You'll need some serious hardware to play Serious Sam 4

[midian182]

In a nutshell: Serious Sam 4 arrives on PC next week, which means the minimum and recommended specs have landed—and there's bad news for those still chugging along on potato-like PCs. It's a particularly demanding game, especially when it comes to the recommended setup that suggests an eight-core CPU.

The Serious Sam series has never been known for its graphics, and while the next installment does look nice, it's certainly not on par visually with some other recent titles. So why the meaty requirements? It's likely a result of the Legion System, which, according to graphics engineer Dean Sekulić from developer Croteam, enables "thousands and thousands, hundreds of thousands" of enemies on the screen simultaneously.

Serious Sam 4 minimum specs:

Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system

OS: Windows 10 64-bit

Processor: 4-core CPU @ 2.5 GHz

Memory: 8 GB RAM

Graphics: nVidia GeForce 780/970/1050 or AMD Radeon 7950/280/470 (3 GB VRAM)

DirectX: Version 11

Storage: 40 GB available space

Additional Notes: Requirements are based on 720p rendering resolution at 30 FPS

Serious Sam 4 recommended specs:

Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system

OS: Windows 10 64-bit (1909)

Processor: 8-core CPU @ 3.3 GHz

Memory: 16 GB RAM

Graphics: nVidia GeForce 1080/2060 or AMD Radeon Vega64/5700 (8 GB VRAM)

DirectX: Version 12

Storage: 40 GB available space

Additional Notes: Recommended APIs include DX12 and Vulkan.

While Doom Eternal is another game that recommends at least a GTX 1080 or RTX 2060, that eight-core CPU demand is pretty hardcore—even Microsoft Flight Simulator asks for either a Ryzen 5 1500X (four-core) or Intel i5-8400 (six-core).

Serious Sam 4 was supposed to arrive on both PC and Google Stadia in August, but like many recent titles, it was delayed. The game was also subtitled Planet Badass, but that was dropped due to how it translated—or failed to translate—into other languages.

Serious Sam 4 arrives on PC and Google Stadia this September 24.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/86731-youll-need-serious-hardware-play-serious-sam-4.html

 

[QuantumPhysics]

No problem!!!

and this Thursday I'll be doing it on a 3080.

 

[VaRmeNsI]

Clickbait article, a faster 6 core is superior to a slower 8 core.

 

[Lionvibez]

Clickbait article, a faster 6 core is superior to a slower 8 core.

Not always.

If the game likes more cores than faster cores the 8 core cpu will be faster.

And there is nothing click bait about it if those requirements come directly from the Dev.

I've haven't played SS since #2 so I may grab this.

I already have the 8 core covered since I'm on a 3800X however my gpu is a RX580 which will be slower than the required ones for now until I upgrade to RDNA2

 

[VaRmeNsI]

Not always.

If the game likes more cores than faster cores the 8 core cpu will be faster.

And there is nothing click bait about it if those requirements come directly from the Dev.

I've haven't played SS since #2 so I may grab this.

I already have the 8 core covered since I'm on a 3800X however my gpu is a RX580 which will be slower than the required ones for now until I upgrade to RDNA2

The only way an 8 core would be faster is if the game failed to utilize all cores of a <8 core CPU.

 

[Lionvibez]

The only way an 8 core would be faster is if the game failed to utilize all cores of a <8 core CPU.

Then send your complaints to the dev team of serious sam and see what they say.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

The only way an 8 core would be faster is if the game failed to utilize all cores of a <8 core CPU.

That doesnt make any sense, because if the game engine didnt use all the cores of the 6 core CPU then it wouldnt use them on the 8 core either.

Why are efficiency gains from more core utilization such an enigma to you?

 

[Ludak021]

Then send your complaints to the dev team of serious sam and see what they say.

He will, like I will, with wallet saying "meh".

 

[orbital]

It's a joke of a game. They will need to pay me to play it...

 

[Irata]

The only way an 8 core would be faster is if the game failed to utilize all cores of a <8 core CPU.

Wait, what ?

 

[Lionvibez]

It's a joke of a game. They will need to pay me to play it...

If you are not interested in the game why bother to comment?

 

[Nobina]

I'm more surprised by the GTX 1080 requirement.

 

[polord]

My 8700k is no go now :’(

 

[OortCloud]

No problem!!!
and this Thursday I'll be doing it on a 3080.

Only a 3080? Your standards are slipping - surely a 3090 is the only way to go?

 

[OortCloud]

It's a joke of a game. They will need to pay me to play it...

Serious Sam was great fun - fast paced - ludicrous amounts of bad-guys on screen at same time - great co-op - it just didn't take itself too seriously (hoho).

 

[pcnthuziast]

I bet logical cores will suffice.

 

[ziffel66]

No problem!!!

and this Thursday I'll be doing it on a 3080.

I like your optimism, because you say that as if your willingness and wallet were all that is required, and not a crap ton of luck.

 

[0dium]

Why are efficiency gains from more core utilization such an enigma to you?

Cuz he's on Intel four-core CPU lol

 

[QuantumPhysics]

Only a 3080? Your standards are slipping - surely a 3090 is the only way to go?

3090 doesn’t come out till the 24th

 

[Lionvibez]

My 8700k is no go now :’(

why would you say that 8 core is only the recommend requirement, and min required is 4 cores. The game will be playable for you just not at the recommended settings.

 

[brucek]

As of the current Steam Hardware Survey, only ~9.2% of rigs have these 8+ cores, meaning more than 90% can not meet the recommended specs.

I do not see how any for-profit publisher green lights this as a business proposition. I'm going to guess maybe the primary target is next gen consoles, they tried a PC port for a little extra cash, and the optimization didn't come out well.

 

[Lionvibez]

As of the current Steam Hardware Survey, only ~9.2% of rigs have these 8+ cores, meaning more than 90% can not meet the recommended specs.

I do not see how any for-profit publisher green lights this as a business proposition. I'm going to guess maybe the primary target is next gen consoles, they tried a PC port for a little extra cash, and the optimization didn't come out well.

The steam survey doesn't equal the whole market.

And you can play the game with less cores you will just have to turn stuff down or off.

I hope you guys all know both next gen consoles coming out this winter are 8 cores parts therefore you will see more and more games recommending it. If you are still on a quad core now maybe time to upgrade.

 

[OortCloud]

3090 doesn’t come out till the 24th

Of course - what was I thinking! You'll have a 3080 for a week then upgrade to a 3090!

 

[brucek]

The steam survey doesn't equal the whole market.

And you can play the game with less cores you will just have to turn stuff down or off.

I hope you guys all know both next gen consoles coming out this winter are 8 cores parts therefore you will see more and more games recommending it. If you are still on a quad core now maybe time to upgrade.

All accurate, but also pretty much non-responsive to what I said. While Steam's measurement of ~9.2% may not be exact for every PC that has played a game in August, there's also no reason to believe the exact answer is materially different. IF the actual answer was double --- an incredibly unlikely proposition, the error is more likely a couple points at most -- would it still change the fact the publisher is aiming at a tiny fraction of existing PCs and therefore likely blowing it financially?

And yes, everyone knows you can try to play below recommended specs, just like everyone knows that is code for you will experience stutter, bugs, and an overall unfun experience. The only likely mainstream response is to choose another game.

And further yes, I expect the Steam surveys from next year and the year after to look different. That will not help Serious Sam's publisher with this title, it will be on the deep discount rack by then.

Still, like I said, if their business plan was entirely focused on the consoles they could still be fine. They may even clear some small additional profit on the PC port. It's just they are certainly not going to sustain a development budget on a title that works well on only 10% or less of existing PCs at time of launch.

 

[Lionvibez]

Still, like I said, if their business plan was entirely focused on the consoles they could still be fine. They may even clear some small additional profit on the PC port. It's just they are certainly not going to sustain a development budget on a title that works well on only 10% or less of existing PCs at time of launch.

I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing and already have all the data and metrics that lead to this decision.