Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Real Compatibilty Database

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 27, 2010 6:56:42 PM

My GPU is old, nor does it have much RAM, but more than often enough. I tried demos for games, well above my spec ( ie 128MB vs my 16MB ) and the game ran just fine.

There are some ad infested sites which ask you to input your system specifications, then tell you about the compatibility, but the results are not quite correct. Nor is there a reverse lookup - ie GPU will give a list of compatible games.

I see no point in upgrading a computer just for gaming. This 8 year notebook plays most HD fine, and is dead quiet when surfing or writing.

Anyways, if there are any resources about real compatibility, that would nice know about.
a b U Graphics card
July 27, 2010 7:11:18 PM

Try Crysis, Metro 2033, or even dragon age. Then think about upgrading again.
m
0
l
July 27, 2010 9:17:04 PM

Thank you stating the obvious, but most people have no need to upgrade their computers, would developers allow more backwards compatibility.
And well, 3 screens 5760x1080p does not make a game good or fun. Apparently Dragon Age's plot is not quite as good as Zelda...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
July 27, 2010 9:32:16 PM

blockedhead said:
Thank you stating the obvious, but most people have no need to upgrade their computers, would developers allow more backwards compatibility.
And well, 3 screens 5760x1080p does not make a game good or fun. Apparently Dragon Age's plot is not quite as good as Zelda...


No matter how hard developers allow backward compatibility, your card simply doesn't have enough power to run modern games with high-poly 3D models and equally high-res textures.

I'm not asking much, nor did I say anything about eyefinity. Just run dragon age on all-low and 1024*768 and see how playable it is. For a good plot, you can have fun with 2D games or even better read a novel. Have fun!
m
0
l
a c 201 U Graphics card
July 27, 2010 9:41:22 PM

Supporting backwards compatibility to cards that old isnt backwards compatibilty, its preventing progress. There is a point at which in order to move forward older stuff must be left behind. Supporting cards that low is a pointless venture for developers, the steam HW survey covers about 80% of gaming systems, less than 10% of systems reported having less than 256MB of VRAM, 5.36% reported other which could mean more or less, but either way, spending significantly more to make low level models that are crappy enough to run on low end cards just to support less than 15% of the gaming community seems like a horrid waste of money. Why add an ultra low setting just so ancient systems can run it when you could spend that money making ultra high look better which will get more people to buy your game.
m
0
l
July 27, 2010 10:53:51 PM

This may be off topic, but few agreed that Vista(initial release) was much better than XP, although the system requirements were much higher. Even with windows 7, there is a noticeable improvement in newer machines if you turn off all the visual enhancements.(the classic look is a winner in my book ).

I agree with both of you that a) it may be easier finding a novel with a good plot,b) spending money on developing functionality  that will not be used by a large percentage of users could be a waste. However for those may be interested, standard scaling could be done at a low cost and offer something for people with older systems. ie. Mount and Blade Warband (2010) works great on my system(I acknowledge the base engine is 2007)

Nevertheless, I would very much appreciate if someone knew of site to reverse lookup game-GPU compatibility.

(sorry my input, i just noticed my input changed to half-width....=_= )
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
July 27, 2010 10:55:19 PM

OH NO.
half-width is so hard to read.
XD
m
0
l
July 28, 2010 5:47:26 AM

I am skeptical that what you're looking for even exists. Two reasons - from the manufacturer's side; they don't support the hardware anymore meaning no more driver updates and it's pretty much use at your own risk. From the developer's side, what you have is probably well below the minimum requirements (whether it runs or not) and they won't bother listing or supporting that piece of hardware so their attitude will be something like 'good for you if it runs, but don't expect anything'.

If you want to play modern games, you'll need a modern system.
m
0
l
a c 153 U Graphics card
July 28, 2010 5:57:59 AM

What you are talking about isn't backwards compatibility at all.

A new pc being able to play an old pc game... thats backwards comptaible.

A xbox 360 being able to play an Xbox original games... thats backwards compatible.

What you are asking for is something different, forward compatibilty?

Anyway, to play a modern game you are going to need a modern system. Don't expcet your 1980's IBM to do something a 2000 computer can do. Don't expect your 1990's computer to play a 2010 video games. Don't except your 1990's phone to be able to text message.

See where I'm going with this? Things have to evolve, and old things have to be left in the dust. If this weren't so we would be stuck in the past.

Also it would cost developers more time and money to create what you want, something that obviously isn't healthy for buisness. And they kind of do this anyway, turn off all features, turn down all specs of the game, and put the resolution to the lowest, I'm so an older system can "run" the game yes. These developers can't try every game they make on EVERY graphics card untill they find out exactly what the lowest lowest card that can run the game is.

blockedhead said:
Thank you stating the obvious, but most people have no need to upgrade their computers, would developers allow more backwards compatibility.
And well, 3 screens 5760x1080p does not make a game good or fun. Apparently Dragon Age's plot is not quite as good as Zelda...


Also, for games that are FPS it really addds to immersion for some people to play at that resolution, so yes while it is opinion it CAN make a game more "good or fun" for some (most) people.

But to answer your question I doubt what you are looking for exists. The best you can do is what you are already doing, just play demos and see if they "run" the game you want to play.
m
0
l
July 29, 2010 5:42:22 AM

In fact, I do have an IBM! Even though my system RAM is 2GB the only way to upgrade the video is through a Dock and an external monitor and a PCI video card (some do support DirectX 10)... probably going to cost 200$ - not worth it considering I spend less than that in software per year.

I still believe better software uses less resources, considering that some features can be left out. Although it is impression, we look at the load time of an application, like a browser, but really it is often open for hours, but people still put graphs showing X took 0.3 seconds longer to load than Y....
m
0
l
!