• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

[H] Assassin's Creed Unity Performance Video Card Review

tommybhoy

tommybhoy

tommybhoy

Soldato
Joined
30 Mar 2010
Posts
13,439
Location
Under The Stairs!
The Bottom Line

When we were first introduced to Assassin's Creed Unity, many months ago, we had high hopes for this game being a next generation game that would make us want to buy the latest generation of video card. After its release, we feel completely different about this game. This game has the most performance issues, the most graphical glitches, and the most gameplay breaking bugs we have seen in any game release this year.

Congratulations Ubisoft, you win an award, an award for releasing the most games in a year with the most issues. From Watch Dogs, to Assassin's Creed, to Far Cry 4 and several other Ubisoft game's this fall, Ubisoft leads the industry in botched PC games publisig. Ubisoft currently has a very low reputation among gamers. Assassin's Creed Unity is the first game we'd recommend for a recall. Refund gamers’ money and delay this game a year to release this time next year, when it is complete.

If you want the best performance and image quality in this game, you'll need GTX 970 or 980 SLI. Anything less, and you're going to have a bad time. AMD user's, we feel sorry for the disparity in performance, which other game's do not show. For gamers in general, we are sorry you are having so many issues with this game, you are not alone.

Here's looking forward to the next Assassin's Creed Unity patch. As it is, this game is in no condition for us to be using as a game to evaluate video card performance. Sorry Ubisoft, try again. Surely though, if a game is published by Ubisoft, many PC gamers will not, and should not in our opinion, be pre-purchasing, or even purchasing on launch day.

******************************
bydozVE.png
******************************
Click to expand...

http://hardocp.com/article/2014/12/...ity_performance_video_card_review/#.VJjMb14gA
 
Specially as at moment SLI is completely messed up in this game.I had been hoping they would have fixed this by early Jan when I finished my build but not likely so far.
 
I think the last big problem is no SLI support think a lot of the other bugs have been resolved now. It has shown them to be a complete laughing stock they couldn't get a single port of the game properly done.
 
I'm pretty sure they outsource their pc development still to eastern European firms. They really don't give two < rude >. They're not willing to delay titles and the people who put the effort in are probably too scared to speak up and say it's not ready.
 
Ubisoft are an entire joke, along with many other games for differing reasons. People should stop pre-ordering games, shift the aim of the company.

When people buy games on pre-order and buy broken games after release anyway where is the incentive to make games better and finished. If you can release a game every 18 months and get say 15mil sales on all platforms, a game that is finished and cost 20% more to make, or you can release a game every 12 months and still get 15mil sales while spending less making the game you're making more profit on each game and making games more often.

When people just buy whatever is spewed out the companies spewing out said games will continue to reduce the quality of games until sales drop. If sales drop and consumers tell them directly it's because your games are being not finished properly and profit goes down, we get better games. Basically if gamers act even marginally responsibly the shareholders will find the game every 18 months that is a actually finished and working game will make them more money, then that is what they'll do.

There is no conspiracy, people like money, they will do whatever is most profitable. It's 100% in the grasp of gamers to dictate to the company what is most profitable. When people buy **** broken games that aren't finished you're rewarding the company and giving them absolutely no reason to change what they are doing.

I didn't buy any of the recent ubisoft games(and yes, I've played all of them except FC4, boo hoo), I will buy them when they are fixed and working to the same level I would want any other game to be working at. If the price of the game has dropped from £35 to £5-10 in a sale by the time they get it working, that is THEIR fault, I'm 100% happy to buy the game WHEN IT'S WORKING.

I have finished none of the Ubi games, when the experience sucks, I don't play or finish said game.

I bought Dragon Age, while it has some buggy cut scenes and isn't anywhere near as good as promised or I hoped. It is what I deem a game, if I want to I can play hours of smooth game play without a ridiculous amount of bugs or horrendous performance.


What I will also point out is this, Ubisoft is Nvidia's biggest partner with games and their general TWIMTBP program. What the hell are Nvidia doing, I don't care about some gameworks feature if the game runs so poorly that both AMD and Nvidia users have massive problems with the game.


There are few to no Gaming Evolved games that come out unplayable and more to the point even those with features AMD worked on like TressFX run very close to as well on Nvidia hardware as AMD hardware. There is no absolute gimping of performance for half the audience, there is no "we'll put this feature in and even our own users can suffer with 20FPS if they want to use it" crap. What are Nvidia playing at, bundle Watchdog with your graphics card you sell at a higher cost than AMD do for the same performance, watch the development process, watch Ubisoft remove higher graphical settings, watch them kill performance and watch them prepare to release a stuttering mess of a game and.... do nothing about it?

I'll go back to Stalker, a TWIMTBP game(I forget which one, 2 or 3 i'm talking about), it was a buggy, broken, crashing mess. Stalker dev's said Nvidia didn't want to know, they pushed Nvidia out and AMD stepped in, helped them fix the game and added DX11 to it.

I don't know if Ubisoft games would run better without gameworks crap tacked on top of them, maybe, maybe not, but I do know that Nvidia is partnered with them and watches them release these POS games without saying a word. They didn't say to their users or gamers in general that even though they've seen the game for months/years, it's going to be a stuttering mess on launch, they didn't use public pressure to get Ubisoft to release a better finished game or to optimise performance before release for say Unity for their own users let alone AMD users. What is the benefit of Nvidia being involved if they do absolutely nothing about the quality of games coming out of it's biggest gaming partner?
 
I am going to have to agree with you about the gameworks crap!
I also wondered, if it was removed, would they run better?

It seems every game it is added to, has problems.
Its a nice thing to have, if it worked ok.

It does run a lot better with the last patch, but now sli flickers!
 
I played it to death on a pair of Titans and 1.3 patch and thankfully, I got the game completed apart from the Unity companion missions (not playing games on my phone) and as the 1.4 patch came out, I thought I would give it another look..... Flickering textures and stutter of obscene proportions.

Good job Ubi :(

As for DM, you talk some crap. Many other games use GameWorks and run without problem... This is clearly a UBIsoft problem.
 
It is very much in the hands of society.


I remember when N64s WWF No Mercy had a save game fault. I'd imagine recalling every cartridge 2 weeks after first sale would have been extremely costly for THQ. Now it's just a case of rolling out a patch if and when you feel like it. No rush...

drunkenmaster said:
I don't know if Ubisoft games would run better without gameworks crap tacked on top of them, maybe, maybe not, but I do know that Nvidia is partnered with them and watches them release these POS games without saying a word. They didn't say to their users or gamers in general that even though they've seen the game for months/years, it's going to be a stuttering mess on launch, they didn't use public pressure to get Ubisoft to release a better finished game or to optimise performance before release for say Unity for their own users let alone AMD users. What is the benefit of Nvidia being involved if they do absolutely nothing about the quality of games coming out of it's biggest gaming partner?
Click to expand...

I've heard (from a reliable source) that Nvidia have ploughed what some might consider a sizeable amount into Ubisoft, GameWorks or otherwise. It's safe to say I think they've been taken for a ride. As above though I don't think for a second it's GW causing the performance problems. Stuttering seems to be a consistent issue with Ubisoft titles. I think someone just needs to sit them down and show them that given how widely spread the issues are from system to system that something is fundamentally wrong with their engines
 
Last edited:
Its lazy development and publisher greed that's at heart Imo, fire it out asap to cash in then try to fix things with umpteen patches. Take bf4, a gaming evolved title. Its just about payable now a year after release. A poor sign when they had to release the CTE to address issues that should have been fixed months ago. Bf3 was the same, yet backed by neither AMD or NVIDIA.
 
setter said:
Its lazy development and publisher greed that's at heart Imo, fire it out asap to cash in then try to fix things with umpteen patches. Take bf4, a gaming evolved title. Its just about payable now a year after release. A poor sign when they had to release the CTE to address issues that should have been fixed months ago. Bf3 was the same, yet backed by neither AMD or NVIDIA.
Click to expand...

Overstretched resources is probably another reason.
The market, by means of parting with their cash demand a game sequel a year.

It's a cash cow worth milking.
 
Yeah I think people aim their anger at the wrong people as developers get most of the brunt. It's the corporate types telling them it needs to be ready, and the hesitant socially inept (yet probably quite talented given the scope of the game) types not having the balls to say 100% no, it's not ready.


I had a tweet from Sebastian who is lead visual on Watch Dogs, that's LEAD visual. Saying "sorry I didn't work on the PC version". Helpful, so who did. It's also given certain comments from ex staff that it's not a very nice place to work for. An animator who's name escapes me made a comment recently about Ubisoft locking down all of the USB ports on their workstations to prevent data leaks. In fact they have their own department dedicated to-just-that. He's now one of the lead animators for Naughty Dog, so not just anyone.
 
Last edited:
Tonester0011 said:
4000 words later...

Seriously DM....if you can't cut down on the filler and make a more concise point, why will anyone take you seriously.
Click to expand...

I find it particularly funny that people who prefer to post 140 characters or less feel the need to identify themselves as such by rather than adding to the discussion, posting purely to have a go at those who do.

Take my post, I could have concisely said "don't pre-order Ubisoft games"... with no explanation. Some people may agree, others may go "du'h that's stupid, why wouldn't I". Thus I put some "filler" in there to explain why pre-ordering makes games worse and allows the company to push out game after game in the same way year after year with gamers not only accepting it but supporting and encouraging it.

If you want to read shorter posts, don't read mine, maybe stick to twitter. Your inability to cope with longer posts and actual discussion merely highlights you as someone I can't take seriously.
 
drunkenmaster said:
I find it particularly funny that people who prefer to post 140 characters or less feel the need to identify themselves as such by rather than adding to the discussion, posting purely to have a go at those who do.

Take my post, I could have concisely said "don't pre-order Ubisoft games"... with no explanation. Some people may agree, others may go "du'h that's stupid, why wouldn't I". Thus I put some "filler" in there to explain why pre-ordering makes games worse and allows the company to push out game after game in the same way year after year with gamers not only accepting it but supporting and encouraging it.

If you want to read shorter posts, don't read mine, maybe stick to twitter. Your inability to cope with longer posts and actual discussion merely highlights you as someone I can't take seriously.
Click to expand...

The fact that what people are complaining about has gone completely over your head basically sums it up quite nicely. Not everything is black and white. Nobody is asking you to use 140 characters. Just reduce your minimum to around 3,200 so that it doesn't come across as partially self indulgent and digress so much
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom