PDA

View Full Version : Assassin's Creed: Unity... The reason I won't support Assassin's Creed on PC anymore



TheDboy2012
02-20-2017, 05:53 AM
I've bought a lot of Assassin's Creed games on PC. I've brought Revelations, AC3 and AC4 on PC. AC3 and AC4 were unoptimized; but are still playable on my rig at 30fps; with most settings maxed out.

Before I talk any further; here are my specs...

CPU: i5 3570k
GPU: GTX 1050


When AC3 came out there were a lot of complaints about the bad optimization. But I can look past that, since AC3 is at least playable at console framerates on my rig. Even maxed out; it's still playable.

There were a lot of complaints about AC4 being unoptimized as well. But even though it's unoptimized; AC4 is still playable for me with most settings maxed out.

So I thought to myself "Hmm... I can max out AC4 at 30fps. So I should AT LEAST be able to get 30fps on low in Assassin's Creed Unity right?". WRONG.

In Assassin's Creed Unity I get drops below 30fps on the lowest settings. This is worse than playing the game on consoles.

Then it hit me; that Assassin's Creed games are always going to be unoptimized. With each new leap in graphics; the optimization in Assassin's Creed games will only get worse. I can max out AC4, but can't play Unity on low? Something's wrong there.

At the end of the day; I'm just finished supporting Assassin's Creed on PC. If I want to play Assassin's Creed; I'll play the console versions which I know will be properly optimized.

GhostAssassinLT
02-20-2017, 06:45 AM
Well, TheDboy2012, I just checked the system requirements for ACU and it says the minimum recommended GPU is a GTX 680, so I compared a GTX 680 with your GTX 1050 and guess what?
The GTX 680 is slightly better than your GTX 1050. Given that your GPU is slightly worse than the minimum recommended GPU it's no big shock that you're having problems with ACU.

Reasons to buy a GTX 680 vs a GTX 1050:


Higher memory bandwidth
192.3 GB/s
vs
112.1 GB/s
More than 70% higher memory bandwidth


Higher texture rate
128.8 GTexel/s
vs
54.2 GTexel/s
Around 2.5x higher texture rate


Better floating-point performance
3,090.4 GFLOPS
vs
1,733.1 GFLOPS
Around 80% better floating-point performance


Significantly more texture mapping units
128
vs
40
88 more texture mapping units


More shading units
1,536
vs
640
896 more shading units


Better cloud gate factor score
21.12
vs
19.92
More than 5% better cloud gate factor score


Slightly higher metro: last light framerate
49.8
vs
40
Around 25% higher metro: last light framerate



http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-680-vs-GeForce-GTX-1050

strigoi1958
02-20-2017, 02:16 PM
Well TheDboy2012 we cannot have huge leaps in game sizes, graphics and more demanding settings from AMD and Nvidia but still expect the games to run on old pc's. A lot of PC owners who struggle to play newer games usually say "but my pc runs this game and that game at these settings and I get xxFPS" that is no guarantee that any future games will run at a set figure.

Also others who's PC systems are not up to minimum spec scream "optimisation" believing it to be a magical way of making something that requires a lot of PC to run on an old PC.

Optimisation actually means that the game is designed to run smoothly on all systems from the minimum required spec and up.... there are ways around this because games are made for 1920 x 1080p and people lower their resolution to 1280 x 720p and games get more fps.

You know this already because, although you haven't posted in a few years ... all your previous posts are about wanting more FPS and thinking "optimisation" will make it happen, but that's not how it works sorry.

Your CPU (I had one) is good, it's above minimum but below recommended and your gpu is not bad but Unity is probably the most demanding AC game, it's huge, highly detailed with lots of npc's running around... (even syndicate is less demanding) and as your gpu is slightly under you should not expect a minimum 30FPS.

My PC cannot play games at 60 FPS in 4k resolution, I play in 2k with mixed settings and average 40 FPS but some games I get 19 FPS so I lower my resolution to 1080p if we want more FPS we must drop resolution. 720p is fine, try it and I doubt you will notice any difference except in the better performance :). I notice you mention Crysis 3 a few times in other posts... when the original Crysis came out, my PC like most people's PC's couldn't run it... it was 1 to 4 FPS... I had to wait 3 years until I had a PC powerful enough to play it, unfortunately as game development progresses, so must we... even console users are having to buy newer consoles more often nowadays so they are not a lot better off than us.

My PC
i7 6700k
16GB DDR4 ram @3000Mhz
M.2 drive (SSD chip)
3TB HDD
Palit GTX 1070 super jetstream 8GB overclocked
Asus ROG maximus ranger VIII mobo

And I never expect 60 fps in any game.

I posted a link on a thread once that showed a PC with 2 12GB titan X cards in SLI only getting 88 FPS in a batman game... If 2000 ($2400, €2500) worth of graphics cards can only get 88 FPS I'm happy with 30 to 40 FPS.

TheDboy2012
02-20-2017, 11:09 PM
Well, TheDboy2012, I just checked the system requirements for ACU and it says the minimum recommended GPU is a GTX 680, so I compared a GTX 680 with your GTX 1050 and guess what?
The GTX 680 is slightly better than your GTX 1050. Given that your GPU is slightly worse than the minimum recommended GPU it's no big shock that you're having problems with ACU.

Reasons to buy a GTX 680 vs a GTX 1050:


Higher memory bandwidth
192.3 GB/s
vs
112.1 GB/s
More than 70% higher memory bandwidth


Higher texture rate
128.8 GTexel/s
vs
54.2 GTexel/s
Around 2.5x higher texture rate


Better floating-point performance
3,090.4 GFLOPS
vs
1,733.1 GFLOPS
Around 80% better floating-point performance


Significantly more texture mapping units
128
vs
40
88 more texture mapping units


More shading units
1,536
vs
640
896 more shading units


Better cloud gate factor score
21.12
vs
19.92
More than 5% better cloud gate factor score


Slightly higher metro: last light framerate
49.8
vs
40
Around 25% higher metro: last light framerate



http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-680-vs-GeForce-GTX-1050
I understand the minimum requirements are a GTX 680. But that is still no excuse for the game to run at sub 30fps on the lowest settings. On this same setup I can play Assassin's Creed IV at 1080p with most of the settings maxed out and rarely drop below 30fps. Assassin's Creed Unity on low does not look better than AC4 maxed out. It makes no sense for me to not be able to maintain at least 30fps on low in ACU.

The PS4 and Xbox One versions run way better; even though they use inferior hardware. Why is that? Because the console versions are optimized. Other modern games run at 60fps on low to high settings. ACU drops below 30fps on LOW because it's unoptimized. If I set settings to ultra the game drops to 5fps. Not even Crysis 3 on Very High settings drops to 5fps on this setup.


Well TheDboy2012 we cannot have huge leaps in game sizes, graphics and more demanding settings from AMD and Nvidia but still expect the games to run on old pc's. A lot of PC owners who struggle to play newer games usually say "but my pc runs this game and that game at these settings and I get xxFPS" that is no guarantee that any future games will run at a set figure.

Also others who's PC systems are not up to minimum spec scream "optimisation" believing it to be a magical way of making something that requires a lot of PC to run on an old PC.

Optimisation actually means that the game is designed to run smoothly on all systems from the minimum required spec and up.... there are ways around this because games are made for 1920 x 1080p and people lower their resolution to 1280 x 720p and games get more fps.

You know this already because, although you haven't posted in a few years ... all your previous posts are about wanting more FPS and thinking "optimisation" will make it happen, but that's not how it works sorry.

Your CPU (I had one) is good, it's above minimum but below recommended and your gpu is not bad but Unity is probably the most demanding AC game, it's huge, highly detailed with lots of npc's running around... (even syndicate is less demanding) and as your gpu is slightly under you should not expect a minimum 30FPS.

My PC cannot play games at 60 FPS in 4k resolution, I play in 2k with mixed settings and average 40 FPS but some games I get 19 FPS so I lower my resolution to 1080p if we want more FPS we must drop resolution. 720p is fine, try it and I doubt you will notice any difference except in the better performance :). I notice you mention Crysis 3 a few times in other posts... when the original Crysis came out, my PC like most people's PC's couldn't run it... it was 1 to 4 FPS... I had to wait 3 years until I had a PC powerful enough to play it, unfortunately as game development progresses, so must we... even console users are having to buy newer consoles more often nowadays so they are not a lot better off than us.

My PC
i7 6700k
16GB DDR4 ram @3000Mhz
M.2 drive (SSD chip)
3TB HDD
Palit GTX 1070 super jetstream 8GB overclocked
Asus ROG maximus ranger VIII mobo

And I never expect 60 fps in any game.

I posted a link on a thread once that showed a PC with 2 12GB titan X cards in SLI only getting 88 FPS in a batman game... If 2000 ($2400, €2500) worth of graphics cards can only get 88 FPS I'm happy with 30 to 40 FPS.
I wouldn't consider my PC an old PC. The i5 processor runs well enough in 99% of games and the GTX 1050 is a fairly recent card.

The fact that the game requires a GTX 680 minimum tells you that it's unoptimized. Consoles that are way weaker than a GTX 680 can play this game on medium to high settings at a mostly stable 30fps. Even my GTX 1050 is more powerful than the PS4; yet can't handle this game at low settings at 30fps.

You use the excuse that ACU is demanding, but guess what? I can play other demanding games on high or ultra settings and not drop below 30fps. Battlefield 3 on the ultra preset is demanding but it never drops below 30fps. Tomb Raider 2013 on ultra settings is demanding; but never drops below 30fps. Crysis 3 is demanding and even on the very high preset doesn't go below 15fps. On the high setting in Crysis 3 AKA one of the most demanding games, I can maintain 30fps most of the time.

At the end of the day, ACU is unoptimized. It is the only modern game I've played where I can't get at least 30fps on minimum. Most next gen games run at 60fps on low or medium settings on this setup.

The console version can run at medium to high settings on an HD 7870 level GPU. Yet, a PC with a more modern GPU and a CPU with triple the clock speed can't run this game on low at 30fps? The game is unoptimized.

I'm not saying that I won't support Assassin's Creed anymore. No; I'm just saying I won't support Assassin's Creed on PC. Why buy a $400 GPU to play a game that a $300 console can play just fine at 30fps? Makes no sense.

strigoi1958
02-21-2017, 01:57 AM
The 3570K is 5 years old but it is a good cpu, I overclocked mine for a while... but there are other things to consider such as the speed of your HDD or even better an SSD.

I said Unity is the most demanding AC game so comparing it with AC4 is not relevant... all games are different regardless of whether they're made by the same company or are part of a series.

Games on consoles have an advantage... what works on one works on them all... so the games are designed to run on that system, PC owners are a huge mixture with almost every pc unique (because of peripherals, other software, viruses, malware, driver problems, AMD or Nvidia, 2 core, 4, 6 ,8 core cpu's sli, crossfire configuration, registry errors... a million problems that consoles do not have).

With a million different pc's it cannot be made to run on every single one at 1080p 60 fps... if it did why would anyone ever buy 1 titan x let alone 2? Game makers make games, they want to make the best game possible and sometimes that forces the requirements up high (like Crysis and Unity) Unity was a huge achievement and when it released it shocked many of us when we read the specs but that is because many of us presumed it was going to be slightly more demanding than AC4... But apart from the huge size and detail of Unity it had lots of npc's and entering buildings directly... other games have an animation or cutscene which allows our pc's to load in the graphics for the rooms, but in Unity we just jump in any door or window. Unity demands on our pc's are far more than AC4.

Consoles have been upgraded to the xbone and ps4 but now there is already the xbone s plus a newer version of Ps4 and 2 more in production so even console owners will need to upgrade to the ps5 or ps4 pro to get better graphics. AND there are backward compatibility problems so console users are having to keep the xbox 360's to play their older games that do not play on the xbone.... same with ps4 and ps3 games but consoles are the cheaper option for gaming...

As I said I have to lower resolution in some games to play them... ACU was a leap forward but it's just 1 game in the series. all the others you will be fine (also running an FPS counter, will affect the performance) so why not just change resolution for this one game? you'll probably be able to run it on very high or maybe ultra

This is in 720p and as you see, it looks and runs great, try it
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoMBG5mnPxc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoMBG5mnPxc)

Danteska_
02-21-2017, 03:13 AM
The PS4 and Xbox One versions run way better; even though they use inferior hardware.
They run better how? Console versions of ACU are capped to 900p and 30 fps, and they struggle to maintain 22-24 in the streets of Paris full of people. You can check any Digital Foundry ACU analysis vid on Youtube if you don't believe me.

Minimum requirements state GTX 680, a GPU that is equal to HD 7870 (which is sort of what the consoles use). So no, consoles are not

way weaker than a GTX 680

Minimum requirements also usually mean "this is what you'll need to be able to run the game on minimum settings at 30 fps and 1920x1080 resolution" (although it can also mean 720p30). You're trying to run this with a GPU that is like 20% worse than GTX 680 (* and **).
* - http://international.download.nvidia.com/webassets/en_US/shared/images/products/shared/lineup.png
** - http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/pdp/gtx-780-vs-gtx-680.png

Also, I'd like you to show us any kind of source or proof for your

The console version can run at medium to high settings
statement.


Am I saying with this message that the game is not unoptimized? I am not. It is unoptimized. But if you had a GPU that would meet the minimum requirements, you'd have your 30 fps. For now, I'd suggest you overclock your GTX 1050 to get the desired fps. ACU on low might not

look better than AC4 maxed out
but it is a game that has a lot more NPCs, uses fancier technologies and makes a lot more draws per call. And Nvidia GPUs overclock pretty nicely.