Ubisoft Recommends Intel Core i7-3770, Nvidia GTX 780 For Assassin's Creed Unity

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
6GB of RAM and a 64-bit OS doesn't seem so bad but the CPU and GPU requirements are crazy, not to mention the HDD space needed. The AMD CPUs listed are out performed by the Intel CPUs they are listed with by a pretty good sized margin. I can't help they are trying to kill SSDs also since 50GB is way too much to put on a 256GB SSD, and most can't afford the 512GB SSDs they are crazy expensive for storage.
 
If these requirements are due to the quality of the visuals truly needing that much power (and not because of bad coding), then I am absolutely happy. Lesser hardware always has the option of lowering the settings to a more usable level, but it is very rare that people that spend the money on the top end hardware get to see it used to its maximum potential. I have never understood why some get upset when companies make games that require higher than an average build spec.. The visuals for a given mid range card are going to look exactly the same whether they label the setting 'medium' or 'ultra' so why hold back those with the hardware capable of taking visuals further? I do have to agree with the SSD comments above. Just like visuals, I think the uncompressed audio that is taking so much space should have an option at install to choose compressed audio installs. It would make a huge difference once you start getting a few games like this.
 
It seems like they have to make up with higher-end graphics for a poor story line and weak game play. I was unimpressed with the last offering and gave it to my son. He finished it in s few days, and felt let down.
 
Ubisoft is out of their minds if they think a Phenom II X4 940 performs similarly to the 2500k, they aren't even remotely in the same class. Additionally, I don't see any recommended overclocking settings for the 2500K and they are most certainly NOT making use of the better IG performance in the K models, so why is the K version mandatory for the minimum requirements? Seems to me Ubisoft just doesn't want to deal with optimizing for anything less.

For the record, a Phenom 940 is more likely closer to the old high-end Intel Core2 Quad and the current low-end i3's (assuming quad core isn't necessary, if not the i5 750). I think it's a safe bet the CPU requirements are either completely made up or ill-informed at the very least. As for the GPU, well to be honest I have no idea. It seems ridiculously high, but at the same time I've seen the lesser cards struggle on newer games more and more these days than they used to, probably because scaling options are slim compared to years ago.
 
These specs and they can't make it at more than 30fps? This is either BS or lazy programming. One more reason to never buy a Ubisoft game again.
 
It always seems like whoever writes these requirements don't know about hardware, I keep seeing shit like: "you need a quad core CPU like the i7-2600K or FX-4170" when the game turns out to be largely single threaded (8350 > 2500K = X4 940 Really?). If the 680 is a minimum, I'd really expect the recommended to be a 680 SLI unless graphics quality can't be changed, the 780 ain't too far.
 
Really? Talk about a TOTAL lack of optimization... unbelievable... i5 2500k, GTX 680/7970 AND 6GB Ram as MINIMUM requirements. Unbisoft, you disappoint us...
 
That if you built a PC a month ago, you would need to have spent like 3 times the cost of a console to run a game well seems absurd. I wonder if recommended is assuming better then 1080p 60fps, like 1440p 60fps. Or if the greater hardware similarities have lead to less of an investment required to have a PC version, meaning less of a commitment to making a good PC version, less of a need to spend resources on optimizing the PC version. Or if Sony and Microsoft want to paint PC as excessively expensive. Or if Hardware companies want to increase sales of high end products.
 

Doubt it. It was made first and foremost for consoles where it's optimized to hell for a low clocked 8-core AMD Jaguar (last gen mobile CPU arch) and the equivalent of an HD7850. Of course there's greater overhead on PC with DX11, but even taking that into consideration those recommended system requirements just scream poorly optimized console port.

So has there been any official confirmation yet on whether the PC version will be capped at 30fps? Given everything Ubisoft reps have been saying for the past couple months I just can't see how they could do anything else, they sort of relentlessly dug themselves into an ever deepening hole. Enabling 60 on PC would be completely contradictory and would be an admission on their part that everything they said was complete BS (which it is). After all fps is "just a number", and anything over 30fps offers no tangible benefits to a real-time experience...
 
That if you built a PC a month ago, you would need to have spent like 3 times the cost of a console to run a game well seems absurd. I wonder if recommended is assuming better then 1080p 60fps, like 1440p 60fps. Or if the greater hardware similarities have lead to less of an investment required to have a PC version, meaning less of a commitment to making a good PC version, less of a need to spend resources on optimizing the PC version. Or if Sony and Microsoft want to paint PC as excessively expensive. Or if Hardware companies want to increase sales of high end products.
Click to expand...

AC: Unity is locked to 1080p on the PC from what I understand.
 
You need an i7 and a GTX 680 for a PC but it will run on the crappy APUs in the XBO and PS4, what a joke. Unbisoft is a joke they can just stick with the console segment. I've got too many other games I can play that are way better.
 
Bad Optimization
Trying to force gamers to play on consoles
alienating low end PC users

or

pushing visuals to the max
 
This games are mostly about the hype anyway. Just wait a few years, and in 2018 or something, when you're rocking a VGA twice as powerful as a 780 and twice as thrice as cheap, then play it.

Or don't, if it's not up your alley or it turns out to be just as bad as Assassin's Creed 4.
 
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what is happening. These games play on consoles. The requirements for this type of PC hardware is the biggest middle finger a PC gamer could ever receive. These games aren't even half-baked for PC anymore.... in fact they aren't even turning the PC oven ON.
 
Good to see a game that is developed for relatively modern tech (still two years old) to push gaming environments forward. Intel, AMD,Nvidia should encourage more high end games to reduce the cycle lives of replacement of hardware to improve their revenue and profit, so that there is positive continued investment for an industry (PC) that we enjoy. Great stuff!
 


Can you pass the kool aid please? A game developed for modern tech would not be locked at 1080p and 30 fps.
 


Someone owns stock........... laughable.

 
True, PS4 and Xbox One owners are capped to 900p and I wonder if there is an appessment strategy in play, or it is that game is hard to push. As long as the game stays at 30fps it should be fine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom