Graphics look OK to me. Not spectacular, but certainly OK. Driving looks OK too. Not very realistic, but it's not a sim. It's definitely an arcade game, but not so over the top arcade that it becomes annoying or silly. But it's definitely more arcade than WRC 7 or DiRT 4, some of the main competitors. Forza Horizon 3 is probably the biggest competitor though for the Microsoft platforms.
There appears to be a good variety of disciplines and events in the game. And it has nice weather effects and night-time lighting etc. So it could be a fun game, if it's well executed. We'll have to wait and see.
@giovannibrescancini: Oh well, your CPU will probably be just fine for the next years. For gaming, the GPU is still the most important part. I have an i5-4590 and a GTX 1070, and all new games run great. The GTX 1070 was a replacement for a 970 which broke under warranty.
I think you can skip Pascal for now (unless you really need more performance) and upgrade when Volta arrives. That is, if you feel you need more power. Changing only the GPU and selling your old GPU can be quite affordable.
@giovannibrescancini: Watch Digital Foundry's review on YouTube then. They show some games where the i7-8700K is several dozen fps faster than the older i7-7700K. The regressions you are talking about are very small in size and nothing to worry about. But there are a couple of games out there that scale well to six cores where you get a real and noticeable performance boost. Most notably HITMAN in DX12.
I'm positively surprised by how low these requirements are. The graphics look pretty crazy to me. The draw distances are amazing, and things like plants and trees have never looked better in an AC title. I hope the game is as well optimized for the PC platform as these requirements would suggest.
I have a GTX 1070, 16GB RAM, Core i5-4590, Windows 10 x64. My screen is only 1080p, and I'm hoping to run the game at High to Ultra settings, 60+ fps.
The game runs completely fine on older i5's as well. Which are better suited for gaming than an AMD FX-6350. The game actually runs better with something like an i5-2500, compared to the FX-6350.
With an older i5 and a recent GPU, you can run 1080p ultra just fine, and even 4K ultra (where the load shifts more to the GPU) is no problem.
So no, you don't necessarily have to have the Intel Core i5 6600K.
@ello432: It's a multimedia and gaming PC running Linux. And they're aiming for a $250-$300 price point. It really cannot be any cheaper than that. A PC consists of many components that all cost money. And a PC that can run games is usually not very cheap.
With a $250 price point, there probably can only be a $70-$80 GPU in the system, which doesn't give you a lot of horsepower.
I can't wait to see the Discovery Tour mode being shown off on the news, and current affairs programmes!! It's almost a guarantee that there will be some primary schools that buy a copy of the game, and then let a couple of children play the Discovery Tour for an hour or two, to teach them about ancient Egypt! And then the news / current affairs programmes will be there with their cameras to film the whole thing. Looking forward to it already, would be good for a laugh or two. Literally anything goes for news these days.
@fanboyman: Not at all. That's because the scoring system was changed. It's no longer possible to give a 9.7 or a 9.5. The reviewer can only choose between a 9 or a 10. That automatically means more 10s, keeping the standards the same.
In the 2001-2010 period many many many games were given almost a 10. Like a 9.6 or a 9.7. That simply isn't possible anymore.
Wiro_'s comments