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

Status
Not open for further replies.
RayMaker said:
Yeah beside being really scripted, I think the consoles version will lack some of the fog effects, reflective puddles on the streets, reflective windows on the streets, the crowds will be less detailed, with less varied animations and waving less flags and stuff,more aliasing (I know its poor quality youtube video, but even then you can see how things like hair have less aliasing then more recent demo's), also the lighting seems better, people have said its probably a different time of the but even still in the E3 demo surfaces look more reflective of light.

I hope Iam wrong but ubisoft have done this for a while now, even the more recent X1 footage of the division looks not as good as the debut gameplay.I will be interesting to see a comparison video from the same segment of the game from the retail version, when the game releases.
Click to expand...

Nvidia will release a video showing off the PC version in all its glory in the next week or so, but I doubt that will be equal to what was seen at e3
 
RayMaker said:
Yeah beside being really scripted, I think the consoles version will lack some of the fog effects, reflective puddles on the streets, reflective windows on the streets, the crowds will be less detailed, with less varied animations and waving less flags and stuff,more aliasing (I know its poor quality youtube video, but even then you can see how things like hair have less aliasing then more recent demo's), also the lighting seems better, people have said its probably a different time of the but even still in the E3 demo surfaces look more reflective of light.

I hope Iam wrong but ubisoft have done this for a while now, even the more recent X1 footage of the division looks not as good as the debut gameplay.I will be interesting to see a comparison video from the same segment of the game from the retail version, when the game releases.
Click to expand...
Have to remember that all previous demos of AC Unity were on pc. And the environment is greatly affected by things like weather,(puddles), and different times of day due to global illumination. Remember the infamous SS "downgrade" debacle.
 
AgentP said:
Are you suggesting Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem only applies to the PS4 and PS4 games?
Click to expand...

No. I'm pretty sure I said the effect is in "all games generated using polygons" somewhere back there.

I was merely suggesting that IF AC: Unity was 1080p on the PS4 it would still have the effect that bothers me the most in games. Shimmery pixels when camera panning. I'm not suggesting any One system is immune to it if that's what you're implying.
 
Hawk269 said:
When MS did this with Blizzard to get Diablo 3 to 1080p/60fps instead of 900p/60fps the majority of Gaf suggested strong arm tactics and forcing developers to change their vision of a game was wrong...but you are suggesting Sony do the same thing in this case and that it is a good thing to get the most out of the hardware.

How is that any different than what MS did with Blizzard? Diablo 3's marketing was primarily PS4 branded. I wonder if Sony does do this will Gaf applaud the move knowingly that a lot on Gaf blasted MS for doing it with Blizzard?
Click to expand...

Please, it's not like Sony is going to have to "strong arm" anybody to get PS4 games to run at a higher resolution... that will just happen naturally unless you force parity.
 
Cole Slaw said:
You are just intentionally being obtuse now. Destiny was used as an example to explain (to you) why politics matter and how they affect the enjoyment of games. In effect, Destiny was used as an example to directly answer the questions that you posed to Amir0x about ACU, because Destiny is an already released game and therefore can actually be used as an example. That's where the leap is coming from, you nunce.
Click to expand...

Just ignore him. He always likes to start arguments & fights with posters.

He did it with me constantly. That's why I have him on my ignore list now.
 
Nephtes said:
The NFL does have something like this... It's called a "salary cap", which seeks to prevent one team with deep pockets from buying all the really good players and decimating the league...
Call it a financial handicap.
Click to expand...

I get that...thats building a team.....nothing stops teams from trying to go under the cap by alot to sign many super star players. Got to get the players on board with that plan tho...lol There are loopholes to salary caps too...
Good scouting, draft picks helped the Seahawks win the SB last year...not millions spent on superstar players. Jimmy Johnson famously traded the best Cowboy at the time to build the team from the ground up with trades n draft picks...and that Cowboys team is one of the best in NFL history.

What I meant is its day 1 of any season....and you tell your star players to play bad, take it easy on the other team. The NBA fined the Spurs for resting star players when it seemed no reason other than...they were playing early in the season....and the game was meaningless.

In the case of the PS4 and XBO...MS coulda went for an absolute home run with specs, or they guessed wrong with what Sony was up to. MS chose this design...like Sony did with the PS3. And Sony did again with the PS4. Sony learned from last gen.

As many stated....how many multi platform games were gimped for the 360 to make the PS3 look better or be on even ground...(because it was harder to develop for the PS3)...."to avoid debates n stuff?

Didnt GTA 5 actually perform and look better on the PS3? Seems like there were advantages to the PS3 that Rockstar took advantage of. They didnt try to gimp it for the PS3 ...."to avoid debates n stuff"
 
jroc74 said:
As many stated....how many multi platform games were gimped for the 360 to make the PS3 look better or be on even ground...(because it was harder to develop for the PS3)...."to avoid debates n stuff?
Click to expand...

I don't know, Ubisoft avoided the internal debate for me. I can buy AC:Unity for my PS4 or my Xbox One and be assured it's visually the same either way.

In that regard they did me a favor because now I can choose which group of friends to co-op with, or which controller I like better, or which achievement/trophy ecosystem I like better...

Either way, as long as the game reviews well and is fun to play...that's all I really care about. Getting to escape to fantasy France after a hard day's work to kill some templars.

Edited for grammar whoops...
 
DragonSworne said:
That case is about graphical trade offs to meet parity. This case is not about a trade off at all. A unecessary limitation is being imposed on PS4 for the sake of parity.

Unity on PS4 can probably run at 60fps with no other adjustments besides removing the fps cap.
Click to expand...

Well , @60fps no. But im pretty sure ( 100% ) that Ass:Unity on PS4 could run @1080p/30.
 
Kazuma Kiryu said:
This really reminds me of last year when a lot of the X1 DRM defenders just said "suck it up, that's how it's gonna be".
I mean, I'm not gonna make a petition or go on twitter to rally with everyone else, but to sit back and mock everyone else who wants to take a stand against something is really something else, as quite a few have done in this thread.
Click to expand...

So true. Sometimes when I read posts I this thread it feels like I am back in 2013 reading an XB1 DRM thread. Some of the exact same defenses are being used here.
There just seems to be a sizable portion of consumers that don't care when companies walk all over them and mock consumers that don't want to lay down and be trampled on.
This attitude especially prevalent in the video game industry.

I really don't understand why.
 
Nephtes said:
I don't know, Ubisoft avoided the internal debate for me. I can buy AC:Unity for my PS4 or my Xbox One and be assured it's visually the same either way.

In that regard they did me a favor because now I can choose which group of friends to co-op with, or which controller I like better, or which achievement/trophy ecosystem I like better...

Either way, as long as the game reviews well and is fun to play...that's all I really care about. Getting to escape to fantasy France after a hard day's work to kill some templars.

Edited for grammar whoops...
Click to expand...

I think overall this post has good ideas...however: I bought a PS4 (same for WiiU) for exclusives. I have my PC for mostly everything else. However I'm sure there are a lot of people out there that saw a $400 system that was more powerful than a $500 system and that factored into it for multi-platform games. If I were one of those people I'd be wondering why my version was being held back a little bit.
 
Crossing Eden said:
Have to remember that all previous demos of AC Unity were on pc. And the environment is greatly affected by things like weather,(puddles), and different times of day due to global illumination. Remember the infamous SS "downgrade" debacle.
Click to expand...

Yves Guillemot's secret GAF account :p
 
zkorejo said:
There is still hope though.
Right?
Click to expand...

hhn.gif
 
That NFL analogy doesn't work. This is more like the NFL telling a quarterback he has to fumble more often because the other team's QB sucks at holding onto the ball.
 
I'm curious about if Sony is talking to Ubi about this. Hell, they could even send some people over to give them the added assistance excuse for improving it.
 
DustyVonEric said:
I love how respecting yourself as a consumer has become a negative, attracting comments like you think you're curing cancer. Or simply being called a hater or fanboy. Then there's the "go buy a PC if it's that important to you then" guys and the "all this because they reached parity? Smh" people. But don't worry, they get the concern. They understand the issue at hand.

If people feel the practice of forcing parity for political reasons as admitted by the dev does not bother them, then they can simply continue to purchase the titles. Those who are bothered by it however have a right to take that money elsewhere. They have a right to express the practice is worrisome as a consumer.

We all have other stresses in our lives, and we turn to gaming to get away. Guess what, the people curing cancer, and visiting at nursing homes, and raising children into good, self-respecting adults need downtime too. Don't we have a vested interest in keeping our hide-away as pure as possible before it's completely compromised?

I know businesses are probably more slimy than not. There's no escaping it or dealing with them. However if you outwardly tell me you're being foul, then I'm not dealing with you. It's on me to protect myself, because obviously reading this thread others aren't going to do it for me. They'll sit on their hands, belittle others, tell us to chill or accept it, and won't realize the effect of their non-action until it's too late. All the while forgetting that it's us whiners who supposedly think we're curing cancer that spread the word and crippled MS' preorder numbers and DRM schemes. I wouldn't doubt us whiners helped keep Sony honest as well. In fact I believe one of those Sony guys said our whining "passion" helped them decide not to go the drm route when everyone and their mothers were Sony Too-ing and expected them to follow MS.

I understand it may not be an important issue for some. But to pop in and downplay others' concern, when it won't hurt them and will actually help them in the end, is baffling to me.
Click to expand...

Kazuma Kiryu said:
This really reminds me of last year when a lot of the X1 DRM defenders just said "suck it up, that's how it's gonna be".
I mean, I'm not gonna make a petition or go on twitter to rally with everyone else, but to sit back and mock everyone else who wants to take a stand against something is really something else, as quite a few have done in this thread.
Click to expand...

Averon said:
So true. Sometimes when I read posts I this thread it feels like I am back in 2013 reading an XB1 DRM thread. Some of the exact same defenses are being used here.
There just seems to be a sizable portion of consumers that don't care when companies walk all over them and mock consumers that don't want to lay down and be trampled on.
This attitude especially prevalent in the video game industry.

I really don't understand why.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of you. And it's just damn sad for people to always be defending corporations, especially when ones that tries to screw honest, paying consumers out of a good or proper product. These people need to wake the hell up & start realizing that no corporation out there gives a fuck about any of them but their money in their wallets & in their pockets.

It's our job to stand up to awful practices like this. Because if we don't, then these companies will continue to get away with what they're doing.
 
Nephtes said:
I don't know, Ubisoft avoided the internal debate for me. I can buy AC:Unity for my PS4 or my Xbox One and be assured it's visually the same either way.

In that regard they did me a favor because now I can choose which group of friends to co-op with, or which controller I like better, or which achievement/trophy ecosystem I like better...
Click to expand...

So if there was a difference visually it might sway you toward the PS4 version, yet you're OK with this. Something doesn't add up.
 
I have never played an AC game and kinda of looked forward to buying this so its a shame I won't buy it unless something changes from today to release day.
 
SolidSnakex said:
We don't know for sure. But when you have a developer openly saying that they're making them the same because they don't want "debates and stuff", then you certainly know what's going on.
Click to expand...

It could still be just an excuse, who knows. It's possible that the developers achieved their intended goal on PS4 early and then focused their efforts on getting the One version up to speed. If their target was 900p from the start, then the PS4's extra power may not have been enough to raise the resolution further. Personally I expect the PS4's frame rate to be rock solid 30 fps at 900p while the Xbox version will have dips at the same resolution. That way everyone is happy: the PS4 gets the best console version, Microsoft avoids another resolutiongate and Ubisoft doesn't have to deal with rampaging fanboys.
 
alexandros said:
It could still be just an excuse, who knows. It's possible that the developers achieved their intended goal on PS4 early and then focused their efforts on getting the One version up to speed. If their target was 900p from the start, then the PS4's extra power may not have been enough to raise the resolution further. Personally I expect the PS4's frame rate to be rock solid 30 fps at 900p while the Xbox version will have dips at the same resolution. That way everyone is happy: the PS4 gets the best console version, Microsoft avoids another resolutiongate and Ubisoft doesn't have to deal with rampaging fanboys.
Click to expand...

Oh, the Destiny excuse.
 
Man. Ubi has just killed any excitement I have ever had in AC recently. 2 different games this year, I mean really! I'm not playing AC again until it takes place in Neo Tokyo and you have laser wrist sabers.
 
Sean*O said:
So if there was a difference visually it might sway you toward the PS4 version, yet you're OK with this. Something doesn't add up.
Click to expand...

It would just have been one more variable in the equation that determines the platform I purchase games for. This is different for everyone.

Would I like AC:Unity to be 1080p? Sure. Would it being 1080p on one system and 900p on the other be enough to sway my decision to buy it on one system versus the other? Maybe. If it was 720p on one and 1080p on the other... More likely.

I guess what I'm saying is 900p to 1080p probably isn't a big enough gap in visual quality to sway my personal decision assuming I had a buddy who wanted to co-op the game on the lesser system.
 
Coolade said:
Xbox One RUINS Assassin's Creed Unity? - Inside Gaming Daily

I think 900p 30fps is the standard for vast open world games on these budget machines. Isn't The Witcher 3 the same specs on PS4? Could be mistaken.
Click to expand...

There's no technical reason for them to both be 900p when one of these "budget" machines is much more capable of higher resolutions than the other unless there's a difference in effects. I wish people would stop lumping them together as if they're basically the same hardware.
 
ICPEE said:
Develop to strengths of each console. Push the hardware on both ends. It wasn't a problem doing that last generation. Why is it a problem now?
Click to expand...
this is a really good question. I remember several PS3 titles that were inferior to their xb360 counterparts and now that roles are reversed its a bad thing?
 
Nephtes said:
It would just have been one more variable in the equation that determines the platform I purchase games for. This is different for everyone.

Would I like AC:Unity to be 1080p? Sure. Would it being 1080p on one system and 900p on the other be enough to sway my decision to buy it on one system versus the other? Maybe. If it was 720p on one and 1080p on the other... More likely.

I guess what I'm saying is 900p to 1080p probably isn't a big enough gap in visual quality to sway my personal decision assuming I had a buddy who wanted to co-op the game on the lesser system.
Click to expand...

The moment you aren't dealing with a 1:1 pixel ratio of game vs. tv, image fidelity drops. It has to scale to fit and that creates the slight vaseline look.
 
Aces&Eights said:
I remember the whole LA Noir "grass" debacle. I was a PS3 owner but was very excited about the new facial animation tech. I wasn't about to not play the game because the PS3 version had less polygons in the grass than the 360 version.

I get that it's a "principal" thing for some people to expect that the developer do whatever they can to make each version the best it can be. I really do. I also would love for that to happen. But, in reality, it's not. OK. I grumble and move on. Companies do whatever they need to maximize their profits. It's like the old adage that Firestone has the patent for a tire that will never wear out. They will never make it, of course, because then they can't sell us tires anymore once everyone buys a set. Shady and anti-consumer? Absolutely. Will I quit driving my car and walk everywhere to "show them!" Nope.
Click to expand...
That was actually Mafia II. L.A. Noire was tipped in PS3's favour, but it wasn't quite straightforward.

PS3's SSAO was too heavy and 360's too light (or not visible at all)
PS3's shadows were more clearly defined without dithering noise but sometimes the dithered smoothing covers up the lack of shadow resolution better or lighting conditions shouldn't create such sharp edged shadows.

edit: MSAA coverage looks more consistent on 360 too.

ibtKHm9Y883x6u.jpg
i0qYRo7pz7U5Y.jpg
Click to expand...

RE_Player said:
Was listening to Podcast Beyond and had to turn it off. Ryan Mccaffery was on and he used the example of Ryse being 900p on Xbox one and that looking gorgeous so no one should complain or worry about resolution...
Click to expand...
IGN.gif
 
Zombie James said:
Oh, the Destiny excuse.
Click to expand...
The reason why Destiny wasn't an issue to me is that the target was clearly 1080/30 and they hit that much earlier on PS4, looking at the betas. I would have liked more visual improvements on PS4 but those require a lot more work than simply upping the framerate. When a game is 1080p and hitting the target framerate, pushing up won't happeN. However if it's below 1080, then there is still easily more wiggle room Destiny was at the ceiling of what the devs wanted to do, this is stopping short of that for the sake of XBO.
 
SuperSonic1305 said:
They said they were aiming for 1080p 60 so no they were not aiming for 900p.
Click to expand...
Wasn't thay quote just from a show floor rep? They tend to tell people what they want to hear in regards to tech issues. I don't believe 60fps was ever an actual target for this game since Ubi has said 30fps is an open world standard.
 
alexandros said:
It could still be just an excuse, who knows. It's possible that the developers achieved their intended goal on PS4 early and then focused their efforts on getting the One version up to speed. If their target was 900p from the start, then the PS4's extra power may not have been enough to raise the resolution further. Personally I expect the PS4's frame rate to be rock solid 30 fps at 900p while the Xbox version will have dips at the same resolution. That way everyone is happy: the PS4 gets the best console version, Microsoft avoids another resolutiongate and Ubisoft doesn't have to deal with rampaging fanboys.
Click to expand...

In that case, Ubi still deserves the backlash simply for lying when there was no need for it. And for continuing to lie about 900p / 30 was their intended target, when Ubi previously revealed they were targeting 1080p / 60.

Any company that continues to lie to their customers deserves heat.

Either way, whether you want to believe their statement about locking specs to avoid debates or think it's a lie, it looks bad for Ubi.

And extremely poor timing for this to come out, so close to the holiday shopping season with other good games to choose from.
 
Quadraphonic said:
The moment you aren't dealing with a 1:1 pixel ratio of game vs. tv, image fidelity drops. It has to scale to fit and that creates the slight vaseline look.
Click to expand...

I'm aware, I just don't consider 900p a major issue. For instance the 900p of BF4 didn't lessen my enjoyment of BF4 on the PS4... The endless bugs and server issues did. -_-
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Assassin's Creed full universe infographic
27
915
Cyberpunkd replied
'Assassin's Creed' no saviour for struggling Ubisoft
2
92
453
K' Dash replied
  • Poll
Prince of Persia VS Assassin's Creed
Opinion 
17
175
HYDE replied
Is anyone here still playing ONLY on last-gen consoles - i.e., Xbox One or PS4, no PC?
2
65
260
mafon2 replied
Assassin's Creed Shadows Preview (Hands on) and Description
4 5 6 7 8
368
22K
viveks86 replied
Top Bottom