Ubisoft has not exactly had the best time getting along with its customers lately. For its own sake, it better take a long hard at itself before it slips from gamers' consideration as a quality publisher/developer.
i really hope ubisoft pays for this bs. i dont mind playing bad performing games(evil within is my goty) but locking down specs and then having the evidently more powerful hardware run it worse is appalling and an utter disregard for a complete userbase. a console is bought for its own merits and people have a choice this is like making ps4 users pay because xb1 users bought a weaker console. yes i get the game is cpu bound. but were not in 1990. there are workarounds which they casually chose to not implement.neither cpu's are fantastic and xb1 being the lead platform ps4 additional gpu strength was barely used. and if these gpu resources weren being allocated there isnt 1 good reason why the resolution wasnt upped. if sony ever decides to shun a ubisoft game for this bs ,they have all my support.wd sold almost half the copies on ps platforms and id love to see ubi not get nervous about potentially instantly losing about half the sales of their next multimillion AAA game
Why would Ubi purposely gimp the PS4 version. Could it be the game is CPU bound and the PS4 has GDDR 5 RAM which has high latency (which is bad for CPUs). Could that be a reason why Ps4 performs worse. Though it is surprising why Sony and MS chose to cheap out on this batch of consoles, by implementing tablet CPUs to begin with. I think they should have stuck to tradition and given both the consoles good CPUs at least.
It can not entirely be "CPU bound". If the GPU has free capacities, they could simply redirect some of the CPU computations to the GPU. Without any experience you could believe this to be an extraordinary difficult task, but its not. Not for a talented development team. The fact that they don't take a week to optimize this game for each platform it releases on really is disappointing.
It just seems to be an issue of the game being too much for consoles(any console) to handle in its current state, sure the dev could optimize the game better, but they are not a first party dev that has deep insider knowledge of the API, cant expect much from third parties this early into the console life cycle. Consoles this gen are still not that powerful to render alot of NPC's optimally at targets like 1080 and 60fps. The only thing thats annoying is the glitches and framerate issues they let go through just to meet the deadline.
I dont think that is the case here, even the PC is having some major problems with pop-ins and frame rate, I just think its a laziness issue from Ubisoft.
the thing is with me in a huge scene do we really need 10000 npcs picking there nose and dancing?? no we dont,people would of been happy at half that. so just to boast huge npc numbers they screwed up and i hope it comes back to bite them.
@Inzo This game is not unoptimized on PC. It is properly multithreaded and takes full advantage of multi-core processors (unlike AC4). It's simply a demanding game due to what it is doing in terms of graphics and world simulations. Unity is simply one of the first truly new gen games. We are going to see similar demands in most other graphically advanced games this generation. Sadly, mostly all we've got up to this point are cross-gen games and last gen ports, so this gave people unreasonable expectations about how demanding games this generation will be. The pop-in is due to the fact that there is so much happening in any given scene and the assets for that much stuff has a harder time being streamed in. Unity is well optimized on PC and consoles, it's simply demanding. There's a difference. People misuse the word "unoptimized" so often. Sure, I agree that they should have done whatever it takes to get the console versions running at a stable 30fps. But lets not pretend that this is the first game on consoles to run with framerate drops. It's exceedingly common on consoles. I played Thief and Alien Isolation, for example, on PS4 and both of those games have framerate issues too. Another thing that I want to point out is that Unity runs no worse than some of the Assassin's Creed games ran on last gen consoles. All of the AC games had framerate drops and several of them also had screen tearing. Unity actually runs better than several of the AC games ran on the PS3 and 360, but somehow some of you only want to flip out over Unity. Why didn't I see this kind of outrage over those previous AC games? It's not like this is a new thing for consoles.
Xbox One has a higher CPU which allows better FPS. The PS4 has a better GPU which allows better resolution. Some real talk though, you're a fanboy on another level. It really kills the gaming industry when Sony fanboys have this infallible mentally on the PS4. It has its flaws.
You don't understand how the consoles work do you...gpu isn't just for resolution...
Thats not really how it works lol. AC Unity is an unoptimized mess on ALL platforms. Both consoles and PC. Xbox one version just happens to be the least terrible, likely because it was the lead platform in development
Completely false. The PC version is well optimized. It doesn't suffer CPU bottlenecks due to poor multithreading and with a good graphics card and processor it absolutely is possible to achieve 60fps. This is in contrast to poorly optimized games that you basically can't get to run right no matter what kind of hardware you throw at it. Unity has good CPU utilization and the frame pacing is good as well. I can cap it at 30fps and it is perfectly smooth and free of latency spikes in the frame delivery. These are the hallmarks of a well optimized game. People act like because it is a demanding game that that equates to it being "poorly optimized". That's a basic error in thinking that some people are guilty of. In reality, Unity is demanding because it is one of the best looking games yet released, and because it is an open world game. People are comparing it to cross-gen games that don't look nearly as good, and that makes no sense.
Nothing new here Parity existed generations ago. GC and Xbox mulplats downgraded for PS2 version.
@vishmarx Well put. Also I love you for calling Evil Within goty. Its mine! Not to deter too much but I never felt Evil Within was bad at all. It runs at 30fps and isn't that glitchy if at all. Its just clumsy I guess. ACU on the other hand is a complete beautiful mess!
Damn this is the second anti ubisoft article....haven't played AC Unity but I guess it must have been really bad -__-
Maybe I'll get Unity in the bargain bin but I have High hopes for AC: Rogue though, getting it tomorrow, although it is worrying that there arent any reviews for it yet.
Are you nuts?
its not bad im playing game right now all ac games incuding 4 has post launch patch that adds 1080p same will happen with this 1. consumers feel ripped cuz microtransactions dont pay for them companion app thing is ripoff cuz i dont own tablet but dont mean i aint gonna enjoy game. tbh i hated brotherhood and revelations to death unity is return to roots of ac 2 days loveing every blasted minute of it ac unity is 9 in my book it got that ac 2 formula period dont know what all hate is for cuz game not perfect day 1 big deal
Come on people , this isn't even anything new at this point. Assassins creed as a franchise is notorious for being rushed and glitchy. Hell I remember when I bought assassins creed 3 for ps3 and it was a horrible mess and that's cause it was on a console they already knew well. Here its a brand new console using a new engine did you guys really expect for this game to run decent. I don't even know how you guys continue to buy this garbage at launch.
They've always had problems but from what I've seen this one takes it to a whole new level. I don't own the game myself but I've watched a decent amount of videos and streams of it and in literally just about every one there have been multiple glaring issues. From the pretty much constant pop in and pop out of people and textures in crowds to npcs suddenly walking in the air or floating around like they're on invisible segways to the framerate turning the game into a slideshow all too often. These really don't seem like rare exceptions you might see now and then, they appear to be the norm. That's why this doesn't seem like a case of the game just being a little rough around the edges or making a valiant attempt to push the consoles as far as possible. As with many recent Ubisoft games it seems that features were added for the sake of sounding good in a trailer without anyone actually bothering to learn how to place those features into an enjoyable or even playable game.
Lol you people that haven't even played the game are the most vocal at bashing the game. I've played the game now for many hours and I have never seen a flying person, the pop-in isn't as bad as you make it sound (although it is the worst aspect of the visuals), and the framerate is rock solid on my PC. Now, the console versions do drop into the low 20s or occasionally even below that, but SO DID PAST ASSASSIN'S CREED GAMES ON PS3 and 360. I played the first three AC games with my girlfriend on her PS3 and those games ran even worse than Unity does on PS4, and they had screen tearing on top of that. So, no, Unity objectively runs better than several past AC games on last gen consoles. And it's not just the AC games that were that way; games like Castlevania Lords of Shadow ran with a similar or worse framerate as that of Unity. But they were still enjoyed by millions of people. Is the framerate as it is undesirable? Yes. Would it be much better if they managed to get it running at a stable 30fps on consoles? Of course. But the people acting like it isn't playable or is a "broken mess" are exaggerating to a ridiculous degree and are basically making a mountain out of a molehill.
@ starchild i do agree on some points but at the same time the reason why were pissed off is because we wanted to buy the game. i wanted to buy it and i was hyped and almost did buy it but with all the negative info ive seen i just decided on not getting it . it gets me pissed off that i really did want to buy this game but ubisoft had to F up the game like this, and yes i was planning on playing it on ps4 which is the console that's the most affected by the glitches with the frame rate dropping under 20 at many times. how the hell in 2014 does a developer as big as ubisoft release games is such poor condition. it just makes me worry for farcry 4 which , yes , is another ubisoft game im looking forward to buying next week but wont if its a glitchfest.
They never had mines.
Indeed, i got the game yesterday, and in fact, it is a beutiful game, but that comes at a high cost in performance, and worse, the framerate is unlocked, when you climb a high tower, the framerate raise almost to the 60, when there is nothing but sky on screen, and then go down to the 30's in the rooftops, but when you go down on the streets levels, the framerate becomes a total mess, i mean, i don't remember been playing a game so badly optimized since i have the ps4, and yes, i played evil within, but playing a game with framerates lowering to 15 fps in heavy action secuences are really disturbing, you really loose control responsive, this game needs a patch right now!!
Assassin's Creed Unity looks like it was built on a PS3, and poorly built at that.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.