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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe it would have been better to say that they were having problems getting their engine to 1080p because it's new and complex and that next year it would improve.
 
If they're happy enough to drop res, which also cuts IQ, I'm sure they're plenty willing to sacrifice anything and everything extra of PS4.

You don't know what the process was, though. It's entirely possible they could not get this game to run as smoothly as they liked at 1080p, but could get it to run acceptably at 900p with 4x MSAA (where the Xbox One version uses FXAA) or something.

I don't think it's hard to believe that some people at Ubi believe that "parity" is going to give them a more positive response than "can't do 1080p".
 
I don't care all that much about the difference in resolution when I go to play on X1, but this seems like a bad idea on their part. People are now going to avoid the game, because they didn't make the effort to get its resolution up to 1080p on PS4.
 
Guess it's time to vote with my waller then, sorry Ubi.

THIS...and its the only thing they will listen too.

I just hope MS wrote them a big enough cheque to counter the offset in lost sales. Its a buyers market, a large variety of games out this xmas. Their loss.
 
If you had a PC that could go above the xb1 version, you should have thought of the PC version the entire time?

No. I hate UPlay and Ubisoft games have horrible optimzation and performance. I planned n getting the PS4 version in hope for it to be 1080p.

Just the thought that I have to get the PC version now is horrible.
 
1qPm2oJFSuWOI4rtFx06_Confused%20Ice%20Cube.gif


I guess they were honest atleast.


Still going to get it. Shame for the people who won't because they care too much about this sort of thing.

Sorry I do care when devs outright tell you they gimped your version of the game. Just to avoid debates and stuff it's absolutely ridiculous.
 
I think Ubisoft is actually right for this one. Resolution/graphical debates between consoles (and in general) have always been childish, and it's sad to see that we always get 40 page threads whenever it's announced that two different versions of a game will have a different resolution.
 
What do you mean?

Another post like this one ^

Except I actually quoted someone.

Don't ever change, GAF.

*dismounts from high horse*

Point them out. Have an actual discussion.

I posted that after posting this

I can't say that I'm surprised. All of the non-PC footage they've shown has looked aliased and fuzzy.

And I seriously doubt that the "parity" has anything to do with Ubisoft wanting to end arguments. If they could have gotten the game running at 1080p on PS4 they would have. I'd surmise that it's an issue of time and, more importantly, a weak CPU as they've stated. If a game is CPU limited a better GPU isn't going to do much.

Everyone getting upset needs to relax as well. Running at the same resolution doesn't mean that both games will look the same.

and seeing how many new people had posted in the thread without taking most things into consideration.

As he said, the game is CPU limited. I definitely believe him, as Ubisoft's PC games tend to have the same problem. I also believe that they had intended to do more with the game, but had to reel it in once the specs of the new consoles were set. This may have resulted in Ubisoft simply setting a target and deciding that the game looked good enough once they had hit it, but what seems more likely is that they did as much as they could with the time they had (which was likely much less than the developers would have preferred) and that, while they both run at the same resolution, the PS4 version will end up looking better anyway.

Rather than consider the situation rationally, though, the general reaction seems to be "he said parity! Get him!".
 
They explained it in the article "CPU bound" is all they needed to say. The advantages of PS4 don't apply if performance is limited by CPU, infact with the higher clock the Xbone could have a small advantage on the CPU, but they are locking them at 30 so it wouldn't be noticeable.

CPU bound is about framerate, not the resolution nor the visual effects.
 
I don't understand plenty of games run the same on both. Why the outrage?

Because even the AC4 is 1080p on the PS4, and both games (AC4 and Unity) look very similar in quality as well.

Basically, if you want full HD, you have to have PC now. And that's fine with me... if I were to ever get it.
 
Option 1 because the AC engine is garbage.

I'll put my bet on #3

Current tally

Option1 : 1 vote
Option2 : 2 votes
Option3 : 2 votes

1. Yet they could make the XB1 version run the same, eventhough the hardware is not on the same level with the PS4.

2. That didn't stop them from making the last gen ACs run better on the 360.

3. Yet many other publishers manage to make their games run at 1080p on the PS4 long before the release date.

There is no way for them to come out of this as impartial without actually making use of the more powerful hardware.

Pretty much.

But I don't see them going with Option 4 (No response at all) or Option 5 (Complete honesty). It will be one of the three I mentioned.
 
Good, now they don't need to worry about 3 different versions of the game and they have more time to optimize... console and pc players can only benefit from that!
*runsasfastashecans*
 
Nope. Remember when Phantom Pain was showed at E3 2013 on MS's stage?

Then after the ground zeroes Graphics comparision, MS told Kojima to never come back to their stage again, and thus Sony picked them up.

Kojima was trolling hard, lol. Probably didn't mind picking up a nice sized cheque for a couple mins work too.
 
Serious questions:

If a game is CPU-bound, then that only affects frame rate - right?
Resolution is entirely a GPU issue - right?
How about other effects, like AA and post-processing. I've always assumed that they are entirely a GPU problem and don't cause any extra stress on the GPU. Am I right?

I've played CPU-bound games on PC, and generally it means that I can stick everything on 'ultra' and it makes everything look better, while the framerate is essentially unaffected.

I mean, the way I've always diagnosed a CPU-bound problem is literally to reduce everything to low/800x600 and see if it makes a significant difference to framerate. If it doesn't, you're CPU-bound.

So why are the resolutions different?
The only reason to be <1080p is because you are also GPU-bound.
The only justification to have both consoles at the same sub-1080p resolution is (IMO) if you are GPU bound, but want to give one console some extra texture-detail/effects/AA rather than bumping its resolution.

Not so serious question:
Is this the same Ubisoft guy that thought blaming the animation expenses would defuse any possible debate about the exclusively male protagonist?
 
Buying used is the solution for me. Will be the first non digital game I have bought in months but I will trudge down to the gamestop to avoid giving Ubi any money for this. After trading in black flag of course.
Even if you buy used, that's still money GameStop's gonna make on a game they'll feel incentivized to further restock in one way or another. You'll still be supporting the further marketing of a game. That's all you'll be accomplishing.
 
They explained it in the article "CPU bound" is all they needed to say. The advantages of PS4 don't apply if performance is limited by CPU, infact with the higher clock the Xbone could have a small advantage on the CPU, but they are locking them at 30 so it wouldn't be noticeable.

Don't put any sense in here while the rage is still on...
 
Nope. Remember when Phantom Pain was showed at E3 2013 on MS's stage?

Then after the ground zeroes Graphics comparision, MS told Kojima to never come back to their stage again, and thus Sony picked them up.
I know it's hyperbole and all, but did this actually happen in some way?
 
Well there you have it folks. The first example of the Xbox One version being gimped because of the PS4. The devs obviously couldn't utilise the power of the cloud to off-load those A.I calculations and now all X1 owners have to suffer with parity.

141.gif
 
Holy fuck are you serious? Forced parity.

Not surprised now that I think about it. Ass creed seems to be "leading" on Xbone, so it would be hilarious if it ran better on a competing platform.

But seriously, eat a dick ubisoft.
 
I'll wait for the PS4 1080p patch. When it comes I'm sure the game will be cheaper (I save some money) and if it doesn't come then I'll not get the game (I save lots of money).
 
I think Ubisoft is actually right for this one. Resolution/graphical debates between consoles (and in general) have always been childish, and it's sad to see that we always get 40 page threads whenever it's announced that two different versions of a game will have a different resolution.

its not about graphic differences. it's about ubisoft not allowing the PS4 version to reach 1080p because.. well you know why.
 
It seems odd that they say the thing about doing it to avoid debate, but then in the same interview have a technical discussion that could've easily explained the reason (ie our AI is too good for CPUs! *shrug*) for it being the same look on both.

Because a CPU bottleneck doesn't explain it, it is just obfuscating the issue.
 
I was planning to get this game when I build my new PC but not anymore. If anything they got me even more excited to play Shadow of Mordor as my Assassin's Creed fix.

Fuck you Ubisoft.
 
Serious questions:

If a game is CPU-bound, then that only affects frame rate - right?
Resolution is entirely a GPU issue - right?
How about other effects, like AA and post-processing. I've always assumed that they are entirely a GPU problem and don't cause any extra stress on the GPU. Am I right?


I've played CPU-bound games on PC, and generally it means that I can stick everything on 'ultra' and it makes everything look better, while the framerate is essentially unaffected.

I mean, the way I've always diagnosed a CPU-bound problem is literally to reduce everything to low/800x600 and see if it makes a significant difference to framerate. If it doesn't, you're CPU-bound.

So why are the resolutions different?
The only reason to be <1080p is because you are also GPU-bound.
The only justification to have both consoles at the same sub-1080p resolution is (IMO) if you are GPU bound, but want to give one console some extra texture-detail/effects/AA rather than bumping its resolution.

Not so serious question:
Is this the same Ubisoft guy that thought blaming the animation expenses would defuse any possible debate about the exclusively male protagonist?

Yes, yes and yes.
 
I just hope MS wrote them a big enough cheque to counter the offset in lost sales..

Haha, come on. The game is going to sell much more than Black Flag and will probably (GASP) still sell more on the PS4 even with this news and MS' marketing deal.

There's far more current gen systems owners now in comparison to last year.
 
Based on past experience the PC version will likely perform somewhat poor on my setup and now they're limiting resolution on both? Might have to scratch this off the list for the time being then.

They fucked up by admitting this, really, whether it's true or not.
 
Nice. So now that the real 'nextgen' multiplats are coming, the PS4 version will be toned down to match the XBox One. Honestly many people argued this would happen and I always thought "oh come on, that's not going to happen". Welp.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom