Final Fantasy XV Windows Edition Coming Early 2018; PC Requirements Listed

[Raevenlord]

Final Fantasy XV has been exceedingly well-received by both critics, consumers, and fans alike, but left out one particular gaming crowd: PC gamers. The original release of November 2016 for XBOX One and PS4 (with PS4 Pro improvements having been baked in the game as well), the game still stands as a showcase for graphics on consoles. However, a true PC, Windows Version of the game is under development in close partnership with NVIDIA, which will see a re-release of the game on PC with many added graphical features, including HDR and 4K resolution support.

Due to its close collaboration with NVIDIA, Final Fantasy XV Windows Edition is expected to be a showcase for NVIDIA GameWorks technologies, such as NVIDIA Flow, NVIDIA HairWorks, NVIDIA Hybrid Frustum Traced Shadows, NVIDIA Turf Effects, NVIDIA Voxel Ambient Occlusion, and more. With all of that NVIDIA technology being built-in, it's somewhat expected that the game will only run the way the developers envisioned on a green team graphics card. However, the system requirements seem to be reasonable - though we expect these to reflect only 1080p gaming, as a 4K presentation fo this game will most likely be a resource hog. As it is, Minimum System Requirements are being listed with DX 11, 8 GB RAM, an Intel Core i5 2400 (3.1GHz) or AMD FX-6100 (3.3GHz) CPU, and GeForce GTX 760 graphics. Recommended System Requirements bring those up: DX 11, 16 GB RAM, Intel Core i7 3770 (3.4GHz) or AMD FX-8350 (4.0GHz) CPU, and GeForce GTX 1060 graphics.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Melvis]

16GB is a far amount I must say but the rest is kinda......yeah so what?

 

[The Quim Reaper]

4K screenshots..probably running at 10fps on their 1080Ti SLI setup as well..

Publisher system specs are such horseshit.

 

[StrayKAT]

4K screenshots..probably running at 10fps on their 1080Ti SLI setup as well..

Publisher system specs are such horseshit.

Those recommended ones seem pretty good for 1080p at least.

Not so sure about minimum (760). I mean, that's roughly equivalent to an XOne. I'm just not sure it'll run as well.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Those recommended ones seem pretty good for 1080p at least.

Not so sure about minimum (760). I mean, that's roughly equivalent to an XOne. I'm just not sure it'll run as well.

Nippon Banzai... Fox Engine also did really well...

But it's way to fast to tell, so much time till it gets released.

 

[Nuckles56]

Yeah and for the AMD team it will be a Vega 56 as the minimum requirement no doubt

 

[bug]

I don't know what this series is about, but why is everyone riding hens?

 

[metalfiber]

I don't know what this series is about, but why is everyone riding hens?

Those are chocobos. They've been in the series since 1988 and the game is a JRPG.

 

[nemesis.ie]

Yeah and for the AMD team it will be a Vega 56 as the minimum requirement no doubt

Indeed, It seems a bit dodgy not to mention any AMD graphics card in the specs of the PR ....

 

[Ferrum Master]

Indeed, It seems a bit dodgy not to mention any AMD graphics card in the specs of the PR ....

The article says nvidia 9 times... what did you expect?

 

[Parn]

I used to be a fan of the FF series, but haven't touched any new ones after FF XII. Squaresoft being a Japansese game company focus more on the console market than PC gaming because console gaming is much more popular in Japan. The last FF game I played, FF XII, was played on a PS2 emulator simply because there was no PC version.

The problem with the console centric approach is that most of those games when released to PC are a direct port with poor optimisation and lots of bugs. Maybe that explains why it needs 16GB RAM and 1060 just for 1080p.

Anyway it might be too early to judge how the game would perform on a PC. If it turns out to be good (ie not a direct port with some green team graphical features thrown on top of it), I'll give it a try.

 

[bug]

Those are chocobos. They've been in the series since 1988 and the game is a JRPG.

Ah, ok. Then it's not weird or childish at all

 

[cryohellinc]

Main hero looks like a proper gay.

 

[Vya Domus]

Yeah and for the AMD team it will be a Vega 56 as the minimum requirement no doubt

Good ol' GameWorks.

 

[bug]

Good ol' GameWorks.

I'm not sure why people in the red camp think GameWorks is some plot to make games unplayable on AMD hardware. Newsflash: GameWorks make games unplayable on high end Nvidia hardware as well. It's all about enabling extra effects on games that are already demanding.
Just turn off effects that your video card can't handle (which in my case would be all of them) and then enjoy the game. It's not that hard.

 

[nemesis.ie]

But maybe we could/can get as good/better effects using open methods that are also more efficient. GW tends to pull AMD hardware down more than it does NV (no surprise there either).

 

[bug]

But maybe we could/can get as good/better effects using open methods that are also more efficient.

Nodoby's stopping us, except that such a library does not exist. There's GameWorks and there's GPUOpen, and game developers get to chose or or the other.

GW tends to pull AMD hardware down more than it does NV (no surprise there either).

Blanket statement, carefully guarded with "tends to". I'd much rather talk real numbers instead.

 

[Vya Domus]

Newsflash: GameWorks make games unplayable on high end Nvidia hardware as well.

You are answering your own question buddy. When a piece of software is massively detrimental in terms of performance on any hardware but provides minimal visual improvement then that means it is poorly implemented and it should have no place in any half decent game engine. And thankfully , in most , it doesn't.

When you see the GameWorks logo , it doesn't mean : "Hey we are using this because it is great and it helps us make better games !" , but rather it says : "Hey Nvidia is sponsoring us , otherwise we would have never touched this !"

It's that simple and quite frankly I have no idea how anyone would embrace it. I have never once heard someone go like : "Fuck yeah ! GameWorks ! ". Instead I heard that when people talk , for example , about Id Tech because it lacks GameWorks/Physx and other crap and use better, in house technologies, meant to achieve the same thing with a minimal performance hit and that are also hardware agnostic.

 

[Prince Valiant]

Those screenshots look bad. What's up with random close textures being so lame and the distance rendering ? The second screenshot looks like AF isn't on .

 

[bug]

You are answering your own question buddy. When a piece of software is massively detrimental in terms of performance on any hardware but provides minimal visual improvement then that means it is poorly implemented and it should have no place in any half decent game engine. And thankfully , in most , it doesn't.

When you see the GameWorks logo , it doesn't mean : "Hey we are using this because it is great and it helps us make better games !" , instead it says : "Hey Nvidia is sponsoring us , otherwise we would have never touched this !"

It's that simple and quite frankly I have no idea how anyone would embrace it. I have never once heard someone go like : "Fuck yeah ! GameWorks ! ". Instead I heard that when people talk , for example , about Id Tech because it lacks GameWorks/Physx and other crap and use better, in house technologies, meant to achieve the same thing with a minimal performance hit and that are also hardware agnostic.

Well, it's not "massively detrimental" if you have SLIs GTX 1080s and play at 1080p (not sure who does that, but that's another discussion). In this scenario it enables you to run some effects no one else can. And sure, those are taxing today, but if you put them in developer's hands, they'll eventually figure out a way to make then more efficient tomorrow. That's what happened with PS2.0, PS3.0, tesselation, AA, AF and every single gfx you can think of.

Also, to kill performance of a video game, you don't need GameWorks. You can easily do it with simple geometry if you set the polygon count high enough. You can do it with shadows, too.
Ok, GameWorks closed source and we don't like that. I get it. But everything else that gets posted on various forums about GameWorks is just crap.

 

[Vya Domus]

But everything else that gets posted on various forums about GameWorks is just crap.

Nope , as far as I am concerned ( and I made my points pretty clear ) , GameWorks is undoubtedly the thing which is crap. If however you still think that all these people which are complaining about it ( from both sides ) are just speaking crap and we are all imagining things ..... then I suppose carry on with your belief....

 

[bug]

Nope , as far as I am concerned ( and I made my points pretty clear ) , GameWorks is undoubtedly the thing which is crap. If however you still think that all these people which are complaining about it ( from both sides ) are just speaking crap and we are all imagining things ..... then I suppose carry on with your belief....

My (only) point is: you've done nothing but call GameWorks crap. You've produced no arguments to back that up, other than "If however you still think that all these people which are complaining about it ( from both sides ) are just speaking crap and we are all imagining things"...
Show me one benchmark where a game looks worse on AMD hardware with GameWorks on and better with it off (compared to Nvidia) and I will accept that GameWorks is crap. Till then: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/01/12/far_cry_4_graphics_features_performance_review/1

 

[Vya Domus]

You've produced no arguments to back that up

I did , you didn't read them , not my problem. I also have no incentive to argue with you , after all you started this by replying to my comment.

Show me one benchmark where a game looks worse on AMD hardware with GameWorks on and better with it off (compared to Nvidia) and I will accept that GameWorks is crap.

No idea what you are talking about. A game where it looks worse on AMD hardware ? When did I even mention something like that ? We get it , you love GameWorks , but it's time to stop.

 

[Lionheart]

Nvidia Scamworks implemented in big time & a emasculating Japanese boy band RPG, will have to think about this one

 

[StrayKAT]

I used to be a fan of the FF series, but haven't touched any new ones after FF XII. Squaresoft being a Japansese game company focus more on the console market than PC gaming because console gaming is much more popular in Japan. The last FF game I played, FF XII, was played on a PS2 emulator simply because there was no PC version.

The problem with the console centric approach is that most of those games when released to PC are a direct port with poor optimisation and lots of bugs. Maybe that explains why it needs 16GB RAM and 1060 just for 1080p.

Anyway it might be too early to judge how the game would perform on a PC. If it turns out to be good (ie not a direct port with some green team graphical features thrown on top of it), I'll give it a try.

I wouldn't worry about it too much. There's far more convergence with consoles than there ever was.