That's what graphics settings are for.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Performance Analysis: Assassin's Creed Unity (Digital Foundry)
- Thread starter cb1115
- Start date
Projectjustice
Banned
CPU bound game, CPU in both Xbox 1 and PS4 are weak.
Ubisoft wanted to show a true leap in Unity compared to past games. They did this buy showing a real living city with tons of NPCs. I have to say, it really stands out and it will with casuals. Its a good move for them. This will sell tons.
HamSandwich
Member
Crazy Framerate dip: http://youtu.be/5wDfAQxu2BQ (PS4)
UnrealEck
Member
Another two comparisons. This time, the PS4 screen is Digital Foundry's
PS4 Screenshot 4
PC Screenshot 4
PS4 Screenshot 4
PC Screenshot 4
^hotlinking error on ps4 shot
It saved at both points it dipped, which is kinda weird as they were seconds apart.
It saved at both points it dipped, which is kinda weird as they were seconds apart.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
From a completely ignorant perspective, the ps4 is a weak console and the xbox one is a weaker console in comparison to how far tech has come since the 360 and and ps3 launched nearly a decade ago.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Is this something that can be patched or are we stuck with it as is?
Ah, I see.
simply because its better for them having the game at least parity rather then having it inferior,
Similar to hows its been in MS best interest to make diablo 3,destiny etc more inline with the PS4 version.
Granted its not going to be that big of deal because sony still has like 90% of the time Superior multiplats but its till gonna have some negative impact on the PS4's image.
Poorly-optimized Engine.
BrainZEROX
Member
No. Definitely, no.
The only one guilty here is Ubisoft. PS4 and XB1 are closed boxes, Ubisoft knows what's inside yet they developed CPU bound algorithms. On systems that were designed as GPU centric.... That is not clever at all to say the least and is totally the result of Ubisoft's own design decisions. This clusterfuck is on them, no on Sony nor MS.
UnrealEck
Member
Well, this is the first game where this is the case, and for silly reasons at that. Do you honestly think this was something that they would have predicted, especially since their device is more powerful graphically and can offload CPU tasks to the GPU without impacting graphics performance?
It took half the first year before we heard consistent reports of MS sending developers to fix multi-platform games. Sony doesn't send devs the very first time a shit game from Ubisoft is unoptimized and it's wah wah Sony's fault all of a sudden.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Their AA solution on console is awful
Their everything on console is awful.
This game was apparently too ambitious for such a short development window.
Pretty big difference! Nice, thanks.
AstroNut325
Member
Well... I sincerely hope people avoid purchase altogether. At least the PS4 user base.
UnrealEck
Member
Well the game is 900p too so it looks really washy. The PC screens have no AA.
Stilton Disco
Member
Development began back when Ubisoft expected the PS4 and XO to feature more powerful hardware. The giant crowds require heavy CPU use, and the Jaguar processors the two consoles ended up with aren't up to the task. Rather than reign in the crowds and scale back to get everything running smoothly, Ubisoft just decided to instead leave the game CPU bound and sell it with an awful frame rate.
The XO has a mildly better frame rate due to a higher CPU clock speed (10%, so should only be 2-3 frames more) and being the lead platform for development due to comarketing with MS (which likely accounts for the rest of the frame rate advantage). The PS4 got the shaft because of 'Parity'.
Ubisoft are shit basically. Expect games next year to utterly humiliate this in terms of scope, quality and polish, on both systems.
You use the word 'nice' too liberally.
In all honesty, what stands out to me is the atrocious pop in. It is something I really couldn't stand last gen. It seems Ubisoft rather than reducing the pop in have gone in the other direction. It seems like a step up to me.
Bit of SMAA it will fix up great!
ProfessorMoran
Member
That's basically what Infamous Second Son has, except Second Son doesn't dip into the 20s.
This. Ubisoft may think they're pioneers with regards to this, but their game was too ambitious for their ability. I fully expect far bigger and better experiences by this time next year.
And looks better.
You cant change some games just not turning out great sometimes, though. And a game cant be in development for an unlimited amount of time.
This goes for anything, really. You say nothing should ever not work great, but you cant stop products from coming out that aren't going to be great. That's just unrealistic. I could probably find some guitar cable that is pretty crap. But I'm not going to raise a stink about it. I'm just not going to buy it. Its not a great product so I move on.
Yea, I'm not gonna fall for this guilt trip nonsense, sorry. Its bad enough when people try and tell people who buy the game that they're 'part of the problem', much less somebody who is actually *not* buying it because of the issues it has but isn't gonna raise a stink about it. lol
I'm also pretty outspoken on my desire for high framerates in games as a priority. Just because I don't get angry or make declarations of boycotts doesn't mean I'm not trying to have a say. If I truly didn't care, I wouldn't say anything about it whatsoever. I wouldn't even be in this topic, ya know?
CassidyIzABeast
Member
No question, its just that the game looks a about 3x as dull as it should. Looks more like 792p rather than 900p
BrokenEchelon
Banned
This game makes hot shit look and taste like creme brulee.
Quality avy.
Ubi claim lots of things.
Also a 150Mhz over clock increasing frame rates by 5fps is nonsense.
This game is undercooked, x1 had more development time but still not enough.
First ps4 beta only happened last week, been ongoing for x1 since early summer.
It's been rushed.
Projectjustice
Banned
Stuck like white on rice!
And where did I say it was sonys fault?????
Predicted? surly Sony must keep tabs of the progress of one of the biggest fall games on there platform.
Yeah I agree this is UBI's incompetence, I never said it wasnt. I simply stated that it is in sonys best interest that this game performs as well on there platform as the competitions.
To say this game being inferior on sonys platform does not affect sony at all, is wrong, it does, weather they had the power to change it I dont know, I'am guessing they didnt given the fact that every PS4 game has been the superior version and sony have been very gamer centric from the start.
Summer Haze
Banned
They could (and should) have lowered the NPC count to make the game run better. The answer to his question is 'shit devs'. If you know full well that the consoles you're working with have weak CPUs, then the last thing you do is fill the fucking screen with hundreds of NPCs until the game runs like hobo ass.
In a way, I'm glad Ubisoft are such fuck-ups. It saves me a lot of money this gen.
Projectjustice
Banned
Closed boxes using PC parts. So you can throw that out the window. Watch how the PC version of this perform really well.
ChoklitCow
Member
Hope this is not a sign of the Division's performance next year.
I can see it now:
"We've utilized both systems to their fullest. There are so many doors on cars that you can open and shoot out the windows in."
They could have delayed it though. Games get delayed all the time.
You could probably go find another Guitar cable. There's only one publisher of AC games.
I'm not guilt tripping you. Tell me how my logic fails with regards to caring for what others buy and I'll respond to it. Well you have the nerve to have a go at those who don't 'educate themselves' about the product, but you won't use your knowledge to help the situation. I'm not asking you to raise a stink, just treat the games you buy like food you buy in a supermarket.
I'm not asking you to be angry, I'm asking you to be more compassionate. Jesus wept. I just can't connect your logic of wanting to previously playing the game, and you're putting people down who are trying to make a stand against the game being unfinished and help future iterations of the game. Me no understand.
boredandlazy
Member
There are plenty of potential reasons, however intelligence isn't one of them.
Care to elaborate, I would like to here your thoughts.
Yup. They should have just swallowed their 'creative' pride and reduced the number of npcs on screen. Simple as that. And I, as well, won't be supporting them this gen because of their micro-transaction practices.
Failure of optimization, and greed. Development for this game started years ago.....and they were expecting that the CPU's of PS4 and MS's consoles would be more powerful. But at the same time, they did not properly optimize the game by reeling in the crowds or scaling things back to improve performance at all and instead sold it as a broken mess because profits.
We know that Ubisoft IS looking into GPGPU capability for PS4 and Xbox One via their development slides to cover for the CPU issues, but implementation of those technologies would have been much too late to ship with this game. So instead we get a broken mess.
I expect next year to get a much better product if Ubi has learned anything from this development.
Projectjustice
Banned
And if you just lower the NPC count then you cant claim its a next gen AC game. It will look like every other AC game before it.