legacyzero
Banned
Holy shit, Ubi. Why so heavy on the CPU?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ubisoft revises Watch Dog's PC specs (even more demanding ones, 6GB RAM minimum)
- Thread starter angular graphics
- Start date
I feel the right time was 2 years ago (at least for this type of very demanding title). But we can agree that it's a good thing that it is finally happening.
Also, as someone else pointed out to me recently, every single CPU supported by this game is 64 bit anyway.
Yeah, I was considering an upgrade to 24 GB (from 12) when it was so cheap, should have done it. I just couldn't see a point back then.
Get a job or get a console~!I want to play this on pc, but I don't have a good enough one. Can one of you guys spec me one of those $500 gaming pcs I hear so much about. I'm probably gonna need an OS so don't forget to include that in the price~!
I can't wait join the master race!
$130 for the cheapest 2x8GB Dual Channel set on Newegg.
plagiarize
Banned
yep yep. that's me. I'm planning a PC build for the end of next year and will be enjoying multiplats on PS4 in the meantime.
OldAsUrSock
Banned
Yeah, all of the people going crazy over specs must have old or low end machines.
The feel of 480p 15fps.
Oh no my once better than recommended is now recommended specs! What am I to do?
UPGRADE!
exactly. for years pc gamers were moaning how current-gen games under-utilize their poweful gaming machines, now watch dogs has requirements for rigs like this and again complaints...
don't get depressed by comments here, overclock the old champion to 3400/3600 (easily doable on G0 revisions) and enable adaptive vsync on the GPU to 30 fps, a friend got one of those for 12 bucks used and just plays 1080p/30fps with a cheap GPU I believe it was a 560. Anything cheaper for 30 fps gaming ? Don't think at that low framerate you need 8 cores and a 7XX card, as long as you have 8 GB of RAM.
It's not really all that heavy. E.g. a 3 GHz quad core Phenom is somewhat more powerful than the 8 core 1.6 GHz Jaguar in the consoles, but not excessively so.
Different people. Real 90s PC gamers are used to this happening every 2 years, not every 7.
Ask Jonathan Blow.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
I'm just wondering, if the PC version needs 6GB memory, what sorry-arse state the PS3/360/Wii U versions are going to be in on 512mb/1GB memory systems.
Also, this is a small but not insignificant justification on why it's right to get a PS4/XB1 at launch window if you are primarily a console gamer. Increasingly the big titles on current gen are going to compromised.
I have to admit the idea of playing a cross-gen game such as this on current gen fills me with depression. But fair enough if that's your only choice.
Eh, it's the first time in 6 years a game has pushed anything significant, and even now it's kind of mild.
Erm, you don't have three seconds a year to check the specs?
Also, just buy latest hardware and it will be enough to run any game more or less smoothly (30-60fps on max) for 3-5 years.
Too fucking true. 2 pentium machines, 2 pentium 2 machines, and k3 amd based machines. Compared to that era you mentioned I will gladly take the style of upgrades we do now especially since I can transplant more parts.
Hooligaani
Banned
My 1080p steambox meets the recommended and my "beast" meets/exceed the ultra specs. Just pony up Ubi and don't fuck it up.
Yeah, I've decided to hold off for a year or so. PS4 multiplatforms will be fine in the meantime.
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
So, that pretty much implies the 'minimum' here is the tripple memstick / i7 setup?
Hmm.
Not that anyone in the right mind should have anything less than 8GB in a gaming rig at this point though. (like I do )
edit: oh, and this will have Uplay as well?
Hmm.
Not that anyone in the right mind should have anything less than 8GB in a gaming rig at this point though. (like I do
)edit: oh, and this will have Uplay as well?
Having gone through that era, It's sort of crazy that I have been able to get generally high settings (at 60FPS in 1080P) in 2013 titles on the PC that I built just before Dragon Age Origins came out, other than an upgrade to a GTX 560. Even moreso when you consider that my PC was only $700 when I built it. In the late 90s, you had to drop $1000 to build something that barely met minimum specs for more than a year.
brightsons
Member
Looks like its finally time to retire my Q6600, had a hell of a run with that CPU.
Probably build a new pc sometime next year.
Probably build a new pc sometime next year.
Horsemama1956
Member
Those specs seem very reasonable, except maybe the i7 for recommended. GPU requirements probably aren't all that high either if you're not resolution obsessed.
Not sure why anyone half way serious about gaming on a PC would have 5 or 6 year old processor.
Not sure why anyone half way serious about gaming on a PC would have 5 or 6 year old processor.
I suspect the games are actually going to be redesigned somewhat.
Fried Food
Banned
my overclocked beast will destroy this game I hope.
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
Game will fry my Processor.
I'm assuming so.
Alcotholic
Banned
Next Gen PC games, everyone.
Chance Hale
Member
Could be both.
Ascended Saiyan
Banned
Dat ram and CPU
frankie_baby
Member
looks like wii u version for me then, well it was going to be anyway but nice to know my few months old computer doesn't stand a chance
Just start saving money, because Haswell-E will be released in Q2 2014 and will bring Haswell CPUs in 6 and 8 cores configurations
I'm definitely buying 8 cores/16 threads CPU, not only it will be glorious, but i wont have to change it for next 7 years.
The only 'scary' part with buying as 'future proof' is that with Volta GPUs there can be change in motherboard construction direction. Its not certain, but there is possibility.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Will i5 3570K be enough to handle this? I haven't bought a CPU yet but I did buy a LGA 1155 board already.
Yeah, I lived that (and having less disposable income than I do now). It makes these "issues" seem somewhat comical in comparison.
I have a 5 year old processor (i7 920 @ 3.8 Ghz) because nothing so far would have benefited from more than that, and because Intel's performance progress on the desktop has slowed to a crawl since the core i7 series. Seriously, I blame Intel. Or physics.
I feel like there are more people complaining about people complaining in this thread than people complaining, TBH.
I'm also planning for a Haswell-E build, and I have the vague fear that I might never have to change it.Just start saving money, because Haswell-E will be released in Q2 2014 and will bring Haswell CPUs in 6 and 8 cores configurations
I'm definitely buying 8 cores/16 threads CPU, not only it will be glorious, but i wont have to change it for next 7 years.