Top
1050°

Assassin's Creed PC to Have Insane Minimum Specs

These specifications are neck-and-neck with Crysis' minimums, even a bit beefier in some respects. If the performance of Crytek's FPS on sub-standard hardware is anything to go by, Assassin's Creed on PC will chug on a system with the aforementioned capabilities.

Read Full Story >>
kotaku.com.au
The story is too old to be commented.
crunchie1013285d ago

Ubisoft are terrible at scaling specs for PC, and I mean, come on, Assassin's Creed isn't THAT much of a technical feat. You still have to load between cities, the character models aren't that great..I..

rrg. I shouldn't be so angry, it's not like I dont have a 360 to play it on.

decapitator3285d ago

Wasn't this a rumor ? or has the specs been confirmed now ? If so, did UBISOFT really think thoroughly about this before implementing this ? I mean, most people have already played the game on their PS3 or 360. Most PC gamers either have a PC and 360 as well and most likely played the game on it.

And really, how is having out of this world specs going to help this game get picked up by the masses who only have Intel's Integrated graphic cards in their computer and have absolutely no plans of upgrading ?

mikeslemonade3285d ago

Well you have to give more to get more Jade Raymond. And this just shows how impressive the current gen consoles are.

PMR_213284d ago

"Assassin's Creed isn't THAT much of a technical feat." whoa, what an ignorant statement...please go visit an optometrist...you have vision problems...clearly

funkeystu3284d ago

PMR_21 - he's probably comparing it to you know....other games, say like crysis, which does look better, and has lower system requirements. It should also be noted that games with (arguably) comparable visuals to Assassin's Creed have much lower system specs.

crunchie101 isn't arguing that Assassin's Creed is terrible, merely that the pc system requirements are dis proportionally high when compared to other current gen games

pointystick3284d ago (Edited 3284d ago )

This is getting stupid, lets spend 2/3 months with a 2 man team just to make an installer and couple of graphical options for the PC gamers. This just reeks lame port... and they start moaning when people dont buy this rubbish!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3284d ago
fermcr3285d ago

Another Console game badly optimized for the PC :(

Crazyglues3285d ago (Edited 3285d ago )

But wasn't it just yesterday that they where saying the hardware has finally caught up and surpassed the gaming industry. Now all of a sudden once again nothing can run these games at full specs.

Hopefully nvidia's new graphics Card will help, or is it just crazy to think that one super high end graphics card can even make a difference at this point.

NEO_X3284d ago

You can make a pc a little more poweful than a video game system but expect to be spending over 1k so really (at least I believe) it's not worth it

Avto3285d ago

ha ha ha who the hell is going to buy this? Maybe in 3-5 years someone will get a D2D version but now? Why do they even bother.

PopEmUp3285d ago

probably in a thousand year from now or may be a million year

ErBarad3285d ago (Edited 3285d ago )

... who are you trying to fool? People have been saying that for years, and guess what... Pc gaming is still alive and it's doing great. There will be always consoles and PCs. Period.

LJWooly3285d ago

Yes, PC gaming's still alive, but it is doing far from great. Take a look at Crysis' sales, for instance. They're appaling.

Two major reasons for this:
1) Insane specs, requiring a costly rig (not worth it)
2) Piracy, meaning over half of Crysis owners got it for free.

Kleptic3284d ago

PC gaming IS dying...not sure why so many disagree with him...

just like above mentioned...looked at sales figures for the biggest release of 2007...

established franchises like Half-life and Unreal also had very underwhelming performances when compared to the console variants (look at the orange box and UT3 console sales compared to PC versions)...

and how well do you think Gears did on the PC compared to the `6 million 360 version?...

and this dates back to years ago...Doom 3, along with Half-Life 2, were touted as the two biggest PC releases of all time...Doom 3 only topped 1 million sales on the Xbox port of the same game (at least as of 2006)...and while Half-life 2 sold over 4 million as of June 8th, 2006...nearly half of that was accredited to bargain pricing on Valve's newly implemented Steam service around that time (that was never confirmed, but retail sales were hovering at roughly 2 million as of early 2006)...

you figure that was back when console online connectivity was relatively young...with only xbl heading that movement (most pc gamers refused to pay additionally for online play, and a lot still do)...

with XBl and PSN both growing at huge rates...you see more and more PC exclusive games making simultaneous releases with consoles...and looking further ahead, it seems more and more PC gamer oriented fps or rpg games are being lead on consoles...bethesda has stated that the 360 has been their lead platform of interest for Fallout 3, a generally PC oriented game...fanbase wise...

name 1 big PC game that has been announced...that has no chance of coming to consoles soon after its release...Quake Wars, UT3, Crysis, and even Bioshock all had horrid sales when compared to the console version of that respective game (crysis and quake wars have yet to have console versions, yet have been nothing but underwhelming sales wise)...

if you think this isn't PC gaming's slow death...I don't know what to tell you...I am not saying PC gaming will stop being around...I am only saying that big PC only franchises and IPs are becoming few and far between...with focus on console development increasing exponentially...PC gaming has not added one dollar to the gaming industry growth for years...its been on a downward slope since the beginning of this decade, give or take a few months with HL2's release...

the days of some of the best games only being on a PC are long gone...its now very infrequent that a PC gets even a timed exclusive...

NEO_X3284d ago

we all know that WOW has no one playing it.............sarcasm

Bolts3284d ago (Edited 3284d ago )

I guess all those hundreds of full 32 players CoD 4 servers doesn't count. Yeah PC gaming is dead...idiot. PC gaming will never, EVER die. It has a user base and the kind of community content that the consoles can only dream of. And anyone who apply console terms like "timed exclusive" to PC gaming is a moron.

ErBarad3284d ago

"and how well do you think Gears did on the PC compared to the `6 million 360 version?..."

Well, how old was GoW when released for the PC? It was still great, but gamers had chosen to play something else, as GoW hadn't been the only game on the market.

Kleptic3284d ago (Edited 3284d ago )

you guys can call me a moron all you want...but you still have absolutely no chance of standing up to my facts that as a part of the industry, PC gaming is being left in the dust...

ok you pointed out MMOs...forgot about those...10 million'ish have subscribed to WoW, which by far and away blows other MMOs out of the water as far as active users go...

there is also probably 5 million stay at home mom's that can't get enough sims, or online puzzle games, or other stuff...lets include that too, just in case...

and yet every other expensive game (publishing wise, development wise, ad wise, w/e) gets absolutely toasted by console counterparts...

if you jackasses would have read my post correctly in the first place, I didn't say "it was dead"...I said it was "dying"...where did I say it wouldn't be around though?...I was saying that PC gaming is losing its grip on being where the technilogical advances are...game development to get engines like Crysis finished is so high, combined with relatively no payout, it simply won't be happening anymore if this stuff continues...

and alos...fanboi...what is wrong with terming a PC game as a timed exclusive?...I understand there is no money trading hands in such a deal, but it is still exclusive to a specific platform for a specific amount of time right?...so whats the difference?...the PC used to get games in situations like that all the time, over 10 a year...and now what?...is not getting one big release that is specific to only the PC a sign that PCs, as a gaming platform, are doing well?

MS seems to agree with what I am talking about...only they agreed with it back in 1999, before I even knew anything about it (I was happy with Quake III and thought everything would be fine)...research why the Xbox line came about in the first place...you might learn something on what has been happening to PC gaming...

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3284d ago
Show all comments (39)
The story is too old to be commented.