Really? I heard it was going to use DX7 so we can give those Geforce2 gfx cards a good workout lol
Seriously though It sounds like the old tradition of poor PC ports is returning
Assassins Creed 2 - Dx9 Only, No Nvidia PhysX Support
- Thread starter LoadsaMoney
- Start date
Really? I heard it was going to use DX7 so we can give those Geforce2 gfx cards a good workout lol
Seriously though It sounds like the old tradition of poor PC ports is returning
I'm one of the many people not influenced by idiotic mainstream reviewers ignoring all it's faults & saying something is great when it has so many flaw's & is almost identical to AC1 but worse in almost every respect but especially graphically & size wise (its over 2GB HD space wise smaller than AC1 & graphics in several places are PS2 level so that's like DX8 equivalent I suppose
). Ignoring the story (which is again a carbon copy of AC1 but so long -winded/boring/uninteresting/juvenille/convoluted) those 2 factors alone would be making me want to play a demo (which they will never make as it would kill PC sales very quickly). If that's a bad thing for me to dislike a vastly inferior game (which cost me almost nothing in the end as I sold it for £5 less than it cost me brand new)then I could not be happier!!!
I very much doubt there will be many PC gamers praising this game if they are naive enough to buy it as if you bought AC1 then you have already played a vastly superior game.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 715
- Location
- Wales, UK
Better hope the next gen consoles have DX11 support...coz that's the only way pc ports will tax our new shiny gaming rigs. Except by then we'll be up to DX13 or whatever, lol
And yet, some people on these forums still think pc gaming is better than ever and if you say its dying you get flamed to death....
And yet, some people on these forums still think pc gaming is better than ever and if you say its dying you get flamed to death....
I'm one of the many people not influenced by idiotic mainstream reviewers ignoring all its faults & saying something is great when it has so many flaws & is almost identical to AC1 but worse in almost every respect but especially graphically & size wise (its over 2GB HD space wise smaller than AC1 & graphics in several places are PS2 level so that's like DX8 equivalent I suppose
If that's a bad thing for me to dislike a vastly inferior game (which cost me almost nothing in the end as I sold it for £5 less than it cost me brand new)then I could not be happier!!!
I very much doubt there will be many PC gamers praising this game if they are naive enough to buy it as if you bought AC1 then you have already played a vastly superior game.
Would be nice if you could show some screenshots or similar to back up the "PS2" graphics comment. Haven't played the game myself, but..if it's identical to the first (and yet also somehow worse in every single way), then that's a real shame
I sold the game ages ago on 360. Just hire it out play for about 20 mins you will know the PS2 gfx early on in some early ingame engine cut-scenes but after about 20 mins you have pretty much experienced all the gameplay on offer anyway.......Would be nice if you could show some screenshots or similar to back up the "PS2" graphics comment. Haven't played the game myself, but..if it's identical to the first (and yet also somehow worse in every single way), then that's a real shame
Ubi did an amazing job with bribing their way to good reviews
This youtube video play close attention to the LOD on the main characters face right at the start as that is how poor it looks ingame.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYo2bUolrRQ
It gets worse as most of the game has the most ugly brown/grey pallette you have ever seen & the new interface is so clunky & cumbersome but if the gameplay were strong it would not bother you as much
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,576
- Location
- Cornwall
You won't find any.
Don't worry it's not. It's a much better game.Haven't played the game myself, but..if it's identical to the first (and yet also somehow worse in every single way), then that's a real shame
AC2 features PS2 level gfx
Go and get a PS2 and hook it up to your HDTV and realise just how ridiculous your comments are.
Although I would agree that the engine appears to have been 'scaled back' for whatever reason (for example the nice cloud shadows from AC1 seem to have gone), there is no way on earth it has 'PS2 level graphics'. If you seriously believe that then you should get down to Specsavers ASAP.
Last edited:
I sold the game ages ago on 360. Just hire it out play for about 20 mins you will know the PS2 gfx early on in some early ingame engine cut-scenes but after about 20 mins you have pretty much experienced all the gameplay on offer anyway.......
Ubi did an amazing job with bribing their way to good reviews
This youtube video play close attention to the LOD on the main characters face right at the start as that is how poor it looks ingame.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYo2bUolrRQ
It gets worse as most of the game has the most ugly brown/grey pallette you have ever seen & the new interface is so clunky & cumbersome but if the gameplay were strong it would not bother you as much
What the hell are you smoking? I need some
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 957
- Location
- Scottish Borders
so u wanna smoke something that makes a game look worse? lmao.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 3,681
- Location
- Poole
Ummm... GTFO!!
I played it on PS3, and really enjoyed it. Thought the graphics were nice, great atmosphere and art style and was always thinking to myself how much better this would look on PC. I may still get it, because the framerate issues on the console versions were rather silly, it couldn't stay at 30fps at all. Its a much better game than the first, one of my favorites of last year and that PS2 gfx comparison is absolutely stupid.
I didn't realise PC games were only worthwhile if they support the latest DX. Perhaps you should judge them on, you know... the quality of gameplay they provide. As long as the performance and controls are good then I don't see what the problem is. I'd rather that than not get console games at all.
Perhaps you should have spec'd your build around the requirements of the games you play, rather than spend ridiculous amounts on unnecessarily powerful hardware?
Ghostbusters apparrently uses only DX8 shaders. Having said that, I'm fairly impressed with it. The lighting and shadows in particular is very realistic.
The human models on AC1 weren't that great in stills but as soon as everything was in motion I forgot about it. That was one of the few games where I'd stop to enjoy the view.
The human models on AC1 weren't that great in stills but as soon as everything was in motion I forgot about it. That was one of the few games where I'd stop to enjoy the view.
I kind of see where you're coming from. However, the original had DX10 support, but the sequal doesn't? That's pretty poor.
I'm not buying it anyway, after Ubi's DRM decision just adding my £0.02
I'm one of the many people not influenced by idiotic mainstream reviewers ignoring all it's faults & saying something is great when it has so many flaw's & is almost identical to AC1 but worse in almost every respect but especially graphically & size wise (its over 2GB HD space wise smaller than AC1 & graphics in several places are PS2 level so that's like DX8 equivalent I suppose
If that's a bad thing for me to dislike a vastly inferior game (which cost me almost nothing in the end as I sold it for £5 less than it cost me brand new)then I could not be happier!!!
I very much doubt there will be many PC gamers praising this game if they are naive enough to buy it as if you bought AC1 then you have already played a vastly superior game.
Wow, you're an idiot!
