Star Wars Outlaws PC system requirements have been revealed and surprisingly, upscaling may be needed for some at any resolution. PC gamers are generally accustomed to having to use some sort of upscaling technology at 4K, and sometimes even at 1440p but it is somewhat rare to hear of a game recommending it at 1080p. Star Wars Outlaws PC system requirements indicate users with older, low-to-mid-tier GPUs will need to use some form of upscaling for the best gaming experience at 1080p using the lowest graphics settings. Otherwise, upscaling is recommended for all resolutions, including using a GeForce RTX 4080 at 4K.
In terms of the rest of the system hardware needs, the game is mostly on par for an AAA title with its requirements. The install size is listed at 65 GB, SSD recommended, which is quite moderate for an open-world type game, and at its 4K/60 FPS Ultra setting, owners of either an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D or Intel Core i7-12700K should do fine with 16 GB of system memory. Generally speaking, the only details that really change among Ubisoft’s different system requirements and either CPU or GPU. The complete minimum requirements are listed below with the CPU/GPU requirements and graphical settings for Recommended, High, and Ultra settings.
System Requirements (per official store page):
Minimum System Requirements:
- Operating System: Windows 10, Windows 11 (64-bit versions), DirectX 12
- CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 @ 3.6 GHz, Intel Core i7-8700K @ 3.70 GHz, or better
- GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (6 GB), AMD RX 5600XT (6 GB), Intel Arc A750 (8 GB, with ReBAR on) or better
- System Memory: 16 GB (dual-channel mode)
- Storage: 65 GB SSD
- Resolution: 1080P, 30 FPS, LOW graphics preset with upscaling set to Quality
Recommended CPU/GPU Requirements:
- CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X @ 3.7 GHz, Intel Core i5-10400 @ 2.9 GHz, or better
- GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (8 GB), AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (12 GB) or better
- Resolution: 1080P, 60 FPS, HIGH graphics preset with upscaling set to Quality
High CPU/GPU Requirements:
- CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 3.8 GHz or Intel Core i5-11600K @ 3.9 GHz
- GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (10 GB)/NVidia GeForce RTX 4070 (12GB), AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT (16 GB) or better
- Resolution: 1440P, 60 FPS, HIGH graphics preset with upscaling set to Quality
Ultra CPU/GPU Requirements:
- CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D @ 3.4 GHz or Intel Core i7-12700K @ 3.8 GHz
- GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 (16 GB), AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (24 GB) or better
- Resolution: 2160p, 60 FPS, ULTRA graphics preset with upscaling set to Quality
Discussion (8 replies)
Join Discussion →Wow that's either very poorly done or VERY demanding. Interesting.
Nothing we've seen from the visuals justify any reason for it to need upscaling at all resolutions. Meaning, it runs like ass for no discernable reason.
If the graphics and modeling are so well made that it is apparent that it is a heavy title, and thus upscaling is needed on current hardware, I am OK with it.
If it just looks like any other game, and it is apparent the developers just got lazy and decided to push their laziness out to end users hardware, then that is unacceptable and I hope this game tanks.
That's fucking awful.
I hope the community refuses to accept it and this game tanks as a result.
Developers of all types have been doing this for decades.
We used to have talented programmers that sent people to the moon with 4k of RAM, but now they all use high level programming languages and poor coding practices justifying that by saying bullshit like RAM and CPU cycles are cheap. Let me remind everyone that THEY aren't the ones paying for that RAM and those CPU cycles.
There are conflicts between good coding practices and hyper-optimization, and I am not suggesting they hyper-optimize the crap out of everything like back int he 80's, as that would make the code an unmanageable mess, but there has to be a balance.
It was really only a matter of time before this happened to GPU cycles as well.
I have for a long time said that we didn't need RT. It doesn't look much better than a competently made raster title with good shadow maps and reflections, and it is like 3x heavier on the GPU. The only reason for RT is that it is way easier/cheaper to model a game like it is freaking 3DStudio MAX and place a camera and light sources than it is to actually do the hard work of layering various maps for bumps, textures, shadows and reflections.
Lets make no mistake. RTX was 100% for developers, not for end users.
Same with upscaling and frame gen.
It lets developers push shovel ware with minimal effort and cost, and makes the end user pay for it with shitty performance and the need to buy increasingly more exotic hardware to play games that look the same.
...and at the same time the games keep getting more and more expensive, despite all of these cost savings.
We need to bring the game industry back to where it was in the 90's, with programmers and game enthusiasts in charge. Kill the damn studios and investors looking for profit margins. We need enthusiasts and aspergers kids like John Carmack who care about doing it right at any cost and timeline in charge.
Get rid of the damn business and marketing people.
It was probably developed for console and poorly ported to PC.
While this sounds good at first, its a bad idea. If you got rid of the business people, you'd end up with a lot of studios either shuttering their doors before completing their work or a Star Citizen type situation.
As with all things, a balanced approach is usually the best one.
I'll say the videos Ubisoft has posted do look very good. I'd also bet that one could find a 'happy medium' between quality settings, resolution, framerate target, and upscaling.
...by an Ubisoft studio, no less. So I'd expect the porting process to have introduced at least some inefficiencies.
I got this for free with a cpu purchase, so I'm going in owing nothing to it but my time. We'll see.