PDA

View Full Version : AC Unity Console Resolution



Valkyre4
08-22-2014, 10:52 AM
Good day to all.



Ubisoft during this year's E3 made a bold statement in regards to AC Unity and specifically that they are targeting 1080p and 60 fps. Yes "targeting" does not mean that you will actually get this performance.

One week ago though we had some troubling news in regards to console resolutions.

a) The first was that PS4 was listed (by mistake?) to be running in 720p in Pre-order page on PS store.If it is true it is going to be the first game to run in 720p for the console.
b) The second was a very vague statement by a senior producer in an interview by Jeux video:



"It depends what type of game you play, action/driving/fighting require high level of fps, action/adventure game don't, it is in general and it was in previous AC games 30fps, the AC standard, what we target for Unity. Resolution depends on the systems"

"So we won't see 1080p on consoles ?"

"No, depends on games, certain games are optimized for this, we prefer quality of pixels over quantity of pixels. Our bet on Unity the quality of the image, the rendering/finish, so we have what we call post-processing, lots of Anti-Aliasing, post-effects, nice particules effects, so it's expensive in term of ressources, we prefer quality over quantity"


Based on these 2 facts it seems the original target by Ubisoft seems way too optimistic.

I would like to know if we could have some idea as to where the consoles' versions resolutions numbers will be like. No need for statements, just want to know if 1080p is something that can still happen, or something that is out of the question.

Personally I would prefer if the game could hit 1080p and not so much about the 60 fps. Could we get the resolution that XBOX gamescom version was running on the floor at least?

PS: I am legitimately interested in consoles resolutions, dont turn this into PCmasterrace/consolepeasant or PS4/XBOXONE fanboy war thing please.

Fatal-Feit
08-22-2014, 10:54 AM
It would be nice if they gave console owners the option to go 720p 60fps, or 1080p 30fps. Personally, a fixed 30fps it totally playable for me. Resolution is where it matters most.

jayjay275
08-22-2014, 10:55 AM
1080p 30fps would suffice, nothing less. They could at least try to hit 60fps with 1080p resolution.

Fatal-Feit
08-22-2014, 10:58 AM
Personally I would prefer if the game could hit 1080p and not so much about the 60 fps. Could we get the resolution that XBOX gamescom version was running on the floor at least?

I forgot to mention, the Gamescom demo was on a PC that was on par with an Xbox One. The FPS had a few drops, but it was most certainly around 30fps and 1080p.

Valkyre4
08-22-2014, 11:26 AM
I forgot to mention, the Gamescom demo was on a PC that was on par with an Xbox One. The FPS had a few drops, but it was most certainly around 30fps and 1080p.

Do we have any Ubisoft confirmation that there is a playable version/demo of XBOXONE/PS4 that is running in 1080p?

Because those latest things (PS4 listed at 720p and producer claiming no 1080p on consoles) really make me worry in regards to the eventual resolution consoles will get.

Layytez
08-22-2014, 11:34 AM
If we are getting 720 i'm expecting at least 60fps....

Fatal-Feit
08-22-2014, 11:42 AM
Do we have any Ubisoft confirmation that there is a playable version/demo of XBOXONE/PS4 that is running in 1080p?

Because those latest things (PS4 listed at 720p and producer claiming no 1080p on consoles) really make me worry in regards to the eventual resolution consoles will get.

I couldn't say. But if it's anything like Black Flag, the X1 version might not be in 1080p.

wvstolzing
08-22-2014, 11:53 AM
I could have sworn that the PSN preorder page used to say 1080p; now I'm confused.

Valkyre4
08-22-2014, 11:56 AM
What I dont understand is the reasoning behind the E3 bold statement by Ubisoft.

I mean why even suggest you are targeting 1080p/60fps for what appears to be a graphically heavy open world next gen game, when in fact there is almost zero chance that you will deliver on this?

If PS4/XBOXONE versions end up 900p 30 fps (ala watchdogs) or even 720p 60 fps, there is going to be a backlash...

That is why I am asking if there can be any short of official response in regards to whether we could see 1080p 30 fps for Unity on consoles.

720p , be it 60 fps or not would be greatly disappointing for me at least.


I could have sworn that the PSN preorder page used to say 1080p; now I'm confused.

See here:

http://gamingbolt.com/assassins-creed-unity-may-run-at-720p-on-the-ps4

Fatal-Feit
08-22-2014, 12:04 PM
I found the video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49tN_PnpES8

wvstolzing
08-22-2014, 12:04 PM
That is why I am asking if there can be any short of official response in regards to whether we could see 1080p 30 fps for Unity on consoles.

720p , be it 60 fps or not would be greatly disappointing for me at least.


Same here.

But in any case: Screen resolution is *immediately* recognizable, unlike FPS; I don't think they'd want their 'totally next-gen new installment' to make less of an immediate impact on PS4, compared to the last cross-gen game, AC4, which did run at 1080p.

Which gives me some hope that the listing might be an error.

aL_____eX
08-22-2014, 12:33 PM
If the game only runs in 720p on PS4 (doesn't matter if 30 or 60fps), I'll cry.

Valkyre4
08-22-2014, 12:37 PM
If the game only runs in 720p on PS4 (doesn't matter if 30 or 60fps), I'll cry.

I think most of us will cry if AC Unity is 720p on consoles.

JustPlainQuirky
08-22-2014, 12:53 PM
As long as it doesn't run like powerpoint I'm good.

deskp
08-22-2014, 12:54 PM
I would rather have a lower resolution with all the cool efffects. insetad of havign a big reslotuion with few cool effects....

And I mean there are more options than just 720, 900, and 1080 they can use.


they shoyld not sacrifice cool stuff jsut to get 1080 or 60fps.

Valkyre4
08-22-2014, 01:25 PM
Every generation has to draw a line in respect to what is considered "standard".

Last gen 720p was considered the standard and the games that failed to meet that standard came to scrutiny. Now last gen, someone could also say "i want more effects", yet nobody released a 480p game just to increase effects. And I agree with that. There has to be a limit as to what you sacrifice and for what.

So if last gen 720p was considered "standard", how can we continue to accept this when we have much stronger machines this time around? I really find it difficult to accept playing a game in 720p. I think image quality is more important than a few extra blurry effects. And I hope that for both consoles, Ubisoft will be able (and should be able) to push for 1080p. I dont mind 30 fps. In a 3rd person action game I am fine with it.

wvstolzing
08-22-2014, 05:29 PM
People who use twitter to get in contact with developers----could you try to get some sort of confirmation about this?

SHADOWGARVIN
08-22-2014, 05:44 PM
I thought i read somewhere it would be 1080p on ps4. All the games i have played on ps4 so far have all been 1080p. Black Flag was 1080p on the Ps4. Why would AC unity be 720p?

AherasSTRG
08-22-2014, 05:48 PM
I thought i read somewhere it would be 1080p on ps4. All the games i have played on ps4 so far have all been 1080p. Why would AC unity be 720p?

You are an indie fan, aren't you?

Anyway. Parkouring in 30 FPS sucks. Just play AC2 on your PC. You 'll see the difference right away.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-22-2014, 05:52 PM
You are an indie fan, aren't you?

Anyway. Parkouring in 30 FPS sucks. Just play AC2 on your PC. You 'll see the difference right away.

Why??

I always play AC on the ps3 or 4, not pc.

AherasSTRG
08-22-2014, 05:58 PM
Why??

I always play AC on the ps3 or 4, not pc.

Cause there is a considerable (not the majority, but still) amount of titles that are not at 1080p. However, all Indie titles are indeed at 1080p.

Yeah, version doesn't matter. No PC vs Console argument here. Just saying that AC should tatget 60 FPS to give the parkour experience even more flow.

pacmanate
08-22-2014, 05:59 PM
900p 30fps on X1 and PS4. Calling it.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-22-2014, 06:15 PM
Cause there is a considerable (not the majority, but still) amount of titles that are not at 1080p. However, all Indie titles are indeed at 1080p.

Yeah, version doesn't matter. No PC vs Console argument here. Just saying that AC should tatget 60 FPS to give the parkour experience even more flow.

Ok, i didn't know that.

It would be strange if Black Flag was at 1080p, but Unity won't be. How many fps was black flag?

Fatal-Feit
08-22-2014, 06:25 PM
Ok, i didn't know that.

It would be strange if Black Flag was at 1080p, but Unity won't be. How many fps was black flag?

Black Flag was originally 900p, but was upscaled. And on both X1 and PS4, it was at a stable 30fps.

X1 is also 720p.

With Unity, I'm guessing that the X1 will be 720p 30fps, and PS4 is 900p/1080p 30fps. I can't imagine 60fps on either platform.

ze_topazio
08-22-2014, 06:42 PM
If I had to choose I would totally go for the 60 fps, at 60 fps the image quality looks better do to the almost lack of after images and motion blur, i think this is particular important when we are running around and moving the camera, I would like to properly see my surroundings, and of course the picture looks sharper do the larger quantity of frames.

http://i.imgur.com/xnGbDts.gif

http://elchapuzasinformatico.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/30-fps-vs-60-fps.jpg


http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2014/063/4/9/residentevil430fpsvs60fps2_by_teddyterror-d78y3ss.gif



https://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

AherasSTRG
08-22-2014, 07:23 PM
Now, imagine that the little ball up there is the Assassin free-running. For me, no amount of Global Illumination, Volumetric Fog TressFX or raw pixels is better than the actual smoothness 60 FPS can offer to rapid movements.

SlyTrooper
08-23-2014, 12:07 AM
I'm blind to these things, so I don't care :)

GoldenBoy9999
08-23-2014, 12:41 AM
I don't really know which one I want more. If it was 1080p 30fps or 720p 60fps I'd go with the latter. I'd rather have a super smooth assassin than a better resolution one. Although, I hope they can achieve both with the new hardware.

pacmanate
08-23-2014, 12:53 AM
Imo, a game like Assassins Creed needs a stable 30fps MINIMUM. This is why I hate AC3 on consoles. Worst frame rate EVER in an AC game.

But yeah, I expect 900p 30fps on both consoles.

Black Flag was upscaled to 1080p in the patch for PS4 but ACU's Paris is all Black Flags landmass in one map, expecting more than 900p is too high of hopes.

I just hope they don't mess up the framerate.

souNdwAve89
08-23-2014, 02:10 AM
Like others. I'm fine with a lowered resolution as long as the fps is higher than 30. Having a higher fps will make the gameplay much smoother especially when it comes to combat and parkour movements. But regardless, I'm fine with the standard that we've been getting so far since the games are still fun.

aL_____eX
08-23-2014, 02:46 AM
This is why I hate AC3 on consoles. Worst frame rate EVER in an AC game.
^ when ACIII was released I thought my old Fat Lady PS3 caused the bad framerate. Sometimes it's ridiculous, especially in chasing sequences with 10-15fps. Performance in this game is terrible.

Some of my experiences with PS4 games so far:

Killzone - pretty solid 1080p at 60fps with some minor framedrops in massive action moments.
ACIV - upscaled 1080p at 30fps without any problems
TLoU Remastered - pretty solid 1080p at 60fps with some framedrops in cutscenes, but smooth in actual gameplay

But then again there was Watch_Dogs - an open world game at least - which is running in mostly solid 900p/30fps and doesn't look nearly as brilliant as I expected.

Unity is definitely going to be beautiful no matter what. But how beatuiful will depend on Ubisoft being able to optimize the game's performance. My hope is that they know the new hardware better now then back when W_D (cross gen title) was developed. Maybe there's our chance to see a game which is running smooth in 1080p/60fps. Otherwise, like pacmanate said it will be something like 900p/60fps or 900p/30fps. Hmm... we'll see.

edit: Same hopes go for X1 players of course. #noconsolewar

Valkyre4
08-23-2014, 08:59 AM
Cause there is a considerable (not the majority, but still) amount of titles that are not at 1080p. However, all Indie titles are indeed at 1080p.Yeah, version doesn't matter. No PC vs Console argument here. Just saying that AC should tatget 60 FPS to give the parkour experience even more flow.Concerning PS4 there is no "considerable amount" of games that are not 1080p. Apart from 2 games, BF4 and Watchdogs (both 900p) everything else if IRC is running at full 1080p. Also ACIV was not "upscaled" it was running native, it was just released via patch because Ubi was tweaking gfx up to the release of the game. So I dont believe that it is not possible for both PS4 and ONE to display 1080p with some extra effort. Ubi has learned a lot about these systems this one year with multiple releases. Playing games in 720p should imho be stopped.

Sesheenku
08-23-2014, 10:19 AM
First lesson of console life, keep your old 720p tv kids.

RinoTheBouncer
08-23-2014, 10:57 AM
I really wish they do make it 1080p/60fps. Im well aware that it may not make that much of a difference but still when you get a new console or upgrade your PC for a certain generation of games, youd expect to enjoy the features you were told you can get. AC:Unity does look good, graphically but its not a playable CGI like the tech-demos show at the PS4 announcement events boasted about. So I wish we get as many improvements as possible.

Sesheenku
08-23-2014, 11:39 AM
I really wish they do make it 1080p/60fps. I’m well aware that it may not make that much of a difference but still when you get a new console or upgrade your PC for a certain generation of games, you’d expect to enjoy the features you were told you can get. AC:Unity does look good, graphically but it’s not a playable CGI like the tech-demos show at the PS4 announcement events boasted about. So I wish we get as many improvements as possible.

Well the PC version will have 1080p and possibly higher. They always do.

RinoTheBouncer
08-23-2014, 12:01 PM
Well the PC version will have 1080p and possibly higher. They always do.

Of course, but not everyone has a PC and PS4 is capable of handling that. However, they just give you excuses.

Sesheenku
08-23-2014, 12:05 PM
Of course, but not everyone has a PC and PS4 is capable of handling that. However, they just give you excuses.

Maybe it can but they're probably too lazy to optimize it properly. I imagine their global illumination is among the most costly effects for example and probably the one most in need of optimization.

Voyager456
08-23-2014, 02:21 PM
They can optimize as much as they can but 60 FPS with an open world game shooting for those visuals and 5000 npcs on the screen is too much for those poor 1.6ghz amd cpus in ps4\X1 unfortunately thats how it is.

Sesheenku
08-23-2014, 02:24 PM
They can optimize as much as they can but 60 FPS with an open world game shooting for those visuals and 5000 npcs on the screen is too much for those poor 1.6ghz amd cpus in ps4\X1 unfortunately thats how it is.

Difficult to say seeing as consoles share the GPU and CPU so closely that they actually are a bit more efficient than the sum of their parts.

Voyager456
08-23-2014, 02:35 PM
Difficult to say seeing as consoles share the GPU and CPU so closely that they actually are a bit more efficient than the sum of their parts.Well then we are going to just wait and see if thy manage to get 1080p 60 FPS on either of those consoles then ill consider them programing gods XD

AherasSTRG
08-23-2014, 03:04 PM
Well, tbh Sony advertised the PS4 as "capable of producing 1080p/60 FPS"... In that regard, they also advertised the PS3 as "capable of producing 1080i output"... And in the end, only 3 PS3 games ended up supporting 1080i...

Sesheenku
08-23-2014, 03:07 PM
Well then we are going to just wait and see if thy manage to get 1080p 60 FPS on either of those consoles then ill consider them programing gods XD

I would consider it them doing their jobs. Both companies already spent their time racking their brains trying to squeeze as much power as possible out of their stuff. I'll give them a bit of a break seeing as they started this game before they knew the specs and probably couldn't rewrite the whole thing by then. Still that could be solved by not aiming for ******ed annual releases.


Well, tbh Sony advertised the PS4 as "capable of producing 1080p/60 FPS"... In that regard, they also advertised the PS3 as "capable of producing 1080i output"... And in the end, only 3 PS3 games ended up supporting 1080i...

Probably just PR crap, telling you that it's capable of 1080 (it is) but not mentioning most games wouldn't be able to do it save for more linear ones.

AherasSTRG
08-23-2014, 03:12 PM
Probably just PR crap, telling you that it's capable of 1080 (it is) but not mentioning most games wouldn't be able to do it save for more linear ones.

Yeah, most probably. However, if MGSV ends up running at 1080p / 60FPS, well that would really be an achievement. With that said, no game released to this for the new consoles really pushes the boundaries of the previous gen.

YazX_
08-23-2014, 03:24 PM
from trailers and game play videos, the game is very very demanding, 3k NPCs are drawn on your screen at the same time, without mentioning graphical effects and other stuff, if Ubisoft could hit 1080/60 FPS, they would definitely do it, why not??

but sometimes there are hardware limitations, while next gen was great leap from previous gen, but its not as powerful as it should have been, MS/Sony had to limit the hardware to keep the prices down, otherwise it will cost you twice as much. However, i'm sure the developers will utilize the last drop from these next gen consoles and try to push the game to maximum limits with the provided hardware, so whether its 720/900/1080, you will get a very good experience.

Sesheenku
08-23-2014, 03:43 PM
from trailers and game play videos, the game is very very demanding, 3k NPCs are drawn on your screen at the same time, without mentioning graphical effects and other stuff, if Ubisoft could hit 1080/60 FPS, they would definitely do it, why not??

Not necessarily.

First off they aren't well acquainted with the tech yet, so they COULD but may not yet know how to.

Second every drop of work costs money, if they feel like it's not worth it to optimize further and there won't be too much backlash then they'll just forget it.

Third devs are getting lazier and are perfectly happy to throw partially complete buggy games out and patch them later... sometimes. There's no patch for AC4's ship bugs.


but sometimes there are hardware limitations, while next gen was great leap from previous gen, but its not as powerful as it should have been, MS/Sony had to limit the hardware to keep the prices down, otherwise it will cost you twice as much. However, i'm sure the developers will utilize the last drop from these next gen consoles and try to push the game to maximum limits with the provided hardware, so whether its 720/900/1080, you will get a very good experience.

Heh. These companies aren't idiots, profit is key, I can guarantee they're getting these parts at wholesale prices. Else they wouldn't be making a profit at 400 dollars. 400 dollars barely covers 8gb of GGDR5 friggin ram. Common high end GPU's are just pushing 4 gigs and only the absolute highest end have 6-12. They obviously have to make a profit. I can guarantee if you went out and bought the parts for a PS4 you'd spend at least 200 more dollars minimum. If it weren't for the downed economy people might accept paying more for a console. Hell in the 80's some consoles pushed past 700 dollars worth of money in todays dollar value. As it stands though, they know they'd just make the consumer mad during this time if they charged more.

If they did though you could get a bit more hardware. Consumers of course just want the lowest price. That's understandable but it has consequences.

Valkyre4
08-23-2014, 07:52 PM
I would consider it them doing their jobs. Both companies already spent their time racking their brains trying to squeeze as much power as possible out of their stuff. I'll give them a bit of a break seeing as they started this game before they knew the specs and probably couldn't rewrite the whole thing by then. Still that could be solved by not aiming for ******ed annual releases.



Probably just PR crap, telling you that it's capable of 1080 (it is) but not mentioning most games wouldn't be able to do it save for more linear ones.

Infamous Second Son is open world 1080p and runs at an average of 40-45 frames per second. And it has killer graphics pushes a crazy amount of polygons and a ton of effects.

Next gen machines are perfectly capable of 1080p. Sure not at the graphical fidelity of PCs , but devs should go for 1080p. And we are only in the beginning of learning what these consoles can do. Look at last gen. Look at Resistance 1 on PS3 and then look the Last of Us. You'd think you jumped a generation ahead. Look at COD2 on xbox360 and then look at Halo 4 and you also think you are playing in a different gen. consoles are closed systems and devs can find ways to squeeze extra horsepower with new levels of optimizations. Already we see crazy difference between launch games in PS4/One and latest titles.

YazX_
08-23-2014, 08:32 PM
Not necessarily.

First off they aren't well acquainted with the tech yet, so they COULD but may not yet know how to.

Second every drop of work costs money, if they feel like it's not worth it to optimize further and there won't be too much backlash then they'll just forget it.

Third devs are getting lazier and are perfectly happy to throw partially complete buggy games out and patch them later... sometimes. There's no patch for AC4's ship bugs.



Heh. These companies aren't idiots, profit is key, I can guarantee they're getting these parts at wholesale prices. Else they wouldn't be making a profit at 400 dollars. 400 dollars barely covers 8gb of GGDR5 friggin ram. Common high end GPU's are just pushing 4 gigs and only the absolute highest end have 6-12. They obviously have to make a profit. I can guarantee if you went out and bought the parts for a PS4 you'd spend at least 200 more dollars minimum. If it weren't for the downed economy people might accept paying more for a console. Hell in the 80's some consoles pushed past 700 dollars worth of money in todays dollar value. As it stands though, they know they'd just make the consumer mad during this time if they charged more.

If they did though you could get a bit more hardware. Consumers of course just want the lowest price. That's understandable but it has consequences.

well i'm afraid that i have to disagree, there is no new tech here, the hardware in next gen is not new, x86 architecture has been around for ages, same for DirectX and OpenGL, so actually its alot easier to get up and start coding for these consoles right away, the transition was very easy and fast. i'm afraid things will not get any better in future in terms of getting more familiar with the tech provided.

As far as getting individual parts will cost you 200$ more, i also have to disagree, you can build a PC with 500$ having better hardware or at least on par with next gen, there are plenty of YT videos using AMD CPUs/APUs and video cards similar or better than next gen hardware which cost around 500$. dont forget that MS/Sony have subscriptions and have some percentage on games' sales and those are the primary source of revenue.

However, i'm not saying its not possible to achieve 1080p with acceptable FPS, but sometimes devs cannot do miracles, they have to deal with the hardware they have, and i still believe if they can achieve 1080p/60 FPS, they would do it without holding back, if its not for players and being lazy as you said, it will be for marketing as it will make great point to market the game, so dont worry business will keep pushing towards 1080p/60 FPS.

Sesheenku
08-24-2014, 11:02 AM
Infamous Second Son is open world 1080p and runs at an average of 40-45 frames per second. And it has killer graphics pushes a crazy amount of polygons and a ton of effects.

Okay? And? It doesn't work like that. You have to compare the actual performance cost of shaders. Unities lighting alone is probably more costly compared to ISS. Their world is also smaller and less detailed.


Next gen machines are perfectly capable of 1080p. Sure not at the graphical fidelity of PCs , but devs should go for 1080p. And we are only in the beginning of learning what these consoles can do. Look at last gen. Look at Resistance 1 on PS3 and then look the Last of Us. You'd think you jumped a generation ahead. Look at COD2 on xbox360 and then look at Halo 4 and you also think you are playing in a different gen. consoles are closed systems and devs can find ways to squeeze extra horsepower with new levels of optimizations. Already we see crazy difference between launch games in PS4/One and latest titles.

Please tell me where I said the PS4 is incapable of 1080 p -.-. I'm talking strictly about Unity here, and the only thing stopping devs from getting 1080p is time. If they didn't force themselves into arbitrary release schedules than the morons would be able to hit 1080p.


well i'm afraid that i have to disagree, there is no new tech here, the hardware in next gen is not new, x86 architecture has been around for ages, same for DirectX and OpenGL, so actually its alot easier to get up and start coding for these consoles right away, the transition was very easy and fast. i'm afraid things will not get any better in future in terms of getting more familiar with the tech provided.

Familiar architecture doesn't mean instant familiarity... You DO realize that the way these consoles share data between their hardware is different from standard PC's right? Both systems use slightly different methods to do it too.

Do you think the consoles could work half as well as they do if they just stuffed old *** tech into it without further work? No. They must take steps to make data transfers between cpu gpu faster and do what they can with the RAM to maximize efficiency.

It's not really the same as just using x86 parts. Both companies have done different stuff.

Look here.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/154924-secrets-of-the-ps4-heavily-modified-radeon-supercharged-apu-design


As far as getting individual parts will cost you 200$ more, i also have to disagree, you can build a PC with 500$ having better hardware or at least on par with next gen, there are plenty of YT videos using AMD CPUs/APUs and video cards similar or better than next gen hardware which cost around 500$. dont forget that MS/Sony have subscriptions and have some percentage on games' sales and those are the primary source of revenue.

It would TECHNICALLY be more powerful BUT because of the work done on the console hardware it won't be anywhere near as efficient at gaming. Please a decent video card already costs 200 at LEAST then a decent i5 will cost you another 250.

You'll need at LEAST that to play games at acceptable frame rates. The power may be factually more but the console has had modifications done in order for the tech to do a better job than the standard parts.


However, i'm not saying its not possible to achieve 1080p with acceptable FPS, but sometimes devs cannot do miracles, they have to deal with the hardware they have, and i still believe if they can achieve 1080p/60 FPS, they would do it without holding back, if its not for players and being lazy as you said, it will be for marketing as it will make great point to market the game, so dont worry business will keep pushing towards 1080p/60 FPS.

I'm not worried. 1080p with 30fps should be perfectly doable.

Yeah because they'll get familiar with how the consoles modified their parts to make them more efficient at gaming than the standard parts.

Valkyre4
08-24-2014, 11:47 AM
Okay? And? It doesn't work like that. You have to compare the actual performance cost of shaders. Unities lighting alone is probably more costly compared to ISS. Their world is also smaller and less detailed.



Please tell me where I said the PS4 is incapable of 1080 p -.-. I'm talking strictly about Unity here, and the only thing stopping devs from getting 1080p is time. If they didn't force themselves into arbitrary release schedules than the morons would be able to hit 1080p.





The fact that you cannot understand how streaming works and how that makes the size of the game world almost irrelevant is enough to render the rest of your post inaccurate at best...

oh and how exactly do you know how less detailed is second son compared to AC Unity? Have you played it? Or are you judging everything by 3 youtube gameplay demos? Have you actually played second son? If AC Unity ends up 720p no matter its graphical fidelity , it is not going to be such an impressive feat compared to other games.

If Ubisoft needs to drop graphic fidelity to provide 1080p image quality , i am of the opinion to go for it. 720p is not excussable it is last gen and certainly i do not expect ubisoft to max out consoles... The same discussions were taking place when Watchdogs was to be released. A lot of people were claiming that Ubi maxed the next gen consoles and yet here we see AC Unity that is miles ahead of it. Now Unity has maxed next gen consoles.... Well you are about to be proven wrong when next AC gets released...

Jackdaw951
08-24-2014, 02:23 PM
Same here.

But in any case: Screen resolution is *immediately* recognizable, unlike FPS; I don't think they'd want their 'totally next-gen new installment' to make less of an immediate impact on PS4, compared to the last cross-gen game, AC4, which did run at 1080p.

Which gives me some hope that the listing might be an error.

It's immediately recognizable if you have the hardware, the proximity to it, and the sharpness of vision. The fact is that most console gamers play on TVs with panel resolutions like 1366x768, or they play across the room from a big set that they're not even sure how it's set up. The one thing that's always quickly recognizable on all HDTVs is the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps. 30 fps strobes each frame twice at you, leading to a jittery effect during the action. 60 fps is always smooth because it matches the refresh rate of the hardware. While TVs can do resolution scaling quite well, they can't handle temporal scaling well at all.

TLDR: I'm on the opposite side of this argument.

Jackdaw951
08-24-2014, 02:44 PM
from trailers and game play videos, the game is very very demanding, 3k NPCs are drawn on your screen at the same time, without mentioning graphical effects and other stuff, if Ubisoft could hit 1080/60 FPS, they would definitely do it, why not??

but sometimes there are hardware limitations, while next gen was great leap from previous gen, but its not as powerful as it should have been, MS/Sony had to limit the hardware to keep the prices down, otherwise it will cost you twice as much. However, i'm sure the developers will utilize the last drop from these next gen consoles and try to push the game to maximum limits with the provided hardware, so whether its 720/900/1080, you will get a very good experience.

Well, it's not as big of a leap as people intuitively expected, but there's a very good reason for that: diminishing returns. The fact is that Gen 7 can already do everything that's expected: large animated 3D worlds with a quality of looks that depends more on artistry than on technology, with more than enough detail to satisfy, with excellent control and with perfect sound. Gen 8 improves on the sharpness, the detail, and/or the smoothness. But there is no leap in fundamental capabilities. As long as we continue to game on flat screens in front of us with handheld controllers, we've pretty much solved all the basic problems, as of Gen 7. Tech thrills akin to a PlayStation 1 after an SNES are a thing of the past.

Sesheenku
08-24-2014, 10:34 PM
The fact that you cannot understand how streaming works and how that makes the size of the game world almost irrelevant is enough to render the rest of your post inaccurate at best...

Streaming what exactly? Are you talking about the article I posted? Otherwise I didn't mention anything about streaming. Size is never irrelevant.. If it was then there would be no need to have such things as LoD and limited draw distances.




oh and how exactly do you know how less detailed is second son compared to AC Unity? Have you played it? Or are you judging everything by 3 youtube gameplay demos? Have you actually played second son? If AC Unity ends up 720p no matter its graphical fidelity , it is not going to be such an impressive feat compared to other games.

Tell me what requires more to process, a simple modern square building or a gothic architecture structure with various highly detailed turrets and various bits and baubles. A typical building in Unity indeed has more detail than a typical ISS building, it's the nature of those times.

The most costly thing once again is shaders and I'm aware ISS has some very beautiful shaders that are clearly well done and surely aren't simplistic to run but their architecture tends to be more simplistic and thus that's less triangles drawn and less stress on the system. Then once again the map IS smaller. By a good deal I'd say. It's not unimpressive but it's a different scope. To say that the size of the world doesn't matter is madness. It does have an effect.


If Ubisoft needs to drop graphic fidelity to provide 1080p image quality , i am of the opinion to go for it. 720p is not excussable it is last gen and certainly i do not expect ubisoft to max out consoles... The same discussions were taking place when Watchdogs was to be released. A lot of people were claiming that Ubi maxed the next gen consoles and yet here we see AC Unity that is miles ahead of it. Now Unity has maxed next gen consoles.... Well you are about to be proven wrong when next AC gets released...

I never said Unity maxed anything, are you pulling **** out of your *** now? I just said devs are lazy and not used to the architecture. On top of that this is multi platform so they'll be even lazier.

ISS was specifically for PS4, they had 0 excuses not to hit 1080p.

wvstolzing
08-24-2014, 10:42 PM
ISS was specifically for PS4, they had 0 excuses not to hit 1080p.

And they had more time with the actual hardware than anyone else, I believe.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-24-2014, 11:29 PM
ISS wasn't 1080p? How much was it?

aL_____eX
08-24-2014, 11:31 PM
It was.

Fatal-Feit
08-24-2014, 11:35 PM
It was 1080p, 30fps.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-24-2014, 11:56 PM
Ok, I thought so. Thanks.

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 09:31 AM
Streaming what exactly? Are you talking about the article I posted? Otherwise I didn't mention anything about streaming. Size is never irrelevant.. If it was then there would be no need to have such things as LoD and limited draw distances.





Tell me what requires more to process, a simple modern square building or a gothic architecture structure with various highly detailed turrets and various bits and baubles. A typical building in Unity indeed has more detail than a typical ISS building, it's the nature of those times.

The most costly thing once again is shaders and I'm aware ISS has some very beautiful shaders that are clearly well done and surely aren't simplistic to run but their architecture tends to be more simplistic and thus that's less triangles drawn and less stress on the system. Then once again the map IS smaller. By a good deal I'd say. It's not unimpressive but it's a different scope. To say that the size of the world doesn't matter is madness. It does have an effect.



I never said Unity maxed anything, are you pulling **** out of your *** now? I just said devs are lazy and not used to the architecture. On top of that this is multi platform so they'll be even lazier.

ISS was specifically for PS4, they had 0 excuses not to hit 1080p.

First of all I will not report your behavior because I am giving you the benefit of doubt, since indeed it is not clear enough in my post.

So, to address that matter, note that my last paragraph was a general comment in regards to certain opinions that have been expressed here. And it was a simple statement that in my opinion next gen consoles have a lot to offer.

Now as for size of game world, it is almost irrelevant because of how streaming works. A game world is never fully loaded, but is streamlined as the player moves in said world. That is why you could have GTAV in PS360 and a lot of other games. It doesnt really matter if your game world is huge or just "big".

And I trully believe ACU can run in full 1080p for both consoles. If there needs to be sacrifices, sure I am willing to take them. Now if Ubisoft cant find a way for the game to look good and run in such resolution without looking like poo, then I believe its mostly their inability to use the hardware as they should.

Same happened last gen. Assassin's Creed 1 was supposed to be too much for PS360 to handle and yet we got games of the series much more beautiful/stable and big to prove this theory wrong.

I used ISS as an example that next gen consoles can perfectly do beautiful big open world games at 1080p and in fact ISS had an average framerate of almost 40. Not 30. (although you can cap it at 30)

Sesheenku
08-25-2014, 10:55 AM
First of all I will not report your behavior because I am giving you the benefit of doubt, since indeed it is not clear enough in my post.

So, to address that matter, note that my last paragraph was a general comment in regards to certain opinions that have been expressed here. And it was a simple statement that in my opinion next gen consoles have a lot to offer.

Ah, very well.


Now as for size of game world, it is almost irrelevant because of how streaming works. A game world is never fully loaded, but is streamlined as the player moves in said world. That is why you could have GTAV in PS360 and a lot of other games. It doesnt really matter if your game world is huge or just "big".

Nonsense. Yes the game world has a part of it not rendered until you get close to it, yes but it also has parts of it rendered in low detail as well. The very fact that they have to do this defeats the point of the world not affecting performance. The size always affects performance unless you literally don't draw anything outside the immediate vicinity. There's no way to get around it, these were invented to help alleviate some of the stress on the system, it's impossible to eliminate it all without constant pop in (like Watch Dogs street lights).


And I trully believe ACU can run in full 1080p for both consoles. If there needs to be sacrifices, sure I am willing to take them. Now if Ubisoft cant find a way for the game to look good and run in such resolution without looking like poo, then I believe its mostly their inability to use the hardware as they should.

I never even said it can't run at 1080p.... My argument has been that they are unwilling to put in the time and man power to make it so. If they didn't impose ridiculous time limits on themselves then they could take the time to optimize the code properly.


Same happened last gen. Assassin's Creed 1 was supposed to be too much for PS360 to handle and yet we got games of the series much more beautiful/stable and big to prove this theory wrong.

That was obviously a bunch of crap for marketing. Second off AC2 runs terrible on PS3 at least with constant frame drops below 30 so it definitely is incapable of running on PS3 at least. Never played the 360 version. Don't remember about AC1,it's been a LONG time since I played that on console and now I have the PC version so I can't test it.


I used ISS as an example that next gen consoles can perfectly do beautiful big open world games at 1080p and in fact ISS had an average framerate of almost 40. Not 30. (although you can cap it at 30)

The problem with this argument is that I never said you can't do 1080p... I'm a friggin game developer in training in college... I'm as much a PC nerd as most people here. I know they can do 1080p. I never ever said otherwise. I just said that they're unwilling to take the steps necessary due to the various reasons I've mentioned throughout my posts.

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 12:05 PM
^^ And hence my post efforts and thread are such, that perhaps make them to atleast try and do some of their original (and quite bold) statement justice.

Claiming target of 1080p/60fps and then delivering 720p is kind of a major disappointment.

Sesheenku
08-25-2014, 12:08 PM
^^ And hence my post efforts and thread are such, that perhaps make them to atleast try and do some of their original (and quite bold) statement justice.

Claiming target of 1080p/60fps and then delivering 720p is kind of a major disappointment.

It is but I personally expected no less from them. They've made a habit out of delivering us glitchy messes of games as of late as well as a plethora of performance issues. They're clearly too lazy to put in the last bit of effort to make it run the best on every platform involved.

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 12:20 PM
By the looks of it, XBOXONE beta build of the game, appears to be running in 792p resolution, like Watchdogs...

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=50676&page=169

Very disappointed if true. Ubisoft atleast shouldnt even been make statements like "targeting 1080p 60fps" when they are so far off from it. I mean seriously 2 months ago they trully believed 1080p/60fps was a a possibility, only to appear now with a 792p resolution? I dont get it.

I know it is a beta and it is not final, but damn...


It is but I personally expected no less from them. They've made a habit out of delivering us glitchy messes of games as of late as well as a plethora of performance issues. They're clearly too lazy to put in the last bit of effort to make it run the best on every platform involved.

Agreed. Not a first from them certainly. Yet, one cannot but hope, that fan backlash will have an effect with them, yet no. I guess they love downgrading their hype one way or another. And I dont get why.

wvstolzing
08-25-2014, 01:09 PM
By the looks of it, XBOXONE beta build of the game, appears to be running in 792p resolution, like Watchdogs...

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=50676&page=169

Very disappointed if true.

Not sure if this is relevant; but one of the longer videos that we shouldn't be talking about had an in-game date indication (as to exactly what unknown) of January 24th; the screens on the link above seem to be even older.

Mr_Shade
08-25-2014, 01:28 PM
Guys, Lets try not to start bickering..

Until the game is finished - any pre-views or 'beta' footage seen - will be old - and not optimised.


Many people were up in arms at AC4 on PS4 being less than 1080p due to previews and news sites saying it was going to be 900p



Lets not start burning the game based on speculation and rumours from sites and 'inside' posters.. lets wait and see what the final game is - before fighting over it.


If they can make everyone happy, they will - or try very, very hard to get there - since they know resolution is important to some.

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 01:47 PM
https://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8kn08YL571r9uqax.gif

I want my AC to be in 1080p Ubisoft! Better deliver...





Soooorry, game's gonna be good no matter what... even in 480p. :):o

edit: Seriously, the game IS going to be awesome, but 1080p with all the detail in Paris would be a dream come true. As long as the resolution doesn't cause bad performance and FPS drops I hope they decide to make it Full HD.

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 01:49 PM
If they can make everyone happy, they will - or try very, very hard to get there - since they know resolution is important to some.

Thing is, based on their recent history, I actually dont think that they consider resolution and IQ, all that important. I honestly hope I am wrong. And of course we are not burning the game, yes it is BETA code, but then again most latest info, points away from any kind of 1080p image quality, and 60 fps. But I would love to have some new info that will prove that Ubi delivered.

In any case I think everyone here loves the franchise. That is why we are eager to experience it the best way possible. :)

Mr_Shade
08-25-2014, 01:52 PM
Thing is, based on their recent history, I actually dont think that they consider resolution and IQ, all that important. I honestly hope I am wrong. And of course we are not burning the game, yes it is BETA code, but then again most latest info, points away from any kind of 1080p image quality, and 60 fps. But I would love to have some new info that will prove that Ubi delivered.

In any case I think everyone here loves the franchise. That is why we are eager to experience it the best way possible. :)

What makes you say that?

AC4 - was boosted from 900p to 1080p and new AA at release…


I'm not saying it may happen again - since they are not saying currently - however you shouldn't judge one game series on another.. different teams - different engines etc..


1080p/60 might be a little unrealistic - based on the other open world games available on PS4 [for example] - however I'm sure they want to make the game the best looking they can - why wouldn't they?

And again - older engines - might be able to get 1080p/60 - but each graphics engine has it's strengths - 500 to 1000 people in a crowd, will be taxing - but that's what both players and devs wanted.. a dense world..

We also have detailed interiors - which other games don't?

So, it's sometimes misleading to compare a game to another.. ;)

I have seen comments about ISS - yeah it's a good looking game - and that doesn't have that many people on the streets - so it's pushing things on the engine :)

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 01:55 PM
I'm not saying it may happen again - since they are not saying currently - however you shouldn't judge one game series on another.. different teams - different engines etc..


1080p/60 might be a little unrealistic - based on the other open world games available on PS4 [for example] - however I'm sure they want to make the game the best looking they can - why wouldn't they?
I hope you're right Mr_Shade.

For me 60fps aren't as important as the resolution IN SP because the resolution is always there even when sitting on a viewpoint and checking the landscape or not moving at all, that's where you definitely see the difference. 60fps would be good for parkour, but it worked fine in the past, so why shouldn't it work in Unity? Multiplayer is a whole different story, especially in FPS games.

wvstolzing
08-25-2014, 02:19 PM
The 720p 'debate' didn't start due to rumors or leaks, though; it started because of the official feature list on PSN's preorder page.

https://store.sonyentertainmentnetwork.com/#!/en-us/games/assassin%e2%80%99s-creed-unity/cid=UP0001-CUSA00663_00-AC4GAMEPS4000001

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 02:20 PM
What makes you say that?

AC4 - was boosted from 900p to 1080p and new AA at release…


I'm not saying it may happen again - since they are not saying currently - however you shouldn't judge one game series on another.. different teams - different engines etc..


1080p/60 might be a little unrealistic - based on the other open world games available on PS4 [for example] - however I'm sure they want to make the game the best looking they can - why wouldn't they?

And again - older engines - might be able to get 1080p/60 - but each graphics engine has it's strengths - 500 to 1000 people in a crowd, will be taxing - but that's what both players and devs wanted.. a dense world..

We also have detailed interiors - which other games don't?

So, it's sometimes misleading to compare a game to another.. ;)

I have seen comments about ISS - yeah it's a good looking game - and that doesn't have that many people on the streets - so it's pushing things on the engine :)

Agreed that different games means different teams etc.

The point of this thread is -as far as our ability as fans goes- to make sure that Ubisoft knows we expect big, because they made us expect big... And yes I know, most people will say, "they already know that" and I agree. But certain info that has come up lately, implies that 1080p is something we shouldnt be expecting, although the same people told us that it was their goal.

As a fan, I thought that there needs to be a place were we could make our opinion be heard in regards to resolution.

900p ACIV that got bumped up to 1080p for PS4 was a good sign. Although I remember reading that Ubisoft simply couldnt include the patch before release.

Do I certainly hope that the same happens with ACU? Of course and if this thread here and people opinions could lead to a 0.0010% difference on making the game better, then I will be happy. Because from the 720p listing on PSN, the 792p beta of the XBOXONE, there does seem to be a bit alarming.

I do not expect 1080p/60fps like Ubisoft claimed 2 months ago. I never did. But their statement made me atleast optimistic that the 1080p part will be met. 1080p 30 fps is perfect. Its not like we are asking the full package they promised, just one will suffice. :)

pacmanate
08-25-2014, 02:25 PM
The 720p 'debate' didn't start due to rumors or leaks, though; it started because of the official feature list on PSN's preorder page.

https://store.sonyentertainmentnetwork.com/#!/en-us/games/assassin’s-creed-unity/cid=UP0001-CUSA00663_00-AC4GAMEPS4000001

That and Microsofts page get things wrong a lot, I would never go there for official info.

RinoTheBouncer
08-25-2014, 02:30 PM
I think the more I look at these debates, the more I know I was right to ignore almost all rumors and info. about the games except for official theatrical trailers. It’s like every moment there’s a new piece of info. that is debated to death and then turns out to be false or something exciting that ends up not being part of the game, or just something that makes me less excited. I’m glad I decided to only watch official trailers, no gameplay and no interviews and just wait for the launch trailer and the final product.

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 02:32 PM
just wait for the launch trailer and the final product.
Yes and then we can finally hit this sh*t! I can't wait to play the game... everything looks perfect.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0c96Uz95mE

Mr_Shade
08-25-2014, 02:34 PM
That and Microsofts page get things wrong a lot, I would never go there for official info.

indeed...

RinoTheBouncer
08-25-2014, 02:39 PM
Yes and then we can finally hit this sh*t! I can't wait to play the game... everything looks perfect.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0c96Uz95mE

Yeah. I feel like expectations are what ruins an experience more than anything and those rumors and leaks contribute to raising or lowering expectations so much. I can’t wait to get the final product to enjoy it and judge it fairly.

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 02:42 PM
Yeah. I feel like expectations are what ruins an experience more than anything and those rumors and leaks contribute to raising or lowering expectations so much. I can’t wait to get the final product to enjoy it and judge it fairly.
Same like Watch_Dogs, it was hyped and it wasn't a letdown imo just couldn't withstand the hype. And it's a new franchise. The same thing isn't going to happen with AC, that's a fact. AC games always delivered, except ACIII which delivered only for 50% of us.

pacmanate
08-25-2014, 02:44 PM
Same like Watch_Dogs, it was hyped and it wasn't a letdown imo just couldn't withstand the hype. And it's a new franchise. The same thing isn't going to happen with AC, that's a fact. AC games always delivered, except ACIII which delivered only for 50% of us.

Im enjoying my second playthough of W_D now i have no hype for it.

Which is why I haven't read anything about ACU since E3, no articles, nothing. I'm going in dry.

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 02:49 PM
Guys, I dont think this thread here debates whether the game will be good or not...

It debates a specific technical part, mainly resolution. If the game ships in 720p or 1080p that wont change how the game plays, but how the game looks. Can a 720p game be great? Sure it can, it can be amazing. No one said otherwise.

But we are here to discuss technically how it will look better if it has a next gen resolution close to or exactly 1080p.

If 720p and 1080p is completely irrelevant to some people, while certainly a totally respectful opinion, at the same time I dont think its a thread that you could participate in ,no offense, since it is irrelevant to you. For everyone else who believes games this gen should push for more can debate this topic.

RinoTheBouncer
08-25-2014, 03:14 PM
Same like Watch_Dogs, it was hyped and it wasn't a letdown imo just couldn't withstand the hype. And it's a new franchise. The same thing isn't going to happen with AC, that's a fact. AC games always delivered, except ACIII which delivered only for 50% of us.

I loved ACIII. My only complaint about it was the ending of the modern day story. Everything was amazing in it, from Connor to the frontier to modern day missions to the story. It’s just the badly directed ending that was a huge disappointment for me. W_D is really good but my only complaint about it was that it wasn’t the modern day Assassin’s Creed we imagined it to be. It was more of a GTA as many said about it before it’s release yet I personally loved it more than GTA. The promotional campaign made it sound like hacking will be everything and it will be more story driven but in reality it was more about gangs and ghettos and the hacking was more of a gameplay mechanic than anything.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-25-2014, 03:16 PM
Guys, I dont think this thread here debates whether the game will be good or not...

It debates a specific technical part, mainly resolution. If the game ships in 720p or 1080p that wont change how the game plays, but how the game looks. Can a 720p game be great? Sure it can, it can be amazing. No one said otherwise.

But we are here to discuss technically how it will look better if it has a next gen resolution close to or exactly 1080p.

If 720p and 1080p is completely irrelevant to some people, while certainly a totally respectful opinion, at the same time I dont think its a thread that you could participate in ,no offense, since it is irrelevant to you. For everyone else who believes games this gen should push for more can debate this topic.

lol. Of course everyone could participate in this thread! Nobody knows what the final resolution will be. It's all speculation. Everyone can speculate. What do you think you're doing?

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 03:23 PM
I loved ACIII. My only complaint about it was the ending of the modern day story. Everything was amazing in it, from Connor to the frontier to modern day missions to the story. It’s just the badly directed ending that was a huge disappointment for me. W_D is really good but my only complaint about it was that it wasn’t the modern day Assassin’s Creed we imagined it to be. It was more of a GTA as many said about it before it’s release yet I personally loved it more than GTA. The promotional campaign made it sound like hacking will be everything and it will be more story driven but in reality it was more about gangs and ghettos and the hacking was more of a gameplay mechanic than anything.
So here's my opinion: From the technical aspects 1080p and even 60fps is possible on every platform, consoles included. But the questions are completely different, like is there enough time to achieve all this? Or do they even want to deliver 1080p (which isn't a real question of course)? What about the extra money that would be necessary? etc. etc.

It's not about the consoles not being able to run the game, imo it's all about not having the time to develop a game till its REAL end (not the end we get to see as gold status) because of Ubisoft's strict dev cycles. But that's not a Ubi exclusive problem. Time's runnign fast these days, people want to get entertained, companies try to achieve it - sometimes more and sometimes less successful.


Lesson: It's not about hardware, it's about time and money which has to be invested.


PS: Of course PS4 and X1 have their limits, but honestly? They aren't nearly pushed to the limits by now...


edit: One thing I forgot, of course it's also about how much companies want to give their customers but still keep them interested in future projects. if everything was perfect in Unity, why buy another game next year? It's hard, but it's business.

RinoTheBouncer
08-25-2014, 03:27 PM
PS: Of course PS4 and X1 have their limits, but honestly? They aren't nearly pushed to the limits by now...

That’s the best thing I’ve heard all day and I couldn’t agree more. We hear so many justifications about how PC is superior and how consoles are limited but are we really close to the limits of the PS4? I think we’re far from reaching half of it’s potential especially that game devs are still debating 1080p/60fps over graphics and textures or the other way rather than those being a given not an option.

With the announcement of next gen consoles, they said that it’ll be easier to develop games for next gen due to the advanced dev kits and the systems..etc. but until now, I can’t see a game that truly pushed the boundaries of what next gen should be like some tech demos presented whether it’s Quantic Dream’s Sorcerer tech demo or the breathtaking Agni’s Philosophy.

I know tech demos are different from full games but I think we’re still far from getting close to the creative brilliance of those tech demos and I’m not even talking about Assassin’s Creed but rather all games of the new gen., announced or released.

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 03:28 PM
lol. Of course everyone could participate in this thread! Nobody knows what the final resolution will be. It's all speculation. Everyone can speculate. What do you think you're doing?

Re-read my post, you completely missed the point. Some people dont care about what resolution comes with the game, if you read some posts here. others suggest that they dont even want to enter a hypothetical debate and will wait for the final game. So for them, I see no reason to come and post something that doesnt contribute something to the conversation in regards to game's resolution. If the topic is irrelevant to some, then why post?

Now if you want to discussion resolution and such, by all means you are more than welcome.

Sesheenku
08-25-2014, 03:30 PM
That’s the best thing I’ve heard all day and I couldn’t agree more. We hear so many justifications about how PC is superior and how consoles are limited but are we really close to the limits of the PS4? I think we’re far from reaching half of it’s potential especially that game devs are still debating 1080p/60fps over graphics and textures or the other way rather than those being a given not an option.

With the announcement of next gen consoles, they said that it’ll be easier to develop games for next gen due to the advanced dev kits and the systems..etc. but until now, I can’t see a game that truly pushed the boundaries of what next gen should be like some tech demos presented whether it’s Quantic Dream’s Sorcerer tech demo or the breathtaking Agni’s Philosophy.

I know tech demos are different from full games but I think we’re still far from getting close to the creative brilliance of those tech demos.

Of course it is. All tech is limited but you can't compare a top end PC to a console. Some PC gamers are already playing at 1440p.

We're not close to its limits yet but obviously PC will always be superior as long as consoles are cheaper and they will always be cheaper cause if they weren't nobody would bother with them.

RinoTheBouncer
08-25-2014, 03:33 PM
Of course it is. All tech is limited but you can't compare a top end PC to a console. Some PC gamers are already playing at 1440p.

We're not close to its limits yet but obviously PC will always be superior as long as consoles are cheaper and they will always be cheaper cause if they weren't nobody would bother with them.

I agree but I don’t personally play on consoles because they’re cheaper. I have a high-end computer, but I use Mac not Windows and I hate the idea of putting two operating systems on the same device. I used to play on PC when I first started gaming during the times of PSone but I ended up getting a PSone cause it was much more comfortable playing with a console where you just put the disc in and play without too much hassle.

But my main point here is that we’re not even close to reaching the limits of next gen consoles even when the PC is much more superior.

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 03:35 PM
Of course it is. All tech is limited but you can't compare a top end PC to a console. Some PC gamers are already playing at 1440p.

We're not close to its limits yet but obviously PC will always be superior as long as consoles are cheaper and they will always be cheaper cause if they weren't nobody would bother with them.
I have to admit you're right. PCs will always be more powerful than consoles, which are more comfortable on the other side. But that's not the point. It's all about companies that develop games and their own expectations like profit, winning new players, starting a new franchise. It's all about the decisions they make. The hardware is only subsidiary.

I bet 100 bucks, if Ubisoft took their time now to release the next AC in 2016 or even 17/18, it'd be a perfect optimized game with all beauty you can have (AA, textures, less pop-ins etc.) on all platforms. But that's not possible, not anymore at least!

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 03:42 PM
I dont know how old the XBOXONE Beta build video that circulated today, is but from the looks of it it had to be a quite old build. At least I hope it was. It had huge amounts of pop in and screen tearing and was running at around 792p resolution. In general the game looked quite rough, completely unoptimized. But the good news is Ubi went down and removed all videos, so hopefully this beta was quite old.

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 03:47 PM
I dont know how old the XBOXONE Beta build video that circulated today, is but from the looks of it it had to be a quite old build. At least I hope it was. It had huge amounts of pop in and screen tearing and was running at around 792p resolution. In general the game looked quite rough, completely unoptimized. But the good news is Ubi went down and removed all videos, so hopefully this beta was quite old.
I know it's a tabu, but sorry, you can't judge things by a crappy YouTube video. I'm out now, I made my point and start to believe Shade was right.

PS: Beta build is beta, with all its pro's and con's. That's how it always was.

Sesheenku
08-25-2014, 03:55 PM
I have to admit you're right. PCs will always be more powerful than consoles, which are more comfortable on the other side. But that's not the point. It's all about companies that develop games and their own expectations like profit, winning new players, starting a new franchise. It's all about the decisions they make. The hardware is only subsidiary.

I bet 100 bucks, if Ubisoft took their time now to release the next AC in 2016 or even 17/18, it'd be a perfect optimized game with all beauty you can have (AA, textures, less pop-ins etc.) on all platforms. But that's not possible, not anymore at least!

I already said a page back or so that the devs are the problem and not the machine.

aL_____eX
08-25-2014, 03:59 PM
I already said a page back or so that the devs are the problem and not the machine.
Sorry, looks like I missed that while browsing through every ongoing discussion.

wvstolzing
08-25-2014, 04:18 PM
That and Microsofts page get things wrong a lot, I would never go there for official info.


indeed...

That's good to hear! Thanks.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-25-2014, 08:20 PM
Re-read my post, you completely missed the point. Some people dont care about what resolution comes with the game, if you read some posts here. others suggest that they dont even want to enter a hypothetical debate and will wait for the final game. So for them, I see no reason to come and post something that doesnt contribute something to the conversation in regards to game's resolution. If the topic is irrelevant to some, then why post?

Now if you want to discussion resolution and such, by all means you are more than welcome.

I didn't miss the point. You clearly seem to think that people need your permission to post in this thread. You seem to think that you can decide what people can post in this thread. This notion is hirlarious!!

Valkyre4
08-25-2014, 08:38 PM
I didn't miss the point. You clearly seem to think that people need your permission to post in this thread. You seem to think that you can decide what people can post in this thread. This notion is hirlarious!!

Are you even remotely serious? Only thing i want is to stay ontopic... If people fill the thread with posts like "i dont care what the resolution is" that doesnt contribute anything to the debate. Enough with your hyperboling attitude of thinking stuff that arent there just to make an impression. Everybody is allowed to express their opinion as long as we stay on topic. What is wrong with that? Or is offtopic material ok to you? Perhaps people should talk about cars here as well so as not to be "deprived" of their right to speak... Jeez, I dont even know why i have to explain common logic...

With that said, i am glad to see that a lot of people do care about what we are going to get in terms of resolution. I hope ubi reflects upon such opinions and if they cant hit the target upon release, maybe consider a patch like they did with ACIV on PS4.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-25-2014, 08:49 PM
Are you even remotely serious? Only thing i want is to stay ontopic... If people fill the thread with posts like "i dont care what the resolution is" that doesnt contribute anything to the debate

That is not offtopic, they're just expressing their opinions. What's wrong with that? The thread is about the resolution. How is that derailing the thread? Because they don't share your opinion, they're derailing the thread? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Valkyre4
08-26-2014, 09:09 AM
That is not offtopic, they're just expressing their opinions. What's wrong with that? The thread is about the resolution. How is that derailing the thread? Because they don't share your opinion, they're derailing the thread? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

You completely misunderstood my intentions. People can express their opinions whether they prefer for example 720p 60 fps or 1080p 30 fps or anything else. People can debate whether 1080p is something devs should go for at the expense of a loss in graphical fidelity. People are free express whatever opinion they have, as long as they are interested in such a topic. If they dont care at all, what is the point? People already here expressed a lot of different opinions than mine, up to the point you came here with your conspiracy theories and completely messed the thread.

So please, lets move on and stop the offtopic bickering.

Mr_Shade
08-26-2014, 11:03 AM
A public thread, is just that Public..


Posts relating to the topic - which looking appears to be resolution - are all valid..


If people wish to post to say 'I'm not bothered' - thats just as valid as those posting '1080p or I'm not buying'


Since the game is still under development, the team are not discussing this yet, until its set in stone - so users are the only people able to post at present.



So, lets move on back to the topic..

RinoTheBouncer
08-26-2014, 03:20 PM
A public thread, is just that Public..


Posts relating to the topic - which looking appears to be resolution - are all valid..


If people wish to post to say 'I'm not bothered' - thats just as valid as those posting '1080p or I'm not buying'


Since the game is still under development, the team are not discussing this yet, until its set in stone - so users are the only people able to post at present.



So, lets move on back to the topic..

I know it’s still not finished and I know it may not be such a big problem to the majority and I won’t be crying about it either even though I had hoped that with this gen., 1080p/60 fps would be more of a given than a wish.

However, despite the game not being released yet but being this close to the release date, isn’t it probably that they have a plan or a decision about this matter? I mean it’s not like the game is finished October 27th and released October 28th.

Don’t mean to just say it for the sake of arguing but I’m pretty sure a vast development studio working on a big title like AC:U does plan ahead and by this time knows where the next step is and what’s possible or not possible.

jayjay275
08-26-2014, 04:02 PM
I'd rather have 1080p and 30fps than 900p and 60fps that drops.

SHADOWGARVIN
08-26-2014, 04:05 PM
I'd rather have 1080p and 30fps than 900p and 60fps that drops.

So would i.

aL_____eX
08-26-2014, 04:09 PM
I'd rather have 1080p and 30fps than 900p and 60fps that drops.
Dear Ubisoft,

I'm a little boy with not many wishes for christmas this year. But could you please make this happen?

Thanks in advance.

https://31.media.tumblr.com/16ec95c0e16a485f33a173d1aaad9707/tumblr_inline_mhq65r6x7e1qz4rgp.gif

dandins
08-26-2014, 07:38 PM
I just hope they dont cut down the graphics of one console version just to make the graphics identical to the other version. we all know that the ps4 delivers more graphic power and hopefully they use it for some graphical benefits. On the other hand I hope the use the specific benefits of the xbox one and make some use of their camera/speak controls.

Valkyre4
08-27-2014, 08:18 AM
I too would massively prefer 1080p and 30 fps (as long as it is a steady locked 30 fps) than any other format, be it 720p 60fps or 900p.

And would also love to see Ubi making it come true...