AC: Unity's devs: 60FPS doesn't look real and is less cinematic, 30FPS feels better

Sn4ke_911 said:
http://www.polygon.com/e3-2014/2014/6/10/5798592/assassins-creed-unity-female-assassins

Don't you get tired of wrongly defending this game? it's LAZY development, nothing more.


Also, maybe Quiet is playable in TPP? who knows...
Click to expand...
Dude, Elise still wouldn't have been playable, the dev was referring to the fact that there is no female version of Arno in co-op. She's a templar, not an assassin. Because guess what, we never would've seen ourselves as anyone other than Arno. The only way that you would've known if you were playing as a woman is if other players looked at you and said "Dude, you're a girl right now." Period. There's nothing lazy about this game's development. That argument would be better for AC Rogue, which is reusing a shit ton of assets from AC4. All of the co-op missions are "Arno paying his dues to the brotherhood with his fellow assassins." Like playable forms of the missions that you would send your assassins on in Brotherhood.
 
Crossing Eden said:
So explain why Elise would be playable when we only play as the main character? Why wasn't Maria Thorpe playable in Revelations? It would make sense to complain that Claudia was never playable, cause she's Ezio's sister. Not Elise. Do people not realize that this game was designed with only one playable character in mind?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how I'm supposed to respond to a series of loaded questions. You have an obvious agenda so this dialogue is ultimately fruitless.
 
Marcel said:
I'm not sure how I'm supposed to respond to a series of loaded questions. You have an obvious agenda so this dialogue is ultimately fruitless.
Click to expand...
Wtf, I don't have any agenda, i'm explaining why we never would've been able to play as Elise, it's been established in AC lore since the beginning as to why we don't play as other characters besides those who're directly related to the current "subject." Like Claudia in AC Brotherhood, who becomes an assassin.
 
iW1XbuC.png


That's it. I'm done. Fuck you Ubisoft. God they are on this winning shit streak now aren't they?

I wonder what some of the people there have to say about PC's moving towards 1440p and 4K at 120 and 144 at an alarming rate. It's too smooooooth. All this year has done is make me want is get whatever Nvidia's next high end card is next year, SLI the shit out of it, and get a 1440p that supports 120hz or whatever, and then laugh at Ubisoft and Ready at Dawn
 
krizzx said:
Fluid? Yes. Better? I can't really agree with that.

Graphical detail makes things look better in my opinion. The videos of MGSV look better because of higher fidelity(better shading and higher quality texture), not because of 60 FPS. The frame rate really didn't make that much difference.
Click to expand...

I really don't understand your position. 60fps gives more control and more fluidity gives better graphic fidelity, there is no way that 30fps is in any ways better than 60fps, unless we are talking performance. Another example, look up trailers for Ninja Gaiden games, the game looks horrible in the trailers because they are all 30fps, it is,however, a bliss to play since it is 60fps.
 
I agree with Ubi. I've been consistent with my opinion on this for years. 60 fps looks too fake, everything looks static when you're moving around. It's not realistic. Move your head around from side to side in real life, is everything static? No, you get lots of blur and aberrations. In a 60 fps game moving your head from side to side is the same as looking straight on standing still. It just doesn't look realistic. I'm aware of the benefits (more responsive controls) but really it doesn't bother me. With that said, it's a must for MOBAs, online shooters, and most sports games. A game like AC? No thanks.
 
I wouldn't even care if they just came out and said "We couldn't reach 60fps with the visual fidelity we wanted to achieve." But this constant stream of excuses from Ubi and others is a slap in the face of intelligent gamers who know better.
 
Ugh... I usually don't have a problem with devs sacrificing frame rates to achieve better visual quality, but outright lies like this suck. This "30 FPS is more cinematic" misconception is one of the most frustrating things in the industry at the moment.
 
Crossing Eden said:
Wtf, I don't have any agenda, i'm explaining why we never would've been able to play as Elise, it's been established in AC lore since the beginning as to why we don't play as other characters besides those who're directly related to the current "subject."
Click to expand...

So by your logic I should not be able to play as Adéwalé in Freedom Cry, right?
 
I'm pretty sure 900p is also way better than 1080p, right Ubi?

To be honest, most of the people who really care about this are not casual gamers, so this directed PR answer sounds more like a nice "fuck off".
 
Fractal said:
Ugh... I usually don't have a problem with devs sacrificing frame rates to achieve better visual quality, but outright lies like this suck. This "30 FPS is more cinematic" misconception is one of the most frustrating things in the industry at the moment.
Click to expand...
It definitely does more harm than good, especially since some people actually believe that 30fps in a game is more like film.
 
lightchris said:
No, they're the same when looked at it at that level. The speed in renderings isn't dependent on the frame rate.

The difference between movies and the simple rendering methods used in games is that a frame taken by a real camera captures all the contribution of incoming photons over a certain time span (exposure time). That way moving objects become blurred because they become visible at all the areas they were at during the exposure time. That's also one reason why 24 fps in movies don't look quite as bad and stuttery as in games.
Now it is of course possible to render images with motion blur too, but doing so in a physically correct way would be too expensive for real-time rendering. Because of that we only have some approximations (if at all) that don't always lead to convincing results.
Click to expand...
Quoting because YOU GOT IT. There is a fundamental difference between game rendering and recorded film that a bunch of folks in this thread don't understand.
 
I thought the attitude on here was 30fps locked was acceptable but 60fps was preferred.

I get the backlash because of the lame PR lingo but is 30fps Unity really that bad?

I dont see this level of bitching for Bloodborne though they havent been shy about just flat out saying they are targeting 30FPS
 
Amir0x said:
I don't honestly care if AC Unity was the game of the generation. I'm never touching another AC game in my life. These guys are pathetic and don't deserve my money.
Click to expand...

Well that's an understandable point of view.
Personally i don't care as much, even though i didn't preorder the game this time, it was more from a pragmatic point of view of not wanting something that may not work on PC on D1, rather than on principle; so i'm waiting for reactions on that.
 
Well, as someone who has played all of the previous AC games on PC at 60 fps, I can confirm that strangely enough it does not feel worse than playing at 30 fps. I think this is more a case of Ubisoft pissing on our legs and calling it rain.
 
Foffy said:
You may find it stupid that I "wish" for it to fail, like I have my fingers and toes crossed and am hoping it bombs. I did say wish as a desire, and I feel I should explain; I prefer honesty, not spin. Nearly everything said about Unity has been bullshit spin. I would desire the game got flack because hopefully companies like Ubisoft don't pull all of this nonsense again, claiming making female characters is somehow hard, that parity stops debates, and the full on fucking lies about the games framerate. They're making excuses, and I find them to be very poor ones.

If they're not called out on it in ways that matter - the success of the product - they will only continue with this bullshittery, because they can in fact get away with it. This is a problem not only Ubisoft has, but it exists all over in the AAA space. I am sure despite any desire I have people will buy the game in droves, and it makes me very concerned that they will not take any criticism for the messes they are making, but will try to continue to get away with them. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile, and that's something we've seen happen with video games the last number of years. What bothers me is how consumers settle so easily for it all.
Click to expand...

If you read my previous reply to Amir0x you will understand why I think a game of this importance should not bomb.

Now, I honestly need to agree with your post (this one of course!) and yes, I'm not buying this game (even though I'm an AC fan) because of all the reasons you posted.

The parity debate is ... well, incredibly stupid and I don't want to support such things.
I dislike they removed the MP to offer an half baked co-op.
Also, from what I perceived the gameplay looks also pretty toned down (I could be wrong here).
I dislike the excuse about the female characters because it is pretty stupid and it's a pure lie.
I can play a game at 900@30 frame even though I'm a graphics lover, but I can't play a game that I don't like.
So, I will not buy this game, but I hope this game will not bomb seriously, otherwise we will never seen another proper AC game.
 
Fractal said:
Ugh... I usually don't have a problem with devs sacrificing frame rates to achieve better visual quality, but outright lies like this suck. This "30 FPS is more cinematic" misconception is one of the most frustrating things in the industry at the moment.
Click to expand...

It's such a horrifically dangerous misconception and it's SUCCEEDING at what it's trying to do to people. It's doing more harm than good. It's a non-debate. 60FPS is objectively better than 30FPS for games. You can have preferences, that's fine, but 60FPS is still objectively better.

It would have been less offensive and I bet people who care less if Ubisoft flat out went "Yeah neither PS4 or XBone can do 1080p/60FPS and we just want our game to look pretty. So we went for 900p/MAYBE 30FPS you cool with that?"
 
Red Comet said:
Well, as someone who has played all of the previous AC games on PC at 60 fps, I can confirm that strangely enough it does not feel worse than playing at 30 fps. I think this is more a case of Ubisoft pissing on our legs and calling it rain.
Click to expand...

Wont PC players just be able to Mod it to unlock 60fps like always?

PC community handles this stuff like noones business.

Maybe they just wont do the work cuz they already know you guys will do it for them. Money in the bank
 
UrbanRats said:
Well that's an understandable point of view.
Personally i don't care as much, even though i didn't preorder the game this time, it was more from a pragmatic point of view of not wanting something that may not work on PC on D1, rather than on principle; so i'm waiting for reactions on that.
Click to expand...

I mean I have a great PC. It's not really the 30fps issue that bothers me. It's the fabrications they keep inventing around the "why." There's no reason for it, but they clearly feel we're stupid, so they think they can get away with it.

Same for this nonsense the other day about AC: Unity having 'parity' on PS4 to avoid "debate." Such anti-consumer stuff is just unsupportable by me.

It's unfortunate because I usually do buy the AC games. I liked AC2 and Brotherhood a ton. It's just there has to be a line in the sand somewhere, and between these two PR disasters from Ubisoft on AC:Unity, they've finally crossed that line for me.
 
iNvid02 said:
there has been a lot of nonsense spouted over the past few days regarding this game though, eden is in overdrive but the clarification is warranted sometimes.



well the review thread and df analysis will rake in the views for sure
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can't wait to play it. But holy shit at their PR. Were it me, I would go on a firing spree. Good God, Ubisoft.
 
HariKari said:
Your frame of reference isn't 60fps then, because it's quite noticeable to those of us that usually play at a higher FPS. It makes a massive difference. To the point where most people would rather turn down IQ to stay at 60 or more than drop frames (at least on PC).
Click to expand...

That's a different situation and different context.
 
Crossing Eden said:
It definitely does more harm than good, especially since some people actually believe that 30fps in a game is more like film.
Click to expand...
Yeah... if general audience starts to believe 30 FPS is more preferable for a video game, it could lead to some ugly stuff, like more developers making higher frame rates an unsupported, "use at your own risk" feature, as seen in The Evil Within and Dead Rising 3.

I wouldn't mind at all if they honestly came out and said 60 FPS can't be done with the level of visuals they have in mind for the game. But declaring this "war" on 60 FPS is rather disturbing!
 
DrROBschiz said:
Wont PC players just be able to Mod it to unlock 60fps like always?

PC community handles this stuff like noones business.

Maybe they just wont do the work cuz they already know you guys will do it for them. Money in the bank
Click to expand...

Wait, has it been confirmed that they're locking it at 30 on PC?
 
DrROBschiz said:
I thought the attitude on here was 30fps locked was acceptable but 60fps was preferred.

I get the backlash because of the lame PR lingo but is 30fps Unity really that bad?

I dont see this level of bitching for Bloodborne though they havent been shy about just flat out saying they are targeting 30FPS
Click to expand...

It's acceptable, sure. Being treated like idiots with absolute bullshit excuses and horrible PR lies is not acceptable though. Ubisoft PR is being extremely incompetent and insincere right now and it's a load of crap.

And there's some serious crazy going on here with people defending Ubisoft's behavior.
 
Crossing Eden said:
For similar reasons to the fact that film needed to look like theater before it got sound and became it's own thing.
Click to expand...

It's too bad for the game industry that it's 2014 and there's no good excuse for constantly looking backward. Flimsy comparison and you know it.
 
Yes Ubisoft, incessantly clicking the parry button until combat ends feels just as "good" at 30FPS as it would at 60FPS.
 
I don't even care about framerate, but holy shit Ubisoft, stfu. It's amazing how much better they'd be perceived right now, if they just didn't open their mouths and spout liquid diarrhea everywhere.

I don't understand how people can be so laughably bad at making public statements. Did he really think that the core audience wants to hear that any aspect is "too hard" to achieve? Christ.
 
lightchris said:
No, they're the same when looked at it at that level. The speed in renderings isn't dependent on the frame rate.

The difference between movies and the simple rendering methods used in games is that a frame taken by a real camera captures all the contribution of incoming photons over a certain time span (exposure time). That way moving objects become blurred because they become visible at all the areas they were at during the exposure time. That's also one reason why 24 fps in movies don't look quite as bad and stuttery as in games.
Now it is of course possible to render images with motion blur too, but doing so in a physically correct way would be too expensive for real-time rendering. Because of that we only have some approximations (if at all) that don't always lead to convincing results.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for this explanation!! I've wondered why games at 24 fps feel so much more clodgy than films at the same speed. Now I'll have to go learn more about how rendering works...
 
mcz117chief said:
I really don't understand your position. 60fps gives more control and more fluidity gives better graphic fidelity, there is no way that 30fps is in any ways better than 60fps, unless we are talking performance. Another example, look up trailers for Ninja Gaiden games, the game looks horrible in the trailers because they are all 30fps, it is,however, a bliss to play since it is 60fps.
Click to expand...

60 FPS requires twice as many resources as 30 FPS do to everything having to be rendered twice as many times per second.

You can push more detail at 30fps than you can at 60fps. There is no circumstance in which this will never be the case. No matter how good something looks at 60fps, you can make it look better at 30.

For FPS games, yes that would give your more control and fluidity do to how fast paced they are. Assassin's Creed, though, has never been a fast paced game. Its about stopped and observing, stopping and countering, stopping and hiding.

Even though I don't like Ubisoft, I agrees with their assessment. 60fps would be a waste for this game do to the above mentioned details.
 
Marcel said:
Elise could be good to go as long as her campaign is sold separately for "lore reasons". Got it.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly. They actually explain in AC4 that Abstergo has been looking through random employee's DNA and could make tons of products from that fact when they find something interesting, since the animus is used for entertainment in the eyes of the public, with handmade edits to make assassins seem like assholes.
 
Crossing Eden said:
For similar reasons to the fact that film needed to look like theater before it got sound and became it's own thing.
Click to expand...

That makes zero sense. Video games are not some new technology in their infancy trying to be a successor to films and movies. Video games are stand alone products that require interaction from the end user and have images rendered. Why in the world should we limit video games to the same frames per second as films when the two are apples and oranges? One you sit back and watch and the other you have to actively engage in using hand eye coordination and logic. Controls need precision and the smoother the better.
 
Crossing Eden said:
Yes, exactly. They actually explain in AC4 that Abstergo has been looking through random employee's DNA and could make tons of products from that fact when they find something interesting, since the animus is used for entertainment in the eyes of the public, with handmade edits to make assassins seem like assholes.
Click to expand...

I don't really take the lore reasons explanation very seriously considering the actual state of Ubisoft's content pipeline but your commitment is cute. It's a nice idea that can be sold with a shark smile. Why doesn't Ubisoft have you on PR again?
 
Another statement which is obviously a standard one in the ASSCREED development process.

"Hey, and while we are at it, let's fuck 30FPS as well. 26FPS is good enough and it spares us the money on optimization. They buy that shit anyway."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hardware is becoming less and less relevant in gaming
2 3
135
1K
rodrigolfp replied
AC Shadows Title Update 1.0.2 - Includes PSSR, Removes 30fps cap in hideout
2 3 4 5 6
297
15K
Topher replied
30fps enough for you?
2 3 4 5 6
279
2K
Hector Hall replied
Doesn't look like Switch 2 will be scarce at launch?
2
69
3K
Same ol G replied
GTA 6 will run at 30fps on console, former GTA 5 and Red Dead Redemption 2 animator expects, and your best shot at 60fps may be hoping for PC
News Drama Game Dev  2 3 4 5
204
10K
ReyBrujo replied
Top Bottom