Psst. Ray. The 5600 is a overclocked 5200.

Ahh yeah, the 5200 isn't that bad. I'm getting well over 100 FPS in most sectors with my texture quality set high. At least recently it does, without the weird OS X slowdown bug that plagued previous versions. But yeah, that's without pixel shaders. Still, that's anything but poor performance and crappy graphics. I think the main issue (at least on the Mac side) is the crappy drivers Apple has been releasing for all nVidia cards.

I don't even have a problem with my radeon 7500 on an 800 Mhz G4 on 1024x768. I used to play it on a 700 Mhz Duron with a 16 Mb TNT on LinuX. Why would they put up such a high recommendation while this version runs so light?

Ofcourse some killer graphic would be nice, but it's not so bad right now in my opinion exept if u zoom in with i and look at the stars :)

Requirements != Reccommendations

The box will probably say something like this:


Minimum System Requirements:

733Mhz Pentium III or Equivalent
600Mhz G3
128MB RAM
32MB NVIDIA TNT2 or Equivalent
Windows 98+, Linux Kernel 2.4+, Mac OS X


Reccommended System:

2.0Ghz Pentium IV or Equivalent
Apple PowerMac G5
512MB RAM
128MB NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 or Equivalent
Windows XP, Linux Kernel 2.6, Mac OS X 10.3

If it runs on such a much slower system then the reccommendations, peaple might think like what i thought and experienced with stuff like UT2004 and Jedi Acedemy, i've got the minimals but it's imposssible to accually play those games on the minimal.

On one hand it might scare peaple, like it already did. Thats bad advertisement.

On the other hand peaple might expect a top-graphics game when the newest techs are reccommended.

Anyways i was hoping to buy the upcoming iMac G5 so i'm probably going to enjoy the killer graphics then :)