By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - DF Performance Analysis: Assassin's Creed Unity

walsufnir on 12 November 2014
Zackasaurus-rex said:
walsufnir said:
Zackasaurus-rex said:
Microsoft must have paid Ubisoft even better than we imagined. >_>

This is just an incredible mess.


What? MS paid Ubi to release a game which is such a technical mess? You can't be serious. My thought is that MS isn't happy about performance on Xbone.


Sure, it's overall performance is a tad sloppy.

But no matter how poor or great that performance is, it should be running better on the PS4. Same architecture, superior hardware, and even easier development. Given the massive advertising partnership, parity nonsense, special bundle, arrangement to get reviews done on the Xbox One version (a rarity), etc., the only rational explanation left is that MS's financial offering was in part directed at lowering PS4 performance.

Even if a game were developed for Xbox One and then simply ported to PS4 (already a bizarre scenario), it should immediately yield better results on the PS4 due to the hardware bump.

It takes intervention to screw with a game's development this badly. Mind, negative intervention was already made public with the parity business decision a while back. We can associate this performance disparity as an effect of the same intervention.

I'm not disagreeing that the devs who worked on performance aspects are incompetent. I am, however, suggesting that more than incompetence is required for this particular result.

 

We don't know any details on how the engine is coded so we don't know how much better hardware would benefit in this case, especially if the game is cpu bound. Judging from outside is almost always totally misleading while I can't blame you as we only know the hardware facts but they don't relate directly to game performance.

Your opinion that MS paid for a bad PS4 port is understandable but I think this is way too much conspiracy thrown in here.

The real details we will most likely never know, however.



Around the Network
FightingSmile on 12 November 2014

I think I saw ps4 version at 18fps.....



Zackasaurus-rex on 12 November 2014
walsufnir said:

We don't know any details on how the engine is coded so we don't know how much better hardware would benefit in this case, especially if the game is cpu bound. Judging from outside is almost always totally misleading while I can't blame you as we only know the hardware facts but they don't relate directly to game performance.

Your opinion that MS paid for a bad PS4 port is understandable but I think this is way too much conspiracy thrown in here.

The real details we will most likely never know, however.


Indeed, Ubisoft will never give us the inside look that would be ideal.

I'm operating on all of the information that we have available, though. It falls short of knowing, but it's the best theory available. Any 100% engine-related explanation is too bizarre to be as likely as yet another corruption story. I like to have an explanation when something strange happens, and this is the most operational one I've got.

At the very least, we're looking at a bad engine with bad porting and a game that had its primary development moved to the Xbox One because of a financial deal. Even in that most innocent of scenarios, it seems clear that intervention was a problem that led to or exacerabated the issues.



http://voteforbernie.org

Dr.Henry_Killinger on 12 November 2014
Zackasaurus-rex said:
walsufnir said:

We don't know any details on how the engine is coded so we don't know how much better hardware would benefit in this case, especially if the game is cpu bound. Judging from outside is almost always totally misleading while I can't blame you as we only know the hardware facts but they don't relate directly to game performance.

Your opinion that MS paid for a bad PS4 port is understandable but I think this is way too much conspiracy thrown in here.

The real details we will most likely never know, however.


Indeed, Ubisoft will never give us the inside look that would be ideal.

I'm operating on all of the information that we have available, though. It falls short of knowing, but it's the best theory available. Any 100% engine-related explanation is too bizarre to be as likely as yet another corruption story. I like to have an explanation when something strange happens, and this is the most operational one I've got.

At the very least, we're looking at a bad engine with bad porting and a game that had its primary development moved to the Xbox One because of a financial deal. Even in that most innocent of scenarios, it seems clear that intervention was a problem that led to or exacerabated the issues.

Perhaps the game makes heavy use of ES-RAM, and when Ubisoft ported it on systems without ES-RAM they forgot the other platforms weren't XB1s.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

HollyGamer on 12 November 2014
Intrinsic said:
I have been screaming it. This game was primarily made on the XB1 and they figured they just do a rush port over to the PS4. At the end of the day they couldn't get the XB1 version running well, and couldn't get the PS4 version running much better either. The stupidly high minimum system requirements for the PC build just goes to show that the game is just an all round unoptimized mess.

Then they did their whole post release review embargo too. Which the media stupidly accepted and are now going around saying they would never do it again. Why would any publisher want to stop the media from telling consumers how their game plays for 12hrs after the game has been released if they don't already know their game has issues.

Ubisoft just seems to be really hitting all the wrong buttons with this game. How or why does anyone try so hard to fail at something is beyond me.

And a lot of users were here saying PS4 gamers were being anal about the whole parity nonsense. Parity is the first sign that you are getting a lesser game than what you should be getting. There is no reason why a game should perform on par between stronger and weaker hardware, even worse perform better on the weaker hardware. But some people can't see they are being sold shit even after they stuck a $60 price tag on it.

You nailed it Lol, yes I agree with u



Around the Network
HollyGamer on 12 November 2014

Parity clause it suck, and i think Ubisoft got even bigger money then the sales of PS4 Watch Dog from PS4 competitor (it remind me of Tomb Rider exclusivity).

I want a video games Industry back to it's root with only PS and Nintendo, no more money hated no more exclusivity deal with money damn i hate capitalist.



curl-6 on 12 November 2014
Zackasaurus-rex said:
walsufnir said:

We don't know any details on how the engine is coded so we don't know how much better hardware would benefit in this case, especially if the game is cpu bound. Judging from outside is almost always totally misleading while I can't blame you as we only know the hardware facts but they don't relate directly to game performance.

Your opinion that MS paid for a bad PS4 port is understandable but I think this is way too much conspiracy thrown in here.

The real details we will most likely never know, however.


Indeed, Ubisoft will never give us the inside look that would be ideal.

I'm operating on all of the information that we have available, though. It falls short of knowing, but it's the best theory available. Any 100% engine-related explanation is too bizarre to be as likely as yet another corruption story. I like to have an explanation when something strange happens, and this is the most operational one I've got.

At the very least, we're looking at a bad engine with bad porting and a game that had its primary development moved to the Xbox One because of a financial deal. Even in that most innocent of scenarios, it seems clear that intervention was a problem that led to or exacerabated the issues.

Xbone does have a faster CPU, if the engine is CPU bound the performance disparity makes sense without a conspiracy.



foodfather on 12 November 2014

My copy arrived in the post today. Best AC game since ACII. Its amazing. I dont care about the glitches, its very fun.



krippaz on 12 November 2014

Game seams like a mess. Dont buy unfinnished crappy games.



Dr.Henry_Killinger on 12 November 2014
curl-6 said:
Zackasaurus-rex said:
walsufnir said:

We don't know any details on how the engine is coded so we don't know how much better hardware would benefit in this case, especially if the game is cpu bound. Judging from outside is almost always totally misleading while I can't blame you as we only know the hardware facts but they don't relate directly to game performance.

Your opinion that MS paid for a bad PS4 port is understandable but I think this is way too much conspiracy thrown in here.

The real details we will most likely never know, however.


Indeed, Ubisoft will never give us the inside look that would be ideal.

I'm operating on all of the information that we have available, though. It falls short of knowing, but it's the best theory available. Any 100% engine-related explanation is too bizarre to be as likely as yet another corruption story. I like to have an explanation when something strange happens, and this is the most operational one I've got.

At the very least, we're looking at a bad engine with bad porting and a game that had its primary development moved to the Xbox One because of a financial deal. Even in that most innocent of scenarios, it seems clear that intervention was a problem that led to or exacerabated the issues.

Xbone does have a slightly faster CPU, if the engine is CPU bound the performance disparity makes sense without a conspiracy.

That wouldn't explain its PC performance however, current gen cpu completely outstrip the mobile cpu's in consoles, which are their weakest parts. Not to mention CPU wouldn't affect resolution, and would only slow down framerate if it was slowing down a process that couldn't be done on GPU and had to be rendered every frame.

Add in the fact that most of CPU goes to manage the OS features, such as multitasking, etc. it doesn't make a lot of sense.

More likely, X1 was lead dev platform, Ubisoft didn't bother treating other platforms like they weren't XB1s... That explains poor PC optimization and worse performance on PS4.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank