They look like this.
What's your take on that ?

10 years ago*

Comment has been collapsed.

Let's Play :)

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I think they want to buy us new desktops :)

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It surely looks like we're moving towards a world with minimum 6 gb ram required to play AAA titles.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I can do it, no prob.
My specs: Pentium IV@2.4, 1,7GB RAM, ATI HD3650 512MB, how does this looks like ? :)))

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Wonderful specs you got there sir! ;)

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No prob, I have a quadcore since end of 2011, and planning on upgrading to 16 Gb of RAM before this year ends.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

lucky man!

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

My take is: good, by the time I'll satisfy those I'll be able to get the game for 1€ in the HumbleRequirementsBundle. <.<
While it's kinda positive to try and push forward the 64bits and stuff, I find hard to believe the game won't be able to run on a more average system in a satisfactory way.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's not a problem...let's hope the game is not shit.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I find the reponse to this highly interesting. When Call Of Duty Ghosts announced the 6GB requirement everybody lost their minds. But with Watch Dogs it's perfectly fine for some reason. Both were originally set for release at about the same time, so why the big change of mind? It's not like beforehand either one of them promised stunning "next-gen" stuff.

And just to get it out of the way: I'm not a Call Of Duty fanboy. In my opinion the last decent game was Call Of Duty 2 and then just went worse and worse. I am aware the the 6GB requirement for Ghosts was based on nothing. I'm talking simply about the response of people here.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Well, you know, COD has shitty graphics,we can't deny it; Watch Dogs seems to promise something better, or at least according to some trailers.
However still can't understand those 6GB ram requirement, if i remember well Crysis 3 was below 2gb ram usage, but i should check it again to be sure. Hope those requirements are not due to bad optimization; except far cry 3 ubisoft always released bad optimized games

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I do believe RAM has more to do with the scripts used in games than it does with actual graphics, hence why we have dedicated RAM on graphics cards(GDDR1-5). That said, Ghosts was using the Havok engine for scripting (with IW6 Engine for graphics), granted Havok's AI scripts are quite good, I don't believe it would require 6gb RAM. IW, being the cheap and crap dev they are(It may have just been Activision trying to heavily market the game), decided to up their min requirements for RAM, hoping it would make people think Ghosts was going to look better than their heavily(yet poorly) modified IW6 engine could produce. IW themselves put in the lock that refused to let someone play the game if they didn't have 6gb of ram, because they wanted you to still believe it actually required it.

Now Watch Dogs; All I know is they're using Disrupt Engine and Havok's physics engine (unsure about their AI scripts, probably tacked onto their Disrupt Engine) so we'll just have to wait and see I guess. If they pull an IW and put a lock in place even if the game doesn't even use 2gb of RAM, I will be sorely disappointed in Ubisoft.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I hope the large memory requirements means larger and more open-ended world... It's the thing that has bothered me the most in the last 2 generations of console ports...

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I think people only flipped shit once it was discovered that Ghosts didn't even fully use 4 gigs of RAM

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I bet this game will work fine with 4GB of RAM. I've played Ghosts during free weekend and there were no stuttering at all. They exaggerated the system requirements, well atleast RAM wise.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

this

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It used to be 6GB but they removed the requirement during the first week of release because a lot of people were whining about it. Apparently, the game refused to run if you had less than 6GB of RAM.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

There goes my 60$

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Welp, my cpu needs upgraded. I can't even hit minimum 0.0

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

A quad core and 6GB ram minimum? That's great news. Sick of games held back by dual core dinosaurs.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Time to see if my laptop can handle these "next-gen" games. :/

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I was thinking the same. My i5 is a few generations behind, and the graphics card will probably melt if I try to play this. I really hope there will be a demo of some sort so I can see whether or not it's worth the money. I really, REALLY want to play this one.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Just pirate it and see if you can run it properly, I usually do that if there isn't a demo available.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Graphics card: Triple checks
CPU: Double checks
Ram: Lol ok no

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Unoptimized for memory...

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It might run on less than 6GB RAM systems but there may be some swapping. PS4 and Xbox One both have roughly 5GB RAM available to them so the 6GB requirement will be very common.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Fair enough.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Time to get a desky.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

hm, looks promising - my laptop should handle it at least on low... at least in theory: i5_3230m, 740M@2Gb, 8Gb ram.
Now lets hope and pray this game won't disappoint like thief did.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Sure I can.

AMD A6-3500 2.1 gHZ
Nvidia Geforce GT 630 2GB DDR3
4GB RAM

:D

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 2.66GHz

Argh great I have the Q8300 :)

166 MHz shouldn't matter.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I think,I'll probably buy it for my PS3 :D

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Aren't you tempted to get a PS4 and get the game for it ?

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Not really, I still have too much backlog on my PC, my PS3 and my 3DS.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

How come watch dogs comes out on ps3/xbox 360 and the minimum requirements are much higher than from those 2?

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Uhm because it's a complete different copy. The PC version will look way better and run higher FPS, higher resolutions etc.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yeah but normally the low settings will be at least as low as the ps3/xbox version

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

For some reason, I believe that the versions are different, since the new consoles have so much power over the old ones.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This. It can run on 512MB on XBox360 and PS3 yet it needs 6GB on PC...
And don't tell me it's Windows that takes 5.5GB...

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

cause its nerfed to hell to work on those older consoles.....

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Even my older computer has that... And it's 5 years old, with new GPU...

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Finally something that actually uses the power of a PC, or just another lazy port? Time will tell.

Just hoping there would soon be games that would put a challenge for my machine (not counting horrible ports)

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

My 2 year old configuration can handle this... so why is this called "next-gen"?
I just hope that this is not some lazy port and only reason for "high" requirement is poor optimization.
-- nothing has been overclocked --

CPU: AMD Phenom II x4 960 black
RAM: 2x4GB HyperX
GPU: GTX 560 1GB

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I believe it is called next-gen because it has been developed around the hardware of the new generation of consoles. But this is only a guess.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I know, I was being sarcastic.
The thing I don't understand, why PC gamers use those terms, this is a PC games dedicated site/forum... Also, isn't "next-gen" already "current gen" for past 4-5 months now?
And to be complicity honest current consoles are just mutilated versions of barely average PCs.
Even my 2 year old PC has better hardware then consoles and it was cheaper back then, then consoles now...

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It is next gen and still runs on a 360.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 6 years ago.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Put me on the list too.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

My PC almost burst into flames while I was reading these requirements.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I feel sorry for you, mate.

10 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Closed 10 years ago by Multy25.