Friday, August 8th 2008

Ubisoft's Far Cry 2 System Requirements Published

Publisher Ubisoft issued today the minimum and recommended system requirements for the PC edition of Ubisoft Montreal's open-world first person shooter Far Cry 2. The successor of the original Far Cry game is also due to be released on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 this fall. "It has always been our intention to make Far Cry 2 as accessible to everyone as possible, and we have worked continuously to optimize Far Cry 2 to achieve this goal," said lead technical director Dominic Guay. The full specs follow below.

Minimum requirements
  • CPU:
  • Pentium 4 3.2 Ghz, Pentium D 2.66 Ghz
    AMD Athlon 64 3500+ or better
  • Video card:
  • NVIDIA 6800 or ATIX1650 or better
    Shader Model 3 required
    256 Mb of graphic memory
  • Memory:
  • 1 GB
  • Media reader:
  • DVD-ROM
  • Hard drive space:
  • ~12 Gig or HD space. (tbd)
Recommended
  • CPU:
  • Intel Core 2 Duo Family
    AMD64 X2 5200+, AMD Phenom or better
  • Video card:
  • NVIDIA 8600 GTS or better
    ATIX1900 or better
    512 Mb of graphic memory
  • Memory:
  • 2 GB
  • Sound:
  • 5.1 sound card recommended
  • Media reader:
  • DVD-ROM
  • Supported Video cards
  • NVIDIA 6800, NVIDIA 7000 series, 8000 series, 9000 series, 200 series. 8800M and 8700M supported for laptops.
    ATI X1650-1950 series , HD2000 series , HD3000 series , HD4000 series.
Source: Shacknews
Add your own comment

77 Comments on Ubisoft's Far Cry 2 System Requirements Published

#1
ShadowFold
They seem moderate. I guess they optimized it well! But 12gb.. jesus lol
Posted on Reply
#2
mullered07
well not as demanding as farcry when it first came out by a long shot, surprised at the reccomended specs, thought they would be a bit more demanding, this is definately good news for most gamers, means most people will be able to run it with all eye candy at reasonable frames :toast:
Posted on Reply
#3
francis511
Wow, those are pretty low. Wonder if they`re realistic tho`:ohwell:
Posted on Reply
#4
twicksisted
i doubt they are realistic... have you seen the game footage...
Thats going to eat loads of ram and need a beefy gpu or two... no getting around it.

also they were going on about crysis being able to run well on low hardware before launch...remember that ;)
Posted on Reply
#5
zithe
Hopefully they didn't pull a bethesda. The 'recommended' requirements could barely run oblivion..
Posted on Reply
#6
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
The specs seem kind of odd to me.

Why require a 6800, but only an x1650 on the ATi side? Wasn't the 6600GT about the same performance wise to the x1650?

And why make the x1900 the recommended on the ATi side, but make it a generation higher on the nVidia side? Why not just make the recommended a 7900GT or something around the same performance as the x1900 from the same generation?
Posted on Reply
#7
ShadowFold
X800's weren't shader model 3, it probably requires it.
Posted on Reply
#8
eidairaman1
worst thing to do is release a PC series to Console then Release it to PC, UT3 was like this as majority of internal tweaks were for XB360 only.
Posted on Reply
#9
CY:G
There is no way those requirements are realistic, have you guys seen all the stuff that can go on at once in this game...
Posted on Reply
#10
DrPepper
The Doctor is in the house
I bet that when this game comes out people who can't play it at very high 1920x1080 will complain that it is unoptimised and a crap engine.
Posted on Reply
#11
Ketxxx
Heedless Psychic
Average specs. Not a fan of how much HDD space will be eaten though. For that kind of space when firing the game up it better be like walking into a new world and make my eyes bleed with all the lush details.
Posted on Reply
#12
CY:G
by: DrPepper
I bet that when this game comes out people who can't play it at very high 1920x1080 will complain that it is unoptimised and a crap engine.
That's the thing, when they release this Recommended Settings they never say at what resolution....

For all we now, they may have tried it at 640 * 480...
Posted on Reply
#13
DrPepper
The Doctor is in the house
by: CY:G
That's the thing, when they release this Recommended Settings they never say at what resolution....

For all we now, they may have tried it at 640 * 480...
Thats ok for me :p I still have an orange monochrome monitor in the back that does that res nicely :laugh: Smooth gaming for me.
Posted on Reply
#14
chron
The screen shots look very cartoony, but still intriguing.
Posted on Reply
#15
CY:G
by: DrPepper
Thats ok for me :p I still have an orange monochrome monitor in the back that does that res nicely :laugh: Smooth gaming for me.
Lucky you :), i play at 5760 * 1200 with 128 bit colors and nothing runs :(
Posted on Reply
#16
DrPepper
The Doctor is in the house
by: chron
The screen shots look very cartoony, but still intriguing.
Looks the same as crysis to me, I just watched the trailer.

@CY:G Must need 1gb video ram just to show the desktop
Posted on Reply
#17
Tatsumaru
Well it looks nice ! Much Nicer than Crysis came out last year with its Devastating Requiremnets..
they say it will take full advantage of Quad Cpus...
But will it ?
and if so just hof much more diffrense there wiil be between a Quad and a Dual cpu in this game ?
Posted on Reply
#18
GREASEMONKEY
Requirements look about the same as crysis also.
Posted on Reply
#19
mullered07
it goes:

minimum: looks crap and choppy as hell but playable
reccomended: looks good, playable on med/high settings at average res
high spec: all eye candy on full, and high res

high spec is probably top end dual/quad core, 4gb ram, crossfire/sli 4870/gtx260/280
Posted on Reply
#20
DarkMatter
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think these requirements are the same that Crysis had. I mean minimum and recommended requirements mean squat nowadays.
Posted on Reply
#21
tigger
I'm the only one
Looks fine to me,not arsed about 12gb required as i have a 195gb game partition.

Farcry was a beast to run when it came out,wonder if this is gonna be underestimated specs like that was.
Posted on Reply
#22
mullered07
by: DarkMatter
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think these requirements are the same that Crysis had. I mean minimum and recommended requirements mean squat nowadays.
how do they mean squat ? i think its pretty self explanatory, minimum is what you can play the game at on lowest settings, reccomended will give you a nice playable experience whilst looking quite nice, if anything the only way it could possibly be misleading, is people misinterpretting reccomended specs for playing at max settings with all eye candy in which case there should be a high end specs also
Posted on Reply
#23
ShadowFold
I haven't reformatted in 8 months. I think I should get to it :laugh: 12gb is alot for me.. I only have 72gb free.
Posted on Reply
#24
Darknova
by: mullered07
how do they mean squat ? i think its pretty self explanatory, minimum is what you can play the game at on lowest settings, reccomended will give you a nice playable experience whilst looking quite nice, if anything the only way it could possibly be misleading, is people misinterpretting reccomended specs for playing at max settings with all eye candy in which case there should be a high end specs also
Unless you are epic games, in which case minimum is the minimum spec required to run the game at full detail at 1024x768. :laugh:

I think that's what he means, minimum and recommended don't mean a thing anymore because we have no idea what they deem to be a playable minimum.

There will always be people who bitch that the minimums are too low or misleading, because they expect to play the latest game at full on their huge-ass monitor with no slow-down, but we just don't know what the devs say is minimum. *shrugs*
Posted on Reply
#25
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
those are decent specs. i really hope farcry 2 is more than just a run and gun. it sounds to me that it is going ot be a lot like crysis (even tho they have different developers.)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment