Yea, I think what they are doing by all these artificially high requirements is push people to buy into the consoles. Nobody want's to maintain a computer which such high specs just for gaming, thus pushing people to game on consoles (which suck).

I bet no computer worth $400 or less, built in the last 2 years, can play this game at 1280x720 with settings that would resemble the 360 version (high with blur/HDR) and get between 30-60fps (that includes K&M and OS).

Flame suit on, nah na na nah! Haha.

I think it's fairly safe to agree with those who say that the persons responsible for this port are "lazy", or perhaps Ubisoft told them to do it in "x" number of days. What this should, at least partially, indicate is that the PC is not considered a premier platform. And if we examined some statistics on the market, I think many of you would be surprised by how small the PC game market has become.

Development companies take a huge risk making anything for the PC game market. So it shouldn't surprise you that a good portion of what you'll see in the future is ports of successful console games. By developing primarily for the consoles they stand a much better chance of making money. To which a "quick and dirty" PC port and adds a modest profit.

I agree the only requirement that looks excessive there is the 3GB of ram.

Everything else you should already have if you care about playing games on computers in 2008!

to even consider those specs tells me that the game is completely un-optimized for any rig. The trailer also does not look impressive at all. Definitely not worth the 1-2 grand you'll be spending to play the game.

why would someone upgrade their PC to play this game, then play it with an xbox 360 controller?

wouldn't it make more sense to get a 360 or PS3?

It's not really *that* high specs. I mean, dual cores are pretty prevalent nowadays and almost anyone into gaming already would have a decent card or if you don't have one, just play at lower res/picture quality.
I think it's great that we have software pushing hardware hard and I want more and more software that will bring my system to its knees so I can upgrade and benefit more from it than before.

I figured the high specs were just a buffer zone, but then I saw the required specs for Call of Duty 4...

Both are very modern games with very high level graphics. It really amazed me how one was so streamlined and the other was so bloated.

Holy crap much?

Why would the system requirements for the PC version balloon out over the X360 or PS3 ones so much?? Ubi still have lazy coders much?

From the X360, which runs it 1280*720 from 512MB of shared system/video memory, with a 3.2GHz crippled G5, to a PC with 3GB of system, 512MB of video, and a 2.2+ GHz Core 2 Duo???

There's a significant difference between a 2.2 gHz C2D and a 2.2 gHz X2. I don't think that my overclocked 3600 x2 would hold much salt againt a C2D 6400.