Diablo 3 was surprisingly awesome on consoles, I don't see this being much different. I may play this on console just for the simple fact that it allows you to have 4-6 skills on screen at one time and not have to use keybinds. IF you can mange to get your hands on a PS5 or Xbox Series X, for $500 you will absolutely be able to play it in 4k at 60 fps.
If you have a last-gen console, I would guess it will run D2 at 30 fps in 1080p with some pretty annoying load times.
16 GB of RAM is pretty standard nowadays. The particle effects alone will make Diablo 2: Resurrected require at least a 1060. The problem you're running into is being a fan of 20 year old games (or in the case BG, a series) being revived after two decades of tech advances. I'm not even sure I would like BG3, and while I'm sure I would like D2:R and had been planning to buy it, I'm not paying $1200 or more for it! I'm sure that's very exciting to a lot of people with plenty of disposable income who already have or will soon buy top of the line new computers, but that's not me. It's hard to believe such an old game could be "remastered" to the point of needing that kind of computer power, but apparently this one is. Best Buy's lower end "gaming computers" have only 2 GB dedicated video RAM on some of the graphics cards. It says it "recommends" 16 GB system RAM and 6 GB (!) dedicated video RAM. I looked at Best Buy, and their bottom of the line (under $1000 USD) "gaming PC's" also don't meet system requirements. That makes two games of interest to me - Baldur's Gate 3 and now Diablo 2: Resurrected, that I would probably need a new computer to play. My computer *barely* meets minimum, much less recommended, and that's assuming it will work on Windows 8, since they support nothing but Windows 10. The system requirements they just released are quite daunting.
0 kommentar(er)
