Waiting for the next Assassin's Creed to play it on your pc? Wait! Read again.
#1

I am a big fan of Assassin's Creed series but when they released system MINIMUM specification I was shocked -

Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.3 GHz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 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.

On top of that, you require to have 64 bit Windows 7 or newer.
50 GB Hard drive space.

That's outrageous. Like seriously.
Comparing to their Black Flag system requirements... yeah ubisoft...


I wouldn't have even started this thread if it was like GTX 650 Minimum.

Well yea... It looks like ubisoft does not want their income from pc....
Since my modest gaming rig cannot run it.

Link to official thread: http://blog.ubi.com/assassins-creed-unity-pc-specs/

FOR YOUR REFERENCE: HIGH END GPU BENCHMARKS:
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

The GTX 680 is 15th in the list of most powerful GPU's.
Reply
#2

It's better to ignore the recommended specs from gaming companies because usually they exaggerate it.

Eg : MP3 & WD
Reply
#3

It's not always correct, I've played alot of games on Medium/High, and according to requirements i couldn't even play it on Low....

Though, that's like too much O_O .... I surely need to upgrade to playe this one on my pc
Reply
#4

Quote:
Originally Posted by [J]
Посмотреть сообщение
It's better to ignore the recommended specs from gaming companies because usually they exaggerate it.

Eg : MP3 & WD
Those are MINIMUM. Not recommended.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy_
Посмотреть сообщение
It's not always correct, I've played alot of games on Medium/High, and according to requirements i couldn't even play it on Low....

Though, that's like too much O_O .... I surely need to upgrade to playe this one on my pc
Indeed. Well I'd be fine if they were recommended, but such minimum specs? What the heck ubisoft?
Reply
#5

Minimum requirement is a GTX 680.... Well what do you expect from Ubisoft lol. They must seriously be having problems with optimisation considering it's going to be locked to 30FPS. Imagine the requirements if it wasn't

Best thing to do is to just not buy anything from Ubisoft. Eventually they will learn.
Reply
#6

Quote:
Originally Posted by V1ceC1ty
Посмотреть сообщение
Minimum requirement is a GTX 680.... Well what do you expect from Ubisoft lol. They must seriously be having problems with optimisation considering it's going to be locked to 30FPS. Imagine the requirements if it wasn't
It is locked 30 on consoles, not on PC. On PC there are 3 settings - LOCK 30, LOCK 60, UNLOCK fps. Although they do not support issues regarding unlocked FPS.
As well While using my GTX 660 that I bought 1 and a half years ago I had no problems with most games, dropping frames at some games. AC4 was running on 25 - 60 fps (acceptable). And now, ubisoft asks us to raid NASA of their computers? Yeah...
Reply
#7

All that minimum hardware is 2+ years old. Its somehow time that games really need that performance.
Do you expect all modern games to run on 5 years old hardware or why so shocked?
Reply
#8

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauzen
Посмотреть сообщение
All that minimum hardware is 2+ years old. Its somehow time that games really need that performance.
Do you expect all modern games to run on 5 years old hardware or why so shocked?
Ehhmmm. 5 years? Do you call a GPU from the fall of 2012 5 years old? According to maths it is ( 2014 - 2012 = 2 years ) and it is still not enough?

GTX 580 / GTX 590 / GTX 650 / GTX 650 TI / GTX 660 / GTX 660 TI/ GTX 670
All those GPU'S do you call 5 years old?

Ok, Lemme rephrase that.
Do you expect everybody who wants to play that game to buy a pc that costs like $900?
Reply
#9

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauzen
Посмотреть сообщение
All that minimum hardware is 2+ years old. Its somehow time that games really need that performance.
Do you expect all modern games to run on 5 years old hardware or why so shocked?
The minimum GTX 680 requirement is what the focus is on here. Check the benchmarks.

A 680, even though it is old, is a ridiculously high spec GPU to be required for minimum settings. Not only that but a GTX 780 is recommended. For a 30FPS game.
Reply
#10

Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
GTX 580 / GTX 590 / GTX 650 / GTX 650 TI / GTX 660 / GTX 660 TI/ GTX 670
All those GPU'S do you call 5 years old?
Thats not what I wrote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
Ok, Lemme rephrase that.
Do you expect everybody who wants to play that game to buy a pc that costs like $900?
I dont expect anything from anyone as Im not the guy who made that game.

If you dont like that or dont want to buy a new PC just for that game, then just dont buy it. It has ALWAYS been like this, you dont buy games that your PC cant run. Its just their own decision if they want to give a shit about proper hardware scaling, they could even set a TITAN as minimum and you wouldnt have a real reason to complain. Its them who have to live with ridiculously low sales, and theyll either learn from that or not.

I wont buy it anyways, but thats because im not even interested in assasins creed, not because of those requirements.
Reply
#11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauzen
Посмотреть сообщение
Thats not what I wrote.



I dont expect anything from anyone as Im not the guy who made that game.

If you dont like that or dont want to buy a new PC just for that game, then just dont buy it. It has ALWAYS been like this, you dont buy games that your PC cant run. Its just their own decision if they want to give a shit about proper hardware scaling, they could even set a TITAN as minimum and you wouldnt have a real reason to complain. Its them who have to live with ridiculously low sales, and theyll either learn from that or not.

I wont buy it anyways, but thats because im not even interested in assasins creed, not because of those requirements.
But in a way you did.
Now you're saying that you did not say this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauzen
Посмотреть сообщение
All that minimum hardware is 2+ years old. Its somehow time that games really need that performance.
Do you expect all modern games to run on 5 years old hardware or why so shocked?
The thing is, 680 is still a high end card, that still costs shit ton.
It is really close to first gen GTX TITAN.

Everybody who cannot afford such cards are going with something like GTX 650 / 660 / 660 Ti or this year, GTX 750 / 750 Ti / 760.
All of those are worse than 680. So basically, the "new" sub $300 card is useless.


And a reply to your:
Код:
It has ALWAYS been like this
Actually, No, There were times when the specs get outdated, that's true, but once in 4 years upgrades should cover you.
As well, why there is not any other game, that would be so outrageous in their system specifications?
You will be able to run GTA V with the "5 year old" system with the minimum specs, but you cannot run this game with 2 year old spec?
Reply
#12

well Assassin's Creed series is already been horrible optimized for quite a while now, and now this..
lets see what happens
Reply
#13

Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
You will be able to run GTA V with the "5 year old" system with the minimum specs, but you cannot run this game with 2 year old spec?
^^ This explains everything. This is why everyone has a problem with Ubisoft recently, or mostly anyway.
Reply
#14

Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
But in a way you did.
Now you're saying that you did not say this:



The thing is, 680 is still a high end card, that still costs shit ton.
It is really close to first gen GTX TITAN.

Everybody who cannot afford such cards are going with something like GTX 650 / 660 / 660 Ti or this year, GTX 750 / 750 Ti / 760.
All of those are worse than 680. So basically, the "new" sub $300 card is useless.
The point is that you either have the hardware or not, and so you either can play the game or not. It has EVER been like this since the very first computer games, and there have EVER been people who couldnt play a game with their hardware on its release.
So just get over it and just give a shit about that game, either until you got the hardware for it, or forever. It wont change a thing if you rage about the requirements in some random unrelated forum. If you really want to rage effectively send Ubisoft a letter and complain about it, but there already will be enough people and reviews who do that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
Actually, No, There were times when the specs get outdated, that's true, but once in 4 years upgrades should cover you.
As well, why there is not any other game, that would be so outrageous in their system specifications?
You will be able to run GTA V with the "5 year old" system with the minimum specs, but you cannot run this game with 2 year old spec?
Crysis 3 was close to that. It had the GTS 450 as minimum which was released just a bit over 2 years before the actual game release. Did anyone cry about that?
Okay, that was a card for cheapies, and cant be compared to the 680's price, but it also wasnt enough to play the game properly. How about you wait for real benchmarks and tests before exploding in blind rage about a stupid game?


Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
You're the one who is like "I do not give a fuck". If you're like so, Do not join the thread then. Find a better waste of time. This thread was created intentionally to provide information to people who actually CARE about assassin's creed series.
This is a public forum and I can add my shit to whatever thread I like.
Actually, I just like discussions with people who wont ever change their mind, and would have gone long time ago if you didnt kept fueling that fire. Dont ask why.
Reply
#15

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauzen
Посмотреть сообщение
The point is that you either have the hardware or not, and so you either can play the game or not. It has EVER been like this since the very first computer games, and there have EVER been people who couldnt play a game with their hardware on its release.
So just get over it and just give a shit about that game, either until you got the hardware for it, or forever. It wont change a thing if you rage about the requirements in some random unrelated forum. If you really want to rage effectively send Ubisoft a letter and complain about it, but there already will be enough people and reviews who do that.
You're the one who is like "I do not give a fuck". If you're like so, Do not join the thread then. Find a better waste of time. This thread was created intentionally to provide information to people who actually CARE about assassin's creed series.

Ehhm... It had the GTS 450 ?
That's like nothing.

Shadow of mordor has GTX 480 minimum, and it still works fine for most people who want to play something.

The thing here is, Ubisoft has stepped over the line of minimum specs.

Most people are having 600 series cards or lower. And only a small part of those people have 680 or 690.
It is fine that the minimum requirement rises up, but not having a Nvidia Geforce GTX 260 in the previous game and then 680 on a follow up.
Reply
#16

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauzen
Посмотреть сообщение
The point is that you either have the hardware or not
You don't understand the point at all. The minimum requirements for this game are set way too high. GTA V PC will be a much bigger game with much more content and you can bet your life savings it wont require a GTX 680 for minimum settings.

A GTX 680 is more powerful than a whole PS4 system, yet it is required for minimum settings. The point is that they've obviously done an awful job at optimising the game.
Reply
#17

Quote:

Crysis 3 was close to that. It had the GTS 450 as minimum which was released just a bit over 2 years before the actual game release. Did anyone cry about that?
Okay, that was a card for cheapies, and cant be compared to the 680's price, but it also wasnt enough to play the game properly. How about you wait for real benchmarks and tests before exploding in blind rage about a stupid game?

And Mauzen, for you to know, those specs are by UBISOFT. Those are not predicted. Those are confirmed.
And no other game has made such hardware requirements leap in just a year.
GTX 260 -> GTX 680? That's a leap of 3 generations of cards.

And regarding the one raging, it is you, using explicit language where it is not required and acting a "I don't give a fucker". Shows your nature real well.
Reply
#18

Well to be honest, I do not know why , I did not liked the Black Flag too much, It wasn't bad actually But it was kind-of boring, Long sailing and etc, Assassins creed series have to make something interesting and enjoyable again and I think 'And Hope' the this would be a good one, But the requirements part is a very bad choice by Ubisoft as some people 'like me' Can't get those specs to play a Game even on very low settings....

I'd rather play other games on High than upgrading to play AC on low or worse :/
Reply
#19

Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
And Mauzen, for you to know, those specs are by UBISOFT. Those are not predicted. Those are confirmed.
And no other game has made such hardware requirements leap in just a year.
GTX 260 -> GTX 680? That's a leap of 3 generations of cards.
Black flag had a GTX 260 as minimum. Looking at some benchmarks it was pretty much unplayable with a GTX 260, even on minimum settings. A 460 or 550TI was the real minimum to get enjoyable performance on minimum settings.

Even "confirmed" requirements usually dont tell anything about the real performance. For some games the minimum might be enough for a fluent game with constant FPS, for others it might mean a shit.
So what if they learned from their poor "confirmation" of hardware requirements, and the GTX 680 would actually be the minimum needed to get constant 30 FPS from it? The real jump in requirements would be much less dramatic then.
So just wait for some benchmarks, you can still rage then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by [WSF]ThA_Devil
Посмотреть сообщение
And regarding the one raging, it is you, using explicit language where it is not required and acting a "I don't give a fucker". Shows your nature real well.
The internet doesnt tell a shit about someones nature.
Even if he keeps using the word "shit" in his posts.
Reply
#20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauzen
Посмотреть сообщение
I dont expect anything from anyone as Im not the guy who made that game.

If you dont like that or dont want to buy a new PC just for that game, then just dont buy it. It has ALWAYS been like this, you dont buy games that your PC cant run. Its just their own decision if they want to give a shit about proper hardware scaling, they could even set a TITAN as minimum and you wouldnt have a real reason to complain. Its them who have to live with ridiculously low sales, and theyll either learn from that or not.

I wont buy it anyways, but thats because im not even interested in assasins creed, not because of those requirements.
Why are you acting like an ignorant? When it's always like that? The requirements they've added won't be able to run this game even on my PC just because even the minimum GPU requirements are so damn high. I've a 2 years old GPU, and I still CANNOT run this because of the requirements.

I can run Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor @ stable 50 FPS at medium settings, Alien Isolation runs @ stable 45 FPS at medium settings, Dead Rising 3 runs @ 20 FPS at lowest settings (this game is barely optimized), The Evil Within runs @ stable 30 FPS at medium settings (FPS locked game), The Crew runs @ stable 30 FPS at highest settings (FPS locked game) and this game, The Crew is actually published by Ubisoft and it runs perfectly on my PC, even on my laptop. I'm mentioning all the things for a reason, why would you select so HIGH requirements even for a minimum GPU, like seriously? Not everybody is wealthy enough to buy a new GPU just to play this game.

Now Mauzen keeps saying that don't buy the game if you can't run that game, etc stuff, now tell me please, for a huge fan of Assassin Creed series, isn't that really bad for people like us? who are getting let down because the requirements are so high. I was so pumped up about this game arrival, and I was waiting for the specification to come, but after checking the requirements, I've just said NOPE here.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)