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

Status
Not open for further replies.
We'll know whether Microsoft are forcing parity when Dragon Age releases next month since they have the same marketing deal with EA. I hope not since I was really looking forward to it.
 
Tbh I cannot tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on my 47" screen when I sit 4+ feet away.

I can however tell the difference between 1080 and 1440 on my Pc but I sit close to that.
 
ic1male said:
There are 44% more pixels. Surely that must have some bearing on crispness? Or else why are we now bothering with Ultra HD next? :p
Click to expand...

I can understand on PCs when you are sitting right next to them and can just about tell the difference on comparison shots but I can't see that it would be a massive difference when you are sat across the room on a console.

(don't own either a PS4 or Xbone)
 
Woogie said:
A higher resolution WILL place a higher load on a CPU even if that is only marginal but that marginal increase may cause stability issues or make the game run choppy at 60fps where as 30fps at a low res may make the difference. Is there any post processing going on? Is there a dedicated physics chip in the PS4 or is it CPU based (No access to check at work)
Click to expand...

No, the CPU load with regards to general processing, AI etc is generally fixed when using the same CPU at different resolutions, the difference being lower resolutions place more demand on the CPU, and higher resolutions take away from it and place more work on the GPU. Plenty of discussions online on hardware forum for you to research. https://www.google.ch/search?q=incr...e=UTF-8#q=increase+resolution+cpu+performance

ic1male said:
There are 44% more pixels. Surely that must have some bearing on crispness? Or else why are we now bothering with Ultra HD next? :p
Click to expand...

Exactly, it is noticeable, can't understand why anyone thinks it wouldn't be. Especially on a bigger screen!
 
Last edited:
In my case, I am literally 1-2 feet away from my 40" TV. I have it on a desk in the bedroom. So I do notice when something is 1080p or 720p. However, I do admit I have yet to try a 900p game.
 
"Ubisoft has released a statement claiming that it "did not lower the specs for Assassin's Creed Unity to account for any one system over the other".

"We understand how Senior Producer Vincent Pontbriand's quotes have been misinterpreted," Ubisoft said in a statement provided to Kotaku. "To set the record straight, we did not lower the specs for Assassin's Creed Unity to account for any one system over the other.

"Assassin's Creed Unity has been engineered from the ground up for next-generation consoles. Over the past 4 years, we have created Assassin's Creed Unity to attain the tremendous level of quality we have now achieved on Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and PC. It's a process of building up toward our goals, not scaling down, and we're proud to say that we have reached those goals on all SKUs.

"At no point did we decide to reduce the ambitions of any SKU. All benefited from the full dedication of all of our available optimization resources to help them reach the level of quality we have today with the core Assassin's Creed Unity experience.""

Regardless of what shape tin foil you've got one - neither console is blessed with wunder-hardware for 2014 and both have trade-offs in their design. Doesn't matter if it's GPU or CPU bound or a consequence of shared resources (both are APU designs but differ in some subtle ways). I can see a point where I might choose a constant FPS over spiking for the console market though - mostly it's ignored by punters unless we drum up a load of crud like this by talking numbers. Black Flag sold **** loads with the same cap.

Interesting that the original story seems to be point at the CPU as being too anaemic in both. They might be telling the truth on that count..
 
Last edited:
It's not so much about the 900p but the fact they are either purposely not making it 1080p to keep MS happy or are too lazy to do develop to the full potential of the PS4. Either way it's another poor show from Ubisoft, can't wait to see how the Division turns out, probably best if we set our sights at 720p.
 
Jase said:
It's not so much about the 900p but the fact they are either purposely not making it 1080p to keep MS happy or are too lazy to do develop to the full potential of the PS4.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why these are the only two possibilities. I agree in a 'normal' scenario resolution is GPU based but both consoles have an APU and share resources to a degree that's very different from, say, the PC. I'm not arguing either of your proposals aren't reality - just that there's an awful lot we don't know here and (as an engineer) I'd generally like more information before making such a statement. Say we take them at their word and the AI loading for the CPU caused a bottleneck - and what happens if that bottleneck means we can't feed our GPU enough? The PS4 has some pro's and some con's over the X1 but it's pretty anaemic even with 'to the metal' programming in play.

Oh well, guess it's another PC purchase though :)
 
r22snapper said:
Is the difference between 900p and 1080p significant for anything apart from riling up PS4 owners?
Click to expand...

You are missing the point. No pun intended but please try to see the BIG PICTURE.

The precedent it set's IS SIGNIFICANT.

I shouldn't have to explain why, but let me know if you still don't genuinely see the significance.
I say genuinely as some posters it seems actually try their hardest not to understand if it messes with their fanboy perception of reality they are defending.
 
dangel said:
Say we take them at their word and the AI loading for the CPU caused a bottleneck - and what happens if that bottleneck means we can't feed our GPU enough? The PS4 has some pro's and some con's over the X1 but it's pretty anaemic even with 'to the metal' programming in play.

Oh well, guess it's another PC purchase though :)
Click to expand...

If the cpu can feed everything at 900p, it can at 1080p.
If for some inexplicable reason Ubi are actually telling the truth, then it would be a good idea for them to actually explain why.
Ubi are now saying the spec's are not set in stone. I'm guessing the fate of 1080p rests with the size of the ****storm this has caused and the number of pre-orders cancelled.
 
An Exception said:
You are missing the point. No pun intended but please try to see the BIG PICTURE.

The precedent it set's IS SIGNIFICANT.

I shouldn't have to explain why, but let me know if you still don't genuinely see the significance.
I say genuinely as some posters it seems actually try their hardest not to understand if it messes with their fanboy perception of reality they are defending.
Click to expand...

The big picture I am seeing is that the developers are saying that this isn't being done because one console is less powerful than the other. A poster above raises other possibilities, such as choking the (weak) CPUs on each machine, meaning that the PS4 can't leverage the extra power it has.

Frankly, if your best answer is "well they would say that wouldn't they", firstly its a poor answer and secondly it is impossible to argue against because it is not based on anything factual that can be proved or disproved.
 
An Exception said:
If the cpu can feed everything at 900p, it can at 1080p.
If for some inexplicable reason Ubi are actually telling the truth, then it would be a good idea for them to actually explain why.
Ubi are now saying the spec's are not set in stone. I'm guessing the fate of 1080p rests with the size of the ****storm this has caused and the number of pre-orders cancelled.
Click to expand...

You should make one of those online petition's!!!!
 
r22snapper said:
The big picture I am seeing is that the developers are saying that this isn't being done because one console is less powerful than the other. A poster above raises other possibilities, such as choking the (weak) CPUs on each machine, meaning that the PS4 can't leverage the extra power it has.

Frankly, if your best answer is "well they would say that wouldn't they", firstly its a poor answer and secondly it is impossible to argue against because it is not based on anything factual that can be proved or disproved.
Click to expand...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...nity-graphics-lock-for-parity-on-ps4-xbox-one
Technically we're CPU-bound. The GPUs are really powerful, obviously the graphics look pretty good, but it's the CPU [that] has to process the AI, the number of NPCs we have on screen, all these systems running in parallel."
We were quickly bottlenecked by that and it was a bit frustrating," he continued, "because we thought that this was going to be a tenfold improvement over everything AI-wise, and we realised it was going to be pretty hard. It's not the number of polygons that affect the framerate. We could be running at 100fps if it was just graphics, but because of AI, we're still limited to 30 frames per second."

What he is saying here is that the AI is limiting the FPS to 30FPS. He is not saying the AI is limiting the resolution.

What you have missed is that the CPU bottleneck is not the reason for 900p.
Below is the explanation for 900p..

"We decided to lock them at the same specs to avoid all the debates and stuff"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom