@whyareyoucrouchingspock: Wild guess here, english isn't your first language?

@BigChickenDinner said:

@whyareyoucrouchingspock: Wild guess here, english isn't your first language?

That isn't a wild guess, it's a petty attack because you don't like what I am saying. It's basically what all your responses are from the get go.

@BigChickenDinner said:

@whyareyoucrouchingspock: Your monitor is shit.

I coulsa spellz like tdiz and I would still be more grown up than you. Please stop being a waste of space and do not reply again.

@ElNeebre said:

After GTA IV and LA Noire, I definitely won't be getting Max Payne for anything other than the 360. Rockstar's games as of late have had terrible PC optimization.

they've always had terrible PC optimization; San Andreas was locked at 25 FPS for example.

@Jayzilla said:

@matthias2437 said:

I'm rocking a I7 3930k @ 4.5 ghz, 32 gb ram, 2x GTX 580, 2x 240 gb SSDs I use for gaming. So correction, I WILL be playing max settings. Also you will not need that high of specs to run that considering the fact that no videogame that will be made in the next 5 years will use 16 gbs of ram, and 6 cores/12 threads.

and yet you have 32 gigs of RAM in your gaming rig?

He could do other things with his computer that require this much ram. Video production or sound production.

That's a lot of slow motion.

I'll bet money that Rockstar just listed the range of hardware the game runs on. Everything from a 8600GT to a GTX 680 etc.

You won't need a GTX680 to Max the Payne.

@easthill said:

I'll bet money that Rockstar just listed the range of hardware the game runs on. Everything from a 8600GT to a GTX 680 etc.

You won't need a GTX680 to Max the Payne.

Looking at the response not just on this board but a couple of other gaming centric boards putting this information out at all was a bad idea.

16GB RAM hahahahaha. Prepare for a fucking horrendous port guys.

@easthill said:

You won't need a GTX680 to Max the Payne.

You shouldn't, but if it's anything like the mess that was GTA IV on PC you'll need to brute force yourself past the horrid optimisation.

I built my computer 5 years ago and it still hits all the requirements. Don't see why people are complaining.

@whyareyoucrouchingspock: What your saying is non-sense, the game looks fine, the textures look fine, your argument of how great Shogun 2 looks is invalid because its physically impossible for that level of detail seen when zoomed all the way in, to be present when zoomed out. The your monitor is shit comment was a joke, because at first I thought you were trolling. How you can say that those screens don't look good is beyond me. Your use of the word presentation is grossly misused, or used in multiple ways. It wasn't a petty attack, it was me trying to confirm that the reason you weren't understanding what I was saying. Your spelling is fine, your use of words and grammar however is terrible. Along with your opinion. Good day sir.

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Good thing I have a quad core hyper threaded @4.25Ghz and an overclocked 7970. I just hope I can run it at decent settings at 2560x1600

@Sooty: Well we knew that as soon as we saw "Rockstar Games". Prepare for folks whining about getting a patch weeks after the game drops. :)

@Th3_James said:

Good thing I have a quad core hyper threaded @4.25Ghz and an overclocked 7970. I just hope I can run it at decent settings at 2560x1600

I wish you luck because GTA IV was a piece of shit on ATi hardware. I used to get mad stuttering even when at 60 FPS on my HD4870, switched to a Nvidia card and it was fine.

@AstroCow said:

@Sooty: Well we knew that as soon as we saw "Rockstar Games". Prepare for folks whining a patch weeks after the game drops. :)

I still couldn't believe it when GTA IV barely ran at 20FPS on my 3.5Ghz Core 2 Duo back at the time. Being able to run Crysis buttery smooth but not GTA IV (which didn't even look good, those shadows...) was a joke.

@Animasta said:

@ElNeebre said:

After GTA IV and LA Noire, I definitely won't be getting Max Payne for anything other than the 360. Rockstar's games as of late have had terrible PC optimization.

they've always had terrible PC optimization; San Andreas was locked at 25 FPS for example.

That's actually not true, not sure where you heard that. San Andreas was one of the last fine PC ports from Rockstar and it was easy to get over 60FPS on that (granted, San Andreas was never a looker.)

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Putting out a demo would probably help alleviate concerns. Rather than poeple just jumping on torrents because they think they cant run it or the quility of the port will be terrible.

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

So to sum up...

"Wah, my computer isn't at spec"

"Wah, my ISP sucks, so 35GB is too much"

"Wah, GTA IV sucked on PC"

None of these are this game's fault. Your computer suck? But new stuff. Your ISP sucks? By the box or get a new IP. GTA sucked on PC? What does that have to do with this?

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

If you try GTA IV on that hardware it will be unplayable.

@CosmicQueso said:

None of these are this game's fault. Your computer suck? But new stuff. Your ISP sucks? By the box or get a new IP. GTA sucked on PC? What does that have to do with this?

Maybe because it's the same developer who also screwed up L.A. Noire on PC.

Can you not connect the dots?

@Vod_Crack said:

@Animasta said:

@ElNeebre said:

After GTA IV and LA Noire, I definitely won't be getting Max Payne for anything other than the 360. Rockstar's games as of late have had terrible PC optimization.

they've always had terrible PC optimization; San Andreas was locked at 25 FPS for example.

That's actually not true, not sure where you heard that. San Andreas was one of the last fine PC ports from Rockstar and it was easy to get over 60FPS on that (granted, San Andreas was never a looker.)

by default it is locked to 25 fps. You can turn it off, but I had to leave it on for a long while.

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

If you try GTA IV on that hardware it will be unplayable.

But this is about Max Payne 3? Besides, it's not even the same studio making the games.

@easthill said:

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

If you try GTA IV on that hardware it will be unplayable.

But this is about Max Payne 3? Besides, it's not even the same studio making the games.

Maybe not the console version but I'm going to guess they're giving it to the same people behind the ports of GTA IV and L.A. Noire which were both terrible on PC.

and a 2.4Ghz Dual Core and an 8600GT is extremely ancient now anyway. The chances are extremely slim.

I'd just like to point out this hilarious grammatical cock-up:

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

it is had a great presentation thats makes use of pc horsepower

On topic, these specs don't explicitly say that the high end equipment is required for max settings. It's probably just the range of hardware that it will run on.

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

If you try GTA IV on that hardware it will be unplayable.

But this is about Max Payne 3? Besides, it's not even the same studio making the games.

Maybe not the console version but I'm going to guess they're giving it to the same people behind the ports of GTA IV and L.A. Noire which were both terrible on PC.

and a 2.4Ghz Dual Core and an 8600GT is extremely ancient now anyway. The chances are extremely slim.

instead of guessing im going to wait and see how it pans out.

@Bell_End said:

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

If you try GTA IV on that hardware it will be unplayable.

But this is about Max Payne 3? Besides, it's not even the same studio making the games.

Maybe not the console version but I'm going to guess they're giving it to the same people behind the ports of GTA IV and L.A. Noire which were both terrible on PC.

and a 2.4Ghz Dual Core and an 8600GT is extremely ancient now anyway. The chances are extremely slim.

instead of guessing im going to wait and see how it pans out.

It's not really a guess an 8600GT wasn't even a very good card in 2006 and it's 2012 now.

I'll probably get this game on console because Rockstar have screwed up on PC too many times now.

@CosmicQueso said:

Your ISP sucks? By the box or get a new IP.

Unfortunately in Canada, all ISP's suck.

@RollingZeppelin said:

I'd just like to point out this hilarious grammatical cock-up:

Really funny.

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

@RollingZeppelin said:

I'd just like to point out this hilarious grammatical cock-up:

Really funny.

Oh, don't be so sensitive.

i think it looks great.@Sooty said:

@Bell_End said:

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

If you try GTA IV on that hardware it will be unplayable.

But this is about Max Payne 3? Besides, it's not even the same studio making the games.

Maybe not the console version but I'm going to guess they're giving it to the same people behind the ports of GTA IV and L.A. Noire which were both terrible on PC.

and a 2.4Ghz Dual Core and an 8600GT is extremely ancient now anyway. The chances are extremely slim.

instead of guessing im going to wait and see how it pans out.

It's not really a guess an 8600GT wasn't even a very good card in 2006 and it's 2012 now.

I'll probably get this game on console because Rockstar have screwed up on PC too many times now.

as i say, im going to wait before making that decision. it might be fantastic. seems stupid to just buy it on the 360 with out at least waiting to see what the PC version is like.

@Bell_End said:

This kind of exemplifies the point about triangular geometry. Hopefully this is because tessellation isn't implimented yet.

@Sooty said:

@Th3_James said:

Good thing I have a quad core hyper threaded @4.25Ghz and an overclocked 7970. I just hope I can run it at decent settings at 2560x1600

I wish you luck because GTA IV was a piece of shit on ATi hardware. I used to get mad stuttering even when at 60 FPS on my HD4870, switched to a Nvidia card and it was fine.

@AstroCow said:

@Sooty: Well we knew that as soon as we saw "Rockstar Games". Prepare for folks whining a patch weeks after the game drops. :)

I still couldn't believe it when GTA IV barely ran at 20FPS on my 3.5Ghz Core 2 Duo back at the time. Being able to run Crysis buttery smooth but not GTA IV (which didn't even look good, those shadows...) was a joke.

I can play GTA everything high on 2560 at around 60fps. My 5870 never had any problems with gta, and my 7970 doesn't have any problems. Still, unoptimized as fuck.

Smells fishy. Those specs are really high and if they are putting out a boxed copy I can't see them springing for multiple DVDs.

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

I run a quad core i5 3.0ghz, 8gb of ram, and 1gb GF 545 video card. I run Skyrim at the top settings, and Witcher 2 damn near that. If Rockstar cant' optimize their games better, they need to go back to school, because every other developer out there does just fine with it. Personally, I don't care for Rockstar's games much, so this is really a non-issue. Its just stupid that they can't get a game to run on a top-tier PC that will run on shittier console hardware.

Yep, so much for Max Payne 3. Not too disappointed though, my desire to play it wasn't that high to begin with.

35gb? turn it on, go eat, done! the average game of 10-15gb takes me about 15 minutes.. not that big of a deal. the specs are a bit much though..

Regarding graphics. I wouldn't worry too much. Look at what modders done to GTA4. It looks near enough photorealistic at times.

@Sooty said:

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

If you try GTA IV on that hardware it will be unplayable.

First off Max Payne isn't GTA 4, the game isn't open world, doesn't have the instant replay editor (the main performance issue with GTA 4 PC, seriously, disable it and you get an extra 20fps) and is using a re-worked version of the engine. I still doubt that a dual core with an 8600gt will play the game that well, but the engine they use is pretty much entirely dependent on the CPU so performance should be easier to cope with.

I remember I tried playing LA Noire on an 8800gt with a core-2-duo running at 2.6GHz and received around 8fps. I installed the game on my dads computer with an 8600gt and a core-2-quad and the game played at 720p, at medium settings, while barely ever dipping below 30fps.

Plus, I am ashamed at the people of this thread. It is almost like nobody here has read pc system requirements before. They almost always have a two sets of figures, one is a low to represent the minimum need to get the game to boot up (not actually minimum requirements), and the other is to play the game maxed out (pun intended). Looking at the veins in Max Paynes arms makes me think that there is a massive amount of tesselation going on in the render and right now hardware is at the point where tesselation needs a beast of a machine to run it properly. Remember a few months ago when Arkham city came out? My old computer could run Arkham City on dx9 maxed out, but turn on DX11 and the game still struggles to catch up (my new system is an i5-2500k, 8gig ddr3, and GTX 680).

@BiG_Weasel said:

@easthill said:

@BiG_Weasel said:

Remember how GTA IV ran on the PC? This is the second coming. Not that I have any interest in Max Payne, but Rockstar should stick to consoles, it would seem.

Why? If they game truly runs on a Dual Core 2.4GHz and 8600GT, I'd say Rockstar have more than done a good enough job.

I run a quad core i5 3.0ghz, 8gb of ram, and 1gb GF 545 video card. I run Skyrim at the top settings, and Witcher 2 damn near that. If Rockstar cant' optimize their games better, they need to go back to school, because every other developer out there does just fine with it. Personally, I don't care for Rockstar's games much, so this is really a non-issue. Its just stupid that they can't get a game to run on a top-tier PC that will run on shittier console hardware.

If we're going by the specs posted they have optimized extremely well, that's all I'm saying. I don't care what they've done before, none of us have tried MP3 yet. Max Payne have primarily been a PC franchise, maybe they've shown the respect the game deserve and made a good port.

NOWHERE does it say you need a GTX680 and a thousand cores to max out the game.

@themangalist said:

In an age where terabytes are dirt cheap, I see no problem in 35 gigabytes. But I'd be lying if I said I have that much space to spare for a 10 hour game.

did you miss the little flood incident last summer that caused hard drive prices to skyrocket?

I need to clean out my drives for this game ...35gig is insane!

@DeF said:

I need to clean out my drives for this game ...35gig is insane!

Even more so if you have an SSD.

@MonetaryDread said:

Plus, I am ashamed at the people of this thread. It is almost like nobody here has read pc system requirements before. They almost always have a two sets of figures, one is a low to represent the minimum need to get the game to boot up (not actually minimum requirements), and the other is to play the game maxed out (pun intended).

Though that might be true, I'd guess Rockstar have listed the range of hardware supported at release. I don't think you'll need the absolute best available hardware to max the game.

wow, look at those high specs! a 5+ year old PC, that could never run BF3, can run Max Payne 3. how dare they release such an unoptimised game. ablublublu.

DX11 support for Payne 3 pretty much confirms DX11 support for GTA V on PC.

Fuck yes.

I remember seeing people complain about Skyrim's low size requirement and specs, expressing worry that it wouldn't really take advantage of powerful PC's.

Interesting bunch, those PC gamers.....

@Anwar said:

look at those window frame textures...

Yeah. Ouch. The actual character models themselves are pretty nice; you can see some nice detail on the cloth and hair. It really makes the environment stick out like a sore thumb.

Kinda like an actor standing in front of a green screen. Or a bad photoshop. Like someone took Max from Max Payne 3 and photoshopped him over a wall from Max Payne 1.

So is the 360 version going to be on multiple discs, or is the console version a more standard size? I suppose no one outside of RockStar is in a position to know that at this time.

time to upgrade to gtx 680. call it a hunch, but it's probably just recommending that for marketing, since it just came out. borderlands 2 is saying you need a gtx 680 too (for physX), but you wont.

Those are obscene stats. That's got to be bad optimization.

I don't mind playing on Medium, but christ, 35 gigs...that's ludicrous.

16 gigs of RAM? Octo-core (not sure if that's what it is actually called- just a guess)? Are they fucking joking? Jesus, my PC will get destroyed by this by the graphics card alone.