200°

Far Cry 4 PC Frame Rate Test Shows Pretty Good FPS on a GTX 770

Far Cry 4 runs quite smoothly on PS4 and Xbox One, but at times Ubisoft’s PC releases tend to chug a little out of the box. This time it seems that Far Cry 4 runs quite well on a video card like the Nvidia GTX 770, which can nowadays be considered pretty much a mid-range card.

Read Full Story >>
dualshockers.com
NBT913827d ago

... I mean yeah, why would multiplatform games not be able to run on mid range PC hardware?
This is the kind of optimization that should be standard, high end PCs right now are really geared toward 1440P or even 4K resolutions. But playing current gen games in 1080P at around 60 FPS should not require you have a high end rig, should it?

solar3827d ago

a high end rig from 2008 maybe, not today

Zhipp3827d ago

lol, I currently have a high end card from 2008(GTX9800+, to be exact.) It's no where near as good as even an modern entry level gaming GPU. It's actually in the same ballpark as some Intel integrated GPUs.

starchild3827d ago (Edited 3827d ago )

Good performance on a GTX 770, which is the card I currently have. (But only for another week, because I'm getting a GTX 970).

@NBT91
It depends on how demanding that particular multiplatform game is in general and how many exclusive graphical features are added to the PC version.

Well-known modder, Durante, wrote on that subject and he covers the issue well. So I'll leave that here:

"Performance at "max" settings, without context and deep understanding what these settings entail, is completely irrelevant for judging the technical quality of a game, and it's highly damaging how often it seems to be used to evaluate the same. I've wanted to make a thread about this for a while, and seeing how there is right now another one on the front page with "max settings" in the title it seems as good a time as ever.

These days, many people seem to judge the "optimization" (a broadly misunderstood term if I ever saw one!) of games on how they run at "max" settings. What does this mean in practise? Let's say I'm porting a game to PC, and I'm trying to decide which options to include. I could easily add the option of rendering shadow depth buffers at 32 bit precision and up to 4096x4096 instead of the 16 bit and 1024² default. But what would this actually cause to happen? Basically, it will improve IQ and image stability, especially at very high resolution. However, let's assume for the sake of argument that it also halves the framerate of my port, when enabled.

In the prevailing simplistic mindset, I just went from a "great, optimized port" to a "piece of shit port showing how my company is disrespectful of PC gamers" merely by adding an option to my game.

I hope everyone can see how fucking insane this is. As a developer aware of this, I basically have 2 options:
Only allow access to higher-end settings via some ini file or other method which is not easily accessible.
Simply don't bother with higher-end settings at all.
The first point wouldn't be too bad, but it seems like the much more rare choice. If the prevailing opinion of my game's technical quality actually goes down by including high-end options, then why bother at all?

Of course, gamers are not to blame for this exclusively. Review sites got into the habit of benchmarking only "max" settings, especially during the latter part of the PS360 generation, simply because GPUs wouldn't be challenged at all in the vast majority of games otherwise." http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

3827d ago
ElementX3827d ago

I just ordered a GTX 970 FTW from Amazon and a 1920x1200 monitor. It'll be coming tomorrow and I'm really looking forward to this game!

solar3827d ago

nice mate. its a great card. and i havent ran a lower rez then that since 2007. 1080p looks blurry to me.

rodiabloalmeida3827d ago (Edited 3827d ago )

The only difference is aspect ratio. Pixel density is the same, with just more lines. And you're losing FOV.

ElementX3827d ago (Edited 3827d ago )

I currently have a 16:10 22" monitor, it's 1680x1050. I've had it a long time. I really don't like the 16:9 monitors. I use them at work and they just seem awkward to me. My TV is 50" so it's better looking but a smaller monitor just looks too wide when it's right in front of you. Also I enjoy the larger desktop space. I'm getting the Asus PA248Q. I realize it's 60hz actually I read somewhere 75hz but I don't need to display 144fps like some gaming monitors. I have been reading up on the pros/cons of IPS as far as PC gaming and it seems to me that a higher refresh monitor is for twitch shooters. I play online shooters on console and use the PC for single player games usually as well as music and photo stuff.

andrewer3827d ago

das ma boy, recently got a 770 with 4gb vram and was getting afraid it wouldn't be able to handle the new wave of extreme demanding games...

Dynasty20213827d ago

Far Cry 3 ran great on PC.

It seems Far Cry is the only series Ubisoft can't break, but then again, pretty sure FC4 is using the same engine as 3.

Show all comments (12)
180°

Far Cry 4 Update 1.08 Adds 60 FPS Support For PS5

Ubisoft's latest Far Cry 4 update enables 60 FPS on PS5 after releasing an update earlier for Far Cry New Dawn with similar improvements.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
RaidenBlack10d ago

late but still a good move, oobi

InUrFoxHole9d ago

Seriously, it's great to see devs add things to older games.

OhReginald10d ago

Sony....you're really letting ubisoft out of all all companies to out class you??? Give us the bloondborne 60 fps patch....ffs

dantesparda10d ago

I second this (Bloodborne 60fps) plus damn, Ubisoft, you're doing great but now the last thing I want youi to do is mae Far Cry Primal 60fps and AC Unity

Profchaos10d ago

Everytime someone asks for a bloodborne patch it gets delayed 1 day.

ETA next century

I_am_Batman9d ago

They know it's gonna cost them sales of the inevitable Remake that'll probably come around the PS6 launch.

raWfodog10d ago

Good news for when, or If, I ever play it. It’s waaay down on my backlog list lol.

P_Bomb10d ago

I like these 60fps patches. Hoping they’ll do Ghost Recon Wildlands someday.

Yi-Long10d ago

Kudos to Ubisoft for once again going back to older titles and then offering a nice upgrade for free. I know the company gets a lot of criticism, in quite a few cases understandable and justified, but in this area of contintued post-launch support for their SP games, they deserve some credit.

Show all comments (15)
150°

Ubisoft Removes Nudity in Silent Far Cry 4 Update (New Info: Changes Reverted)

Update: Ubisoft has acknowledged that the Japanese version of the game, which includes regional censorship, was mistakenly released globally. The company says it has reverted these changes in the game's worldwide branch.

Ubisoft has quietly removed nudity from Far Cry 4 in a recent update, sparking speculation about Tencent’s growing influence on the publisher.

Read Full Story >>
powerupgaming.co.uk
CrimsonWing6934d ago

You can murder, mame, and viciously attack people, but anything that deals with showing a body in a natural state whether for titillation or narrative, is some truly terrible thing. We are so weird with our puritan thought process. Feed our bloodlust and fuel our enjoyment for entertainment of simulating acts of harm and murder, but god forbid you see digitized TnA. It will never make sense to me.

Rebel_Scum34d ago

tbh even if they did remove it, it doesnt matter. I dont even remember when there was nudity in the game. If it was there it was so inconsequential.

B5R34d ago

Agreed. It absolutely makes no sense

Also, even though Ubisoft reverted the changes that removed nudity, there's the bigger issue of developers being able to make large changes to the game you paid for whenever they want.

Kassanova0734d ago (Edited 34d ago )

Stellar Blade comes to mind. This is why buying physical is the way to go.

180°

Far Cry 20th Anniversary Celebration

Far Cry debuted on March 23, 2004, meaning that next week, it will have been 20 years since Jack Carver first washed up on the shore of a tropical paradise teeming with hostile mercenaries.

Read Full Story >>
terminalgamer.com
DefenderOfDoom2421d ago

Played and enjoyed Far Cry, Far Cry 3 and 4 campaigns .

-Foxtrot421d ago

4 wasn’t so bad

Pagan Min was pretty entertaining

Skuletor421d ago

Yeah, 4 was good, was hard choosing which Golden Dawn member to side with, when they were both pieces of sh!t.
I've beaten all the main entries except 2 and 6, ended up uninstalling 6 to download something else instead.

Profchaos421d ago

I'd love a far cry pack with the original PC game (not the half assed port on ps360) instincts, predator even a port of far cry 2 to modern consoles back when these games had their own identity and weren't far cry 3 cut and pastel

Demetrius421d ago

Still one of my most favorite franchises along with assassins creed

banger88421d ago (Edited 421d ago )

Same here, I don't know why these games get so much hate. I've thoroughly enjoyed every single one of them, with only a couple of exceptions. I wish they'd hurry up and announce Far Cry 7. The only thing I'm concerned about is the rumoured time limit.

Show all comments (14)