-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Assassins Creed Unity Leaked PS4 version shots (Confirmed 900p / 30fps)
- Thread starter valkyre
- Start date
Depends what it is on tho.
Sigh, tell that to the ones that jumped all over me.
NullPointer
Member
And thanks for it. Am flustered with the game, definitely, not you.
Eyre Square in Galway (Ireland).
Shouldn't let it get to you and if it does just back off. Never let anyone annoy you that much, especially people you don't know. Not having a go at you, I just don't like when stuff gets personal.
Dictator93
Member
Why do you think that Rockstar / 1st party are the only competent devs on a technical level to take advantage of hardware?
I think that is something that should be questioned. We know the PS4 is extremely easy to code for this time around, why would it only be sony first partys or rockstar which can "max it?"
Graphics programming wise (and not CPU), all the AC games have been extremely competent and efficient. It is allways on the CPU side where tehy struggle.
Yeah definitely not very new, but it is very much so welcome.Also Alien Isolation uses probes as does Killzone:SF it is hardly a new process in games all of a sudden.
People losing their sh!t in here is now a common occurrence, if it is not PC specs, it is no leaked poor shots of a game that is sub 1080 and yet to receive a given day 1 patch (hence the 2 week delay).
If you are thinking it will look blurrier and worse than the already seen X1 footage shown then....ah who am I kidding peeps just like to scream/bitch/moan and meltdown now..i just need to grab the......
In the end, like you, I am advising people to cool it a bit. 900p is not the end of the world and I think this game looks pretty alright.
Well the GI in far cry 3, according to their docs and at least in the PC version, works for all map light sources (sky, point lights). So it is definitely not as comprehensive as Aliens Isolations. But then again, the constraits of view distance indramatically change what kind of GI you can use whilst still having playable framerates.
On the graphics side, AC games have been pretty well "optimized." They are just severly CPU limited. Brute graphical computing power does matter. It is the reason this game is 900p. In spite of everything those AC Unity devs say, the CPU limitation of having x amount of world sim should have nothing to do with resolution. They limited the resolution because there is not enough grunt to achieve the graphical wuality they want at 1080p and 30fps.
Handy Fake
Member
Cheers fella. I must have been an Irish Chieftain in a past life.
Masquerader
Member
Oh, that explains the lack of any shadows worth speaking of, and why everything is just grey.
Handy Fake
Member
As Northeasterner in England, I empathise.
What is even worse is that the game doesn't even look good and yet performs as if it were Witcher 3 on console.
Also, pretty sure nobody asked ubisoft to add more lifeless npcs that look like shit and do nothing, at the price of IQ. Obviously Infamous doesn't handle as much but come the fuck on, they look like two games on two different generations. There had to have been a middle ground between "crowd" and that horror we got. And remember the clipping is the worst thing about the game, so the excuse of "it's better in movement" doesn't even work since moving the camera around makes textures and shadows pop up... Or just sprinting.
If you don't see shadows in this picture, go and visit your local optician. Should have gone to Specsavers!I hate it when shadows are disabled in real life too.
I mean, come on, I don't wake up in the morning for this downgraded shit.
DarkLordMalik
Member
http://a.pomf.se/ohbjdc.gif
The GIF is from the video I posted. It is from the beginning of the game so potential spoilers, hence not direct linking it here. But it does show that the interiors look pretty neat.
The GIF is from the video I posted. It is from the beginning of the game so potential spoilers, hence not direct linking it here. But it does show that the interiors look pretty neat.
ninjablade
Banned
Still nothing to do with parity though, since this version allegedly barely runs at 30fps, it's obvious they weren't able to run it at 1080p, parity or not.
Further optimization of a game also doesn't have to do with "parity", just with time and money spent on said product.
I think people are sort of playing dumb there.
Again, no shit shadows are there, that's how physics work, if there weren't any shadows, the screen would be all white.
The point is that overcast shadows, may be better represented by soft AO, instead of dynamic drop shadows, since we're talking about a virtual simulation run on limited HW.
KojiKnight
Member
Two things to note: Higher resolutions does not necessarily mean lower frame rate. From everything we've heard, the game is CPU bottlenecked, not GPU.
Second, something has to give. The PS4 is a significantly more powerful machine... If both machines are performing equally on this game, then there is something that is holding the PS4 version back artificially.
Sure, but i'd wait for the DF comparison, before screaming parity.
If the ps4 keeps those 30fps better than the Xbone (which not long ago descended in the teens very often and with heavy pop in, going by people who tried it at various events) we know where that power gap has gone into.
wanderjahr
Banned
Did Ireland ever get shadows patched in? Last I heard, the developers refused to implement any lighting effects whatsoever.
Parity between north and south.
Indeed they look neat but where's the shadows or AO ?
BloodMoney
Banned
does it really matter?I can't tell if this is sarcasm
I mean, have you read this thread.
It's mostly a joke
mostly
Felix Lighter
Member
I wasn't aware of this technique. I guess I assumed prerendering gameplay footage to playback at a higher resolution or framerate than any piece of hardware is capable of in realtime was crossing a line. It's just an extension of the supper downsampled screenshots they've always used, so I shouldn't be so surprised. I guess it's an accepted marketing strategy but I can't see it as anything but extremely deceptive.
I would imagine it's an extension of what they did in AC4.
http://bartwronski.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/ac4_gdc_notes.pdf
Hope that helps.
thelastcrusader
Banned
It's a valid complaint. What's your problem? How is that bashing? Weird bugs like that happened in AC4 after patches and they ruin the immersion.I am done here. This Unity post bashing has reached a new low with your post. Despite there being positives you turn it around and only the see negatives in this game.
Please... Go ahead and play your perfect game on your perfect PC because imperfections in videogames is certainly not valid in your world.
Here you go.. For your amusement:
Are we going to have a conversation on Historic or even recent performance and optimisation work on Ubisoft games?
They make great games, I enjoyed WD, Far Cry and most AC games. This has all the hallmarks of AC1. New tech, like a tech demo infact to show off. But full of bugs, glitches and performance issues. WD cannot maintain a solid 60 even on the best hardware, I have seen this game first hand running on Dev PC's and it was in no way a solid performer, lets not pretend that Ubisoft have ever been called in to show a machines potential. It is a given only first party games Can and Should "max" (hate that term but aware I used it without quoting it so my bad) a console out as only they can tailor code and engines to exactly that along with having 1st hand info on the hardware.
In many ways GTAV on last gen had a better shader engine and Lighting model and on a technical level was superb on such old and weak hardware..hell it nearly ran at the same resolution as WD on XboxOne.
This game looks superb, yes it is not finished and is going to be buggy and not the best performer, but it will be superb to play and at times (like WD) I am sure look lovely. The weather system and dynamic lighting from the clouds/sun really look great I cannot wait to play it.
travisbickle
Member
I hate it when shadows are disabled in real life too.
I mean, come on, I don't wake up in the morning for this downgraded shit.
Definitely shadows in there, but the Anisotropic filtering is very low.
Messofanego
Banned
The dude has an AC avatar, been quite defensive, doesn't want anyone else talking shit about the game until the Digital Foundry article. Pretty understandable even if naive.
SJRB
Gold Member
Black Flag was 1080p on PS4, so.. no. I agree that all the others ran on sub-par resolutions on consoles, unfortunately.
thelastcrusader
Banned
I get the whole wanting to defend AC but people need to stop trying to make our complaints unjustified, as gamers we have every right to complain whether its the shitty resolution, the fps, the clipping, the downgrades, the leg spins, the shadows, models that look like the Ecce Mono, etc. We have every right. Stop attacking us, stop waving us off as dumb for caring, and let us talk our shit. That is what a discussion forum is for - discussing. If everything so far about the game is shit, then we will talk shit.
Sorry but the criticisms in this thread have gone way beyond reasonable and veered into mud flinging. "Barely looks better than PS2" is idiotic and doesn't promote anything but a race to the bottom for who can spew the most bile.
EightBitNate
Member
Then let us discuss.
All we're saying is it's disingenuous to write a game off based off the facts at hand.
Shadows are definitely there. Bluriness is from compression. 900p is not a shitty resolution. Those glitches people are posting are from the beta.
There is a logical argument to everything you say. You don't have to accept all, but at least acknowledge some.
thelastcrusader
Banned
Shadows, agreed. Not a problem to me. Blurriness, you're assuming that, we'd need HQ to prove one way or another. 900p is debatable and on my setup it does not look as good as 1080p. The problem with the glitches is most of the time they make it into the final product. After numerous patches AC3, Liberation, and AC4 still had numerous glitches, bugs, and clipping issues. Can't even count how often Edward's swords would go through him or through his cloak. You cannot assume every bug from beta will be fixed by launch. I've worked in software and web development for years and bugs are always prioritized and the majority of low priorities either get fixed after release or never. From what we've seen from Ubi it usually turns to never so we cannot assume the leg spinning is fixed. The point is, based off of what we currently have it is safe to assume this will play like a clusterfuck. I might do what i did with AC3 - I bought the Collectors Edition on day 1, played it for a couple of hours, saw it was a buggy mess and waited a few weeks till the patches came out...then saw it was still a buggy mess, backlogged it, and eventually went back and beat it to still be annoyed with bugs the whole experience.
DragonSworne
Banned
Any comparison shots with the first assassin creed game?
CyberPunked
Member
Haha, nice find (it's my screenshot by the way
). I never said it was, just that peoples shouldn't act like they've been lied to if their console version of a game, doesn't match the footage of the trailers which is always the PC versionGaffercake
Member
Er what? All the other AC games were 720p on last gen and that was pretty much the standard so I don't see how it was sub par
EightBitNate
Member
I'm not arguing 900p looks better, simply that it's not bad.
"The problem with the glitches is most of the time they make it into the final product"
That's not true at all...
And ACIV, the most recently released Assassins Creed, was much more polished than ACIII. But I guess we could ignore and go back 2 games back instead of 1.
PanicFreak
Member
It doesn't look that bad :-/
Satire is funny and has been funny ever since the invention of the theater. Obviously it's not funny for the fanboys, but that's the whole point.
My personal opinion is that constructive critique for Ubisoft has sailed many AC games ago. What else can people do but make fun of them as they race to the bottom of having the best prerendered gameplay? The consumerist solution would be to simply not buy the game, but this is a forum and hence we discuss.
CyberPunked
Member
Those are the worst 'comparisons' i've ever seen. They're comparing images that are in completely different areas, and time of day, rendering them useless.
DragonSworne
Banned
Maybe because the areas, lightning, and effects don't exists in the real version anymore.
thelastcrusader
Banned
God this is depressing as fuck. Thank you.
I platinumed AC4 and it had a ton of glitches.
Like I already said, clipping. Besides that, missions were bugged until they released a patch (remember that one?). Jumping from my ship to the enemy ship, perfectly timed and enough distance, I'd Shadowcat through the ropes and end up on a guy or fall short despite the game showing my otherwise and ending up in the ocean. Killing guards and their bodies staying there. Double assassinating air, etc. The game had issues, I just chose to ignore most of them.
First one, character comparison, is legit considering character in pics is same [as far I can tell] and "Rooftop view" is second most solid one out of all comparisons.
Downgrade is real.
PC-version? Either way. This parity bullshit. Why? We got 50% more power here so lets not use it? Ubisoft, Ubisoft. When will you learn?