A possible problem about system requirements...

I know system requirements for Doom 3 have been discussed pretty regularly on here, but I have a point I'd like to make. I have two computers at home, both of which have 3.0 ghz P4s and a gig of RAM. However, one has a 128mb GeForce 5700 Ultra, and the other has a 256mb GeForce 5800 Ultra. Running Far Cry on both, I've noticed that on the 5700, the best playable set up is 1024x768x32 resolution with "medium" on all graphics settings. On the other I can run 1152x864x32 with "very high" settings. The difference is unbelievable. The 5700 looks basically cartoony compared to the other one. What I'm trying to say is that I feel Doom 3 will be much more graphics-intensive, so for any realistic aspects in the graphics, I feel it will take more than a 5700 Ultra. Just something I noticed.

Sorry, I forgot to add that the lighting difference is also unbelievable. From the 5700 to the 5950, the lighting goes from nice to basically realistic looking.

Um, I fail to see any problem.

Heh, heh. Well, video cards aren't exactly cheap, and unless you plan on running Doom 3 on the absolute minimum settings, or at least something close to that, it would seem as though the 5700 isn't going to exactly be good enough, nor, for that matter, will many other lower-level cards. The stated system requirements, even recommended, do not seem like they will run the game very well if Far Cry is pushing my card so much on those settings. That seems like a problem to me when people have to pay a couple of hundred bucks to play a game, perhaps I'm worng.

People won't have to pay a couple of hundred bucks to play the game, they'll only have to pay a couple of hundred bucks if they want to play the game at high res with all the graphical options turned up.

I'm sure a large proportion of people will be perfectly happy playing the game at 1024x768 with some of the settings not at maximum, or even 800x600. Heck I know someone who'd be fine with 640x480.

i'm probably going to be running doom 3 at low-med settings because I have a geforce 4 mx 420, but I think the game will be good at those settings, since doom3 is based on the geforce 3 card series.

imo, doom 3 isn't realistic looking, but the graphics look definitely cool. the graphics look like graphics from cg animated movies like final fantasy. everything in doom3 looks like smooth surfaces.

half life 2 i guess would be realistic looking. sort of.

Ive personally played it at a decent setting with an fx5200 so i dont see what all the fuss is about

GeForce3 Ultra is way better than GeForce4 MX, and you wont be able to enjoy the nice lighting effects that is the flagship for Doom3.

I remember bbg saying it teh leak had 40fps on his 1.5ghz with a geforce 4600.

I have a 2ghz with a gf fx 5700 256, so it should run like painkiller. (30fps).

I plan on getting another card in a few months.

I get almost a constant 60 FPS om the leak @ 1024x768, full detail, 8xAF on my Radeon 9800 pro

I play halo at 640x480, can't tell the difference.

I have a GF FX 5500, and I'd be satisfied if it played decently (>30FPS) at 640x480 with medium settings. I suspect it will.

EDIT: Oh, and about the Far Cry/Doom III comparison, you have to keep in mind that Far Cry has HUGE levels, and doom III will consist mostly of small indoor levels (as far as we know, at least.)

Skeletor said:

i'm probably going to be running doom 3 at low-med settings because I have a geforce 4 mx 420, but I think the game will be good at those settings, since doom3 is based on the geforce 3 card series.

The GeForce4 MX is really a GeForce2 card. It does not have any of the important GeForce3 technology.

You only need to worry if you have a Gf2MX or lower.