Quality/Performance Issues in Assassin's Creed: Unity [WCCF]

[boozzer]

What do people think about this?

http://asidcast.com/index.php/2014/11/ex-ubisoft-employee-talks-experience/

already read it a while ago. but what he wrote is pretty much true with every game dev with a few exceptions(minecraft got monies, blizzard got monies, valve got monies)

pc gamers should ban together and not buy these games + not pirate(so they would have no excuse) the games. that will happen when the sun rises from the west.

 

[Final8ty]

No problems here on my 5930K @ 3.7GHz and 780 Ti GHz @ 1215MHz, maxed out @ 1200p w/ FXAA everything else Ultra v1.1:




Poky old Core 2's need not apply . . . . . sure it could be optimised further but its pretty good so far.

EDIT: Click twice on screenshots, once here, once @ postimg.

They look shockingly bad and blurry.

 

[Erenhardt]

They look shockingly bad and blurry.

We are at page 9 of 3rd thread about AC:unity... How can you still get shocked?

 

[Silverforce11]

No problems here on my 5930K @ 3.7GHz and 780 Ti GHz @ 1215MHz, maxed out @ 1200p w/ FXAA everything else Ultra v1.1:






Poky old Core 2's need not apply . . . . . sure it could be optimised further but its pretty good so far.

EDIT: Click twice on screenshots, once here, once @ postimg.

Ugh, is this patched up?

Look at the fruits floating on the ground in the first screenshot. I guess Ubi's PR thinks it's not a bug since you are running on NV hardware and not AMD.

Graphically unimpressive for the hardware required. Definitely a showcase of a poor engine asked to do too much.

 

[beginner99]

Screenshots of my rig with G1 GTX 970s getting 60 FPS at 1440p max settings with FXAA

So I suppose whoever it was with the 980 SLI that got 30 to 40 FPS just didn't know what they were doing :whiste:

wow. Notre Damn in the background you can literally count the pixels. Extremely blocky. Like one guy already said. Looks more like SNES than GTX 970 SLI...

 

[Grooveriding]

The game is a wreck. Linus from Linus Tech Tips tried to do a benchmark review on it and couldn't due to how broken and inconsistent performance is. You know the game is bad when multiple reviewers can't even review the game because it is just that broken.

I think Far Cry 4 may just manage to escape the failure that is AC Unity and Watch Dogs. In early results the game seems to be running well and looks to actually have decent game play.

AC Unity is a write off, garbage across the board.

 

[NTMBK]

What do people think about this?

http://asidcast.com/index.php/2014/11/ex-ubisoft-employee-talks-experience/

I think that we should take it with a pinch of salt since there is no proof whatsoever. But I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

 

[cytg111]

They look shockingly bad and blurry.

+1

 

[NIGELG]

People seemed to be shocked that a newly released game doesn't run right on their Radeon. This is nothing new. It's been that way since the ATI days. They are far more likely to have issues on newly released games compared to NVidia.

Yawn.....

My Radeon runs just fine

I am not shocked that Nvidia owners feel this way.

Publishers should just stop releasing half finished games and blaming others for crappy performance.

 

[KaRLiToS]

People seemed to be shocked that a newly released game doesn't run right on their Radeon. This is nothing new. It's been that way since the ATI days. They are far more likely to have issues on newly released games compared to NVidia.

This comment really disturbs me, especially coming from you, Adam.

 

[f1sherman]

Ugh, is this patched up?

Look at the fruits floating on the ground in the first screenshot. I guess Ubi's PR thinks it's not a bug since you are running on NV hardware and not AMD.

Graphically unimpressive for the hardware required. Definitely a showcase of a poor engine asked to do too much.

You are very very wrong

I've seen AC:U at my friend.
And let me just say that no video and no screenshot that I've seen so far does any justice to this game. (except than one with the girls hair(!))

I've seen something similar (screenies not representing game well) with Alan Wake, but not to this degree.
The game is truly ahead of anything I've ever seen. And it seems that we can only truly appreciate the lighting and the shadows in motion.
I am not sure why youtube videos, same as screenies, are just as equally bad at conveying the beauty of this games, maybe due to compression.

There is a touch of image softness, but this is characteristic of all AC games and it suits the game well - its actually very pleasant and relaxing.
Contrary to say Witcher 2 and those eye bleeding textures (yes even with AllowSharpen=0 for me), textures which are very good textures, make no mistake, but they give me tense and eye tiring feel.

Lighting, faces shadows, textures, attention to details - are all simply superb.
You have to see it.

Although that crude hair... its even more distracting than in screenshots.
Because everything looks that much better.

 

[AdamK47]

This comment really disturbs me, especially coming from you, Adam.

I've owned the 9700, 9800, X850, X1900, three 5870s, and three 7970s. I remember a good share of games that had problems at release that were driver related. Morrowind, Far Cry, UT2003, Doom 3, Oblivion, Amnesia, Crysis, BioShock, and Red Faction Guerilla. These are just some that I remember off the top of my head. Even with older games nVidia drivers are still better overall.

 

[garagisti]

I've owned the 9700, 9800, X850, X1900, three 5870s, and three 7970s. I remember a good share of games that had problems at release that were driver related. Morrowind, Far Cry, UT2003, Doom 3, Oblivion, Amnesia, Crysis, BioShock, and Red Faction Guerilla. These are just some that I remember off the top of my head. Even with older games nVidia drivers are still better overall.

IIRC, think it was microsoft, who was behind a report where Nvidia's buggy software was reportedly accountable for 30% of total crashes on Vista... Exploding drivers? They both have their positives and negatives. Physx, was something which always tempted me, even though its implementation in games like Mafia 2 etc., left a lot to be desired. On the other hand, TWIIMTBP/ GAMEWORKS is what was plainly a screw-job, much like Intel's compilers written to screw competition. Don't know where you stand, similarly AMD has a positive, which is Mantle. Unlike what many peddle in forums on interweb, AMD doesn't encourage companies to code poorly for competition, and the proof is that NVIDIA cards performs sometimes better than AMD counterparts in DX11.

Usually, NVIDIA/ TWIIMTBP/ GAMEWORKS (now) games are where AMD has always lagged with their drivers, as the code is not exposed. Optimisations can't possibly be made without the code being available...

 

[mindbomb]

maybe this was brought up before since this thread is 9 pages long, but the title of the article is quite a leap from the quote by some ubisoft tech on the ubisoft forums. And the second quote is from an email from an unnamed source, so it's likely just made up. The article itself is just too terrible to be worth discussing.

 

[96Firebird]

maybe this was brought up before since this thread is 9 pages long, but the title of the article is quite a leap from the quote by some ubisoft tech on the ubisoft forums. And the second quote is from an email to an unnamed source. The article itself is too poorly written to be worth discussing.

I questioned that in post 33, but nobody cares about facts. They just take the article's title and run with it.

 

[Mem]

I've owned the 9700, 9800, X850, X1900, three 5870s, and three 7970s. I remember a good share of games that had problems at release that were driver related. Morrowind, Far Cry, UT2003, Doom 3, Oblivion, Amnesia, Crysis, BioShock, and Red Faction Guerilla. These are just some that I remember off the top of my head. Even with older games nVidia drivers are still better overall.

I played those games with various ATI/AMD cards and never had any issues.

I also have Nvidia cards as well and have had issues for example remember the famous lockup while browsing with 4xx/5xx cards last year in Geforce.com forums that took Nvidia over six month to fix,it was so bad for me I had to either use very old drivers or use my AMD card on my other PC.

I will say I've been gaming since Voodoo 1 and TNT days so have used quite a lot of ATI/AMD and Nvidia cards over the decades,drivers in general cannot be perfect ,reason being that's why you get updates from both sides,also other factors like factor overclocks can cause issues,I had 7800GTX Nvidia factory OC that would lockup at default OC speed so had to underclock it to get it stable.


My experience has been slightly better towards ATI/AMD in terms of stability over the decades then Nvidia,don't get me started on the crappy Nvidia Vista drivers in the early days or ones that killed cards.
My point being Nvidia drivers are far from perfect like Nvidia fans try to make out here,both sides can have issues but that's only natural with how complex games and video cards are becoming.


At the moment my main gaming rig is AMD but I do have two PCs on both sides so two AMD PCs and two Nvidia based PCs video card wise.

Getting back to the real problem ie PR and the developers of AC3 ,I wonder how they can really blame AMD when others companies can make games for both sides just fine,also they are lucky that 3DFX/Matrox are no longer in the ball game because I think they would have a fit and throw in the towel (and beyond their skills)trying to make AC3 work with a four horse race(video card wise).



So to recap both AMD and Nvidia are about as good as each other,no company is perfect but to blame AMD for this is really really wrong and a PR stunt,does not say much for their skills either.
Nvidia fans especially the younger generation will jump up on this,but remember the older wiser Nvidia users like myself know better .

 

[Carfax83]

I questioned that in post 33, but nobody cares about facts. They just take the article's title and run with it.

Can't say I expect anything different. There's people in this thread that think Dragon Age Inquisition is a graphical powerhouse and superior to ACU, despite it being fundamentally designed to run on last gen consoles. :sneaky:

After playing around with it myself, the game reeks of last gen consolitis with low polygon models and no real outstanding graphical feature other than the texture detail.

Objectivity is a rare thing these days on AT forums.. :whiste:

 

[monstercameron]

Can't say I expect anything different. There's people in this thread that think Dragon Age Inquisition is a graphical powerhouse and superior to ACU, despite it being fundamentally designed to run on last gen consoles. :sneaky:

After playing around with it myself, the game reeks of last gen consolitis with low polygon models and no real outstanding graphical feature other than the texture detail.

Objectivity is a rare thing these days on AT forums.. :whiste:

you can say that again.

 

[rgallant]

You are very very wrong

I've seen AC:U at my friend.
And let me just say that no video and no screenshot that I've seen so far does any justice to this game. (except than one with the girls hair(!))

I've seen something similar (screenies not representing game well) with Alan Wake, but not to this degree.
The game is truly ahead of anything I've ever seen. And it seems that we can only truly appreciate the lighting and the shadows in motion.
I am not sure why youtube videos, same as screenies, are just as equally bad at conveying the beauty of this games, maybe due to compression.

There is a touch of image softness, but this is characteristic of all AC games and it suits the game well - its actually very pleasant and relaxing.
Contrary to say Witcher 2 and those eye bleeding textures (yes even with AllowSharpen=0 for me), textures which are very good textures, make no mistake, but they give me tense and eye tiring feel.

Lighting, faces shadows, textures, attention to details - are all simply superb.
You have to see it.

Although that crude hair... its even more distracting than in screenshots.
Because everything looks that much better.

+1

 

[frozentundra123456]

maybe this was brought up before since this thread is 9 pages long, but the title of the article is quite a leap from the quote by some ubisoft tech on the ubisoft forums. And the second quote is from an email from an unnamed source, so it's likely just made up. The article itself is just too terrible to be worth discussing.

Exactly. I havent tried the game, and I suspect it does deserve a lot of criticism, but really, the outrage over a simple comment, and the thread title which is not really what any developer said, are just absurd. I did make similar comments earlier, but you said it better, and I totally agree with you.

 

[escrow4]

More screens, moving into packed districts dips the FPS into the 40s (not really shown):









Graphics settings (all are ultra):



Yes, this does need optimization but the crowds in a living city is pretty impressive, and the NPCs have a pile of stuff to do - it ain't repetitive. Its more Ubisoft bit off more than it could chew on a clunky old engine.

EDIT: Click once on the image, once on the postimg site again for full 1200p shots. They are originally .png.

 

[SlickR12345]

More screens, moving into packed districts dips the FPS into the 40s (not really shown):









Graphics settings (all are ultra):



Yes, this does need optimization but the crowds in a living city is pretty impressive, and the NPCs have a pile of stuff to do - it ain't repetitive. Its more Ubisoft bit off more than it could chew on a clunky old engine.

EDIT: Click once on the image, once on the postimg site again for full 1200p shots. They are originally .png.

If that is ultra quality, then the graphics suck major. I mean the texture models on the clothing for the NPC's, the background textures, etc... they all look so bland and devoid of detail.

 

[master_shake_]

No problems here on my 5930K @ 3.7GHz and 780 Ti GHz @ 1215MHz, maxed out @ 1200p w/ FXAA everything else Ultra v1.1:






Poky old Core 2's need not apply . . . . . sure it could be optimised further but its pretty good so far.

EDIT: Click twice on screenshots, once here, once @ postimg.

so everyone needs a 600 dollar 6 core and ddr4 memory and a high end video card to play this game?

sounds like a really well put together finished product.

it's not a buggy piece of trash at all.

 

[NIGELG]

More screens, moving into packed districts dips the FPS into the 40s (not really shown):









Graphics settings (all are ultra):



Yes, this does need optimization but the crowds in a living city is pretty impressive, and the NPCs have a pile of stuff to do - it ain't repetitive. Its more Ubisoft bit off more than it could chew on a clunky old engine.

EDIT: Click once on the image, once on the postimg site again for full 1200p shots. They are originally .png.

Screen shots look like crap.

 

[stahlhart]

Thread title has been changed. Now stop arguing about it.
-- stahlhart