Originally Posted by ryan_syek
My point was its old tech there using, its safe to say if you can play one of those games on the list you SHOULD be fine.
bl2 will have the ability to change settings to sack quality for performance. either via ingame tweaks or ini tweaks. just like the games I've listed.
take my laptop for instance. its not near the recommended and slightly below the minimum specs for homefront.
but utilizing alittle bit of knowledge from Google im able to play homefront without a hitch.
i dont know what more to say, but like i said. if you can play those games weather you utilize tweaks or options you SHOULD be fine in bl2
its a very good game engine.
and as for playing bl1 on low settings.. i would upgrade if that were the case, and in that sense almost any amount of upgrading at this point in time would be a mega +
the engine does not determine how demanding a game might be. the assets gearbox produces will determine the hardware requirements more than anything... high res textures... lod's... the depth that they take optimization. The only thing that the ue3 label offers up as a requirement is the bare minimum. pixel shader 3.0 or above and a minimum of dx9 compatible hardware.
not trying to be rude but the range of games that can be produced with the ue3 engine is tremendous. You could easily make a game that wont play on 90% of the pc's out there... hell swapping out all textures in borderlands 1 to 4k textures would do that.
specifics aside i think its fair to say that bl1 will be the mid range benchmark. if you were playing at the lowest screen resolution with all settings on low you might have to upgrade. Even that isnt a given though. I could easily see them keeping low of BL 1 the low for BL 2, and just opening up the top end of the whole thing for those who can run it that way.
Gearbox doesnt seem like the sort of company to force people to upgrade just to play on low.
Also the 680 thing is not a requirement.