PDA

View Full Version : Game is extremely buggy, nearing unplayable.



thefawz
11-20-2012, 10:56 PM
I don't often complain about a game, but I figured that the only way they can know how bad things are is if people complain and make themselves heard.

I've been playing AC3 on PC and at first I was enthralled with the game. They took a lot of great approaches that make this game very enjoyable and unique.

My issue lies with how unstable the game game is. In the few hours I played I encountered dozens and dozens of bugs, some are simply small annoyances while others are game breaking. This is a major disappointment. I had head the console launch wasn't too great but that they had fixed a lot of issues with patches and that the PC version would get all the fixes that they had made. I guess it just goes to show how buggy the game was if it's still this bad after all those patches. I understand that a new engine comes at the cost of not being familiar with some of it's issues, but this is beyond frustrating.

To cite but a few issues my character often gets stuck between 2 pieces of geometry while in a mid-air jump animation. I remain stuck like that despite all I try to do and the only solution is to exit the animus or restart the game. There are also a number of random freezes and crashes (I have a very high end computer and maintain it very well.). Quite often NPC models will randomly disappear. Or during cutscenes when objects (Character models, trees) block the view and make things look weird. These are but a few of the issues I encountered and I must say I am very disappointed with the state of the game. I'm not talking about the design decisions (the lock picking system) or the rushed features (footprints only on the heaviest of snow) but about the actual quality and stability of the game.

Having worked in QA for a while right here in Montreal for some big publishers, I know that the problem most probably does not lie with the QA team but with the fact that most bugs got pushed aside as known shippables to release the game in a hurry so that they could make the release window. I really hope they continue releasing patches to fix these issues and that they learn from this not to rush a game and polish it properly. I've played all of the AC games and was generally pleased with the quality of the games, but with AC3 it has left me very displeased and I'm not sure I hold the AC series in such high esteem anymore.

I'm trying really hard to get past all the bugs and just enjoy the game (because it really is a great game) but everytime the experience is ruined by various bugs. How has everyone else's experience been with AC3?

MaceMagoo
11-20-2012, 11:00 PM
Hmmm, so after delaying for a month to 'optimise' you're saying it's not very erm, optimised?

As long as you Americans keep beta testing so it's good for us UK people I'm happy :)

x-Lyyr-x
11-20-2012, 11:17 PM
Yea... I dont want to be interrupted by bugs while im killing the new world order british empire...

MaceMagoo
11-20-2012, 11:21 PM
Or have the terrorist colonials affected by bugs either! Those pesky terrorists!

x-Lyyr-x
11-20-2012, 11:27 PM
Or have the terrorist colonials affected by bugs either! Those pesky terrorists!

I agree with that comment a 100% percent... */** was an inside job!

BzkGB
11-20-2012, 11:33 PM
Hmmm, so after delaying for a month to 'optimise' you're saying it's not very erm, optimised?

As long as you Americans keep beta testing so it's good for us UK people I'm happy :)

From what I've been reading I doubt there's anything that can fix AC3 before it hits UK shelves, mate. We're screwed :<

DamageIncM
11-20-2012, 11:48 PM
Of course that it doesn't have bugs and such is important.
But on top of that, what's also important; How is the optimization and how are the controls?

I mean, the terrible mouse-acceleration in "ACII" makes it unplayable. Only because I found out a trick it's only just playable.
Besides that, it has terrible optimization, causing sudden framerate-drops and many stutters and such things.
Both of these issues were absent in the first game. It controlled almost perfectly, loved to run around in the world.
And also the game's performance was excellent and it looked better than "ACII" as well.

Clearly, after reading many technical complains about "ACIII" as well, somehow the bar for quality isn't that high anymore.
I'm not sure if they started aiming at consoles more after the first Assassin's Creed or what. But it just stinks.

If there aren't any actual fixes for these issues, including the ones I mentioned (unless they're not there in "ACIII" ofcourse), I'm not paying a cent.
And I'm not just saying that. Because this means you're delivering a broken product Ubisoft, and it makes the game less enjoyable.
I don't understand what kind of quality-testing this gets when there are so many complaints.
Does the quality-team go like "Whatever, it's fine, ship it."?

You should take example from Naughty Dog or something, Ubisoft, because they know how to deliver quality.
If you'd do nearly as well, I wouldn't even care if you decided to not even release for PC anymore.
I'm mainly a PC-player, but I would almost give it up and choose for console-exclusivity if I get such quality (as 'Uncharted') in return.
That's one of the only times in recent years that I've really felt like I played something not broken and of pure quality.
Games are NOT moving forward for the most part, especially for the PC-titles, that get crap ports, like "ACII" and "GTAIV".
Which is very sad... Shouldn't be the case when you have the technology to do something great...

MaceMagoo
11-21-2012, 10:37 AM
Of course that it doesn't have bugs and such is important.
But on top of that, what's also important; How is the optimization and how are the controls?

I mean, the terrible mouse-acceleration in "ACII" makes it unplayable. Only because I found out a trick it's only just playable.
Besides that, it has terrible optimization, causing sudden framerate-drops and many stutters and such things.
Both of these issues were absent in the first game. It controlled almost perfectly, loved to run around in the world.
And also the game's performance was excellent and it looked better than "ACII" as well.

Clearly, after reading many technical complains about "ACIII" as well, somehow the bar for quality isn't that high anymore.
I'm not sure if they started aiming at consoles more after the first Assassin's Creed or what. But it just stinks.

If there aren't any actual fixes for these issues, including the ones I mentioned (unless they're not there in "ACIII" ofcourse), I'm not paying a cent.
And I'm not just saying that. Because this means you're delivering a broken product Ubisoft, and it makes the game less enjoyable.
I don't understand what kind of quality-testing this gets when there are so many complaints.
Does the quality-team go like "Whatever, it's fine, ship it."?

You should take example from Naughty Dog or something, Ubisoft, because they know how to deliver quality.
If you'd do nearly as well, I wouldn't even care if you decided to not even release for PC anymore.
I'm mainly a PC-player, but I would almost give it up and choose for console-exclusivity if I get such quality (as 'Uncharted') in return.
That's one of the only times in recent years that I've really felt like I played something not broken and of pure quality.
Games are NOT moving forward for the most part, especially for the PC-titles, that get crap ports, like "ACII" and "GTAIV".
Which is very sad... Shouldn't be the case when you have the technology to do something great...

There was nothing wrong with my AC2, plays perfectly well. In fact every AC game has run fantastic from launch...