PDA

View Full Version : Why won't Ubisoft give us the love we deserve?



iN3krOiZ
09-01-2015, 12:33 AM
I'm so upset right now, i'm replaying all the Assassin's Creed, again, tho the first time in my "new" rig (has already 14 monthes now :|) and i'm not having such a great experience.

First in Ac1 i had to turn off v-sync on NVCP because otherwise some haystacks would be solid, the one that killed me a lot of times was the one that took you right to the bottom of masyaf to leave the city faster.

Then in Ac2 i couldn't play at 120 fps since the game was capped at 62 fps. Yet, i could have 120 hz, and so i could have my monitor strobbed so that it doesn't strain my eyes.

In AcR i had to disactivate all but one thread to play through the Shakulu's fight, because otherwise the game would crash, there i was playing with 24~50 fps when the rest of the game was 120 fps smooth.

In Ac3, well, first i had to force AF 16x and MSAA 4x in NVCP since the game implementation of MSAA was making characters clothing to flick a lot and i would bet the game was running on Bilinear or Trilinear filtering since textures were really blurry when looking at longer distances. First i thought the game had Depth Field activated but i couldn't find any option to desactivate it, even in the .ini file with the configuration. Well, even with AF 16x the game is still a bit blurry in the horizon compared to Anvil based Assassin's Creed game.

But this wasn't the worst problem that Ac3 had, the worst problem that i could have is that the game is so poorly coded that playing at 120 hz would make the game not to render physics based carts and carriages (the ones that are hard coded to be stationary have no problem).

Now, i wouldn't mind the glitch if i could still play the game, but there's one mission in sequence 3 that you must enter a cart in order to get past fort guards without being detected, imagine what, there was no cart ._.

So i had to force my monitor to 60 hz (since changing frequency in-game wouldn't change anything, lol) and play through that mission without strobbed backlight.

My eyes are now a bit of red because of the strain that this causes uppon them.

This is what i get from spending 1500 eur in my rig + 300 eur in my monitor + 80~100 eur for each assassin's creed (except Ac1, that was 10 eur), dayum the deluxes editions are expensive.

Broken games that can't handle V-Sync, Multicore and High Refresh Rates well even after up to 8 years after their release.

And there i was wondering why i never had a single glitch in any assassin's creed game until AcUnity, but then, that game was the first one i played with my new rig, while everyone was crying for the plenthora of bugs the games had. Now i understand that i was just a pleb wasting as little money as the console users on my old rig.

Is that how much Ubisoft despises us? Doesn't Ubisoft and Nvidia have a partnership with Nvidia Gameworks? Why don't they work with Nvidia to fix this problems instead of just promising without delivering for every new Assassin's Creed game?

Really, i'm not really buying more Ubisoft games until i start read people praising them for good ports. My experience with AcU was just so bad that it was the first and only assassin's creed game to date that i haven't finished, and replaying the old games just make me realize how ubisoft never really cared for those customers that are willing to pay for a good product.

strigoi1958
09-01-2015, 02:36 AM
Your problem is... expecting everything to revolve around you... rather than understand technology has moved on... 5 year old games have not... and not just Ubi games.

My old system with a gtx970 makes loads of my old favourite games unplayable unless I changed the settings... my skylake system and gtx980ti gets here this week.... ;) when ACR was made do you think the devs had any idea what a 6700k was ?

Trust me there are guys who make my pc system look pathetic with quad sli titans but they play games, so do I and so can you.

many games do not benefit any huge amount with HT turned on and in some cases it can cause problems.

Games developed and released this year have no idea what technology will be available in 5 years.... maybe 16k at 240hz with 128Gb gpu's. 24 core cpu's... or complete virtual reality suits... whatever the future holds... it might not run this years games as well as the equipment it is designed to run on now... and if it doesn't use 8 cores now it will not use 24 core then.

I run ALL games at 1920 x 1080p ALL with VSYNC on and I have never run any game maxed out that I am aware... I turn settings down or off to suit either myself or the game.... but then... I'm a gamer, I'm only interested in gaming and not all the nonsense FPS and settings... we can play smart and play... or just not play... that is why settings can be turned down and off... to make them compatible.

iN3krOiZ
09-01-2015, 03:19 AM
What new technology is causing the problem when everything that's making this awfull experience for me is old technology.

Multicore? Intel Core 2 Duo are from 2006, AC 1 is from 2007, and the game that forced me to disable all threads was revelations, from 2011. And no, it wasn't a hyperthreading issue, when i've read about disabling cores i've thinked it could be a HT issue so i disabled it and yet the game crashed anyway.

MSAA? I don't even know when it was developed, but man, even source engine shipped with it back in 2004 so yeah, it must be really old.

High refresh rate? I'm from the time when people played cs 1.3 in CRT monitors at 100 hz. It was like, back in 1999~2000 ?

AF 16x? Again, source engine shipped with it was in previous AC titles, what excuse is there to remove it from Ac3? It doesn't even hit perfomance at all.

And i don't know what are u even talking about being a gamer, if you were a gamer you'd want your games to work, not to be a bunch of poorly written codelines. I loved this series back when AcU was released, but if i can't enjoy the games because of compatibility erros with old and stablished technology, then i'll surely be upset with it.

PD: And Ac3 already crashed twice after i got past that mission in 60 hz. So awsome this experience :|

strigoi1958
09-01-2015, 11:32 AM
"new" technology... I put because you said you had a new pc 14 months old and it cost 1500 euros....

you said replaying... if you didn't have problems the first time you played and the only thing that has changed is a new pc... then it is obviously the new pc... or user error. it sounds as though you expect all games to fit your settings.... that is not how it works....

It sounds like you have got a 120hz monitor and feel "entitled" that all games should run at 120FPS and just because you can set AF and AA to ultra or high levels... does not mean that all games can use them or that all games require it...

If you are a gamer ... you'd adjust your system to the right settings and play the game....

People with vastly better and worse systems than your pc are playing these game without problem. If you are trying to use setting above those that the game uses or are not capable of adjusting settings to the right level... then we can help you set up your pc settings correctly. :D

iN3krOiZ
09-01-2015, 12:39 PM
It's not so much about running at 120 fps and more about having the monitor at 120 hz. It's not so much about the framerate and more about the strobbing backlight. Seriously, without it my eyes strain so much....

Anyway, i was the one to say that i wasn't asking for them to fix compability for new technology, i'm talking about years old technology that's breaking my game.

VSync, MSAA, lack of AF and high refresh rate.

Whatever, seems like talking in the game forum ain't the best idea, this is full of fanboys >_>

strigoi1958
09-01-2015, 01:22 PM
you didn't reply... did you play them the first time without problems ? if so then you have equipment or settings incompatible. if you didn't have strobing backlight the first time you played then your new monitor needs setting up correctly... many new monitors use anti flicker or pwm .... and don't suffer with strobing...if your monitor does not have this you need to go to the manufacturers forum and check which settings cure this for you... strobing backlight is a monitor based problem and not game related.
As for Fanboy I assume it was an attempt at an insult because you haven't had any reply that supports your mistaken idea that ubi are to blame for you changing your equipment and it not being set up properly... but I'll take it as a compliment ;) thanks.

iN3krOiZ
09-01-2015, 02:07 PM
Strobbing backlight is a feature to reduce motion blur and eye fatigue ._.

Ofc the new settings are incompatible, but these new settings are from long well stablished technologies that i couldn't or shouldn't use with my old rig.

I didn't use VSync cause i didn't have the hourse power needed to run the game over 60 fps, i didn't use MSAA cause it would hurt even further the framerate and i didn't use 120 hz because my monitor didn't support it.

It doesn't change the fact that all this technologies were well stablished years before Ac1 was released so all the games in the franchise should handle them properly.

It's not like i'm talking about old games like the older PoP games, i'm talking about 7th gen games.

They are to blame for not supporting this technologies.

strigoi1958
09-01-2015, 02:41 PM
I understand you feel upset and want to vent ... I did the same thing when I first came here.... I think I wrote 5 or 6 posts blaming ubi for everything... but when I thought about it ... I just wanted to get my frustration out.... and luckily the guys here understood that and didn't rant at me

It is great that you have all the AC games and have been replaying them... AC2 was impossible for me but still a good game but too difficult in the tombs for me to replay.

Ubi make their games to their own settings... same as other companies and just because a technology exists... it doesn't mean they have to make their games compatible. You sound as though you have thought very carefully about your system and spent money wisely on important items.... Ubi are not the only company to set their own boundaries... there are many games being released nowadays that are capped at 30fps so even a 60hz monitor is more than what is required :( I think there is a group on steam that doesn't really review games but just posts "30fps" on reviews or feedback now that steam does not state FPS... (I think Totalbiscuit the youtube reviewer may be something to do with the group) so it isn't so bad to play at 40 or 50 or 60 fps....

120hz and 144hz monitors are great for very fast action games like racing or cs.go but in stealth games it is not that important... use your system to benefit from the things capable of using the power... and use the settings to make games run at what is best for the game...

iN3krOiZ
09-01-2015, 02:54 PM
I just want them to pay more attention to this stuff in next games, i know they won't do anything about year old games now....

Anyway, as i said, the thing with 120 hz is that it enables the use of strobbing backlight, it would be less of an issue if the game was capped to 60 fps like Ac2 was instead of having bugged 120 fps, because even tho i had 62 fps in Ac2, my monitor was working the way it was intended to.

Ofc i used to play without strobbed backlight, but i also used to have an IPS panel, but playing with a TN panel without the strobbing just hurts my eyes.

For example, there's one memory in Ac3 that has 24 fps, and i don't really care, cause it's suprisingly smooth. It's the mission where juno speaks to connor and turns him into an eagle ;)

As for games that are capped at 30 fps, this issues are quite streamlined so i know about them before i buy the game, so i can AND decide not to buy these games. Not because i can't play at 30 fps, first time i played Ac3 it was at 26 fps, lol. But it's because i won't accept being treated like trash, even if i had my old rig, i would still not buy this games. That's my opinion on the matter >_>

strigoi1958
09-01-2015, 03:16 PM
It's possible that they might

I think a few companies are seeing the average gamer at 16 x 9 resolution so I think less resolution options are appearing in games and technology is pushing 1440p and 4k ... those normally have an impact on fps... and as such I think 120hz and 144hz may be not at the top of their list... even though 3d gaming needs it and 3d is huge in America.

I have often tried to decide between higher resolution and higher Hz/FPS ... and although dsr means I can generate a 4k image and downscale it to fit my 1080p it is not as clear as a 4k monitor... so the best option would be a 1440p at 144hz but at the moment they're too expensive... I limit my monitors to a 200 / 240 euro budget.... I would expect games to drop in FPS at 1440p by around 20 to 30% so any game that got 90fps would still get 60fps and any game I enjoyed at 60fps would be just as good at 45 fps or 90fps and bad games are bad even at 144fps.

I don't remember the Eagle sequence and I love ac3... is it in the DLC ? I really should buy the DLC and play it... my AC library could do with filling up a bit more

I always buy BENQ as they have flicker free and the TN monitors have the best 1ms response times for gaming.

Jessigirl2013
09-02-2015, 01:48 PM
I have to admit this thread is confusing?

So are you saying that older AC games work better on older hardware and worse on new?

Surely it would work at least the same or better ;)

jonathan7882
09-02-2015, 03:50 PM
I have to admit this thread is confusing?

So are you saying that older AC games work better on older hardware and worse on new?

Surely it would work at least the same or better ;)

Yeah I'm confused too. So far in my replay I havent had any real issues just the same texture bugs in ac2 that corrects if you turn of msaa.

strigoi1958
09-02-2015, 04:53 PM
The OP has upgraded his system and monitor and wants to replay all the AC games at maximum settings and 120 FPS ... He is saying as higher Hz/ FPS and nvidia options were available before these games were made... he should be able to run these games at his settings not at the settings used when Ubi released the game.

I'm saying... adjust the settings to play the game ... don't expect the game to run settings above those it is intended to use.

As Jonathon has pointed out... turning a setting off has fixed a problem...

For the OP just because options like msaa are available he wants to run them and doesn't want to turn them off to play. I understand it frustrates him having a good system that offers a performance more than some games can match ... but it is better to adjust the settings and play rather than not play.

jonathan7882
09-02-2015, 07:46 PM
@strigoi1958 I agree. You can't expect to run older games with current technology standards. If I did that I'd never play my older favorites. It'd be like playing KOTOR or KOTOR 2 and expecting smooth as silk gameplay, no jaggies etc...

Jessigirl2013
09-05-2015, 02:28 PM
Yeah... Isn't this point obvious.;)

But with newer hardware it cant be worse than older. Can it?

Mr_Shade
09-05-2015, 03:42 PM
Yeah... Isn't this point obvious.;)

But with newer hardware it cant be worse than older. Can it?

Yeap it can - new CPUs / Hardware and OS's can all affect games.. in very strange ways..

Some games are capped at 30 fps - and animation and physics are linked into that rate - so when you uncap and hit 200 fps - things can go very wrong..

If you ever tried running DOS games without emu's - it's 'fun' ;)

strigoi1958
09-05-2015, 04:27 PM
yes... over the many many years I have been gaming I have found a few games that have a special place in my favourites... 1 in particular was a star wars rogue squadron and my favourite part was mission 3 flying round the legs of an AT-AT firing a cable and tripping them up...(you must find it on youtube to see how far games graphics have leapt forward in 16 years) the last time I found it and installed it... it ran so fast it was unplayable... even a game I bought a few years ago I started to replay a few weeks ago and had to set all inputs to virtually nothing because the slightest twitch when driving made the car spin erratically... pc tech is racing forward and it means it is more important that we adjust our systems to suit games rather than vice versa.

I often see the people who want to "max out" every game but settings go in both directions for a reason... if not we'd only have 1 "max" ;)

jonathan7882
09-05-2015, 07:48 PM
yes... over the many many years I have been gaming I have found a few games that have a special place in my favourites... 1 in particular was a star wars rogue squadron and my favourite part was mission 3 flying round the legs of an AT-AT firing a cable and tripping them up...(you must find it on youtube to see how far games graphics have leapt forward in 16 years) the last time I found it and installed it... it ran so fast it was unplayable... even a game I bought a few years ago I started to replay a few weeks ago and had to set all inputs to virtually nothing because the slightest twitch when driving made the car spin erratically... pc tech is racing forward and it means it is more important that we adjust our systems to suit games rather than vice versa.

I often see the people who want to "max out" every game but settings go in both directions for a reason... if not we'd only have 1 "max" ;)

Yup. You can pretty much make most games work with a bit of tweaking. THat's what I do to avoid having 10 computers in my house lol.

Costanzafaust
09-11-2015, 04:58 AM
Sounds like you need to fiddle around with Nspector, it may not be able to solve any problems with a capped framerate, but I've been able to solve most graphical glitches in the AC games and many others by making a profile for the game and tweaking it as needed.