PC version of Ghost Recon Wildlands | Forums

[GustyX]

Some questions about the PC version:
- will be it a port from console or a real PC version?
- which is team is making this version?
- 30FPS locking ****? Dont do it....

And a big fear, and a request in the name of EVERY GAMER WHO PLAY ON PC (this or anything!)
- optimize the game!!!!!!!!!*
- dont make undue high system requirements!!!! On highultramega settings maybe its reasonable, but on medium settings????
and beside developres
Watch_Dogs, AC Unity, Future Soldier from Ubisoft. And there are so many games, which graphics wasnt' commensurate with system requirements, and beside, developers didnt make any optimization...
High system requirement without reason, without optimize= HORROR, NIGHTMARE.

See Batman Arkham Knight. Its PC version is a trash....

*At least follow the general expectation: lower settings=lower quality=more FPS, smoother gameplay. And vice versa.
Not low or high settings=low performance=low quality.

[Cortexian]

It will be a proper PC version, as far as we could tell when talking with the developers in Paris. I'm not sure what you mean by "which team is making the PC version". Most PC versions come from the same development team/studio. There are dedicated people on the Wildlands team who's job it is to ensure that the PC version works and does everything we want it to.

I brought up all the normal PC performance concerns to the team when we were there. No FPS locking, no resolution limits, optimization, hardware compatibility for SLI / Crossfire, field of view sliders, and more...

That said, it's a beautiful game that I suspect will require a fairly powerful system to run on high graphics settings. Most open world games are like this. It doesn't matter how much a developer optimizes a game, eventually you need to invest into more powerful hardware if you want it to look better. It would be great if I could run all my games at 4K 60fps + using an integrated Intel Iris graphics processor, but that isn't a realistic suggestion.

*At least follow the general expectation: lower settings=lower quality=more FPS, smoother gameplay. And vice versa.
Not low or high settings=low performance=low quality.

Of course! If you get bad performance on lower settings, that just means it's time to upgrade your PC! I know it sucks to spend money, but PC gaming is a hobby like any other, and like a lot of hobbies there's a lot of money you can invest to it depending on your dedication to it!

[GustyX]

Of course! If you get bad performance on lower settings, that just means it's time to upgrade your PC! I know it sucks to spend money, but PC gaming is a hobby like any other, and like a lot of hobbies there's a lot of money you can invest to it depending on your dedication to it!

Unfortunatly not that is the problem. I dont think, between low and high (not the absolut max.!) settings is minimal difference. I read many comments, how a game is badly optimized, because a performance is slim, low and high settings too, with minimal difference, on recommended or above config. Like AC Unity, W_D.
I did experience it too, with Future Soldier.

And sometimes (nowadays more often) there are games which nor on high end system run smooth, and gives low FPS, and lower teh settings doesnt help so much, which it should. But I had the system for it.

PC version of FS was made by Ubisoft Kijev. I thought on this, on "which team".

Yes, its such a hobby, but I do except, a game should run smooth on recommend sys configuration.


"No FPS locking, no resolution limits, optimization, hardware compatibility for SLI / Crossfire, field of view sliders, and more..."
Great to hear these!

[Diedel443]

It will be a proper PC version, as far as we could tell when talking with the developers in Paris. I'm not sure what you mean by "which team is making the PC version". Most PC versions come from the same development team/studio. There are dedicated people on the Wildlands team who's job it is to ensure that the PC version works and does everything we want it to.

I brought up all the normal PC performance concerns to the team when we were there. No FPS locking, no resolution limits, optimization, hardware compatibility for SLI / Crossfire, field of view sliders, and more...

That said, it's a beautiful game that I suspect will require a fairly powerful system to run on high graphics settings. Most open world games are like this. It doesn't matter how much a developer optimizes a game, eventually you need to invest into more powerful hardware if you want it to look better. It would be great if I could run all my games at 4K 60fps + using an integrated Intel Iris graphics processor, but that isn't a realistic suggestion.


Of course! If you get bad performance on lower settings, that just means it's time to upgrade your PC! I know it sucks to spend money, but PC gaming is a hobby like any other, and like a lot of hobbies there's a lot of money you can invest to it depending on your dedication to it!

Or you try to play one of the many games that no amount of Hardware will fix, like arkham night right now and many many other games, a lot of them horrible console ports.

[Cortexian]

Or you try to play one of the many games that no amount of Hardware will fix, like arkham night right now and many many other games, a lot of them horrible console ports.

Yes, obviously there are optimization passes that can be done to make the game playable.

My point is that the dev team needs to make a decision at some point about how much they're going to let you disable in order to improve performance. There's only so many things they can let you disable before the game no longer looks like a game they want to release to the public... If you don't meet the minimum hardware requirements, you need to upgrade to play the game properly...

[RaulO4]

sorry Cortexian but

every UBI devs says the same thing when it came to the pc version of almost every game they release.

Samething said about AC,WD, and so on.

UBI is a see to believe and i would like to remand about one thing.

STEAM REFUND.

dont work as it should and my money will go straight to my pocket.

[Cortexian]

Well, I played the PC version in Paris and it was already fantastic. It looked just as good, or better than what was shown in the trailer.

I saw, and I believe. Unless they manage to break the core game they have running right now, this will be an awesome PC game.

[wellsorama]

Any idea, or can you say what kind of hardware was being run on the PC you used there?

[SanityAgathion]

I think Ubisoft will do OK with PC version. I know there were some hooplas with other titles, but in general they make good PC versions. Certainly better than recent Batman. With Wildlands there is a big potential for stutter though, due to vast landmass it needs to load real-time.

What I am afraid of is that after recent disaster with Arkham Knight, companies will think twice before even considering PC versions. Where considering = "we develop for consoles, but will at least somehow slap it onto onto PC last moment to shut their mouths". I mean, we are just a bunch of whiny self-entitled kids bagging about their super-expensive rigs, that pirate every game, right?

[Cortexian]

Any idea, or can you say what kind of hardware was being run on the PC you used there?

I asked, and I was told that it was irrelevant since by the time the game comes out there will be all new hardware.

Makes sense I guess. No point in trying to come up with system requirement guidelines this early.