Poll: AC Unity System Requirements (LOL)

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.3 GHz or AMD Phenom II x4 940 @ 3.0 GHz processor
6 GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 or AMD Radeon HD 7970 (2 GB VRAM) video card

Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3.4 GHz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or better processor
8 GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 or AMD Radeon R9 290X (3 GB VRAM) video card

Windows 7 SP1 or Windows 8/8.1 (64-bit versions only)
DirectX Version 11
DirectX 9.0c compatible sound card with latest drivers
50 GB available HDD space

So, minimum requirements demand more than what the current consoles are capable of. Either we have another case of highly inaccurate requirements, or the port is abysmal. And I cannot stress enough how abysmal it would need to be.
A lot of people seem to be canceling their pre-orders. I can't say that I blame them. I don't know what possessed them to pre-order a PC version of a Ubisoft title in the first place.

 

[Sassafrass]

So even with my planned CPU upgrade[footnote]Seriously, AMD is good if you're on a budget but add a GTX760 to an AMD A8-5600K CPU and it is bottleneck city central. So I'm upgrading to a high end i5, possibly a 4690 (I don't really care about over-clocking so I won't take the K unless it actually works) any suggestions as to which one would be helpful as I have about £200-£250 for both a CPU AND new mobo.[/footnote] I may only just squeak into the minimum requirements category.

Thanks Ubistahp, you convinced me to not buy this.

 

[Supernova1138]

And it all won't matter because the game will be locked to 30FPS to make Microsoft happy. I doubt you really need an i7 or FX 8350 to actually get good performance though, all the past AC games have only really used one or two cores heavily, so unless they've completely rewrote their game engine to make heavy use of multithreading, you really don't need to have the i7.

 

[Roxas1359]

In all honesty, I take any PC system requirements with grains of salt seeing as how multiple times this generation we've seen inflated PC spec requirements from companies, especially UbiSoft.

 

[Ambient_Malice]

I put little faith in system requirements. Real benchmarks will reveal the truth.

 

[Shadowstar38]

After having to fuck around with Uplay, I've kinda already decided not to buy anymore Ubisoft games till I've replaced my console. So thankfully, not a problem personally.

 

[CrazyBlaze]

Yeah I really doubt we will need those. I mean look how inflated SoM's specs were. Its really a wait and see lately which sucks. I wonder if companies are just doing a really bad job porting or if they inflate them to increase hardware sales.

 

[raeior]

Well I never bought any AC game for more than 10? anyway so...no I won't buy this one (for more than that at least).
I find it quite funny that they lock the fps to 30 for the "cinematic look" and then still demand such specs. Seems to be an indicator of a really well designed and optimized PC port*coughs*. In the end if those specs are really necessary, this will probably cost them a lot of sales and afterwards they can state that PC gamers obviously don't want their games so they can put even less resources into their ports!

 

[Denamic]

Why would a game have a minimum requirement of double the current console's power?

 

[Sight Unseen]

Why would a game have a minimum requirement of double the current console's power?

Because instead of optimizing the game for the PC, they just raise the system specs ... Because it's totally reasonable for a PC game to have twice the minimum specs as a console... /s

 

[spartandude]

Thank you very much Ubisoft for saving me money by convincing me not to buy this game, will probably get either Civilisation Beyond Earth or Fantasy Life (3ds) instead.

 

[Hazy992]

Jesus Christ I can't even run this on minimum D:

I mean I probably wasn't buying Unity anyway but it certainly ain't happening for PC. Either the PC version is one of the most gorgeous, most densely populated open world games ever, or (more likely) the port is absolute dogshit.

After having to fuck around with Uplay, I've kinda already decided not to buy anymore Ubisoft games till I've replaced my console. So thankfully, not a problem personally.

I forgot about Uplay. Yeah I won't buy Ubisoft games on PC regardless of what happens.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

I called all of this last year with AC: IV.

Welcome to the next gen, fellow PC Gamers! Lazy porting and compression beckons!

If anyone needs me, I will be awaiting for my copy of The Witcher 3!

 

[fix-the-spade]

Oh well, massively uncompressed textures here we come.

I think this has become part of the advertising hype in a lot of publisher's minds, a game isn't 'next gen' unless it's got wildly massive hardware requirements that anyone with half a brain would figure out are fabricated.

Of course if they really want to go the whole hog they could put in a hardware check that won't run the game at all unless you have the min spec, Ubisoft have done dumber things.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

Oh look another abysmal port from Ubisoft..who would of thought?

I can run Mordor 1080p 60 on my 560ti and I can't run this that looks worse? Come on now!

UBISOFT logic: Console = 1.75Ghz APU, 1310 Gflop GPU @ 853Mhz vs PC: 4Ghz CPU, 3090 Gflop GPU @ 1006Mhz (MINIMUM). Does any one else notice the massive -unoptimized piece of shit- flag here?

 

[pearcinator]

Ridiculous specs! Dragon Age: Inquisition looks far more impressive and I easily match the recommended specs for that game!

The difference between good optimization and poor optimization is this. Ubisoft, optimize your damn games better!

This game looks no different than practically every other assassins creed game ever. I have only played AC Brotherhood and AC Black Flag (and they are supposedly the best ones right?) and while I enjoyed them, there's nothing that stands out to me as revolutionary in any way.

It seems that Ubisoft games have a certain 'feel' to them. Watch Dogs had the same 'feel' that AC does. Play one AC game and you've played them all.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Well Uplay still exists so I doubt I'd even consider getting the game, it's bad enough that for me to even play 2 Uplay needs to somehow exist when the game boots up, I just wish it would die and the only redeeming feature they have is Uplay points which is all I care for.

 

[Gladion]

I think this has become part of the advertising hype in a lot of publisher's minds, a game isn't 'next gen' unless it's got wildly massive hardware requirements that anyone with half a brain would figure out are fabricated.

I think you're onto something here. But who's to blame? I remember that, a few years ago, PC graphics were not measured by how well they actually looked (the difference is getting harder and harder to tell anyway during normal gameplay), but how well PCs could generally handle them. The worse, the better.

Ridiculous specs! Dragon Age: Inquisition looks far more impressive and I easily match the recommended specs for that game!

You're comparing the performances of two games that both haven't come out yet. Doesn't help that there is no industry-set standard for what "Minimum" and "Recommended" mean. For all we know, Ubi's "Minimum" could mean a minimum of 30 FPS with all settings to low-medium whereas Bioware's would be "bare playable minimum". Not to mention that the two game systems are different.

 

[Rellik San]

Sounds to me like inflating the specs, people will wuss out and buy a console for it instead... as a result they'll buy Xone for it.

But they don't count on us just not buying the game.

 

[seris]

i could play is game at close to recommended if i bought a new graphics card, too bad i wont be playing this game since it will run bad either way