The PC vs Console debate is fuelled further with the recently released Assassin's Creed Unity which still performs badly on PC.
Im waiting till they fix the frame rate issues so i can play it.
Our biggest flaw is having companies release games full of bugs and shitty optimization.
How do you optimize for an ever changing landscape. Do you want them to optimize for your setup, or the guy down the street? It's far easier to optimize on consoles due to the hardware being the same. So cry if you want to about it being shitty optimization or maybe your PC just sucks and you need to build a new one.
Well, honestly AC Unity doesn't have poor optimization. It requires a decent graphics card to run really well, but the CPU optimization and multithreading is good and it scales well on more cores. I think about most of the games I have played recently on PC--Lords of the Fallen, Far Cry 4, Dragon Age Inquisition and AC Unity--and it's clear to me that AC Unity actually has the best performance-to-graphics ratio of any of these games. All of these games at max settings are similarly demanding, but it's clear that AC Unity also has the best graphics out of any of them. The other three games are cross-gen games and you can see it in their geometry and other elements of their visual makeup.
Well, it's only really a flaw to those hellbent on making PC's look worse. Consoles are the true culprit in this scenario, because companies are prioritizing consoles first and PC second. It's not news that Ubisoft makes poor PC ports, and it's just another game to add to the list.
Well I played through it at 1920x1080, everything on Ultra with FXAA at 50-60fps, I'd take that over the console version any day.
Watched the video expecting to see some great flaw, but ended up seeing him run the game at higher resolution, graphics, and framerate than any console could ever dream of.
I like how some people have used this game as a basis for an argument when it runs like crap on consoles too lol.
Developers can't necessarily count on uniformity on consoles because there have been cases where dev kits were using different firmware versions that the retail consoles and once the games were released the games had bugs. Also, who has to upgrade hardware to remain competitive? For example, if I have an older PC running a race game I can compete just fine with a brand new super-duper PC running the same game.
Shows Ubisoft's greatest flaws, more like.
Framerate is all over the place. Cant even play this game at a locked 60 maxed out on pc on ultra with a 980 gtx.
hate it when ppl scream gtx 970 does this/that - id like to know what % of pc gamers play games with such hardware, as if this is the standard of gaming on pc? id say vast majority use much more cheaper cards
Probably true that most pc gamers use less than a gtx 970, but we don't expect new games to run at 60 FPS, 1080p on Ultra.
Whatever. Call me when a gaming console can run games smoothly above 1080p.
It's sad all someone has to do is write an article that is clearly BS and it gets so much more attention than a real one about games... :(
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.