Jimquisition: Ubisoft Talks Bollocks About Framerate And Resolution

[+Asmodai MVC]

Except when computer hardware is concerned, using 100% of anything is a bad idea. You want to use as much as you need. Optimization is about efficiency, not using 100% reasources.

In games like AC you want to squeeze every bit of performance out of the hardware. No one cares if you write a super efficient game that does 640x480@10fps that uses very little CPU/GPU. If it's super efficient then push the resolution and framerate up as high as it can go on the given hardware. Use as close to 100% as you can.

So unless you really believe games should be using 100% GPU and CPU on anything they run on to be optimized, then my statement still stands.

I really believe games like AC should be using as close to 100% GPU and 100% CPU as they can get. Especially on consoles which have fixed hardware. If they are not they should increase the resolution and framerate AT LEAST until they hit the 1080p@60fps that the vast majority of the TVs they are connected to support. If they hit that and STILL have room then they might want to seriously consider adding more capabilities to the game (better AI, more effects, higher polygon models, etc.) until they do get as close to 100% CPU and GPU as they can get. Obviously 100% of both is an ideal and isn't going to happen EXACTLY every time but it's the target to strive for.

 

First of all, let me state that it's quite counterintuitive to begin facts with the statement "IF". In fact, by definition the world IF means there is a variable and thus it is not a fact. But I've already mentioned this on several occasions and you continue to state possibility as fact.

I was organizing my argument in the form of Propositional calculus. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such logic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_calculus

My "FACTS" are factual premises in my overall argument.

As you've numbered them Fact/Premise 1 and 3, taken together prove that the GPU is being underutilized. As do 2 and 4 when taken together. I'm sorry if you find propositional calculus counterintuitive. I find it the MOST intuitive way to explain something but perhaps that's just me.

1. Only if there was a way to more greatly use the GPU, and benefit from that usage. You cannot just say, "You aren't using enough, use more." when there isn't any other way to use it. I may have 30 muffins, but I can only eat 5 of them. Sure I've got room in my lungs but you can't breath muffin.

So you're saying there is no way a game that's running at 900p@30fps can possibly use more GPU? Is that seriously the point you are trying to make?

2. Except both consoles are "underutilizing" their GPU's, so the point is moot. If one glass is half full and the other is 3/4's full, they are both still not full.

The point is that you've repeatedly disputed my claim that they are underutilizing the PS4 hardware and the developer claims the PS4 CANT perform better. You've conveniently redefined uderutilize for your own purposes and even accused me of saying the developers are incompetent for having the audacity to say such a thing. At least now you seem to be admitting it IS being underutilized, that's progress.

As for your glass example if you have two different size glasses and when you put the same amount of liquid in both the smaller glass isn't full then you KNOW the larger glass is definitely not full. You're not even really trying to fill the second glass if you're making sure the first glass can hold the amount you're pouring. That's "parity" and again my point isn't even if that is good or bad so stop the straw man that's my point is parity is bad (that's a whole different discussion) My point is that Ubisoft isn't listing out the good explanations and benefits of parity, they are explicitly denying it has anything to do with AC: Unity performing the same on both consoles and that's one of the "bollocks" statements this thread is about.

[Emn1ty]

In games like AC you want to squeeze every bit of performance out of the hardware. No one cares if you write a super efficient game that does 640x480@10fps that uses very little CPU/GPU. If it's super efficient then push the resolution and framerate up as high as it can go on the given hardware. Use as close to 100% as you can.

I really believe games like AC should be using as close to 100% GPU and 100% CPU as they can get. Especially on consoles which have fixed hardware. If they are not they should increase the resolution and framerate AT LEAST until they hit the 1080p@60fps that the vast majority of the TVs they are connected to support. If they hit that and STILL have room then they might want to seriously consider adding more capabilities to the game (better AI, more effects, higher polygon models, etc.) until they do get as close to 100% CPU and GPU as they can get. Obviously 100% of both is an ideal and isn't going to happen EXACTLY every time but it's the target to strive for.

 

Yes, you want to squeeze out every bit of performance you can. That doesn't mean a game can always benefit from squeezing more out of it, nor is it always possible to squeeze more out of areas you are "underutilizing". You cannot put such arbitrary demands on a system, especially on a game that is multi-platform (even if some platforms have standardized hardware, they aren't standard between each other nor with the PC market). You are placing unrealistic expectations based on huge assumptions on what the game should be rather than looking at what the game is. 60fps isn't the end of the world, in fact I'd say (while objectively visually better, it's subjectively important to a gamer and to the genre of game). You can't just say 60fps or it's not optimized. That doesn't work out, and that is exactly what you're doing and conveniently ignoring the details to make it make sense.

 

 

I was organizing my argument in the form of Propositional calculus. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such logic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_calculus

My "FACTS" are factual premises in my overall argument.

As you've numbered them Fact/Premise 1 and 3, taken together prove that the GPU is being underutilized. As do 2 and 4 when taken together. I'm sorry if you find propositional calculus counterintuitive. I find it the MOST intuitive way to explain something but perhaps that's just me.

 

Mathmatics isn't a subjective subject, though. 1 - 3 don't prove anything unless you decide to ignore reality. The one where we have many variables which are unknown. You remember that in math class right? Problems with no solution or answer because there were too many unknown conditions? This is exactly what we have here, but instead you've decided to go ahead and solve the problem anyways. You are committing several fallacies here such as creating arbitrary associations and 'facts' which really have no relevance ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy - aka PS4 > X1, therefore PS4 ACU must be > X1 ACU). Just because you're using a mathematical argument doesn't make you any more right.

 

 

So you're saying there is no way a game that's running at 900p@30fps can possibly use more GPU? Is that seriously the point you are trying to make?

 

Strawman. What I'm saying here is that you can't request more from something that may or may not have a way to deliver it. You are demanding something that we don't actually know we can demand from them. Instead of trying to understand that my entire basis of this argument is that there are variables we do not know, you are ignoring parts and trying to paint a worse picture of my argument in an effort to devalue it.

 

Also, just using more is not a silver bullet, you've yet to prove it is so stop bringing it up like it will magically solve every problem. That doesn't mean I think it never will be useful, but I also am not going to assume that it will be the holy grail of game performance.

 

 

The point is that you've repeatedly disputed my claim that they are underutilizing the PS4 hardware and the developer claims the PS4 CANT perform better. You've conveniently redefined uderutilize for your own purposes and even accused me of saying the developers are incompetent for having the audacity to say such a thing. At least now you seem to be admitting it IS being underutilized, that's progress.

I accused you of thinking they were incompetent after several very deliberate accusations/judgements about how they made their game, and many other statements about how their game shouldn't be what it is and it should be different. Again, I'm not conveniently redefining a dictionary word. You've completely ignored what I said. I was attempting to put us on the same page, but you would rather become more hostile about it and throw out more "strawman" as you so love to state I'm doing. Unfortunately hypocrisy isn't a fallacy. That said, by your text book definition perhaps it is underutilized. But I'd like for you to acknowledge that just because they are not maxing the hardware does not mean the game is not optimized. But I doubt you will, you'll probably just gloss over that like you've already done.

 

 

 

As for your glass example if you have two different size glasses and when you put the same amount of liquid in both the smaller glass isn't full then you KNOW the larger glass is definitely not full. You're not even really trying to fill the second glass if you're making sure the first glass can hold the amount you're pouring. That's "parity" and again my point isn't even if that is good or bad so stop the straw man that's my point is parity is bad (that's a whole different discussion) My point is that Ubisoft isn't listing out the good explanations and benefits of parity, they are explicitly denying it has anything to do with AC: Unity performing the same on both consoles and that's one of the "bollocks" statements this thread is about.

 

I know what parity is, the difference here is regardless of a large/small glass both glasses are not full. So the size of the glass is irrelevant.

[soniqstylz]

Apparently, "cinematic" refers to FPS in the 20's.

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/PS4/comments/2ly5xt/the_framerate_in_acu_is_######ing_terrible/-

 

http://www.dealspwn.com/assassins-creed-unity-pretty-damn-choppy-ps4-185196

 

 

 

Even after playing for just under ten hours, (UPDATE: To be clear, this original report was written after installing the ~900MB patch) it's clear that there are some glaring technical issues with Assassin's Creed: Unity.

In terms of technical execution, the game is an utter shambles on PS4 -- I can't speak first-hand regarding other versions. Glitches abound, responsiveness is laughable, the context-sensitive detection areas around interactive objects like key mission items and reward chests are patchy and inconsistent. The crowds are impressive, the game does a fine job of creating a visually engaging representation of Paris, but the framerate is horrible. Lengthy jumps see Arno hang in the air, crippling slowdown is everywhere (especially if you get into cover), and although the free-running repertoire and animation sets have been massively expanded, its not uncommon to see the framerate juddering down below the 15 fps mark.

...

UPDATE: It seems as though there may be framerate issues across all platforms, with NowGamer reporting Xbox One issues as well:

"I would like to warn anyone thinking about buying this game,? said thewouldbeking. ?I got it with my Xbox bundle. I just started it, and it runs sub 30 frames per second constantly. I would advise to wait until its fixed or not buy it at all. It is practically unplayable.?

 

 

 

So much for crazy optimized.  At least there's the lighting tho!

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

The game looks a technical mess. NPC clipping/disappearing and other jank as well.

[Guest]

:laugh:

 

This game is a true next-gen mess.

[soniqstylz]

[vcfan]

yeah, the ps4 version was really held back, right? I wonder what this would look like in glorious 1080p :laugh: 
 

 

[Showan]

yeah, the ps4 version was really held back, right? I wonder what this would look like in glorious 1080p :laugh: 

 

 

 

 

Buy lots of videogames after selling the medallion for large sums of $$$  :/

 

Framerate does look horrid...

[soniqstylz]

Which all makes this article from yesterday even funnier:

 

http://www.worldsfactory.net/2014/11/11/ps4xb1-fully-harnessed-assassins-creed-unity-says-ubi

 

We really harnessed every ounce of power from both these consoles as much as we could. We could not have made this game on previous-generation consoles.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Which all makes this article from yesterday even funnier:

 

http://www.worldsfactory.net/2014/11/11/ps4xb1-fully-harnessed-assassins-creed-unity-says-ubi

 

 

lol. no.

 

The "micro"transactions in the game are hilarious as well. Right up to $99.

 

It's like Ubisoft wanted to do absolutely everything possible to ###### on this game, just to sell it in the millions and say ###### sells.

 

[eilegz]

and guess what happened, ubisoft really its creating debate on how this game run worse on ps4 and pc than xone...

 

with all reviews blasting the ac unity it seems that rogue its the better one this year, if last year its pirates this year its marines?

 

anyways dont buy any ac until it cost 20 dollars because this its getting worse every year

[spacer]

I'm looking forward to Jim's next video. The awful state of Ass Creed Unity and the ridiculous, anti-consumer review embargo from Ubisoft can only make for an entertaining Jimquisition.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I'm looking forward to Jim's next video. The awful state of Ass Creed Unity and the ridiculous, anti-consumer review embargo from Ubisoft can only make for an entertaining Jimquisition.

 

And microtransactions!

 

He will rip them a new one lol.

[soniqstylz]

[theyarecomingforyou]

It seems that both versions are extremely poorly optimised. It's one thing to have a 30fps cap but it's another entirely to have frequent, major drops to below 20fps. It seems that the XB1 version runs better, which suggests that the CPU could be the bottleneck (the XB1 having a marginally faster clockspeed) - I'd go as far as to say the PS4 version is unplayable. That said, it seems unlikely that the .15GHz difference is responsible for such a substantial difference in performance. Given that consoles have fixed specs it seems absurd for a major developer to design a game that substantially exceeds their capabilities. What's clear is that neither version is acceptable.

 

For what it's worth the situation doesn't look to be much better on PC, with reports of slowdowns on high-end systems. I'll know for myself when it's released here in a couple of days, as I got a copy of Assassin's Creed: Unity and Far Cry 4 with my new graphics cards (two GTX 970s).

[Guest]

with all reviews blasting the ac unity it seems that rogue its the better one this year,

 

Wait, what the hell. Are they releasing two games at the same time? -_-

[Guest]

...

 

Damn, awesome cinematic experience!

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

To the guy in the video.

 

Then go back to PC gaming and stop complaining about consoles. What an arrogant prick.

Oh and I'm a PC gamer but once in a while start up my PS to play FIFA. "Uhhh-ohhhh consoles can't keep up with PC's" - really? Is that even news anymore that he has to whine like a little "b" about it?

 

He is right on one thing tho, Ubisoft is known to make really bad ports but then go over and keep on bashing consoles for that, oh shut the **** up.

[Vandalsquad]

 

Multiplat running better on the One? What's going on here.

[compl3x]

I haven't bothered with the AC series since AC3, and I only played that because it was one of the free games in my PS+ sub. If I can get a cheap copy of that pirate one I might give it a whirl.

 

It's kind of a shame because I like the series, I think AC2 was one of the best games of its era.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Yeah I think the jokes on Ubisoft... maybe this would have worked if your game wasn't a technical mess

 

 

[Showan]

 

Yeah I think the jokes on Ubisoft... maybe this would have worked if your game wasn't a technical mess

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are there really faceless characters in the game... :blink:  :omg:  :blink:  :omg: 

 

Is there a sulfuric acid drinking contest in the game that melts faces off.... :woot:  :omg: 

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

I preordered Far Cry 4 about two weeks ago as I had just joined Best Buy's Gamers Club Unlocked thanks to an oversight in a promotion they ran. I now get 20% off video games and I had a $10 Reward Zone certificate that was expiring on the 20th of this month (was from Wolfenstein). I had no interest in support AC:Unity because of this whole fiasco (which was clearly the right decision), I also have no interest in MCC, and although I am interested in LBP 3, I am not interested enough to buy it at full price.

So the only other game I somewhat interested in was Far Cry 4, and now I am really regretting that decision.

I am going to Best Buy at lunch today to trade in COD:AW, so going to see what my options are.

 

I did wind up renting Unity from GameFly, it already shipped, so I will get to see first hand what a mess it actually is.

Ubisoft really has taken the crown from EA imho. The awful lack of any optimization for either console version is not even the biggest offender either, it is the microtransactions and forcing people to use a companion app. Combine them with the yearly releases that are clearly rushed and it no doubt shows their bottom line is money and not putting out quality games.

[Showan]

I preordered Far Cry 4 about two weeks ago as I had just joined Best Buy's Gamers Club Unlocked thanks to an oversight in a promotion they ran. I now get 20% off video games and I had a $10 Reward Zone certificate that was expiring on the 20th of this month (was from Wolfenstein). I had no interest in support AC:Unity because of this whole fiasco (which was clearly the right decision), I also have no interest in MCC, and although I am interested in LBP 3, I am not interested enough to buy it at full price.

So the only other game I somewhat interested in was Far Cry 4, and now I am really regretting that decision.

I am going to Best Buy at lunch today to trade in COD:AW, so going to see what my options are.

 

I did wind up renting Unity from GameFly, it already shipped, so I will get to see first hand what a mess it actually is.

Ubisoft really has taken the crown from EA imho. The awful lack of any optimization for either console version is not even the biggest offender either, it is the microtransactions and forcing people to use a companion app. Combine them with the yearly releases that are clearly rushed and it no doubt shows their bottom line is money and not putting out quality games.

 

 

I stopped buying Ubisoft games on release day.  Ubi games usually take a price cut before most others do.  So I tend to stay patient... and wait for a good price point before I pounce...

 

Never like AC games too much anyways...

[soniqstylz]

Wait, what the hell. Are they releasing two games at the same time? -_-

 

Yeah, Rogue came out on PS3/360 on Tuesday (NA), and if you liked Black Flag and Haythem Kenway in AC3, this is the game for you.