Report: Call of Duty: Ghosts patch lowers PC RAM requirement

A Call of Duty: Ghosts patch has purportedly lowered the RAM requirement from 6GB to 4GB, following fans questioning if the 6GB requirement was necessary.

8

A patch for Call of Duty: Ghosts appears to have altered the minimum spec requirements, lowering the RAM requirement to 4GB instead of the prior 6GB. This follows only weeks after fans called the 6GB requirement into question.

Though patch notes are unavailable, users on Reddit (via Polygon) noted a few of the changes from the patch. In addition to lowering the RAM requirement, it also purportedly fixes some menu stuttering and introduces eSports rules with Broadcaster mode.

The RAM change is likely to get the most attention, though. Though not necessarily related to the change, some Call of Duty fans had raised questions about the 6GB RAM requirement. One such example, in the video below, shows the game running just fine with only 4GB of RAM after circumventing the requirement. It seems like the game ran more-or-less fine (at least in single-player) with 4GB of RAM, and now it lets you do just that without resorting to system chicanery.

Editor-In-Chief
From The Chatty
  • reply
    November 19, 2013 7:00 AM

    Steve Watts posted a new article, Report: Call of Duty: Ghosts patch lowers PC RAM requirement.

    A Call of Duty: Ghosts patch has purportedly lowered the RAM requirement from 6GB to 4GB, following fans questioning if the 6GB requirement was necessary.

    • reply
      November 19, 2013 7:02 AM

      So they were bullshitting. Hilarious.

      • reply
        November 19, 2013 8:55 AM

        Yrah; the project manager who thought a "throw exception dialog" approach for systems with 4 GB should be forced to watch the video of John Romero in 1993 playtesting Doom with a 4 MB RAM limiter switch.

        • reply
          November 19, 2013 9:09 AM

          Meh, phone keyboard. Anyway, Infinity Ward had access to the Steam Hardware Survey (as does the public), so they had signs that less than half the consumer population on Steam had 6 GB or more... and they went forward with this dumb "We won't let you start the game" dialog anyway? I don't imagine that the patch notes or Mark Rubin will acknowledge the actual reason why that decision was made, but I hope those who originally successfully made that stand in some strategy meeting are now a little more humble, at least privately.

          • reply
            November 19, 2013 9:12 AM

            A little more unemployed would be better. There are only so many small (yet huge) errors like this that can be made before they begin having major effects on the profit line.

    • reply
      November 19, 2013 8:10 AM

      Could this be Game of the Year 2013? I'm kidding of course...but if it is...

      • reply
        November 19, 2013 9:41 AM

        Nah, it's crashing BF4. Right? Oh wait. :)

    • reply
      November 19, 2013 10:05 AM

      Yeah the game doesn't run nearly as well as BF4 does on the "same" settings.

      Also the game doesn't support Eyefinity which is lame as hell. BF4 earns it's right to be a PC game, even with the bugs because that's part of the PC experience haha.

      • reply
        November 19, 2013 1:05 PM

        Even though I'm irritated as all heck with BF4 (for being a buggy disaster, pretty much) and I've enjoyed Ghosts way more (so I'm sure I'll seem biased) I don't agree. Ghosts seems to run better for me, by a mile than crashing BF4.

        • reply
          November 19, 2013 1:39 PM

          Well BF4 hasn't crashed that much if at all for me. Only when I quit a game at the end of a round or when I was over clocking my GPU like mad. Lowered the clock some and it's fine now and crashing during the end of march score screen is not a big deal, really it's getting me back to Windows a ton faster.

          Also you lied about the Ghosts having a FOV slider. I play it in windowed mode as CODG doesn't support multimonitor resolutions and it stutters quite a bit in that mode than compared to full-screen (with all three of my screens showing the same thing).

          BF4 comparatively works even though it was rough around the edges (server disconnects/performance doesn't count as crashes). BF4 is also a brand new engine version of Frostbite whereas CODG is just an upgraded MW3. They even recycled motion capture from the last game. So CODG is hardly the "from scratch" engine you loved to claim.

    • reply
      November 19, 2013 10:27 AM

      I hadn't even heard anything about this. Although I really don't keep up on anything CoD wise. As soon as I saw the 6GB requirement I instantly thought "Wtf 6GB? Why?" and this was before reading the article, seeing the video, or anything of the like.

      In a side note... if the the guy in the video had a just slightly deeper, raspier voice he would have been a perfect cast for Garrett in the new Thief game. I think he has the Garrett of old voice inflections down.

    • reply
      November 19, 2013 1:21 PM

      Maybe they didn't want to seem technically inferior to battlefield so they fudged their system reqs?

      I did realize that BF4 does need 8GB to run smoothly on certain maps. Don't know if that is because it's unoptimized or not, but I'm definitely having enough fun that I'll be upgrading soon.

Hello, Meet Lola