Dragon Age

[Crenshinibon]

Windows XP Minimum Specifications

* OS: Windows XP with SP3
* CPU: Intel Core 2 (or equivalent) running at 1.4Ghz or greater
* AMD X2 (or equivalent) running at 1.8Ghz or greater
* RAM: 1GB or more
* Video: ATI Radeon X850 128MB or greater
* NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT 128MB or greater
* DVD ROM (Physical copy)
* 20 GB HD space

These minimum requirements for Dragon Age seem pretty reasonable to me, although I don't know how much "extra features" you need to strip off the game to get to this level.

Recommended Specifications

* CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent
* RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP)
* Video: ATI 3850 512 MB or greater
* NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater
* DVD ROM (Physical copy)
* 20 GB HD space

The recommended specifications don't really look like they require a high end computer either.

[Vygg]

The system requirements don't look to be a problem, but I'm leery of what it will take to actually run the game.

I've avoided EA games ever since I made the mistake of shelling out money for one of their LOTR games.

Since it's Bioware, I'm assuming that it won't require disabling all software protections (anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewalls, etc.), shutting down all TSRs and systematically turning off Windows operating files just to get the game to load?

Cheers.

[fable]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vygg The system requirements don't look to be a problem, but I'm leery of what it will take to actually run the game. I've avoided EA games ever since I made the mistake of shelling out money for one of their LOTR games. Since it's Bioware, I'm assuming that it won't require disabling all software protections (anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewalls, etc.), shutting down all TSRs and systematically turning off Windows operating files just to get the game to load? Cheers.

It's Bioware, Part of EA. You might want to wait for reviews.

I should be able to tell you something myself at least a few days after release.

[Kiwi]

Anyone with a slight knowledge about PC video cards can see a variety of ignorant inclusions in the proposed System Requirements. For instance, a Geforce 7600 GT is named as minimum for a PC running Vista. The equivalent Radeon for performance is either the X1650 Pro, or the X1650 XT, and which it is will depend on how heavily the game uses shaders, because the Geforce 6000s and 7000s were weak when the shader instructions became profusive.

But no amount of shaders would ever make an X1550 equivalent to any Geforce more powerful than a 7300 GS!

(Remember, it's just a detuned X1300 Pro with another name.)

{Edited here: Instead of an X1650 Pro as the match to a 7600 GT, it's the X1650 XT that is equivalent. Also of note is that even though the video card entries remain screwed up, an amended official requirements list is out that affects the minimum and recommended CPUs.}

Supposedly, a PC running XP will need an X850 minimum? Really? That one blows a 7600 GT into the weeds, but it's the equivalent, they think, to a 6600 GT? Not only ignorant, that's just plain stupid! I can imagine the 7600 GT as the XP minimum, matched to a Radeon X800 GTO, perhaps.