Looks terribly inefficient resource handling innit, surely in this day and age (i.e last decade) there are neat little tricks for not having to render distant objects in such high detail yet still retain a more than sufficient visual quality, can only imagine how much grief that's going to cause with a full scale battle going on, not to mention it still has a very "computay game" look despite the billions of pixels and special effects. Apart from the orc in the menu screen, that looked neat. But what about the ground texture? Seen more detail in flight simulators. Then again what do I know. Fuck all probably.

I guess I'm just disappointed, judging by the title was hoping this would be a RTS battle for middle earth 3 :<

high textures work with 2 GB of vram. ultra requires 4 GB, not 6 like they advertise. this guy is just a moron, trying to run a modern game with a four year old gpu at nearly 4K on max settings. of course it's going to play like this. jesus.

This game is not demanding on the cpu, but it requires a lot of video memory for textures For low texture quality 1gb vram, medium - 2gb, high -3gb, ultra 6gb.
gtx680 is a little better than mine gtx480 for this game, because it has a small amount of memory 2gb, but the gtx680 gpu is much more powerful than my gpu gtx480.
I have new optimal settings for my pc - the graphics settings to Auto Detect, the game looks good and have 50-60 fps. textures is low, but other settings high and medium 1680x1050. It looks better and much smoother than my earlier settings - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=excVGUBHP34&am...DJg0RqGDEg (1100x700 all maximum, textures - high)

Its not the most up to date engine. But looks good. Having a lot of fun with this game though. Running very decently 1080p at high ~60fps+. For that high resolution you need a lot more vram.

I know you said slide show, but video should come with an even more stern warning.

Like, WARNING: 4 FPS EYE CANCER

I'm curious, how much does recording at such resolution additionally tax a system's resources? I wonder where his system would be running at, fps-wise, if he weren't recording.

That's a good question. Should ask him to test that.

Is it 'Assassins Creed : Tolkien' ?

Parcour is from AC, combat is from Batman Arkam, lore is Tolkien. I'm having quite some fun with it.

It looks really good and if I hadn't bought Alien Isolation I would of got this after watching some streams on twitch.

The combat looks really cool, fluid. Definitely feels like Batman in a Tolkien setting. Not decided if I really like the game or not yet but it is pretty fun. :)

no fucking shit it runs that badly on a 480 with those settings. you're trying to run a modern game on a four year old gpu at nearly 4K on max settings with 1.5 GB of vram. modern flagship gpus have trouble with less demanding games at 4K. i'm surprised it even let you play instead of just straight crashing.

After this game I wanted to buy a video card gtx980 for 625$, but I have a problem with money in the next few months,please throw off all together me money for the video card to the my wallet number xxxxx ))))
gtx980 = stability 60fps gameplay for ultra settings and 1080p

Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor 1344x840 45-60fps gameplay new setting test for gtx480 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc4WRaLlGsw

why....

There are 4 levels of reason:

1. What's logical;
2. What's illogical;
3. What no one even thinks about;
4. What only kevlark would think about.

Draw your own conclusion.

Good purchase I made 3 years ago - gtx480, the most powerful graphics card for today is gtx980, but my gtx480 is also not very weak. gtx480
my graphics card is still capable of doing a decent FPS on decent settings in the game newest and greedy for computer hardware

kevlark : geforce :: p0rt : q43a

Russian simpletons are really endearing for some reason. I think their poor English makes it feel like you are talking with a baby.

probation

what the fuck, you're trying to run 3360x2100 on a 1.5GB card?

shame on you!