Titanfall PC system requirements revealed

Respawn co-founder Vince Zampella took to Twitter today to reveal the minimum PC requirements for the PC version of Titanfall. Get your machines ready.

22

Titanfall is about to unleash high-tech mech warfare on March 11, with the beta potentially arriving in the next few weeks. So if you're a PC user, you're going to want to make sure your machine can handle the upcoming battle. Respawn co-founder Vince Zampella has revealed the game's system requirements in a condensed 140 character Tweet.

Zampella's Twitter (via Polygon) offers the following:

Minimum requirements:

  • 64-bit Windows 7, 8, or 8.1.

  • AMD Athlon X2 2.8GHz or Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz

  • 512MB VRAM, Radeon HD 4770 or GeForce 8800GT

  • 4GB Memory

Zampella also teased the possibility of a Mac release in a later Tweet, but notes that it would be discussed after the main Xbox One, Xbox 360, and PC versions launch.

Senior Editor

Ozzie has been playing video games since picking up his first NES controller at age 5. He has been into games ever since, only briefly stepping away during his college years. But he was pulled back in after spending years in QA circles for both THQ and Activision, mostly spending time helping to push forward the Guitar Hero series at its peak. Ozzie has become a big fan of platformers, puzzle games, shooters, and RPGs, just to name a few genres, but he’s also a huge sucker for anything with a good, compelling narrative behind it. Because what are video games if you can't enjoy a good story with a fresh Cherry Coke?

From The Chatty
  • reply
    February 4, 2014 4:15 PM

    Ozzie Mejia posted a new article, Titanfall PC system requirements revealed.

    Respawn co-founder Vince Zampella took to Twitter today to reveal the minimum PC requirements for the PC version of Titanfall. Get your machines ready.

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 4:17 PM

      brb need to upgrade

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 5:18 PM

      Minimum specs hardly tell us anything.

      • reply
        February 4, 2014 5:22 PM

        It tells you that their version of the source engine still scales well and the game will be playable for many people without high end systems. More important for sales.

        • reply
          February 4, 2014 6:41 PM

          Ironic that it's Source and won't be on steam.

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 5:28 PM

      Not bad at all.

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 5:31 PM

      lol, that could almost run on my phone or tablet.

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 6:05 PM

      I did not previously know this was source, thats nice to hear, I find it so much more responsive than frostbite and UE3.

      • reply
        February 4, 2014 6:28 PM

        Even the smallest trace of idtech left in source is bound to make it more responsive than almost anything else out there sadly.

        • reply
          February 4, 2014 9:46 PM

          It greatly depends on framerate. CoD Ghosts' engine is still based on Q3 tech, and the previous CoD engines did feel very sharp; however, with Ghosts they added so many additional graphics effects (which you can't turn off) that they turned the engine into a turd.

          Frostbite will also feel like a turd if the framerates are low. But considering the graphics quality, Frostbite runs at amazingly high framerates, and I haven't even played it with Mantle yet! Too bad it's got stability issues - but that's a different issue.

          • reply
            February 5, 2014 5:11 AM

            Ghosts feels fine on my PC. Granted not as good as Black Ops 2 but still better than everything else out there.

            Battlefield (3 and 4) both feel like garbage and I run them at a locked 60 fps and never drop below that mark.

          • reply
            February 5, 2014 7:06 AM

            Can't agree with your perception, Code-e255, at all. Ghosts felt crisp and ran very well on my PC which is only a mid-range gaming system at best.

            • reply
              February 5, 2014 9:55 AM

              Well, I don't know what it is exactly, but the Ghosts engine is choppy as fuck for the first 10 seconds or so after a map loads on my system. This choppyness even occurs in the menus. I've fairly good system with an SSD. The old CoD games ran at a stable 100+ frames per second. I read that it's related to Steam Friends, but disabling it didn't help either.

              Once the maps run more smoothly, I still get nowhere near 100+ fps like in CoD:MW3. (Isn't it even hard-capped at 40 or some shit like that?) The hit-detection feels great if you're coming from BF4, but the framerates suck.

              Oh, I had to disable mouse accelleration in Windows to prevent mouse accelleration in-game. I never had to do that for any other game.

              All in all, there are lots of little things about the Ghost engine on PC that make it feel like a shitty port of enhancements that were implemented primarily for the consoles.

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 10:02 PM

      Aww yeah c2d

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 10:07 PM

      So my 2 year old machine will be fine running it at 1600x1200 on medium settings? Yay.

      • reply
        February 4, 2014 11:25 PM

        I'm shooting for 1920x1440 at the highest settings on my ~2 month old machine!

        • reply
          February 4, 2014 11:43 PM

          You don't go 2048x1536? I actually recently discovered you can go even higher than that with a program called CRU. I played FEAR 3 the other day at 2304x1728@60hz. Hope that's not bad for my CRT.

          • reply
            February 5, 2014 2:03 AM

            [deleted]

            • reply
              February 5, 2014 5:07 AM

              PQ:price

              • reply
                February 5, 2014 7:35 AM

                [deleted]

                • reply
                  February 5, 2014 8:54 AM

                  PQ stands for picture quality. The PQ to price ratio for a used CRT is why I still game in 4:3. I bought a lightly used photo and video editing CRT for $50. BF4 with HBAO and Ultra lighting looks staggering on it. And 4:3 doesn't bother me because most PC games are still compatible with it. For PS3 and Wii U games I just sit closer.

    • reply
      February 4, 2014 11:36 PM

      Obviously the requirements aren't going to be that robust, it does need to run well on an XBox 1 after all.

    • reply
      February 5, 2014 1:37 AM

      Yesss my 8800GT lives on!! Take that BF4!

      • reply
        February 5, 2014 3:08 AM

        Same here! *fist bump*

        • reply
          February 5, 2014 5:50 AM

          Bamii, doesn't BF4 blow, though?

    • reply
      February 5, 2014 5:48 AM

      I want recommended requirements so I can make sure my computer crushes them! >:-D

    • reply
      February 5, 2014 5:52 AM

      [deleted]

      • reply
        February 5, 2014 5:55 AM

        no one told you to do anything, curb your fucking enthusiasm.

      • reply
        February 5, 2014 6:03 AM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        February 5, 2014 6:38 AM

        WAY TO BE BRIMMING WITH POSITIVITY PRICK

        • reply
          February 5, 2014 7:05 AM

          Wow, such anger over videogames. Priorities much?

          • reply
            February 5, 2014 7:09 AM

            WAY TO BE ANGRY AT ME FOR MY ANGER, JERK

            • reply
              February 5, 2014 7:37 AM

              WAY TO BE ANGRY ABOUT HIS ANGER, BRO.

              THAT'S NOT A CRITICISM, I'M ACTUALLY TOTALLY PSYCHED ABOUT YOUR ANGER, HIGH FIVE! FUCK YEAH!

    • reply
      February 5, 2014 6:24 AM

      valcan_s has had a system ready since 1987.

    • reply
      February 5, 2014 4:56 PM

      To this fucking day, cod ghosts crashes consistently for me. Either every single time before i play first game, or every single time after first game, it literally crashes to desktop, EVERY SINGLE FUCKING TIME!

      This has NEVER occurred for me in any other cod game ever.

Hello, Meet Lola