GameStop reveals minimum specs for Modern Warfare 2 PC [update]

but aren't there 100+ million PC's with XP or Vista and less than 1 million PC's with windows 7 right now ? it looks like they were mostly concerned with the 98%+ of PC owners who will be buying the game only. and this is not a finished product yet ?

but great observation, that is a great question for people who would want to run the game on windows 7.
me personally i do not buy OS when they come out and I wait until the bugs are worked out.
i cannot allow my business and home computers to be test for a new product, which in the past has had severe issues at launch.

Windows 7 worked flawlessly when I was using the Release Candidate, and what few bugs were theoretically in that seem to have been since ironed out. I wouldn't have an early-adoption fears for this system, given the fact that it's worked wonderfully for all of the (many) people I know who have used it.

Also, it's true that few will have Windows 7 when this game launches, but numbers will go rapidly.

Mind you, 99% of games that work on Vista run on Windows 7 without any tweaking. Heck, all my pre-Vista games worked well, too.

Regarding Windows 7 - Just because it worked for you doesn't mean it will work for everyone. There are still a lot of business type applications that don't run on vista, let alone W7, properly. Since he mentioned business machines I would imagine his main concern is that. But yes, for the average user windows 7 is absolutely great. That being said, if you're on XP and it does everything you need it to do, or want it to do, there's no reason to upgrade to W7 just yet. Until XP SP3 gets grandfathered like XP SP2 is getting this december.

Windows 7 is just Vista with a facelift.

What does that even mean?

it means that if you paid for Vista, you really only paid for the Windows 7 beta.

Yes, they should have put the Windows 7 logo on the box, it would have been a rather good marketing play.

I wouldn't say 7 is a face lift of Vista. It's what I think Vista should have been from the start, and the fact is that it really is a better OS than Vista was. I feel bad for everyone who paid for Vista only to have a better version come out only a few years later. Microsoft should have made the upgrade cost for Vista users much cheaper as a semi-apology.

And I've been using Windows 7 for a long time now, and I've never had any issues with it. It's just a solid OS. If you're not a fan of Windows, then 7 won't really change your mind, but if you do prefer Windows, it won't disappoint.

warlord- then vista must have been a bad facelift of XP, done by a bad cosmetic surgeon which was supposed to be better, but just turned out to be butter face ? isnt any new product of the same kind an expansion of what was already done and just an upgraded version with new things?


'Microsoft should have made the upgrade cost for Vista users much cheaper as a semi-apology.'
thats true but they will never admit to their own failures in that degree. i think they want to sweep vista under the rug as best they can at this point.

i was mad when i had no choice but to purchase a vista PC, when XP was not offered anymore. so now i have 3 vista PC's and 2 XP PC's at work and home... its really annoying to me. i would have loved to just stick with XP, but after computer failure and need for upgrades and company expansion we were somewhat forced into getting vista with the PC's.

it hurts to have to pay to fix problems left on my computer by microsoft should i want to install windows 7. i will wait and see for compatibility issues and support with the programs we use. it sounds like a great OS, but vista was also supposed to be a great OS.

Goddamn comment fail, let's try that again.

sk8monroe, I'm sorry to be the one to have to tell you this but Vista has been perfectly fine for at least a year now. People continue to bitch and whine today because of the bandwagon, because of Mac ads, or because they simply have no goddamn idea what they're talking about and haven't used a Vista-equipped PC since early 2007.

All the speed issues and crashes were due to a clumsy launch, due to ill-prepared drivers and Microsoft forcing OEM manufacturers to ship PCs with Vista which really weren't up to snuff. Driver issues have been completely worked out, as has program compatibility, and any computer you can buy now will have no trouble running the operating system perfectly.

In fact even if you bought a Vista PC close to launch that wasn't capable of competently running the OS it's your own damn fault for just trusting a sticker and not seeing for yourself if the specs were even good enough to run XP for a couple months before grinding to a screeching halt. But no, I bet you're one of those guys who just assumed and accepted that "Vista is just slow, it's not because I bought a piece of shit computer because I am a gullible as hell consumer".

Windows 7 is indeed not much more than a more streamlined interface with some improvements to speed and accessibility and included programs. It is, in effect, an incremental improvement upon the perfect stability that is Vista today, and as such if you are running Vista already and have even the lightest tiny sliver of tech savvy, there is no excuse for you not to be running Windows 7.

Iglaw- youre a dumbass,
my opinions and my experiences with XP and Vista have nothing to do with which OS you feel is better.

i cant stand Vista to this day. it is slower. it lags. there are more unneeded graphics which slow the memory down. it is a proven fact that vista runs slower than windows xp in many respects mainly due to the fact that it 'looks prettier to consumers' and is more 'user friendly' and vista is actually less tech savvy than XP.

you said: 'Vista is just slow, it's not because I bought a piece of shit computer because I am a gullible as hell consumer".'

so a 4gb memory, dual core Pentium processor computer is cheap and not capable of typing business documents? get real. im not trying to edit movies at 60fps or anything...
i am not going to spend $ 2000.00 on a computer to type documents so i can have windows vista work... is that your excuse for Vista being a sub-par OS ?

are you stupid ? had to ask...

i have 2 XP computers and 3 vista computers, so i probably have more experience with the 2 OS than you do yourself. anyways i prefer XP and i always will along with millions of other people.
how many people can say they prefer vista over XP?

and you are an idiot again. i bought the vista computers after the service pack came out and year(s) after vista was released to the public.

um money is a great reason for not caring or wanting to run windows 7. XP and vista do everything I need a computer to do and windows 7 is not going to change that.
that has nothing to do with knowing computers.. damn you are really dumb.

care to go on?

now you must be the only person i have seen defend windows vista, please go away i am sure nobody is listening.

you love for vista has not affect on my opinion of the matter.

you said: ''sk8monroe, I'm sorry to be the one to have to tell you this''

wow did you really think you teaching anything ? i am almost positive you felt smarter for a second when you typed that comment. then you probably had that 'gotcha' smirk and/or attitude after ?
-----------------------------------------
'you said: 'and as such if you are running Vista already and have even the lightest tiny sliver of tech savvy, there is no excuse for you not to be running Windows 7.''

so you are saying that if you know anything about computers you have to buy windows 7 ?
hell anybody that knows enough about computers knows they can do more modding and actual work and tailor their computer to their needs more themselves with an XP system. vista and 7 are geared to combat these things more. so where are you trying to go with talking about computer tech ? vista and 7 were designed to be more user friendly, you know for the average 'casual' computer user.
---------------------------
you said: ''an incremental improvement upon the perfect stability that is Vista today''

so you are saying that vista = perfect ?
oh wow, do you work for MS ?

:) thanks for putting words in my mouth and attempting to describe my computer knowledge.

and why didn't you learn when your comment failed that it just wasn't meant to be ?

not impresed, i played the other day a eroge/galge game which needed 25gb of free hdd

yeah, lots of scenes and also they jumped from static images on conversations to full cell shade models

That was my first impression too

Yeah I was fine with everything else, but holy shit 16 gigs?

Dragon Age requires 20GB.

Btw, STEAM is required?!

And what game is that CJLopez?

@RKN: Timeleap Paradise

http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2009/01/26/time-leap-paradise-to-be-idol-master-eroge/

Steam is handling the anti-cheat duties with VAC.

That's like 2 DVDs, not too crazy... I'm guessing it's because PC needs textures for every detail level but consoles only run at 1 setting.

If you are looking for a cheap card the radeon hd 4770 and geForce 9800 gt are both under 100 bucks and are awesome for the price.

I just bought a 9400GT from Newegg the other day. These cards are very overclockable (just make sure you have a decent power supply).

will a 500w suffice for the overclock???

no, 800 then, xDDDDDD

*breaking news, the electricy bill on CJLopez house skyrocketed in the last months!!!

his mother says that "HIS RIG IS 1337!!!!! NEEDS MORE NAKED PANTs POWER!!!! He refuses to use pants on the house!!!!!*

We'll keep you informed on the matter*

gotta wonder why did i get downvoted in my last comment???

not buying, downloading, cuz they really wanted to give us pc players the shaft with that IWNet crap, well, we ought to show our appreciation on the matter, dont we?

Fee fi fo fum, I predict a downvote.

@CJLopez

I really hope you're not talking about pirating. Because any intelligent person knows that will just hurt PC gamers in the long run. Either with tighter DRM, or they just wont make it for PC anymore. Consoles are already Activision's target for a few reasons like that. If you are talking about pirating...get a job, move out of mom's basement, and buy the game.

Filipino I hope you understand how the market works. If people are still buying the product and it makes a profit they will continue to release it. If 3x that number are pirating the product even if you can prove it, it still doesn't matter because it still made a profit and they will not pull support for a profitable item.


Piracy does not inherently hurt the gaming industry. Its only lack of sales due to piracy that hurts. So if he's not going to buy the product because it doesn't offer dedicated servers for online play, and will pirate it on a whim just to play the single player, that is NOT a lost sale and will not hurt the industry in the slightest.

Now, people like me... that pirate everything... I'm hurting the industry by not buying games at all. Shame on me. But making a stand against one game for a specific reason and then turning to piracy cannot be viewed as piracy's fault.

I have a job
I live with my mom cuz i'm the one paying the bills of my house (my dad died a couple of years ago and i had to take care of my house)
My house doesnt has a basement
I only buy the game when i want to show my appreciation to the devs for their hard work. I download them when i want to tell them "better stay outta here"

Really, that IWNet thing, just not coupling with mine and another 100k gamers test. If they are gonna give us this kind of treatment, i rather they go all the way for consoles. Its the same deal with Blizzard and their descition to take out lan capabilities and sticking to thei own servers on starcraft 2. but still i'll be buying that game cuz, for real, its MODAFING STARCRAFT 2!!!!!!!

now, gentlemen, comence downvote in 3......2.......1.......

This is hilarious. Here's everyone complaining about the game not having dedicated servers and how its a huge step back in PC gaming, and I get downvoted for stating the obvious.

This is why IW isn't doing shit about it. They know everyone will buy it anyway.

Eh I'm downloading it too. I'll save my real money for Borderlands and Dragon Age.

I'll finish this campaign in a sitting anyways. Probably won't even have to go washroom.

Guys if your boycotting a product it doesn't give you permission to pirate it you jack-offs.

Ghen, your entire rant was bullsh*t to convince yourself that what you do wrong is ok. It's not - live in denial, but don't expect the rest of the world to jump on board.

The same broke PC gamers that are used to paying 50 dollars instead of 60 for a game? If this game does well 60 will be the new trend.

You make a good, and worrisome, point.

Hmm...

Representin'

We're the same broke PC gamers who shell out 1000+ every 3-5 years for the latest gaming rig instead of grabbing a console.

$50 instead of $60 is the industry's own special way of not kicking us in the nuts while we're passed out on the ground.

@ HippoHero

$50 was the standard price for games and should remain that way. The only reason PS3/360 games are sold at $60 is because the developers are trying to compensate for the licensing fees they have to pay to Sony/Microsoft. Since there is no one charging the developers licensing fees on the PC, there is no reason for the $10 price increase. It is simply greed on Activision's part.

Fancy that, that's the time I plan on upgrading too. That is, if finances permit. Gotta rob somebody...

I'll be building a 2nd PC for my wife.. she won't be using it all the time so.. LAN party??


oh wait, no LAN support. roflcopter

BOOM HEADSHOT!!!!!!

im sure this is bare minimum requirements. will probably take closer to 20 gigs, and with a video card and cpu like that, well, at 15 fps it is still technically playable...

The PC i played CoD4 on were just in line with the minimum requirements and the game ran surprisingly well with medium settings. I don't see my PC handling this game very well, but i'd love to try it. Too bad there's no demo for it.