KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
No Man's Sky finally has a release date, with the long-hyped space game finally heading to the PC and PS4 in June. Fortunately for those of you looking to play it, the minimum system requirements to run the game are very reasonable.
The game's minimum system requirements call for an Intel Core i3 processor, 8GB of RAM and a GTX 480 graphics card or higher. The game itself will also take up around 10GB of storage space.
Not much has been shown about No Man's Sky prior to this announcement but according to press outlets that have managed to get some hands-on time with the game, it is actually an exploration survival game. All planets are procedurally generated and some of them will be hazardous, so you will have to spend time searching through space, gathering resources, learning alien languages, battling different species and crafting different items to stay alive.
No Man's Sky comes out on the 22nd of June on Steam and the PlayStation 4.
KitGuru Says: It looks like most of you are going to have no trouble running this game on the PC at all. It is also nice to finally know what No Man's Sky actually is because we have seen very little in the form of gameplay over the last couple of years. Are any of you looking forward to No Man's Sky coming out?
truly hope the lack of info about the game is just the developers way of driving up excitement and not because its a steaming pile.
Thats what I am hoping, And they are asking $60 like its a triple A title but I worry about it, I don’t doubt that they have the content but do they have the content to keep you wanting to play every day or for hours or will it get super boring after a bit? It wont be worth $60 if that is what it is. Just like all survival games, they are fun for a bit and then super boring.
The marketing department of this game is a failure. I wonder if the game is that good. Reminds me of Ubisoft PR Tactics.
i can’t shake the fear that this game will suffer from similar “mile wide inch deep” issues that other big open exploration games have had.
All we’ve seen so far, all the devs have talked about and shown is 1 or 2 planet side clips, a transition from orbit down to the atmosphere and dev chats about the procedural generation. We know nothing of the economy side of the game, the story side (if such a thing exists), we don’t know the depth of the combat, will ships of subsystems and loadouts and configurable settings etc.
We can see that the min requirements are extremely light for a game of its scope – and that makes me wonder just how much activity they plan to be active on screen at any given time. But we don’t have these details. In fact we’ve gotten very little. And before a release date was set, and before pre-orders went live, this hadn’t been something I’d taken into consideration when looking at the game. But now with it so close, I consider if the there’s a realistic value proposition for a AAA price tag from an indie game that’s dearth of an overlay of release features.
I want it to be good. Nevertheless, I remain skeptical.
I link you an article so you can know exactly what this game is up to
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/50835/heres-list-things-mans-sky/index.html
By the way it already looks on ps4 i guess the game must have very good performance so the low min specs are more a good thing.
I’m skeptical ANY Space exploration game made to be in parity with consoles will be any good. ED sucks… I’m sure this will be mindless redundant exploration too. Consoles suck at this genre.
This is one game that I hope really does live up to the hype… Personally I find the trend toward co-operative multi-player games has gone too far. I’m a player who only gets chance to drop in-and-out of a game in short chunks of time, and this makes the co-operative play many games require to get the ‘good stuff’ completely impractical, and thus for me NMS sounds perfect. Remember that originally all games were single player – Doom, Hexen, Heretic, Half Life, Quake etc. and they were far from boring without multi-player! However all those games did have an ‘end goal’ and the challenge here will be to keep NMS entertaining in the long term… I can see it being hugely entertaining to explore and discover and ‘boldly go where no man has gone before’ for a while, but how quickly will that fade when we see our 100th ‘fluffy blue snake with wings’? I’m not sure… Minecraft for example started off as an exploration and survival game too, but has now evolved into a creative game. Will NMS go the same way? Is it the sort of game that *can* evolve? Let’s hope that the creative genius’ behind NMS will be up to the challenge of entertaining the Galaxy for a long time to come…
There is a definite goal. I just saw it in a games radar article where they said that your end goal is getting to the center of the universe where there is some kind of atlas.
The game then gives you procedurally generated hints as to where to go in order to get closer to that goal.
But still I can see this gaming being very relaxing to just sit down and explore planets.
Can’t wait and this game has intrigued me since the announcement. Yes I’m skeptical but so far it seems this will be well optimized and really enjoyable and relaxing to play.
Yeah if it’s just an endless exploration game with not much depth in terms of building and crafting it might be a bit expensive, but still think this will be awesome to play while high or something
GTX 480 looks like a light spec for desktops, but I’m wondering what the equivalent is for laptops. Based on G3D scores (I’m no expert on this, but that seems one way to compare), you’d need something like a GTX 780M or 970M to approach an equivalent, and that means a very expensive specialist gaming laptop. On the other hand, sales people have tried to tell me that much lower-specced mobile graphics cards would be fine for NMS. Does anyone have a better way to compare?
would love to play this but looks like i will need a whole new PC (minus the CPU)
what would be a price range of a whole new PC with a bit better than minimum specs cost ?
in USD or CAD.
take into consideration i am very cheap & dont need any bells & whistles.
I’m wondering about this too. I’ve got a fairly capable 860M and whilst the 480 is a comparatively old card, it’s still powerful when compared to laptop cards.
only 10 gb wowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Ordered the explorer’s edition for PC and replacing my old 5yr dell XPS for something more current. Really hope this game is at least half of what it claims to be
What kind of Intel core i3 are they referring to? There are Intel core i3 processors ranging from 2.5 GHz to 4 GHz and I’m trying to figure out what processor I would need to play No Man’s Sky. Can anyone help me out?
decent quality new pc from scratch ill say about 500-600 bucks new if you dont care about new probably about 400-500
ill say about a i3-530 or pretty much any decent quad core cpu should make it the requirements are fairly low
I am not going to play No Man’s Sky on a PC. I have a PS4 just for this game. Dose anyone know what Pay Station Membership I need to get to play. One is $17.00 the other is $45.00 for three months. This is my first time getting any sort of game like this. You didn’t need this kind of thing on Atari. Can anyone help me figure this out.
Well, could my specs run it although at lowest settings as possible:
Intel Core i3 4005U 1.7 GHz
RAM 8 GB DDR3 (formerly 4 GB DDR3)
Nvidia GT820M 2 GB
As you can see, the main problem is the GPU, it’s only GT, not the GTX one, so I really hope soon it’ll run cause I really wanted for a brilliant Sci-Fi game such like this!
PS plus is $50 Canadian per month. However, if you do not want to play multiplayer, you can play without a membership.
It won’t work. Your processor is garbage (I have one from 2002 that’s better), and the recommended GPU is 440% better then what you have.
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-480-vs-Nvidia-GeForce-820M/3157vsm9527
You need a new computer man.
I’ll try for sure, because I’m waiting this game for too long, no matter how weak my CPU and GPU are.
And Btw you don’t know how hard it is to achieve a new laptop, my parents doesn’t allow me to buy another laptop/PC until I finished Senior High School…
I’ve been in your shoes with a not so great computer. Back then I tried to find advanced tweaks to make the game run faster. I succeeed and could run games with below specifications… but now games are more complex its getting harder to do that.
Is this good enough?
Intel core i5-4210U 2.7GHZ
AMD Radeon HD 8500M
8GB RAM
DirectX 11
Can I run this game on an AMD CPU? I am new to pc gaming and I am not sure that since AMD CPU’s are not listed under the minimum requirements that if I can run it under an X6 or I have to buy an intel CPU. (I am new to pc gaming and am trying to make a build with the best pieces for best available pricing and the X6 was my most viable option).
Can I run this game on an AMD CPU? I am new to pc gaming and I am not sure that since AMD CPU’s are not listed under the minimum requirements that if I can run it under an X6 or I have to buy an intel CPU. (I am new to pc gaming and am trying to make a build with the best pieces for best available pricing and the X6 was my most viable option)..