official Watch_Dogs

[+virtorio MVC]

Hmmm, doesn't scale back for older PC hardware, even when it's coming out of the 360/PS3.

 

It's like a bad PC port, only in reverse of what we're used to.

[Blackhearted]

CoD Ghosts

 

 

GTX 780 :rofl:

 

That pretty much has to be fake.

[HoochieMamma]

That pretty much has to be fake.

 

It's from the nVidia site, of COURSE they want you to think a 780 is recommended.

[mrp04]

About damn time games started using the hardware! Sick of games being held back by 8 year old consoles. I bet AMD and NVIDIA also love this. For years you could run games extremely well with really old cards.

[Shiranui]

I remember when games needed a 200mhz processor and 32mb of ram lol

 

I remember when games needed 48k, came on an audio  cassette tape and took 5 minutes to load.

[Raa]

I think I might upgrade. :laugh:

[Cute James]

I remember when games needed a 200mhz processor and 32mb of ram lol

I remember when games started requiring a 512k memory upgrade...

(Amiga 500 reference for the kids there...)

[SharpGreen]

About damn time games started using the hardware! Sick of games being held back by 8 year old consoles. I bet AMD and NVIDIA also love this. For years you could run games extremely well with really old cards.

GTX460s aren't exactly new anymore.

[Slammers]

I think it's clear that this is going to be a poor pc port, seeing as they easily have it running on 360/ps3. 

I'm all for pushing steep requirements (I have a SLI 760's setup) , I've been waiting for these new consoles for years to help give graphics the boost PC has been patiently waiting on.

But I think company's should still provide settings for older computers to run their games, or they will make PC gaming look even more elitist than it is currently portrayed. 

 

I'm fairly confident watch dogs could run on well under 4gb of ram if it was optimized correctly. Most top of the line games don't usually push more than 2-3gb of use.

 

DX11 and 64bit OS is fair enough though. 

 

Looking forward to this one.

[notuptome2004]

I think it's clear that this is going to be a poor pc port, seeing as they easily have it running on 360/ps3. 

I'm all for pushing steep requirements (I have a SLI 760's setup) , I've been waiting for these new consoles for years to help give graphics the boost PC has been patiently waiting on.

But I think company's should still provide settings for older computers to run their games, or they will make PC gaming look even more elitist than it is currently portrayed. 

 

I'm fairly confident watch dogs could run on well under 4gb of ram if it was optimized correctly. Most top of the line games don't usually push more than 2-3gb of use.

 

DX11 and 64bit OS is fair enough though. 

 

Looking forward to this one.

 

 

 

then explian the 2011 demo of it that had no console  tied to the game  the game is first PC then next gen including Wii U  and then current Gen 7th gen consoles   so  it is not gonna be a Port  unless you consider  a PC port to PC a port  then sure  

[HawkMan]

I remember when games started requiring a 512k memory upgrade...

(Amiga 500 reference for the kids there...)

 

pffft. Kickstarter upgrade :p

[djdanster]

fine by me, so long as they know their target audience size, and don't blame sales #'s on piracy.

 

It's Ubisoft, so they most likely will...

[riahc3]

Hello,

 

I have a personal opinion about requiring 64 bit versions of Windows, but I rather not state my opinion because it might start a flamewar.

 

Good for users that want this :)

[seta-san]

Hello,

 

I have a personal opinion about requiring 64 bit versions of Windows, but I rather not state my opinion because it might start a flamewar.

 

Good for users that want this :)

 

it's time to kill 32bit and it's unreasonable 4GB limit.

[Arkos Reed]

it's time to kill 32bit and it's unreasonable 4GB limit.

 

Nothing unreasonable, it's just math, unless math are unreasonable?

The switch to 64bit for games would have happened sooner or later anyway, the 2Gb per process boundary and graphics memory adressing requirement have been pushing the boundaries for a while. Even blizzard had to compile a 64bit version of Wow to accomodate for some setups.

[HawkMan]

it's time to kill 32bit and it's unreasonable 4GB limit.

 

The 4GB limit is probably one of the lesser of many reasons to move to 64 bit. 

[+Red King Subscriber²]

It looks like it is an optimized port though.

[spaceelf]

The 4GB limit is probably one of the lesser of many reasons to move to 64 bit. 

Not so much.  Texture RAM on the GPU and audio is mapped to that 4GB, so you choke out your AI and other processes with it the more stuff you have.

 

It's the most important reason to move games to 64 bit.

[xWhiplash]

How can this game perform well on the 360 and ps3?

[spaceelf]

How can this game perform well on the 360 and ps3?

By cutting down assets and world density.

[MorganX]

It's about time some commercial software started taking advantage of all the power on users' desktops. Funny thing, all those x86-x64 systems with 8GB Ram that have been upgraded over the years to overpower poorly written 32-bit software would be powerhouses now...

[theyarecomingforyou]

I think it's clear that this is going to be a poor pc port, seeing as they easily have it running on 360/ps3. 

I disagree. Ubisoft games have a very good track record on PC and usually are well optimised. The fact that the specs are so high and they're making 64bit a requirement only shows how seriously they're taking it, as that will seriously limit their potential audience. While it's disappointing that it won't scale my hope is that the game will be all the better for those able to run it. To me it indicates that PC gamers are getting the full next-gen experience rather than a dumbed down X360 / PS3.

 

We'll see how well the game does but I still have high hopes for it. Ubisoft stated early on that the PC is the lead platform, which is a lot better than the contempt we get from Rockstar. I just hope it can live up to its lofty ambitions.

[Yazoo]

I remember games used to come written in the pages of a magazine and we had to type the code in manually for hours if not days before we got to play them and only required 8k of ram or 16k if you were posh.

[LaP]

It's Ubisoft what people did expect? Ubisoft is on my blacklist as far as PC gaming is concerned.

[Wakers]

I'm not sure if this is a game that will make the most of PC hardware, or if it's just been horrificly ported.  The recommended requirements are probably 4x more powerful than the next gen consoles.

 

It's either going to be the best PC port ever made or.. one of the worst.