Wolfenstein: The New Order system requirements published, 50GB space required

Wolfenstein: The New Order

By on May 2, 2014 at 7:18 am

Why are game caches getting ridiculously big these days? I know there was that cock-up with Titanfall that saw gamers accidentally download about fifty million languages of uncompressed audio but that’s supposed to be an aberration, a cruel April’s Fools joke in May. Or March. You get the idea. But everything else? C’mon developers. My SSD is only so large.

Anyway, since you might not have any idea what I’m whining about, the system requirements for Wolfenstein: The New Order were released on Bethseda’s official blog this morning. The meat and potatoes is obviously the CPU and GPU requirements and they’re not too shabby since it’s 64-bit only. Finally. It’s about time Windows XP and its silly RAM limitations buggered off. This is 2014, after all.

The full list, then:

  • 64-bit Windows 7/Windows 8
  • Intel Core i7 or equivalent AMD
  • 4 GB System RAM
  • 50 GB free HDD space
  • GeForce 460, ATI Radeon HD 6850
  • High Speed Internet Connection
  • Steam account and activation required

The “high speed internet connection” is a bit of an odd-one: what precisely do they mean by “high speed”? Do you need the NBN? Will good old ADSL2+ work? Or do you to need fork out your left eyeball and accept the proverbial from Telstra or Optus for cable? It’s not quite clear.

Either way, the rest is pretty straightforward. Note that the Bethesda site just says system requirements, not recommended requirements or minimum requirements, just system requirements. Perhaps system requirements means the minimum you’ll need to have a decent experience, which is how I’ve always read it anyway – as in, ignore the minimums and make sure you work hard enough to afford more than the recommended tosh.

A measly 4GB of RAM seems a bit, well, low. But perhaps that’s just telling us that WolfensteinTheNewOrder.exe will only call about 3GB of RAM. Or something. As long as I get to shoot an extra 1GB of Nazis that I couldn’t do in Windows XP, I’m happy.

24 comments (Leave your own)

The only stupid thing about this list is requiring an i7.

 

ive got an i7, but surely thats a mistake. Im no tech expert but would a game even be able to tell?

 

I have;
7GB DDR2 667 @960Mh/z
Athlon II 620 @ 3.54GH/z
Gigabyte 660 3GB edition.
1Tib WD Raptor.

Hope to god i can play this!

 
Some_Bored_Dude

narcarsiss,

Nope, you need an i7, they were clear on that. Gonna have to swap that AMD for an Intel. ;)

“High Speed Internet Connection”, Well… There goes 99% of Australia!

 
Some_Bored_Dude

*double post*

 

I remember reading a review in a magazine called PC Format for a game called Strike Commander way back in the day. They gave it around 90% and seemed to love it, but one of the big complaints was that at 50MB it took up way too much hard disk space. Now I’m looking at this game, looking at the 50GB hard drive footprint and having a sense of déjà vu.

All I’m hoping is that for a game that size it will last longer than 8 hours. I mean it’s not really that correct to directly correlate hard drive footprint to number of hours played but I can’t help comparing this to something like Skyrim for example, which was 6GB (give or take) and has had a good hundred or so hours sunk into it. Or Daggerfall which fit on a single CD but had a mammoth world. Or Minecraft which you could download and stick on a floppy disk and have space to spare…

 

IT would seem these requirements do need some more looking into and the game probably needs some more optimization.
As much as it pains me to say (as an AMD Fanboy) there is very little AMD hardware that is directly comparable to current i7 hardware. That said it only says i7 which could very much mean gen 1 i7 which would mean most gen 2 at least i5 should be find and likely gen 3 i3 too.
As it is 64 bit only they probably should be looking to use even more memory than 4GB too.

Lastly 50GB of HDD space would still seem to me to be kind of bloated more than it should and is really getting to the storage limits of Blueray disks which could limit it to PC only ( which is not a bad thing at all) especially as the X1′s HDD is tiny. Also those who are using SSD’s for boot / game stores are going to struggle to fit it on their current driver (unless they are very recent).

 

Well the i7 bit is wrong, basically just flat out wrong.

The reason why, is no game uses hyper-threading, which is the only benefit to an i7 over an i5. Even then it’s a dubious benefit at best unless you are doing a lot of video encoding or other HT enabled work.

So any avg to good i5 will do the job. On the flip side you’ll need a pretty good AMD to keep up, so anything that’s quad core with 4Ghz or better and the most L2 cache you can get your hands on. That old Athlon II 620 with DDR2 is pretty much a dinosaur! An equivalent would be an FX-4300 or better.

With the 50GB install that seems to indicate that it has HD textures so as much gfx RAM as possible along with a good helping of system RAM will do the trick. It says min 4GB of system RAM, though I’d have at least 6-8GB to be on the safe side. If it can address and use 4 you’ll need stuff left over for Windows and those 20 Browser tabs :D

GFX card wise the req’s above are actually quite low, suggesting that’s a min requirement list. A 660Ti or 7950 or better should do the job just fine for medium settings, if you want high as usual aim for the GTX 780′s and the R9 290′s (seeing as anything below those is just rebranded tech from the previous generation).

 
Anon. E. Moose

Don’t a lot of games nowadays list a “high speed internet connection” in their system requirements?

 

well it certainly DOESNT need a high speed internet connection, as there is no form of multiplayer whatsoever. wolf: the new order is strictly a singleplayer affair. however if ur downloading it and dont want it to take two weeks… (through steam)

 

Also requires a wallet with at least $80.

 

sdhc,

What? Who keeps money in their wallet any more? Mine seems to be mostly a dumping ground for receipts and such.

 

anonemoose: Don’t a lot of games nowadays list a “high speed internet connection” in their system requirements?

Pretty much every game released in the last decade.

 

Since when has been reporting the retarded shit coming straight from idiotic companies been considered news?

Wolfenstein is a single player game, so tell me in what way that it requires an internet connection other than the initial install.

Although some games make use of 8cores, the difference between 8 and 4 core is next to nothing, also the engine that runs this game is the exact same one that ran Rage, a 2 and a half year old game.

4gb of ram isnt measly, its about average, if not a little over the top. Ive never witnessed a game using more than 1.5gb of ram.

50gb HDD isnt large, for an $80 1TB HDD its about $4 of space
People whinging about how their precious SSD’s dont have large storage spaces, well hate to break it to you but SSD’s simple aren’t faster than HDD’s when loading video games.
Im always the first to load into Dota2.
Im always the first to spawn in BF4,
Im always the first to take off in War Thunder.
Diablo 3 always loads the map within 2 seconds.

But sure, im absolutely certain that spending 5 times the money for equal storage space was worth it.

Anyway, i hope people arent diluted enough to spend $80 on a single player only FPS game.

Thankfully bethesda make games that are incredibly easy to pirate.

 
PsychoSmiley

stryker3216:
Since when has been reporting the retarded shit coming straight from idiotic companies been considered news?

Wolfenstein is a single player game, so tell me in what way that it requires an internet connection other than the initial install.

Although some games make use of 8cores, the difference between 8 and 4 core is next to nothing, also the engine that runs this game is the exact same one that ran Rage, a 2 and a half year old game.

4gb of ram isnt measly, its about average, if not a little over the top. Ive never witnessed a game using more than 1.5gb of ram.

50gb HDD isnt large, for an $80 1TB HDD its about $4 of space
People whinging about how their precious SSD’s dont have large storage spaces, well hate to break it to you but SSD’s simple aren’t faster than HDD’s when loading video games.
Im always the first to load into Dota2.
Im always the first to spawn in BF4,
Im always the first to take off in War Thunder.
Diablo 3 always loads the map within 2 seconds.

But sure, im absolutely certain that spending 5 times the money for equal storage space was worth it.

Anyway, i hope people arent diluted enough to spend $80 on a single player only FPS game.

Thankfully bethesda make games that are incredibly easy to pirate.

Yet your not the first to be wrong… Keep on deluding yourself buddy.

 

stryker3216,

And here we see the idiot in its natural environment. This idiot, like many of its species thinks it knows everything. The best course of action when encountering an idiot in the wild is to ignore its statements like they never happened.

 

At 50gb of download, anything less than a high speed connection will be a problem. Certainly counts me out.

 

Will most likely be another 3+ DVD install.

Publishers should really look at using Blu-ray for PC game install media.

Yes I’m going to keep beating this drum. Deal with it.

 

PalZer0,

Few people have Blu-ray drives and the more expensive disks will most certainly give them justification to hike the price even higher for boxed copies. It’s been a long time since I’ve bought a physical copy of a PC game…

 

wolfstar90:
PalZer0,

Few people have Blu-ray drives and the more expensive disks will most certainly give them justification to hike the price even higher for boxed copies. It’s been a long time since I’ve bought a physical copy of a PC game…

But people will upgrade to a bluray drive if there is a need. Their cost is quite low now so people just need to move on.

Also someone commented above about HDDs loading faster. Hell no. But you really need to pick and choose what games are on your SSD to get the most out of it. I.e. For me I find that simulators such as DCS and Arma 3 load way faster and run a bit better too.

 
Leave a comment

You can use the following bbCode
[i], [b], [img], [quote], [url href="http://www.google.com/"]Google[/url]

Leave a Reply

PC Gaming Calendar 2014

Follow Games.on.net

YouTube

Steam Group

Upcoming Games

Community Soapbox

Recent Features
Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel

Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel’s great humour carries it through

It may feel like the world's biggest piece of Borderlands 2 DLC, but the Pre-Sequel has a flavour all its own.

The Evil Within

The Evil Within: It’s a fine line between pleasure and pain (especially on PC)

We check out Shinji Mikami's latest punishment simulator, but buyer beware when it comes to the PC version.

Shadow of Mordor

Choose your own adventure: Why heavily scripted cinematic games need to loosen up

It's time for game developers to sit back and let the players take control.

world of warcraft warlords of draenor

World of Warcraft’s Tom Chilton talks Warlords, paid level 90 boosts, and jumping the shark

WoW's Game Director explains how they've been on, off, and all around the shark since 2004.

Streaming Radio
Radio Streams are restricted to iiNet group customers.

GreenManGaming MREC

Facebook Like Box