You're going to need a kick-ass PC boosted by a flux capacitor to get a decent frame rate in Assassin's Creed on PC if spec requirements published on the 'net are accurate.
"In order to play this game properly, your PC MUST meet or exceed these minimum requirements", a post on Ubisoft Solution Centre, before dropping the almighty bombshell.
And make sure you're sitting down before you read this. Having a stiff drink to hand probably wouldn't go amiss eitherho)...
Supported OS: Windows XP / Vista (only)
Processor: Dual core processor 2.6 GHz Intel Pentium D or AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or better recommended)
RAM: 2 GB (3 GB recommended)
Video Card: 256 MB DirectX 10.0-compliant video card or DirectX 9.0-compliant card with Shader Model 3.0 or higher (512 MB video card recommended) (see supported list)*
DirectX Version: DirectX 10.0 libraries (included on disc)
DVD-ROM: DVD-ROM dual-layer drive
Hard Drive Space: 12 GB
Peripherals Supported: Keyboard, mouse, optional controller (Xbox 360 Controller for Windows recommended)
*Supported Video Cards at Time of Release: ATI RADEON X1300-1950 / HD 2000 / 3000 series NVIDIA GeForce 6600-6800 / 7 / 8 / 9 series
To put this into some kind of perspective, here are the official minimum spec requirements for Crysis that were published:
Minimum for both XP and Vista:
CPU - 2.8GHz for XP, 3.2GHz for Vista
RAM - 1.0GB for XP, 1.5GB for Vista
GPU - 256MB, DirectX 9.0c compliant. Supported chipsets: NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT or greater; ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (Radeon X800 Pro for Vista) or greater. Laptop versions of these chipsets may work but are not supported. Integrated chipsets are not supported. Updates to your video and sound card drivers may be required
Sound Card - DirectX 9.0c compatible
HDD - 12GB
Even our ninja office games PC is sweating at those specs.
Considering this article states that the geforce 9 series is supported, could this be a possible hint that the 9 series is not that far away from release?!
lol, another POS ubi port, theyre getting very good at chruning out unaltered/hacked 360 versions onto the PC with no optimisations.
Ahh, its like their last big por, Vegas 6, 33FPS @1280x1024 with a 3Ghz Core 2 and 8800GTX, bless them
I have to laugh at their arrogance, i pity anyone picking up this thrash version on the PC. Presumably if you have the recommended specs youll get 30FPS at 800x600
Considering this article states that the geforce 9 series is supported, could this be a possible hint that the 9 series is not that far away from release?!
The 9800GX2 is due in 2 weeks, but its overpriced at what its supposed to retail at, i.e. $600( probably 600euro over here in the EU, and 400 or whatever in stg ). Considering its only supposed to be 30% faster than an 8800Ultra
Id wait if you want a tope end card, the G200 will be out in around May, and will be one hell of a beast
lol, another POS ubi port, theyre getting very good at chruning out unaltered/hacked 360 versions onto the PC with no optimisations.
Indeed all their ports are garbage, R6 Vegas, GRAW 1 and 2, all run like crap and don't look a whole lot better than their console counterparts.
They should take a leaf out of IWs book they did an amzing job of optimising CoD4 (no doubt learning the lessons from their poor CoD2 PC version's optimisation).
Sorry but they aren't that bad tbh. I mean you can't expect to make the jump in PC gaming to the likes of ps3/360 games without at least a slight upgrade in hardware. And then just look at what it requires, 2GB - standard for anyone considering playing games on PC and not that expensive. a Pentium D 2.6 ghz or 2.2 Core 2 Duo, both of which are pretty cheap these days, hell the 3.4ghz PD is next to nothing these days. On top of that, a mere Ł50 graphics card such as a 7600 can play it, and pushing the boat a bit further will of course achieve it's recommended settings. They are seriously quite low imo.
lol, well im well above the recommended specs in all areas, but not a chance would i pay for this, specs like that mean it will definately be a pile of dog turd with the following *features* ( normally associated with ubi ports ) - no proper PC widescreen support ala 1680x1050 - only support for 360 controllers, nothing else or remapping - As the minium spec for XP is P4 2.8Ghz it will detect dual cores as not meeting the minimum specs - most likely will be capped at 30FPS - will run like poo - will get no support or fixes for major issues in the PC version - next to no PC options for configuring gfx
3Gb of RAM, on XP. Ok, it's possible with SP2 (I've got 4Gb myself, but obviously XP can't use it all), but 3Gb of RAM for an xbox360 game.
There's PC versions of console games, then there's straight conversions, then there's CTRL+C and CTRL+V of the code and hope it works.
Lazy bastards, someone send John Hare round to sort them out. Or maybe next time, Valve won't spend an extra year making sure the Orange Box works a treat on the consoles, they'll just cut and paste the code then suggest you have two xbox360's running in parallel.
It's sheer laziness. Even running windows XP, an average Core 2 Duo, an 8800GT and 2Gb of branded DDR2 (which can be picked up for Ł30 in some places - and not the budget RAM either) makes the 360 look like a ZX Spectrum.
Just goes to show, you can get games like this and crysis onto consoles.
but this doesnt look great in comparison? with that spec PC you can run CoD4 faster than any console, at higher resolutions than any console and at settings above the consoles. Its a poo conversion
Sorry but they aren't that bad tbh. I mean you can't expect to make the jump in PC gaming to the likes of ps3/360 games without at least a slight upgrade in hardware.
Explain please. The PS3 GPU is based on the G71 NVidia GPU, the Xbox's GPU is based on the R520 ATI chips. Both build on a DX9 spec. 8800's are DX10 and have a lot more oooomph generally. Look at UT3,CoD4,GoW, all run on high settings, at 60 FPS (Vsync on) @ 1680x1050 on a 8800GTS (better on a 512m GT).
Your telling me I should expect to take a slight hit on a port from a PS3/360, horse sh1t, it's laziness on the developers' side.
Why is everyone so surprised? Gaming is big business nowadays so of course they're gonna shoehorn it onto PC in the cheapest way possible - that way maximising profit.
They don't care if it doesn't run as good as it could as long as it sells - and it will sell, you can count on that!
This is not the first, and will definitely not be the last.
Why is everyone so surprised? Gaming is big business nowadays so of course they're gonna shoehorn it onto PC in the cheapest way possible - that way maximising profit.
They don't care if it doesn't run as good as it could as long as it sells - and it will sell, you can count on that!
This is not the first, and will definitely not be the last.
Bah this is nothing. Have you seen the specs for Guitar Hero 3? even when you make it look like the ps 2 version it still needs a 2.8 dual core and a 7600GT. For the record my pc can run these games and I bought assassins creed for the ps 3 but I was hoping to get guitar hero for my sis. Its insane how lazy these ports are
It would be worth it if they are using that extra power to add some gameplay to the game otherwise it'll still be one of the best looking nothing games ever made.
Those specs certainly point to a significant lack of PC optimising. I can run crysis at 1400x1050 at medium with more than decent FPS, but i'm only just above the minimum specs for Assassins Creed? (3800+ AMD X2 and 2GB RAM, with 256Mb x1950) Yeah, that's not going to do well unless i leave it on low, with maybe a few settings on medium (providing we're allowed to play with the settings and its not a strait "adaptive" port, ie goes to low on anything short of a liquid nitrogen cooled Cray) Guess i'll be giving this one a pass. Although a demo to verify these rather silly claims would be nice.
What crap... hell Gears of War can run on the PC with far less of machine and Gears is still the best looking game on the xbox IMO.
Horrible, lazy developer. If they didn't have a hot chick in a titular role, this game wouldn't have sold so well.
Gears of War is a great game...on the 360, the PC version is a very s**tty port and does not stop stuttering. Im running the game on a core 2 duo e4500, 8600gt and 2gb ram and it stutters constantly, very dissapointed with it
Its like all they are doing is selling the 360 version and an emulator. Its like trying to run a ps2 game on PC, we know the ps2 cant touch even a 5 year old PC but in order to run the games half decent you need a fairly hefty PC. The specs they are talking there are an absolute insult to PC gamers. And for all the people that think because those specs are much higher than Crysis, thus will port to a console have to understand that it is just a horrible conversion job and if it was the other way round with crysis getting ported to PC you would probably need THIS to run it! http://www.top500.org/system/8968
What crap... hell Gears of War can run on the PC with far less of machine and Gears is still the best looking game on the xbox IMO.
Horrible, lazy developer. If they didn't have a hot chick in a titular role, this game wouldn't have sold so well.
Gears of War is a great game...on the 360, the PC version is a very s**tty port and does not stop stuttering. Im running the game on a core 2 duo e4500, 8600gt and 2gb ram and it stutters constantly, very dissapointed with it
dunno about the stuttering, but the hamachi patch( its a hack, removes all the live crap from it, google it ) for GoW fixes loads of issues for gears of war for people. Youre probably ram limited with the 8600gt, does it stutter also on medium settings at 1024x768?
What crap... hell Gears of War can run on the PC with far less of machine and Gears is still the best looking game on the xbox IMO.
Horrible, lazy developer. If they didn't have a hot chick in a titular role, this game wouldn't have sold so well.
Gears of War is a great game...on the 360, the PC version is a very s**tty port and does not stop stuttering. Im running the game on a core 2 duo e4500, 8600gt and 2gb ram and it stutters constantly, very dissapointed with it
I feel your pain. I had GoW for xBox and then I got it for PC and yeah the stuttering was horrible.
It has been patched though and now it runs flawlessly and smokes the xbox graphically. Try turning textures down to medium. That is basically what the xbox ran the game at.
I have a E6600, 2GB, vista x64, 1900gt, so I don't have a monster rig.
Mines no monster either and yep im running the game all in medium settings in 1024 and get the stutter.
I just looked at this forum and wish i had 3 days ago before i asked my wife for it for my birthday. i hope she hasn't ordered it yet. i have the system( Q6600, 2GB, XFX 8600GT 512MB) but it doesn't sound as tho that matters. any ideas on what would be a great starter game for PC? i'm new to gaming and can't afford a 360/PS3.
I got mine running by setting the audio performance to none in sounds and audio devices, now runs so smoothly its unbelievable, (having played it for the first three assassinations with the stuttering.)
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Please let me win the lotto Saturday!
