Preview KotOR glimpsing at GameSpot

Saint_Proverbius · Oct 12, 2003

Tags: BioWare; Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic

The gentlemen of <A href="http://www.gamespot.com/">GameSpot</a> have done up <a href="http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/starwarsknightsoftor/news_6076705.html">a preview</a> of <a href="http://www.swkotor.com">Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic</a>, detailing what will be new in the PC version of the title. Things include some new ph4t l3wt, bug fixes, other stuff, and some steepish system requirements:
 
 
<blockquote>The PC version of the game will also fix a few technical issues from the original game, such as the bug that occasionally caused the your character's list of upcoming combat actions to freeze up if you added too many skills to the queue. Since Knights of the Old Republic will be a huge, fully 3D game, its minimum system requirements will include a 1GHz processor and 128MB of RAM for Windows 98 users, and a hefty 256MB of RAM for Windows XP users (512MB is recommended). Knights of the Old Republic is scheduled for release this November. </blockquote>
 
 
Remember when 640k of memory was more than you'll ever need?
 
 
Spotted this at <a href="http://www.homelanfed.com">HomeLAN Fed</a>

Sol Invictus · Oct 12, 2003

Those aren't very steep requirements. My old computer surpasses them easily. They look to be just slightly higher than the requirements for NWN on its highest details. Even though the game may not be that good (Though, I'll probably be trying it) I just hope that they port it well, and not in the manner that Gearbox ported Halo, which really sucks.

Of course, this should bring up the point that Halo never actually ran smoothly on the X-Box to begin with so maybe it's not even Gearbox's fault that it stinks on the PC. </digress>

DarkUnderlord · Oct 12, 2003

Saint_Proverbius said:
Remember when 640k of memory was more than you'll ever need?

Yes, I also remember playing around with autoexec.bat and config.sys loading things into highmem and what-not just so that I could GET enough memory so the damn thing would play. Although the one thing I miss about DOS was that it worked. Install a program and then when you want to get rid of it, just delete it's directory and you zapped the whole thing. Now you end up with files everywhere and you have to edit registry to clean something up if you can't delete it properly. It's also a bitch when things crash during install. :/

I find it funny that Windows XP users need twice the amount of RAM... Does an operating system really need so much over-head? I mean read the fucking files for christ's sake! Do whatever other things it is that operating systems do! You don't need to load all this shit into memory god-dammit!

*grumble grumble*

Saint_Proverbius · Oct 12, 2003

The reason the 8086 processor could address only 640k of memory is because the engineers at the time figured 64k was enough, but they needed room to expand that for the future. So, they took 64k and multiplied that number by 10 and made the chip so it could address 640k - because that's all the memory anyone will ever need.

That's what I was refering to with that line. It is kind of funny there's games now that recommend nearly one thousand times that many bytes to run, though, and only 20-30 years later.

Briosafreak · Oct 12, 2003

Hey Fergus and MCA are making KOtOR2!

http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php#21638

Volourn · Oct 13, 2003

I haven't played KOTOR yet; but if this is true; it's retarded. For all games, I prefer the original developer to work on it if at all possible.
Bah.

Grifman · Oct 13, 2003

Volourn said:
I haven't played KOTOR yet; but if this is true; it's retarded. For all games, I prefer the original developer to work on it if at all possible.
Bah.

Your loss. I don't think you can automatically assume someone else will screw up. I've seen sequels done by different developers that stunk - others that improved upon the game. I'd also base my opinion more upon who is doing the work. Though Obsidian doesn't have a track record as a company, a number of individuals there have excellent track records.

Grifman

Saint_Proverbius · Oct 13, 2003

I'd put more stock in Obsidian Ent making good Star Wars CRPG than BioWare. If nothing else, MCA is good at detailing a setting.

Volourn · Oct 13, 2003

Grifman, it has nothing to do with feeling that another company can't do as well as the original. It just seems silly to contract it out to another company when the first one supposedly did such a good job. KOTOR, whether people like BIO and the game or not, was both a critical and fan hit so why in the bejeebers would BIO, or even Lucas Arts go elsewhere for a sequel? Silliness.

I, for one, hope Obsidian does a good job on the game; but that's beside the point.

HanoverF · Oct 13, 2003

Star Wars fans would be happy with poo in a sack if it had the words Star Wars on it anywhere, witness the box office receipts for episode 1 and 2, which I'd rate a step below poo in a sack.

Psilon · Oct 13, 2003

Besides, look at what happened with MDK. Shiny made the original, BioWare made the sequel. Now BioWare's made the original KOTOR and Obsidian's making the sequel.

Volourn · Oct 13, 2003

I never played either MDK, and I still think it;s dumb that it worked that way. Shiny shoulda have made the sequel. Oh well.. In the end, no big deal.