Why are EA Sports games' spec requirements so low?

[JWL3]

I have an old Pentium 2.8Ghz, 1 Gig, and a 9800 pro. It runs Live 07 perfectly at 1024x768. I've noticed that EA games are very undemanding of system requirements. Why is that? Games like Call of Duty 2 or FEAR would crush my machine. If EA Sports graphics were really that good, why does it give such high framerates even with the resolution and graphics maxed out?

[Tuomas]

Because the PC version is a port from xbox and ps2 versions, therefore it doesn't need that much hardware.

[BHD]

But why EA can't make NBA, FIFA or any other games graphics similiar to next-gen? For example take Need For Speed. The graphics ar just amazing. And what about BattleField? It requires 2GB of ram to run perfectely. And don't forget the Medal Of Honor series. All these games are made by EA and has spectacular graphics. But EA Sports is still making shited graphics for PC. It's 2006 come on...

[coolmkv69]

I think EA is waiting for Intel to come out with the Quad Core processor chip lines so they can port the PC version of Live from Current Gen to Next Gen quality.

I do, however, agree with your statements. I've been playing Live since '95 and I've noticed the changes over the years but these changes don't reflect the potential what EA is capable of or are they parallel to other EA games such as NFS or the FPS games.

My $0.02

[Tuomas]

Those are questions many of us have pondered for a while now, it seems like it and it probably is that making the pc version is not one EA:s primary concerns. They just make a half-hearted port every year.

[coolmkv69]

But this year seems to be the worst. There are a growing amount of overlooked mistakes that I feel shouldn't have happened. Such as, why are the new mistakes made in Live 07 not in Live 06? For example, the substitution problem: Isn't the coding/programming the same? It's not like they start from scratch so I don't see where or how they would encounter an error where a bug would occur. I hope it's not due to the removal of certain slidrs that would have such a monumental effect. And as for the quit game bug, come on now. That is possibly the simplest code to write IMHO. Even if it's not newly written, why was it not copy and pasted over from previous versions? Please excuse my naiveness for assuming programming is that simple as I'm just amatuer.

I'm not trying to personally attack EA for their lack of work because w/o them, there would be no Live. I just wished they released a demo like Live 2004 where us, the consumers, can test out all the bugs and reply with constructive feedback so that when the final product is release problems like these wouldn't occur.

My $0.02

[patinig]

If EA Sports graphics were really that good, why does it give such high framerates even with the resolution and graphics maxed out?
<<!!!!!!!!is that a problem? ??WTH??be happy it runs on your pc PERFECTLY man...my goodness some people are really ungrateful these days...

if you want to have a slow framerate try playing live07,wow,oblivion,cod2,fear,halflife2,,and themafiaboss*hehe* at the same time

[ignatu]

"But why EA can't make NBA, FIFA or any other games graphics similiar to next-gen? "

And also in regard to the comment about waiting for the Intel Quad Core to port Next Gen to PC.

The current processing power - graphics and otherwise - of PCs is better than the so-called "next gen" systems. XBox 360 is a year old. Current top of the line PCs are more powerful, and would be better as the gold standard to which EA develops Live 07.

[Crystallas]

This is a useless argument. New PCs are more powerfull graphically, even with other tasks and a hog OS running. Its economics and politics. Nothing we say or do will change how they decide to make their money. Thats why we rely on the NLSC and other open counterparts to mod the crap out of the game, to make it look better.

[JWL3]

You know what I mean; I'm not really complaining that it runs well on my machine. Just that it seems like it's not taxing at all. And that usually means that the graphics suck - which it does actually. First person shooters need to render entire environmental scenes outdoors with long draw distances. A basketball game only requires a stadium, so you would think that the graphics for a bball game would be awesome because it's so much smaller and simpler a "world. "

Besides, I have a 3 year old machine but my brother has a Dual Core with an ATI X1800 XT 512. It would be nice to have good graphics instead of 500 frames per second.

[maceo24]

I would like to see the leap made, but as the propud owner of a 9800 Pro, I glad to have a new game that doesnt make my old hag of a video card hack and weeze like a throat cancer patient.

[Jowe]

Cause the game doesn't have gameplay.

['Sheed]

Cause If you asking for lousy 'requirements' ,more PC's can run it = more peoples will buy it = money.

[754boy]

Cause If you asking for lousy 'requirements' ,more PC's can run it = more peoples will buy it = money.

Exactly. Its a mainstream game, and since not everyone has a souped up gaming rig, they have to make the game scalable for the crap PC's. I hope they go nex-gen with Live 08 for PC cuz my shit can handle it