Can Your PC Handle The EverQuest Next Landmark Alpha?

EverQuest Next Landmark. Your desktop / notebook / goblin-powered gaming contraption. Can the latter run the former? The answer to that question is most likely "Yes", unless you're still plugging away at C&C: Red Alert on your dusty old 486DX.

Posted a couple of days ago, the system requirements for the alpha version of EQN Landmark are surprisingly OK. Even so, the post mentions the developers will be "performing optimizations throughout our testing period", which should allow it to drop the requirements in the future.

Minimum System Requirements:

OS – Windows 7 64 bit Processor – Intel i5 Dual Core or higher / AMD Phenom X3 or higher Memory – 4GB RAM Hard Drive – 20GB Free Video Memory – 1,024 MB RAM Video Card – nVidia GeForce GTX 275 series or higher / AMD HD 4890 or higher Sound Card – DirectX compatible Internet – Broadband (10Mbit/sec or higher)
Recommended System Requirements:

OS – Windows 7 64 bit Processor – Intel i5 Quad Core or higher / AMD Phenom II X6 or higher Memory – 8GB RAM Hard Drive – 20GB Free Video Memory – 1,024 MB RAM Video Card – nVidia GeForce GTX 560 series or higher / AMD HD 6870 or higher Sound Card – DirectX compatible Internet – Broadband (10Mbit/sec or higher)

I don't really keep up-to-date on PC requirements these days, but the need for the 64-bit version of Windows 7 is interesting, as is the absence of Windows 8 in the recommend requirements (though I imagine it'd run fine on the operating system).

It's not like limiting things to 64-bit is really going to inconvenience anyone, but it does remind me of a time when people were burning their houses down whenever a game didn't support Windows XP.

EQN Landmark Alpha System Requirements [EQN Landmark]


Comments

    Quite reasonable spec's, but that connection requirement is going to screw most of us Aussies.

    I'm really interested to see how this turns out.

    If the tool set is as good as it they're making it out to be, there's a lot of potential for some great fan made content.

      After seeing these guys make engines like the planet side 2 one, I have faith in it being pretty good.

        Well it certainly looks it. Let's hope they put in the time and effort something like this deserves.

        I'm filing this one under "cautiously optimistic".

    THe funny thing is, until my GTX 780 arrives, I dont meet minimum requirements, cause I have atm a G210.

    I still try to play games using Windows XP because I don't want to spend more money on operating systems. But now that the new NFS: Most Wanted doesn't support Windows XP, I guess it's time to burn my house down...

      But what about directx? Your stuck at version 9 and no able to use all the features modern graphics cards are capable of.

        ... I don't really care about graphics and only really play strategy games on mu PC. Everything else I play on Nintendo and Sony's latest consoles :)

          In all honesty 7 is better than XP in most any way. MS continues it's trend of every other release being good. XP->7->Whatever comes after 8, good. 98->Vista->8 bad. Also, 64 bit XP kinda sucked.

            64-bit XP sucked!!!? I had to cover my iMac's microphone when you said that, if it heard you it'd never use Bootcamp again! In all honesty though, I have Windows 7 running on my laptop and really don't see it being any better than XP.

    How much bandwidth will this new Everquest use? I mean if it'll have all those voxel things won't that use a ton?

    The 64-bit requirement is so that you can use the 8Gb RAM that they recommend. 32-bit OS' only support up to about 3.5Gb.
    Yes, there are exceptions to that, but no process can see more than about 4Gb of useable memory in 32-bit. 64-bit increases the address space quite significantly.

    Did no one notice the HUGE

    Internet – Broadband (10Mbit/sec or higher)

    What the hell? Games take up almost no data, we are talking literally bits of information about other players. Speed is a non issue as well because 1GB or 1 MB download doesn't make a difference when the data you are getting is so small.

    So what gives here? Worth noting that with speedtest.net data indicates my 3MB speed is faster than 40 odd%, extrapolating you can easily state well over 50% of aussies wouldn't even be close to that speed. America would be the similar or even worse since something like 50% don't even have broadband. So 10mb as a minimum, outside them plain old lying, would likely destroy the potential user base.

    Last edited 25/01/14 5:19 pm

      Yeah that was the first thing I noticed as well.

      Bearing in mind that we're talking about an alpha test, not even beta yet, I'm assuming that this is going to change well before the final release. Chances are they're just overshooting the requirements quite significantly because they know the client is going to be very early and not even close to optimised.

        Just realise a possible reason it could be due to the constant need to patch and re download the entire client when needed within limited time frames.

        But outside of that it seems a bit odd even for overshooting.

          Possibly, but even still, 10mbit is a pipe dream for most people, in or out of AU. They are going to grossly limit their available pool with that one.

          This popped up on the net from one of the developers:

          Hey guys. I just wanted to clarify the question about the bandwidth and disk space recommendations.
          This is a streaming game, and you will not have an initial 20GB download. It is more about disk space used for caching data.
          This also relates to the bandwidth recommendation that is due to the previously mentioned streaming of data. While you can play at lower bandwidth, you may need to wait longer for the data streaming to finish as you move through the world (if it isn't cached). So for alpha at least we wanted to be up front about how your bandwidth may affect game play while we get a better feel for how low your bandwidth can go before it starts being a serious problem.

          Sounds like they're trying to cover their bases so people don't lose it when they have to wait on giant structures downloading while they walk around.

      It need the bandwidth because Landmark (and Next)is not like any other game. Almost everything is destructable, and the world changes all the time, mobs move around according to the AI, etc etc. So what you saw yesterday may not be the same - and it has to download the new info. There will be a lot more data passing down from the server.

      10mbs is pretty steep everywhere, but it's particularly bad for people who live down here in Australia.

      I just got my office internet installed (<30 people) - 20mbs, unmetered = 1500 dollars.

      If you think that's bad, Telstra wanted to charge us almost 9k for 10mbs unmetered.

      I was talking to our CFO the other day on Skype (they are based out of the States), he pays around 400 dollars a month for 40mbs.

      But hey, privatization brings cheaper prices for everyone, right? I mean, if the government hadn't sold off Telstra, we'd probably be paying like a bajillion dollars for dialup... or something.

    I was seriously expecting A LOT since the article title was Can you handle

    my computer is 5 years old and shits on deez specs

    Im right on the minimum except for my processor. Im still running an Intel Core 2 QUAD @2.66 Ghz. Will I be able to run this with that processor? :/

    [URL=http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3395606751][IMG]http://www.speedtest.net/result/3395606751.png[/IMG][/URL]

    Hope my internetz are fast enoughs..... lolz

    Mbit =/= MByte

Join the discussion!