirectX 9.0c
nVidia GeForce FX5500
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:46 am
by Ambi07
I ran it on a 500mhz computer with 256mb ram and it worked, just a bit sluggish. Especially at the effects (AKA Froze for seconds at a time and had to skip it).
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:49 am
by Synoptic
AMD Athlon - 1300 MHz
512 MB SDRAM - 100 MHz freq
Nvidia GeForce MMX - 64 MB
Windows XP Professional Service Pack 2
10 years old system
Most of the game runs smoothly but the fireworks, snowflakes, the medical word onslaught, and the crowd background effects run choppy.
Not unplayable though... it's still enjoyable... a lot.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:22 am
by Eligre
3 year old system:
2 gigahertz processor, 2 core,
3 gigs of ram
A few hundred gigs of space left from the terabyte I started with
Radeon X1950Pro
On Old Faithful here it runs smoothly even in Shizune's Fireworks. I don't know what everyone else was talking about when they said they had issues with it, really...
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:21 pm
by Juno
Eligre wrote:On Old Faithful here it runs smoothly even in Shizune's Fireworks. I don't know what everyone else was talking about when they said they had issues with it, really...
Because your computer is much more than enough for anything Python. Go try an early Pentium IV or somesuch and you'll see it struggle.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:20 pm
by Validus Razgriz
Eligre wrote:On Old Faithful here it runs smoothly even in Shizune's Fireworks. I don't know what everyone else was talking about when they said they had issues with it, really...
That's because your computer is one of the better ones listed in this thread. My Win XP machine has 1/6 the RAM of yours, a single core processor instead of a dual core one, plus a built in video card. I wouldn't expect your computer to have any problems.
Re: Benchmarking: Let's see the minimum requirements to play.
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:51 pm
by Synoptic
Eligre wrote:3 year old system:
2 gigahertz processor, 2 core,
3 gigs of ram
A few hundred gigs of space left from the terabyte I started with
Radeon X1950Pro
On Old Faithful here it runs smoothly even in Shizune's Fireworks. I don't know what everyone else was talking about when they said they had issues with it, really...
Showoff
