It's not like I was going to buy AC:U anyways, since I don't like the franchise (II and Revelations bored me to death), but it worries me that Ubi follows this trend of having next gen games requiring high-end PCs that only dedicated gamers that can afford serious hardware can enjoy on PC. I have a 660Ti which isn't bad at all, but apparently, according to Ubisoft, it's not powerful enough to run a game that runs on a GPU which doesn't necessarily have much more power than my GPU.
This is wrong, so I'd just have to ditch my GPU and get a $1000 one (Less than that probably wouldn't be much future-proof at all) because one company decides that my $400 GPU is not up to the task because they are too lazy to optimize their AAA games on PC?

The worst thing about this all is that the reccomended specs are about 2-2.5x the pure computing power of the consoles, which just points to Ubisoft being lazy. They probably don't even care about PC anymore, the real $$$ is from the console manufacturers who pay them to endorse their system.

Ubisoft can go to hell.

I really wish Ubi would stop gimping the PC ports to make consoles shine, it's really stupid as hell and just perpetuates to the "PC gamers spend £1000's on hardware" myth because of their inherent laziness, they should be making these on PC first and scale down for consoles later, I'm using a 660ti pe and running FC3 perfectly but then again that was the only port Ubi has done right in a long time, also Uplay really needs to fuck off, consoles hardly have it so why should we?.

Ubi is the new Crytek, confirmed...

Doesn't even make sense. I'd love to hear an explanation from Ubisoft about why the specs need to be so much higher than a PS4.

Honestly, I can't help but wonder if it's bullshit to make the game seem "next gen". I'm tempted to buy it when it's $5, just to see if it runs on my below minimum video card.

I will continue to buy Ubisoft products.

Only catch: I will only buy them when they're creative gems like Child of Light. Their AAA offerings haven't interested me in years. And I don't see anything on the horizon that will change that. Unless... They finally announce Beyond Good and Evil 2.

I don't think either Sony nor MS would be very happy with a dev that makes their consoles look underpowered a little more than a year since their release.

But yeah, imagine a AAA game that looks almost real and perfectly defined and has some incredible optimization for Windows 7/8 and PC hardware in general. Maybe half-life 3? After all, Steam will be the main platform withot a doubt, and Valve doesn't joke around with their games.

On the other hand I have a small and highly unlikely (yet, why not, possible) theory that consists in Ubisoft commiting some sort of "half-suicide" in PC so they can later not port some franchises to PC in order save up money and justify themselves saying "PC sales are low and unprofitable".  Not the most important ones, but games that surely won't be a hit on PC can be omited from the ecuation even if it doesn't take a lot of work to port them (Since consoles and PCs share architecture this time around).

There's lazy, and then there's Ubisoft lazy. Sure, most games aren't very much optimized for PC, but at least they are made to run on older and weaker hardware as well. This is just Ubisoft releasing such a bad port that they can't even guarantee it will run on high-end hardware. You need the best of the best to play a game that honestly does not even look THAT impressive. Not even optimizing that much is just horrible.

The master race be squirming.

- M, Carl

You gotta love gamers...

"I want all my games running in native 1080p @ 60fps AT MINIMUM, and even higher resolution for PC... anything less is unacceptable!"

"What??? Whadaya mean I need a decent PC rig to run this shit at the minimum specs I demanded?!?"