Deep Silver Delivers Metro: Last Light PC Requirements

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Deep Silver Delivers Metro: Last Light PC Requirements

image

Because you demanded it (and because it's only a month away) we present to you now the many and varied system requirements for the PC version of Metro: Last Light.

Does it feel weird to anyone else to describe Metro: Last Light as a Deep Silver game? Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, although I certainly have no major complaints about the THQ-published Metro 2033, but it's weird. "The Deep Silver shooter Metro: Last Light." That's going to take some getting used to.

Anyway, the game is coming ever closer to launch and in the fine tradition of such things, that means it's time to talk system requirements. Metro: Last Light is built upon the 4A Engine, the same technology that powered Metro 2033, so if you handled that game without any difficulty you'll probably have good luck with this one too. For those who remain uncertain, behold!

Minimum:

  • Windows: XP (32-Bit), Vista, 7 or 8
  • CPU: 2.2 GHz Dual Core e.g. Intel Core 2 Duo
  • RAM: 2GB
  • Direct X: 9.0c
  • Graphics Card: DirectX 9, Shader Model 3 compliant e.g. NVIDIA GTS 250 (or AMD equivalent e.g. HD Radeon 4000 series) or higher

Recommended:

  • Windows: Vista, 7 or 8
  • CPU: 2.6 GHz Quad Core e.g. Intel Core i5
  • RAM: 4GB
  • Direct X: 11
  • Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 580/660 Ti (or AMD equivalent e.g. 7870) or higher

Optimum

  • Windows: Vista, 7 or 8
  • CPU: 3.4 GHz Multi-Core e.g. Intel Core i7
  • RAM: 8GB
  • Direct X: 11
  • Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 690 / Nvidia Titan

Nvidia's 3D Vision is supported on compatible video cards with a 120 Hz monitor and NVidia 3D Vision kit for Windows Vista, 7 or 8.

I don't imagine that very many of us can meet the "optimum" spec but the "recommended" hardware should still provide a pleasantly horrific journey through the Moscow Metro. Do my words confuse you? For the benefit of those who find my mysterious language both strange and beautiful, the good folks at Nvidia have put together a little something that will tell you if your rig is ready with just the click of a button.

Metro: Last Light comes out on May 14 for the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC.

Permalink

Optimum

Windows: Vista, 7 or 8
CPU: 3.4 GHz Multi-Core e.g. Intel Core i7
RAM: 8GB
Direct X: 11
Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 690 / Nvidia Titan

I need to have $1000 graphics card to run the game optimally?! :sigh: looks like its time to break that bank ._.

Well, those are certainly some steep requirements on the optimal end of things. I 'only' have GTX 570, so I guess I will have to make due at settings slightly below recommended.

So I'm assuming it's just going to be like the witcher 2 where you look at the settings and say "Why the fuck do I need this on?". Metro 2033 looks good and imo it doesn't need Moar graphics.

Yeah, the "optimum" settings only apply to someone who wants to run the game across multiple monitors at above 1080 resolution with the highest AA settings, some crazy PhysX stuff, and 120 fps. Maybe it has a weird "ubersampling" option too.

The really important stuff for me is getting the HD textures, some AA, and hopefully near 60 fps.

The minimal requirements are pretty ... minimal.

dang those are some hefty requirements in the graphics compartment compared to alot of games out there, will be interesting to see it in play.

I guess metro is the new benchmarking game. The first was tough on pcs for some reason even though it didn't look particularly nice. I'm also curious what each setting entails. I think recomended should be max everything 1080 at stable 30+ as that would be a "standard" way to play the game.

Seems like I am going to overshoot the optimal RAM requirements with... 24GB. too bad my GPU is "only" a GTX670.

sneakypenguin:
I guess metro is the new benchmarking game. The first was tough on pcs for some reason even though it didn't look particularly nice. I'm also curious what each setting entails. I think recomended should be max everything 1080 at stable 30+ as that would be a "standard" way to play the game.

Metro 2033 not looking nice??!?@???!@#?? What the...
Well if I have to be serious there were several parts in the games (usually the snow I believe) that could have beem done better, though they were still pretty. But as for pretty much everything else... its so gorgeous its inanse :P . Or maybe you do not like the oppressive look? Well that is fair actuall.

OT: Ehh I ran the first on DX 11 Very high with a 5770 (my res is "only" 1440x900 though) and it ran well and looked phenomenal. 2033 did not need even MOAR GRAPHICS though. Still, I have high hopes for the actual game.

OWWW....my elitist pride......Time to get a 2nd GTX 670 and SLI this game to death!

Just by reading that, I noticed that the temperature monitor in my taskbar for my GPU just raised a few degrees.
These requirements are making my GTX 650 stress out! :C

Sssshhh, hush little baby. Everything will be okay...this game may hurt you, but I'm doing it because I love you.

RipVanTinkle:

Sssshhh, hush little baby. Everything will be okay...this game may hurt you, but I'm doing it because I love you.

Graphics card S&M? ....I'm actually OK with this. (Somehow.)

Metro 2033 was a nightmare to get running smoothly on pc. It looked great, but was poorly optimized. I have the feeling that they just "threw more wattage" at their design problems. Look at Dishonored (on PC). Not the most stunning DX11 (tessalation, ambient occlusion, particle fx)graphic showcase, but the game was visually stunning, because it was DESIGNED well. These guys (Crytek too) could learn from a few things about presentation from Arkane Studios. Visual innovation doesn't always come from a research/tech lab blowout. Hopefully Nvidia has given a them more than a few kickbacks for the future sales of their gpu's.

Nvidia Titan for optimal specs? Overkill maybe? I think that is rather absurd.

I barely have the specs for recommended, hope my GTX 560, 8gb ram and i5 should suffice to run this at high settings. I don't think I will even bother to touch ultra.

WaitWHAT:

RipVanTinkle:

Sssshhh, hush little baby. Everything will be okay...this game may hurt you, but I'm doing it because I love you.

Graphics card S&M? ....I'm actually OK with this. (Somehow.)

Graphics cards are like Pokemon, they love being forced to fight and sometimes get beaten to a bloody pulp. We do it for exp points love and training. :D

DTWolfwood:

Optimum

Windows: Vista, 7 or 8
CPU: 3.4 GHz Multi-Core e.g. Intel Core i7
RAM: 8GB
Direct X: 11
Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 690 / Nvidia Titan

I need to have $1000 graphics card to run the game optimally?! :sigh: looks like its time to break that bank ._.

I'm pretty damn sure they mean that that's what it takes to run it

-At maximum Settings (including PhysX, presumably)
-At 1080p, 1440p or Eyefinity/Surround/3D

Well, I knew my graphics card would need replacing sometime about now, and there it is on the minimum requirements.

Pinkamena:
Seems like I am going to overshoot the optimal RAM requirements with... 24GB. too bad my GPU is "only" a GTX670.

Not jealous, honest.

Having said that, my HIS7850 is proving surprisingly immune to projected requirements, so with any luck it'll run this on higher settings than Deep Silver think it will.

Still, nice to see Deep Silver staying stubbornly on the max out ALL the hardware line of thinking.

Mr.Tea:

DTWolfwood:

Optimum

Windows: Vista, 7 or 8
CPU: 3.4 GHz Multi-Core e.g. Intel Core i7
RAM: 8GB
Direct X: 11
Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 690 / Nvidia Titan

I need to have $1000 graphics card to run the game optimally?! :sigh: looks like its time to break that bank ._.

I'm pretty damn sure they mean that that's what it takes to run it

-At maximum Settings (including PhysX, presumably)
-At 1080p, 1440p or Eyefinity/Surround/3D

In all likelihood, even at the level the game will have frame rate drops. Much like how 2033 was a favored Benchmarking game. This one will presumably be the same.

Funny thing is i have everything except the graphics card. XD

This is ridicoulous. But it is actually good, because there's now a game that has better graphics than Crysis 3. Better Aesthetics is a thing about which we could talk all day, but I really loved Metro 2033's atmosphere, soooo... C3 is kind of the loser there too IMO.

Clovus:
Yeah, the "optimum" settings only apply to someone who wants to run the game across multiple monitors at above 1080 resolution with the highest AA settings, some crazy PhysX stuff, and 120 fps. Maybe it has a weird "ubersampling" option too.

Nope... this is the 4A engine. For multi-monitor setups you'll probably need several Titans. Have you looked at the benchmarks for Metro 2033? To be able to run that game on max, you need a GTX680. And this game is going to have even better graphics.

Mind you, those are confined spaces with lots of rendering occluders. If one were to make a game like Far Cry 3 in the 4A engine, it would not only look even more amazing, but it would also require a GF Titan... on the "Minimum requirements" list.

Some background on 4A: These are the people that coded for S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and deserted the company because they hated the old engine. And they made the 4A Engine... which is a technological marvel.

Just to clear something else up - Engine =/= good Graphics =/= Bloom. Effects are decided on by the developers and are always either attached to objects or whatever... it's dev choice. The engine only ever does the rendering and dictates how many different effects you can use and how you have to code UI and gameplay elements in (the CryEngine for example requires all UI elements to be parts of a flash movie, and all new gameplay elements are either Flowgraphed or coded in C++). CryEngine =/= tropical islands. However CryEngine = good dynamical shadows = nice and feasible looking indoor or forest areas because you don't need ambient lighting all that much.

Can't quite hit the optimal seeing as I have a GTX 680 in my PC but I'm very happy nonetheless.

Now to wait for some actual gameplay and reviews post launch.

Wow...they developed a game for 2013 using DirectX 9....welcome to a decade ago.
I curse MS and Sony for crippling graphical advances by keeping ancient hardware around long after it should have been put down.

Well the first game practically broke my old computer and now on my laptop it can't run without game-breaking framerate issues.
Looks like I'll be getting the console release on this one...

To be fair, computer requirements aren't what they sued to be.
Back in the day, if you met the minimum, you played with barely playable framerate. Nowadays, you can play at medium/high with solid framerates with the minimum requirements.

Lieutenant PC Gaming Elitist reporting for duty.

I can run the game on optimal settings. I guess that somehow makes me better than all of you plebeians. My hardware is the greatest yadda yadda yadda...

Seriously though, those optimal settings are rather steep. Is this the way most games are going at the moment? I mean, I have them, but was hoping that my system would've remained overkill for a little longer.

Captcha': win hands down.

Well thank you Captcha', I suppose there's hope left after all...

Not exactly the bleeding edge of journalism. Everything but the optimal could have been found on Steam and the Wiki half a month ago...

I fall short of Optimum only because my graphics card is a GTX 590. Oh well, time to go find my wallet.

KingsGambit:
Wow...they developed a game for 2013 using DirectX 9....welcome to a decade ago.
I curse MS and Sony for crippling graphical advances by keeping ancient hardware around long after it should have been put down.

The game is also being released on consoles. 360 and PS3 can't support DX11. PC version supports DX11 though, did you even read past minimum?

The game will look fine with recommended hardware. Hell, it'll look great. "Optimum" is when you call strangers over to your house and say "HAY OMG LOOK AT THIS!"

fix-the-spade:
Still, nice to see Deep Silver staying stubbornly on the max out ALL the hardware line of thinking.

Agreed. Maybe it's the die-hared PC weirdo in me but I find it oddly comforting to know that there's at least one publisher out there willing to say, "You know what? Fuck you."

But in a good way, of course.

Metro 2033 was one of the most brutally punishing games on framerates so this would fall in line.

However the aesthetics didn't really make me go "wow, so beautiful!", the art direction didn't make optimal use of the sheer amount of polygons/tesselation when compared to truly beautiful and expansive games like Battlefield 3 or Crysis series.

I'd be able to run it at optimum, but alas I'm still using my 250 GTS. I hope to god my GPU won't commit suicide.

RipVanTinkle:

WaitWHAT:

Graphics card S&M? ....I'm actually OK with this. (Somehow.)

Graphics cards are like Pokemon, they love being forced to fight and sometimes get beaten to a bloody pulp. We do it for exp points love and training. :D

No, no, that still sounds like S&M to me...

Everyone should remember that Metro 2033 "only" gets around 45 fps @ 1200p at max settings with a Nvidia Titan image, so needing it for optimum for a newer games isn't that surprising.

Mneyh Should run pretty well on my baby.

Looking forward to this game. I'll have to finish the first one. It's tense as hell.

so im at the upper end of recomended? Im fine with this

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here