4 ms·
I had to return that game because it was totally unplayable on a 2009 iMac with Radeon 5850. That should be plenty of computer but there's this obnoxious cloud
by thrownaway2424 11y ago
I had to return that game because it was totally unplayable on a 2009 iMac with Radeon 5850. That should be plenty of computer but there's this obnoxious cloud simulation over the top of everything that pegs the GPU. Pretty sad.
- chimeracoder 11y ago> I had to return that game because it was totally unplayable on a 2009 iMac with Radeon 5850. That should be plenty of computer Skylines came out only this year. 6 years is a long time in the gaming world. I wouldn't expect to play many games from this year on any computer from 2009.
- thrownaway2424 11y agoLots of games run fine on this computer including games that came out this year or recently, including Kerbal Space Program, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, XCOM: Enemy Unknown and XCOM: Enemy Within, and Papers Please. Cities: Skylines is the only one that was a slideshow, which is weird because city sims don't need graphics. I'd be perfectly happy with Transport Tycoon-level graphics from 20 years ago.
- yareally 11y ago> Papers Please That could potentially run on a Pentium 4 with integrated graphics, not exactly the best comparison. Great game, but not sure why you felt you needed to include it in that list. Quite a few of those games are not overly demanding either and mostly forgiving of older graphics cards. If you can run things like Arma 3, Witcher 2 or 3, I'd be more curious. Cities Skylines is a simulation, it's going to eat up a lot of CPU and a lesser extent, GPU.
- simoncion 11y agoI can run The Witcher 3 with quite playable performance. Pertinent system specs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10372389 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10372389 If Bohemia Interactive wrote ARMA 3, I wouldn't take its requirements for a beefy machine as indication of anything other than the... interesting design choices those guys make when designing and implementing their games.
- yrro 11y agoI'm playing Cities: Skylines just fine on a ~2009 computer (Core i5 750, Radeon HD 5850), on Windows. So the difference is in the software.
- thrownaway2424 11y agoThat's interesting. I'll admit I haven't tried it under Windows. Maybe it works fine under that OS.
- simoncion 11y ago> I wouldn't expect to play many games from this year on any computer from 2009. I run many, many, many recently released (and not-yet-released) big-name 3D games on 5 [0] and 6 [1] year old hardware. Console-first development has done terrible things to video game design, but it has let cheap bastards like myself get enormous mileage out of our gaming rigs. (BTW: Cities runs juuuuuuuuust fine on my "ancient" PC. :) ) [0] Radeon HD 6950 [1] AMD Phenom II X4 955
- Klinky 11y agoDid you swap the video card? The 2009 iMac didn't come with a Radeon 5850.
- thrownaway2424 11y agoIndeed. After 5 years the original GPU developed some kind of intermittent flaw so I swapped it out with the board (and cooler) from a mid-2010 iMac. It's an easy swap. Mac OS X identifies it as a Radeon 5750 but Windows calls it a 5850. Either way, I believe it's very similar in performance to the original 4850 that was the top spec in the late-2009 iMac.
- code_sterling 11y agoYea, I totally agree. My Commodore 64 didn't even know what to do with the game. Pretty sad indeed. I don't understand why developers choose to go after markets of majority, rather than developing in accordance to what my machine is. I mean, it has 64,000 bytes in RAM, and although I don't have a firm grasp on even simple computing requirements, 64,000 of anything is a lot and should be able to play the most modern games.
- simoncion 11y agoYou'd do well to peruse a few of the replies to the person you replied to. Your brief screed is rather off the mark.
- code_sterling 11y agoGood grief.