Support us on Patreon
PayPal
The cogs are rolling, and XCOM 2 is extremely close to release. So close in fact that we finally have the XCOM 2 system requirements for Linux players. This is confirmed by 2K directly, but Feral have yet to confirm it directly.
Correction: 2K had it wrong, here's the requirements directly from Feral Interactive.
Sadly, it's another major release on Linux that only supports Nvidia. It might work on AMD & Intel, but you're on your own for now. Probably the usual case of open source drivers have bugs/incomplete OpenGL support, and AMD Catalyst probably has the usual known performance problems.
RECOMMENDED
OS: Ubuntu 14.04.2 64-bit or Steam OS
Processor: Intel i7 series
RAM: 8GB
Graphics: 2GB NVIDIA 960
MINIMUM
OS: Ubuntu 14.04.2 64-bit or Steam OS
Processor: Intel i3-3225 3.3 GHz
RAM: 4GB
Graphics: 1GB NVIDIA 650
The minimum is pretty low, so it looks like it might scale reasonably well across the lower-end. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: Mountain ManQuoting: chris200x9Or maybe you should buy an Nvidia card to punish AMD? Feral doesn't write AMD's drivers, so there's no point punishing Feral for something that is out of their control.Quoting: lordheavyWhy buy it on Feral store, to reward their bad decisions? They should feel the sting of their incompetence.Quoting: subAs AMD user I'll most likely have to play it under Windows.
You'll can buy it on the Feral store, then play it under windows :p
Yea, because NV's oss drivers/contributions are sooooo superior
0 Likes
Quoting: Mountain ManQuoting: chris200x9Or maybe you should buy an Nvidia card to punish AMD? Feral doesn't write AMD's drivers, so there's no point punishing Feral for something that is out of their control.Quoting: lordheavyWhy buy it on Feral store, to reward their bad decisions? They should feel the sting of their incompetence.Quoting: subAs AMD user I'll most likely have to play it under Windows.
You'll can buy it on the Feral store, then play it under windows :p
Or maybe devs should embrace standards and write to OGL spec not undocumented NvidiaGL, just a thought.
Edit: The Mac port works on AMD so there's nothing "wrong" with AMD's OGL code it's just Feral took shortcuts and can't be arsed with a decent Linux port.
Last edited by chris200x9 on 3 February 2016 at 10:06 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: pete910Quoting: subAs AMD user I'll most likely have to play it under Windows.
Why?
Because I want to play that game soon... :)
And *if* it's really that it is not playable on my AMD configuration,
then I won't hesitate to play the Windows version.
And switching to Nvidia is not an option for *me*.
I support AMD for their open specs and OSS drivers.
I'm pretty sure this will eventually lead to a great OSS driver,
capable of playing recent AAA games with good to very good performance.
IMO, supporting Nvidia harms Linux way more than the decision
to play a new AAA game on Windows because it performes poorly
on Linux/Catalyst.
It seems I get pragmatic lately...
and I feel good about it. :D
1 Likes, Who?
Higher-end AMD cards with the binary drivers don't have any issues that I can tell with any of the Feral Linux ports. If you use the OSS drivers, performance is worse, and recent GL features are not available which can prevent a game from running or rendering properly ( e.g. on a R9-290, Shadow of Mordor renders the scene and character face/hands, but without the rest of the character; amusing but not quite the experience I'm after ).
I'd rather not blame Feral, AMD or Intel without knowing why they don't officially support certain hardware. It's likely that porting each game is different, depending on the original technology used ( engine, middle-ware etc ), and the renderer is just one part of the porting puzzle.
Under Windows, D3D provides a single development target; when there is no GPU support for a particular function, D3D provides a CPU software implementation. Under OSX, Apple insist on providing the only OpenGL stack so that they can implement the same sort of software fallback mechanism. Under Linux, there is no single OpenGL provider, and each GL stack has different feature coverage, strengths and weaknesses.
Perhaps asking Feral for comment on hardware support would be more helpful, but I suspect it comes down to the fact that NVidia has 2/3 of the GPU market, and Valve have worked primarily with NVidia to kick-start the Linux games market. Linux games are still marginal in terms of revenue, so porting costs have to be considered carefully, particularly in cases like this where fragmentation pushes them higher.
I'd rather not blame Feral, AMD or Intel without knowing why they don't officially support certain hardware. It's likely that porting each game is different, depending on the original technology used ( engine, middle-ware etc ), and the renderer is just one part of the porting puzzle.
Under Windows, D3D provides a single development target; when there is no GPU support for a particular function, D3D provides a CPU software implementation. Under OSX, Apple insist on providing the only OpenGL stack so that they can implement the same sort of software fallback mechanism. Under Linux, there is no single OpenGL provider, and each GL stack has different feature coverage, strengths and weaknesses.
Perhaps asking Feral for comment on hardware support would be more helpful, but I suspect it comes down to the fact that NVidia has 2/3 of the GPU market, and Valve have worked primarily with NVidia to kick-start the Linux games market. Linux games are still marginal in terms of revenue, so porting costs have to be considered carefully, particularly in cases like this where fragmentation pushes them higher.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: etonbearsPerhaps asking Feral for comment on hardware support would be more helpful, but I suspect it comes down to the fact that NVidia has 2/3 of the GPU market, and Valve have worked primarily with NVidia to kick-start the Linux games market.
Linux games are still marginal in terms of revenue, so porting costs have to be considered carefully, particularly in cases like this where fragmentation pushes them higher.
Of course if nvidia have around 85% of market is logical supports because as your said too, port game have costs
And if this nvidia have around 85% of market practically almost money comes from them users
On amd side is more complicated because have fragmentation, them have around 15% of market and of this percentage have around 50% of this are catalyst users and another 50% are open source driver users
Without forget, in most cases catalyst is supported first than opensource driver (opengl stack incomplete, bugs, etc) this is leave around 7 to 8% of market
However amd must be define actual situation around catalyst, this fragmentation dont help
^_^
Last edited by mrdeathjr on 4 February 2016 at 5:08 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: chris200x9Edit: The Mac port works on AMD so there's nothing "wrong" with AMD's OGL code it's just Feral took shortcuts and can't be arsed with a decent Linux port.
Who did the Mac port?
0 Likes
Quoting: subAs AMD user I'll most likely have to play it under Windows.
As a Linux user the OS is more important than GPU-vendor, so I go with what works.
0 Likes
Why do they have to put i7-series on recommended. Can't be any more specific?? Come on, there is a HUUUUGE difference in between first i7s and the ones we got nowadays.....
0 Likes
Quoting: 2pack2u2Why do they have to put i7-series on recommended. Can't be any more specific?? Come on, there is a HUUUUGE difference in between first i7s and the ones we got nowadays.....
It's not really that huge, which is what has kept me from upgrading my i7-2600.
0 Likes
Quoting: chrisqQuoting: 2pack2u2Why do they have to put i7-series on recommended. Can't be any more specific?? Come on, there is a HUUUUGE difference in between first i7s and the ones we got nowadays.....
It's not really that huge, which is what has kept me from upgrading my i7-2600.
I7-880: https://cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7+880+%40+3.07GHz&id=833
i7-6700: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-6700+%40+3.40GHz
Not huge difference you say?
0 Likes
See more from me