PC version of Ghost Recon Wildlands | Forums

[TOG_Vulcan]

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.

I think that guy means the system that runs the demo you've played at Paris, not the system requirements for the game when it comes out.

[Cortexian]

Yes, exactly.

I asked what the PC hardware was that we used in Paris, and he said it didn't matter because by the time the game comes out the hardware in the computers we used will no longer provide a baseline to figure out what kind of power you'll need to run the game.

They didn't want to tell us, because if they told us specific hardware and then we (the people they invited to Paris to play the game) communicated that information and said the game ran really well... People would jump to conclusions and say "Oh, well that means we'll need hardware exactly like that to play the game".

The game hasn't been optimized yet, so in all likelihood the computers they had running it were overpowered and not representative of the kind of hardware they'll be targeting when the game actually comes out.

[GiveMeTactical]

Knowing very well the history of UBI since 2005, I can bet a few things... my house if I have to.

1.- This will be yet another unoptimized console port by the time it launches

2.- UBI will try to blame this port on the Pirates... nice way to bamboozle people out of their money.

3.- There will be no difference, even with high end rigs, between minimum and maximum settings... console ports can only do so much, less when poorly optimized.

4.- The potential will always be there but UBI, classic UBI... will try to get away with the bare port so the majority of people that pre order, more so those with less pc knowledge. will get the the short end of the stick.

5.- Patches (or updates (nice marketing gimmick) will do what they always do... fix things that were not broken and brake things that were working.

6.- DLC will be abound even though the game is still broken... making the Single Player even shorter than what normally would be.

7.- Third Person View is for kids who can't handle the real sim of a First Person Shooter, this is why this also tells me that it will be a port.

Flame suit On for the normal fanbois... Bring it! LOL

Bookmark this thread so whenever the game launches we can have a laugh or UBI can make me eat crow... I highly doubt it even though I am hoping they will but after 10 years of the same old thing, I am sure I got nothing to loose.

This will be a wait and see after a few months if I want to pay 20 bucks for the game... but there is always hope! LOL

[docwatson223]

Finished the open bata this AM and can say that twin water-cooled 980ti's had major issues (flickering, choppiness) playing this at anything over 'medium'. SLI integration is missing and the video code needs some serious revamping.

[jtb33z]

same thing here on 970's. everything looked fine in the alpah and TT. now all the bushes look like they're having seizures.

[Squat-a-lot]

Yea and what If you have a PC that is top of the line? Wait till next year for upgrade ? Thanks.

[topeira1980]

But does the game look ugly on medium?!?!
THIS is what you need to ask yourselves.
now, I didnt play the beta so take what im saying as words of a bystander.

what if UBI called "low" HIGH, called "medium" - ULTRA and called "high" - UBERULTRAWOW?
would you accept it then that the game runs fine on ULTRA?

question is when you get the game to run at your favorite 50 or 60 fps (if you can get that high) than does it look sub par?
If it isnt than let it go. it's just the f#*king name of the settings. it's not an indication of a visual quality.
It's like crysis all over and people dont learn.

If the game, on low, looks like garbage and constant pop-ins and ugly shadows and effects and stuttering and yada yada\ yada than there's a good reason for an uproar, but if it looks good on low than its a good looking game that can look even better after patched. if someone set the game to certain visual settings and let you play it without telling you what settings the game was on - that would have been the test. if you loved what you saw and how it ran than that should have been called "high".

However, i do agree that a game should run on 60fps on high end rigs with 980 etc. at the very least on LOW. beyond that it's a matter of how ugly or beautiful LOW is.

[Zanmato-]

But does the game look ugly on medium?!?!
THIS is what you need to ask yourselves.
now, I didnt play the beta so take what im saying as words of a bystander.

what if UBI called "low" HIGH, called "medium" - ULTRA and called "high" - UBERULTRAWOW?
would you accept it then that the game runs fine on ULTRA?

question is when you get the game to run at your favorite 50 or 60 fps (if you can get that high) than does it look sub par?
If it isnt than let it go. it's just the f#*king name of the settings. it's not an indication of a visual quality.
It's like crysis all over and people dont learn.

If the game, on low, looks like garbage and constant pop-ins and ugly shadows and effects and stuttering and yada yada\ yada than there's a good reason for an uproar, but if it looks good on low than its a good looking game that can look even better after patched. if someone set the game to certain visual settings and let you play it without telling you what settings the game was on - that would have been the test. if you loved what you saw and how it ran than that should have been called "high".

However, i do agree that a game should run on 60fps on high end rigs with 980 etc. at the very least on LOW. beyond that it's a matter of how ugly or beautiful LOW is.

So I have never actually answered on any video game thread in my life, but I will now to let you know just how bad things are with any Ubi game that comes out nowadays. I'll start by telling you my specs, I have an older PC so I already know going into any modern game that I will not max anything out. Anyways, my specs are a i5-3570k watercooled, 16GB of ram and a GTX 770 4GB, these are really the main things you need to know about.

I got into the beta yesterday and have already finished the missions with the help of some friends. Super short beta, game is really fun with friends but it is lacking so bad. The performance is best described as "Doo Doo". The game is NOT a good looking game, even when maxed out, it also doesn't look the same as the footage they have shown, at least it doesn't to me (Again nothing new here with Ubisoft). The game auto adjusted itself to Medium settings, and after running it for a bit, it couldn't hold 60 FPS 99% of the time, so I decided to run some test, i set some settings down to Low and kept some at Medium, again same thing, no solid 60fps. Okay let's try Low, guess what, it now can hold 60 FPS like 99.5% of the time with some massive dips randomly, these dips also happen on any setting. So okay, Low and Medium aren't working so well, let's try high for the hell of it, max of 40 FPS, and max of 33 FPS on Very High.

Gonna throw in another reminder here that the game is NOT, I repeat NOT that good looking, even when maxed. But I finally chose to limit my FPS to 30 and set it to high, which works, sort of... It stays at 30 and every once in a while it will have an insane dip, like ridiculously bad unbelievable dip, also setting terrain quality to very high doesn't matter because when driving the textures can't load in fast enough so the terrain looks the same as it does on Low. And don't get me started on the driving and flying, it is just sad how bad it is, helicopters just bob back and forth and cars will hop around and slide off the road if you attempt to turn. PLEASE UBISOFT GET SOMEONE WHO KNOWS VEHICLES TO WORK ON YOUR DAMN CARS! It's like every car in the game is front wheel drive and wants to understeer every turn.

For a game that has apparently been in production for 4 years, this is so disappointing but expected from a Ubisoft studio. Also you cannot say that I need new hardware, I can run Witcher 3 on Medium with higher FPS than this game. THE DAMN WITCHER, the game that looks so lovely even on low, so clearly Ubisoft isn't and will never put in the effort to cater to the PC market because they just assume we are all made of money and can go buy new hardware every time they release a broken game. My final point is that no matter what they call their settings, the game will never run at 60 FPS, and I am not the only person who thinks this way, look at other threads with people who have even better hardware and struggle to run High.

[Dave3d07]

I dont 'struggle' to run high.
I have an I7 6 core, 16gb ram, and a Titan X video card, and it runs fine for me on High (what it defaulted to, less dof and 2 other video settings, plus fov maxed) with a 2k screen (2560x1440 @ 120hz).
You are correct that the game doesnt look very good, even on high, but it ran smooth for me. Unlike other Beta's out there right now.

[Zanmato-]

I dont 'struggle' to run high.
I have an I7 6 core, 16gb ram, and a Titan X video card, and it runs fine for me on High (what it defaulted to, less dof and 2 other video settings, plus fov maxed) with a 2k screen (2560x1440 @ 120hz).
You are correct that the game doesnt look very good, even on high, but it ran smooth for me. Unlike other Beta's out there right now.

I would really hope that you don't struggle on high settings with a TitanX. But what you're telling me is that you're okay with your $1200 GPU ($1560 Canadian and costs more than some peoples entire systems) not running this game easily on very high? That makes no sense, I'm going to reference Witcher 3 again, I am sure you can max that game out or come very close to it with a rig like that, so why can you not max out a game that doesn't come anywhere near the same level of graphical amazingness? I get that you're playing at 1440p but that is still not an excuse for the game not maxing out.

That is the type of stuff I will never understand, I will also never get how Ubisoft gets away with things like this every year and with every game. I know this is a beta and I am hoping that all these issues will be fixed by launch, this is also why they need to release betas more than a month before release so they have time to work on things without feeling rushed.