So yeah, pretty self explanatory ...

Minimum:

• Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.3 GHz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or AMD Phenom II x4 940 @ 3.0 GHz processor
• 6 GB RAM
• NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 or AMD Radeon HD 7970 (2 GB VRAM) video card

Recommended:

• Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3.4 GHz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or better processor
• 8GB RAM
• NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 or AMD Radeon R9 290X (3 GB VRAM) video card

Recommended kinda blew me away with just how high they are, anybody else feel the same?

Jesus fucking christ. Is Ubisoft that bad at optimization?

Gtx 680 min? Lol ooooookay ubisoft

This has been a really great year for hilariously ludicrous recommended specs.

Minimum processor, 6 year old low-end AMD quad core, minimum GPU 2 year old high-end from both. Well done Ubisoft?

This is easily the worst I've seen. What the hell is Far Cry 4 gonna be like?

holy moses, my current gaming rig can't even hope to meet the minimum. The recommended basically say "upgrade your computer now".

I have a gtx 580 that still runs any game on high. Its a fantastic card and for them to make the min 680 is hilarious

Welp looks like I'm not getting this game for a while. My processor is like four years old and I can still run my games on high settings. But I can't meet those specs.

I have better than the recommended specs asked here and could not play Watch_Dogs at 60 fps unless it was on medium. Bravo Ubisoft.

I've red that these system requirements are still to be confirmed by Ubisoft. Someone discovered them on a korean site (don't know if it was on Ubisoft korea website or something).

When I posted the Dragon Age: Inquisition System requirements, I said I regretted upgrading. I no longer have that regret.

I can't think of a Ubisoft PC release that didn't run like garbage on my PC. However, even outside of Ubisoft, I feel like this year has seen the release of some very poorly optimized PC games. I've gotten used to locking games at 30-40 fps.

I thought Far Cry 3 was optimized alright for PC. It was a lot better than some of their other PC ports.

Where the hell are all these several gigabyte VRAM specs coming from? First time I ever saw it was for Shadow of Mordor, have I just been out of the loop? Are there even cards with more than 3GB of VRAM apart from the ones that cost like a car?

Damn, I'm only 10 GTX's away from recommended.

Huh, I thought it was the CPU that was bottlenecking the game.

Ubisoft with their poor optimization never fails to amaze me.

Was already being confirmed by Ubisoft? Thought it was a rumor from a supposed leak.

Sometimes I wonder how much of this isn't the graphics cards makers striking deals for forcing people to upgrade...

None of it.

I mean... the 680 is a March 2012 card, and the 780 is a May 2013 card. The next gen consoles have been out for going on a year now. You guys are gonna have to upgrade at some point, as more and more games are developed exclusively for the new consoles.

And they were saying next gen consoles wouldn't be better at optimization than PCs.

Ridiculous PC specs required for next gen games, who knew?

Could they put the specs so high to force people to the other two versions (mainly zone)? Just a thought...follow the money...

HOLY SHIT ON A SHIT SANDWICH! Thank god I bought that PS4.

My 660 can't run unity?

I don't believe you.

Hmmm, I'd almost suspect that the increase to the 780 in the recommended requirements is GPU memory based more than raw horse power based. AC4 had some stuttering issues because they capped the GPU memory usage for assets at 2GB and moved to streaming the assets for anything that wouldn't fit, of course that could have been mitigated by moving to a 64-bit address space so that the excess assets could be streamed from system memory instead of disk similar to Shadow of Mordor but it is Ubisoft.

FIND YOUR TIN FOIL HAT AND FOLLOW THE MONEY!

Man I only hit min specs that send crazy to me

Nvidia dealt under the table to steal the missing 180 p's from Sony.

Either this game is going to be jawdroppingly nice looking or is terribly optimized. I would hazard a guess and say the latter. Doubly so because the minimum required CPU is nearly 5 years old while the minimum GPU is the flagship from just over 2 years ago. That's just nuts.

It just occurred to me that I can run it. I just upgraded to a 970 GTX after my old card got fried in a PSU failure.

Still, this is ridiculous.

@ben_h: I see it more as Ubisoft not putting in the work to make is scalable. It's not like on the lowest settings this game will look terrible. It'll most likely look great still, because they haven't done the work to change the assets and the rendering. Dead Rising 3 on PC, even if you turn most things off it looks great and still requires good specs. It's not a good thing, I'm just saying that's what it seems like they're doing.

The sad thing is my PC could absolutely run this, but the download size will probably force me to get the Ps4 version.

These requirements are nonsense - there is hardly any difference in games between an i5-2500k at 3.3 and an i7-3770 at 3.4. So unless Assassin's Creed Unity is the first PC port in history to take advantage of hyperthreading, then I consider this entire set of numbers to be bullshit. Just like Ubisoft.

This is a great way to sell lots of copies!

900 p's dont come easy

I cant even imagine the specs if they had to animate a female character

What are you talking about? I'm always wearing my tin foil hat!!

For every gender add 3gb to the vram requirements.

Gee i wonder where they want people to buy their game???

@brandondryrock: FOLLOW THE MONEY MAN

Also who wants to bet the specs required for witcher 3 will be reasonable as fuck and it will probably look better?

Is this a big surprise to people? The new consoles are way more powerful than the old ones so when they make games for them that get ported to PC the specs are going to need to be way higher/

I don't think these are necessarily terrible. I mean, it's important for games to have low requirements, sure, but at some point you probably have to accept that you're not going to play cutting-edge games on your three-year-old laptop.

Well gonna wait to hear how the game runs on peoples rigs before running out and buying this. From what I remember ubisoft has been very hit and miss on the optimization for their games on PC when they initially come out.

@rorie: The point is that they won't have the graphical fidelity to justify the large resource use, like watchdogs. Which just shows terrible optimization on their part. Or they just fluff up the minimum reqs because they can. Nothing shown justifies these requirements, and I highly doubt anything will.

Pretty much, people did get relatively comfy the last time around through since the old machine were just ... so ancient.

@alistercat: Yeah that definitely sounds like it will be the case. We'll have to see.

@rorie: Yes, however do consider that this is to the point where it somewhat limits their market. If the 680 is the minimum, that means that stuff like the 760, a fairly common card that's only a year old, would likely struggle since it is less powerful than the 680. That basically puts them in a situation where the only people who can run the game are people that have flagship GPUs or GPUs just below the flagship. The "sweet spot" $200-300 cards can't really run it and those are the GPUs that a lot of people have. Most people don't want to drop $400+ on a GPU.

Yes we need to move past some older tech (for example, until maybe a year ago I still frequently saw my old X1950 Pro as the minimum for a lot of games. That is a fairly old card at this point. Somewhere around 8 years), but this is perhaps a bit too much. If this game was like Crysis and it was apparent why the computing power was necessary, then sure, but nothing we've seen has really shown that. This game doesn't appear to be terribly groundbreaking in terms of graphical quality.

Great. I sure hope they don't follow suit with Far Cry 4... I wouldn't mind playing it on my PS4, but I prefer FPS' on my PC.

...I recently finished playing Shadow of Mordor on my three-year-old laptop. It ran okay. :l