IGN streams the gameplay of Assassin's Creed.
IGN streams the gameplay of Assassin's Creed.
IGN shared the streaming clips of AC:U. Regarding the graphics, they seem decent but would require a minimum spec of around 680. The gameplay is average, with only minor improvements compared to previous entries—especially since new rooms appear after loading screens. Overall, it looks like a decent title, though not worth upgrading my system. IGN also mentioned that Watchdogs struggled on PC and PS3, noting the issue around 27:10.
If the game was limited by the PC and they provided only what was available, that perfectly highlights the core issue for Ubisoft—lack of competence.
The idea that Watch Dogs is limited by the PC is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard from developers. It's even more absurd than the claims about "30fps being more cinematic," because it usually comes up in the context of console playback. This? Pure nonsense.
It wasn't a developer as I first believed; it was actually a comment from someone at IGN. Sorry for the confusion. Still absurd that someone connected to the gaming world holds such an opinion.
I realized my misunderstanding after reviewing the video where the remark was given. I thought it was a comment from the AC dev team during an interview, but it actually came from someone else. I’ve seen many BioWare presentations for DAI before, which reinforced this confusion. Nonetheless, I still think the person who made the comment at IGN can’t be excused from the ridiculousness of what was said.
The video stands out because of the huge number of NPCs present. That’s impressive; it suggests this game wouldn’t have been feasible on the Xbox 360 or PS3. The visual quality seems much better in a high-resolution version rather than a compressed one. On rooftops, the distance appears greater, but it reduces when you move to ground level. Still, a minimum of 680 or 7970 feels excessive given the limited GPU power compared to the consoles.
PCs of today handle next-gen titles well. A 5770/9800 offers more power than a PS3. The remark was completely off-topic because the developers didn’t really aim to support Watch_Dogs on lower-end systems—it barely ran on a GTX 680. If that’s the case, it shows incompetent creators. The distance display wasn’t impressive, but the graphics quality was low and mostly obscured by fog, a common technique. Rust provides better depth than ACU based on what I saw. The required specs aren’t unrealistic since they work on consoles, though a GTX 680 is still considered high-end. The average cost for a 770 (equivalent) is around $300 or similar in your region. Steam data and Nvidia info suggest most people spend about $200 on GPUs, especially if they buy dedicated cards. Ubisoft’s strict requirements might push many away, making the game less accessible unless it’s optimized well. With such high standards, it signals the game will be similar to Watch_Dogs, which performed poorly on my GTX 680 instead of a 980.