Battle.net - English Forums -> Demo at BlizzCon 2008

Varti

Europe

0. Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 01:44:19 PM PDT

quote reply

Bashiok, could you tell us, what was the hardware configuration of the computer whereat the Diablo III ran?

The Camels are coming...

Verdreht254

USEast

1. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 01:58:16 PM PDT

quote reply

This is EXTREMELY relevant to my interests.

Johnor

USEast

2. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 02:01:02 PM PDT

quote reply

Surely we could be told this information. It doesn't make anything final. It merely gives us an idea of what to expect for hardware requirements.

Reddog22

USEast

3. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 04:11:54 PM PDT

quote reply

Q u o t e:
Surely we could be told this information. It doesn't make anything final. It merely gives us an idea of what to expect for hardware requirements.

There's no way they can release requirements early. People would buy computers based on these, and would go nuts if the final requirements were lower.

Bashiok

Blizzard Poster

4. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 04:36:23 PM PDT

quote reply

They were insane.

There's a few reasons why it doesn't matter what those machines were though.

Most machines are lent to us by hardware vendors. It's in our interest to have our games look good and run well, and it's in their interest to show off the latest and greatest their company has to offer. So generally they're top of the line, using all the newest and best hardware.

Because we're working with a pre-release version we work with the hardware that's going to be on the show floor to build a final show floor build. The game hasn't hit (obviously) final QA and hardware compatibility testing as it would before release to the public, so we need to ensure it's going to run smoothly on this one specific set of hardware for the show.

It can also help, to a degree, overcome some potential technical hurdles we could run into with a pre-optimized build of the game. Throw more CPU/RAM/3D processing at it, and generally those pre-optimized problems won't throw a wrench into the brief glimpse of a game that isn't finished yet.

So, the combination of having hardware vendors showing off the latest and greatest, coupled with our interest to have a unoptimized version of the game look good, leads to show floor specifications that are probably way beyond what even the final "Recommended" specs for the game would be, let alone "Required".

This is the general outcome anyway, it could turn out that hardware we had is EXACTLY recommended spec and I'm TOOMA here. But regardless it really wouldn't matter at this time, and also... I'm noooot goooonna teeeeell yooooou! ;)

Verdreht254

USEast

5. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 04:46:07 PM PDT

quote reply

Q u o t e:
also... I'm noooot goooonna teeeeell yooooou! ;)

I'm content with that.

It's better then: I'm going to tell you "soon".

:P

Bob_the_evil

USWest

6. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 05:06:38 PM PDT

quote reply

No but I can, I have it written down somewhere, let me see if I can find it.

Made with bits of real nightsaber.

Bob_the_evil

USWest

7. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 05:13:00 PM PDT

quote reply

core 2 duo 2.5 or 2.6 ghz depending on the station.
4gb ram (no idea what speed)
3870 or 4870 ATI cards depending on station
vista 64bit

Whee, don't ban me please :(

-edit-

Note in addition to what Bashiok said:

This is not what the full requirements of the game would be, games like this get lots of tuning to lower the requirements - as well as test systems being far above the necessary level. It might be a fair bet to say that it'll run pretty damn perfectly on such a system, and that such a system is probably what they are playing on internally.

[ Post edited by Bob_the_evil ]

Made with bits of real nightsaber.

Ricky927

USEast

8. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 05:24:58 PM PDT

quote reply

Heh id Love to buy a nice 2.4+ Ghz Quad computer for Diablo. It would probably be overkill but playing Diablo 3 on Max settings would not be a bad thing.

Mardukdeathbane

Europe

9. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 05:26:46 PM PDT

quote reply

Both Crysis and Dawn of War 2 have 2GB RAM as recommended.
Oblivion says 2GB, too.

Even Fallout 3 says 2GB as recommended.

I'm surprised if Diablo 3 will use more RAM than those do!

My hands smell like coconut.
-Bashiok

Verdreht254

USEast

10. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 06:30:43 PM PDT

quote reply

Q u o t e:
Both Crysis and Dawn of War 2 have 2GB RAM as recommended.
Oblivion says 2GB, too.

Even Fallout 3 says 2GB as recommended.

I'm surprised if Diablo 3 will use more RAM than those do!

In reality Crysis probably says lower specs then they really recommend. Just so people will still buy there game, and not pass over it due to high system requirements.

G_zc3

USEast

11. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 07:41:02 PM PDT

quote reply

Q u o t e:
Both Crysis and Dawn of War 2 have 2GB RAM as recommended.
Oblivion says 2GB, too.

Even Fallout 3 says 2GB as recommended.

I'm surprised if Diablo 3 will use more RAM than those do!

RAM is not nearly as much of the problem here, I'm right now using a laptop with 4G of RAM, but a less-than-great GPU (8400m geforce), and it runs oblivion like poop. The critical bottlenecking always occurs at the video card.

Acastermalbis

USEast

12. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/13/2009 08:24:20 PM PDT

quote reply

Q u o t e:

RAM is not nearly as much of the problem here, I'm right now using a laptop with 4G of RAM, but a less-than-great GPU (8400m geforce), and it runs oblivion like poop. The critical bottlenecking always occurs at the video card.

I run Oblivion on a mobo nVidia 128MB equiv. hah, who needs expensive vid cards? :)

2337

Europe

13. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/14/2009 04:40:47 AM PDT

quote reply

He could of course just have told us the system specs but his long reply reasoned why it wouldn't make sense. However his the end of his post HAD to include this nasty statement

Q u o t e:
way beyond what even the final "Recommended" specs for the game would be, let alone "Required" which

which evokes the general speculation&begging because if we knew the specs we could compare our own computer to that and just do the math...

What I'd like to know:
Is Diablo3 going to support and use multicores efficiently? There are many games, even new ones, that don't profit at all from multicores. Assuming that Diablo3 isn't developed in the late 90's and will be played for a couple of years and feature expansion pack(s) as well I think it'd be reasonable to support multicores and use them efficiently since the majority has them already or will have in the next years when Diablo3 gets released

pwned

Zomgtehdave

USWest

14. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/14/2009 06:11:27 AM PDT

quote reply

I was going to say that the specs of the machines for the Blizzcon demo were probably super awesome, but Bashiok beat me to it.

But yeah, if you've ever played an alpha or beta build of game while it's under development, they're usually unoptimized to hell. You'll get slowdowns and memory leaks galore. Sometimes running it on a spectacular machine like the ones Bashiok describes will fix it, at least for the show.

Also, Bashiok, how does it run on machines that are either above or below the as of yet unrevealed specs? Average FPS, that sort of thing?

Drapester

USEast

15. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/14/2009 07:04:28 AM PDT

quote reply

Q u o t e:
They were insane.

There's a few reasons why it doesn't matter what those machines were though.

Most machines are lent to us by hardware vendors. It's in our interest to have our games look good and run well, and it's in their interest to show off the latest and greatest their company has to offer. So generally they're top of the line, using all the newest and best hardware.

Because we're working with a pre-release version we work with the hardware that's going to be on the show floor to build a final show floor build. The game hasn't hit (obviously) final QA and hardware compatibility testing as it would before release to the public, so we need to ensure it's going to run smoothly on this one specific set of hardware for the show.

It can also help, to a degree, overcome some potential technical hurdles we could run into with a pre-optimized build of the game. Throw more CPU/RAM/3D processing at it, and generally those pre-optimized problems won't throw a wrench into the brief glimpse of a game that isn't finished yet.

So, the combination of having hardware vendors showing off the latest and greatest, coupled with our interest to have a unoptimized version of the game look good, leads to show floor specifications that are probably way beyond what even the final "Recommended" specs for the game would be, let alone "Required".

This is the general outcome anyway, it could turn out that hardware we had is EXACTLY recommended spec and I'm TOOMA here. But regardless it really wouldn't matter at this time, and also... I'm noooot goooonna teeeeell yooooou! ;)

You haven't reached that stage yet?! Oh..God. Oh God! *cries into his egg whites and cottage cheese

Oh guh-guh-god!

On a brighter note, my security input said rdfSEX. Verra nice.

Bob_the_evil

USWest

16. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/14/2009 12:30:19 PM PDT

quote reply

Probably super awesome nothing. Those ARE the specs for the Blizzcon demo machines, what do you think I just played D3 the whole time?

Made with bits of real nightsaber.

Johnor

USEast

17. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/14/2009 01:25:37 PM PDT

quote reply

Bob_the_evil = Bashiok's alter ego?

Bob_the_evil

USWest

18. Re: Demo at BlizzCon 2008 05/14/2009 01:47:49 PM PDT

quote reply

Q u o t e:
Bob_the_evil = Bashiok's alter ego?

No. I do not work for Blizzard, I just went to Blizzcon and played way too much D3.

Proof:
I have a sticky in this forum, if I worked for Blizzard that wouldn't be happening, at least not on a regular account.

-edit-

Plus Bashiok's not evil... or is he?

[ Post edited by Bob_the_evil ]

Made with bits of real nightsaber.

Forum > Diablo III > General