Assassin's Creed "Parity": Unity is 900p/30fps on both PS4 & Xbox One

Status
Not open for further replies.
devilsadvocat said:
Is it? So Microsoft can initiate then take a hands off "don't look at me they actually agreed to it" approach like they did with Tomb Raider.


End of the day, it's about then not squeezing the most out of the system because the system that has the marketing deal this time around can't hack it.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying MS had nothing to do with it. I'm just saying that Ubisoft would have known what they were getting into when they signed whatever deal they signed.

So no matter how ridiculous the terms were, someone at Ubi is the one that signed off on that document. The buck stops there.
 
This is just crazy, how does this help to avoid debates? Who is promoting this game with Ubisoft? Sounds like money traded hands.
 
Kintaro said:
Why aren't you thanking them for stating this? They put it right out on front street! You can now make your decision with more information on hand! This is actually kind of glorious!
Click to expand...
I agree. It's amazing. This poor guy is never going to be allowed to do a press interview again though.
 
gofreak said:
I hope for Microsoft's sake this wasn't a stipulation of their co-marketing deal on this game.

Because if it was, they've given people a legitimate reason to want to see Xbox One do poorly again - something they should have learned to avoid after the summer of 2013, I'd have thought.

#NoForcedParity , amirite
Click to expand...

Sounds like a case for Kotaku!
 
This sucks... I was really looking forward to the co-op element, and for all its complete lack of innovation I still enjoy AC games, Black Flag was a great pirate simulator. Now I'll be cancelling my pre-order..

There are very few business practices I actually feel strongly enough about to refuse to purchase a product I enjoy, but this is one.

Maybe I'll just buy it used so they don't get a dime from me.
 
Next? lol

farcry4_thumbnail.jpg
 
R&R said:
So Assassins Creed Parity it is...

Pretty much only thing that would make this debacle even more hilarious would be some MS PR about "how the gap has been closed" etc...lol.
Click to expand...

Just wait for the misterx post which explains it all.

But tbh, this has to be one of the stupidest things ubi has ever done.
 
We decided to lock them at the same specs to avoid all the debates and stuff,"
Click to expand...

and then

"Technically we're CPU-bound,"
Click to expand...

which is it Ubi?

The Person who said this should be fired. parity on the PS4/X1 is no bad thing, but its a bad thing if they deliberately gimp the PS4 version or X1 version to try and avoid negative press.

Each console should be used to its upmost, if it does not effect costs and time.

for example

PS4 team of 100 devs has 2yrs to make AC unity they achieve 1080p 30fps

X1 team team of 100 devs have 2yrs to make AC:Unity they achieve 900p 30ps

but the Ubi suits are like, we dont want MS to get negative press because there giving us a shit tonne of money, or we dont want negative press for the X1 version which may reduce sales of it.

bottom line is if the dev team can achieve a certain resolution and framerate on a platform it should not be cut back for any reason, and this quote

We decided to lock them at the same specs to avoid all the debates and stuff,"
Click to expand...

implies they are doing just that.
 
I am boycotting this game and Ubisoft in general. For someone who double dipped on Black Flag (PS4 and PC) Ubi can fuck off if they are going to punish us for Microsoft's poor hardware architecture choices.
 
I was looking forward to this game.
Was also expecting 1080p on PS4 and assume it could have reached if they tried.
I refuse to buy this now on the principle. I do not want PS4 games hobbled because of Xbone's weaknesses. I have both systems and like them for their own reasons. This is just stupid.
 
Ricky Ricardo said:
So let me get this straight, parity and other assorted bullshit aside.

A co-marketing deal with MS = what, Bribery?

but a co-marketing deal with Sony = completely normal, nothing to see here?

I'm not understanding. When does a co-marketing deal not involved paying for the right to advertise in a certain way? Or are the studious business majors on here just spitting facts over my head?
Click to expand...
If a co-marketing deal actively harms the experience of the game on another platform, then it's something people will detest.

Ubisoft's wording states that they are holding back the PS4 version just so it doesn't surpass the Xbone version. Due to the marketing deal with MS, the implications that this change is the outcome of the marketing deal are certainly there.

Exclusive content is fine since it's just side activities that don't affect the overall story or just new outfits. Timed exclusive DLC is fine since it will come to the other platform. But limiting the game on another platform it could have looked much better on because of parity? Not good at all. I bought the most powerful console so I can have the best looking games and don't want to have them watered down in the name of parity (money).
 
I'm not buying this game. Ubisoft can shove it where the sun doesn't shine.

There is no reason whatsoever to force parity just for debates.
Money is involved somewhere but they don't want to say it.
 
I used to disregard the parity claims for these multi-platform games as fanboy BS but this one is impossible to ignore. The only thing I could see being true is Black Flag was 1080p on PS4 but it was a cross-gen port, and Unity is PS4/X1 only, so that could be a reason it's 900p. Ultimately, I can't imagine more than 10% of prospective buyers will know about the parity debacle so in the end you lose 10% sales but retain the heavy support of MS both in sales and marketing.
 
They are CPU bound so that could explain the limitation on the PS4 as well...
I agree that the statement is terrible, but perhaps the goal of running the game at 1080p with all the bells and whistles has proven impossible, even on the most powerful of the two consoles.
 
BruiserBear said:
I can't help but think he just explained this really poorly, because he then goes on to say they're CPU bound, and both consoles are nearly identical on that front.
Click to expand...

CPU bound means they can't increase framerate, it has nothing to do with resolution or visual effects.
 
Dumb move. I'm an XB1-only guy, and I see no point to limiting the PS4 version. I've accepted that the XB1 is less powerful a LOONNNGGG time ago. The devs should just put out the best versions that they can for the respective platforms and move on.
 
So... I wonder what the PR retraction will be.


Option 1: "PR mis-spoke. PS4 version is not at 900p/30fps for parity, we couldn't make it run any better"
Option 2: "We are doing this for the gamers. We don't think any gamer should get an inferior version just because they bought a different console"
Option 3: "Resolution isn't set in stone yet for these platforms, we are still in active development." Followed by complete silence. Followed by DF analysis post-launch showing nothing changed.

I'm putting my money on Option 2.
 
So how many upset people are going to buy it anyway? Every time I see posters boycotting a company, the next week most are playing the game.

Will be interesting to see what's left in the PC files this time around.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Assassin's Creed full universe infographic
27
832
Cyberpunkd replied
Assassin's Creed Shadows Preview (Hands on) and Description
4 5 6 7 8
368
21K
viveks86 replied
  • Poll
Assassin's Creed: Shadows | Review Thread
Analysis Review  18 19 20 21 22
1K
71K
Rocco Schiavone replied
Assassin's Creed Shadows needs an online connection to install on PS5
2 3
101
5K
Fortress of Regrets replied
Assassin's Creed Shadows: Launch Cinematic TV Ad
45
2K
Chuck Berry replied
Top Bottom