[QUOTE=ZeMole;46477584]Rip my dreams of playing this with Les Miserables blasting in the background (and signing along...)[/QUOTE]
[t]https://i.imgur.com/JOMCbUq.jpg[/t]
At least someone at Ubisoft loves their job.
[QUOTE=Daemon White;46477491]Not until I get another good 3D Rayman game.[/QUOTE]
With the way Ubisoft is going, That's never going to happen.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;46477691]With the way Ubisoft is going, That's never going to happen.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately.... But at least Rayman 2 is on sale at GoG, so there's that at least.
[QUOTE=Daemon White;46477491]Not until I get another good 3D Rayman game.[/QUOTE]
Oh my god I want a sequel for 3!
I love origins/legend but I want to see more of the old, more serious in tone stories
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;46477679][t]https://i.imgur.com/JOMCbUq.jpg[/t]
At least someone at Ubisoft loves their job.[/QUOTE]
Far Cry 3 has the same feature, I think it's the same guy writing descriptions :v:
[img]http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/186ma8q6xwc13jpg.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/186ma88fsa86ajpg.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/186ma8aeuza1zjpg.jpg[/img]
Whoever that guy is, he isn't getting paid enough.
[QUOTE=Saxon;46477456]Its not like that talent pool is that bad anyway so I wonder what the issue is.[/QUOTE]
money
it's aaaaall about money
ubisoft has managed to create a situation in which people continue to make their games best-sellers despite them being extremely average
thusly they know they can make a sloppy unfinished product and still make a fat wad of green
Ubisoft had solid fucking gold in their hands, too. Watch Dogs, Black Flag, Mighty Quest for Epic Loot was even looking great until they RUINED it, This new AC, Siege and Division are upcoming. And they said fuck optimizing, we're not wasting time or money on that shit, this needs to be out TODAY. And we're also going to make sure our word is the only word you hear about until after these games release so that we maximize our day one sales, because WE KNOW that these games are not up to scratch
Ubisoft has decided, officially, that a few extra dollars is worth more than their reputation
The worst part is, children with mommy's credit card that don't know the value of a dollar because they only ever have to buy lunch at school with it enables this shit, because it's them that pre-order and buy on day one, and can't wait a couple days. Now I don't have anything against pre-ordering if you've played a demo of the game first, or watched a plethora of TB-esque videos on the game before it comes out. But doing it based on marketing from the publisher is insane
if I ran a company like Ubisoft, Embargoes a week or two in advance of a game's release date is when they would be lifted. There would be a playable demo or trial of every game's Gone Gold final build. It might take more effort and cost some sales, but shit, if you know that what you make is going to be available to be scrutinized by everyone before it's released, you're damn well going to be sure some fucking Q&A goes into it first, aren't you? That's going to produce better games, and it's going to make happier customers
[QUOTE=Crimor;46477986]Whoever that guy is, he isn't getting paid enough.[/QUOTE]
There always seems to be one self aware guy at Ubi. Like in AC4 there's a reference to connor being too stoic to be interesting for an audience, somewhere.
Also Far Cry 3 is golden. I loved as well in universe you got to meet the guy writing your descriptions.
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;46476424]I'm not sure if TB really understands why this game is poorly optimized. He seems to think that his hardware isn't enough, when in reality, it's Ubisoft's shitty coding that doesn't use the hardware in the right way that is the source of the problem, and has been this way since at least AC3. Every Ubisoft game since then uses 100% of one CPU core and then 15-30% of all of the others, when it should be high, equal numbers for each available core on your processor. Lots of people also noticed that recent Ubisoft games don't even touch 100% GPU usage in certain situations, when it should be at 100% until you close the game. It's like they built their engine to run on hardware that doesn't exist in this dimensional plane or something.
When he mentions the usage of SLI (and the fact that he actually bought a Haswell-E CPU, holy shit what a waste of cash aaa), I just started shaking my head. Of course it's going to have problems in some games, because not every game out on the market is optimized to handle more than one GPU working to produce the images on your screen (and Unity was just released too, I seriously doubt there is going to be day-one SLI compatibility). Ubisoft games are notorious for scaling poorly with SLI as well, such as Watch_Dogs actually [I]losing[/I] performance exponentially when using three or four graphics cards at once. The rest of the video is decent, but I get the feeling he doesn't really understand why the game runs so poorly.[/QUOTE]
TB stresses that stuff to put into perspective what is needed to play the game like it should be. If a 5930k and dual 980's don't do 1080p60, then you'd best be ready to drop your settings quite low to play it.
I will say though I hate this notion of "ugh it doesn't do 60fps on PC's?!?!" When there is so much to it than just "y dont devs make 60 fp"
[QUOTE=Brt5470;46478111]TB stresses that stuff to put into perspective what is needed to play the game like it should be. If a 5930k and dual 980's don't do 1080p60, then you'd best be ready to drop your settings quite low to play it.
I will say though I hate this notion of "ugh it doesn't do 60fps on PC's?!?!" When there is so much to it than just "y dont devs make 60 fp"[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I think the amount of people in the crowd is frankly amazing. Still sounds like it's horribly optimized, but the setting looks amazing.
I haven't played Assassin's before, so it's not like I'm tired of the formula - if this gets patched to the point of "definitely playable", I might pick it up. There are too few games that take place in this time period (or really in any time period before the 1930's).
[editline]13th November 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=RichyZ;46478119]tbh ac4's pirate combat shit got old pretty fast on a second playthrough or long enough on the first, i could see why they'd make 2 separate games each focusing on separate parts of the game to improve them (unity, rogue)[/QUOTE]
I love how the people just yelled and applauded when you boarded the ship. Pretty enthusiastic people. The ships were also basically motor boats with immidiate acceleration.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;46478111]TB stresses that stuff to put into perspective what is needed to play the game like it should be. If a 5930k and dual 980's don't do 1080p60, then you'd best be ready to drop your settings quite low to play it.
I will say though I hate this notion of "ugh it doesn't do 60fps on PC's?!?!" When there is so much to it than just "y dont devs make 60 fp"[/QUOTE]
I understand that perfectly, but the way he talks about how his hardware isn't "up to scratch", isn't true. His processor and graphics card aren't the problem (but I'm still on the fence about SLI, Ubisoft games have always been a little weird with it), it's the game's coding that's the problem because it doesn't utilize his hardware in the right way.
What's wrong with the animations? There's no weight behind them, it looks like the player just floats from jump to jump.
Thanks TB, ya saved me $70!
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;46478417]Yeah, I think the amount of people in the crowd is frankly amazing. Still sounds like it's horribly optimized, but the setting looks amazing.
I haven't played Assassin's before, so it's not like I'm tired of the formula - if this gets patched to the point of "definitely playable", I might pick it up. There are too few games that take place in this time period (or really in any time period before the 1930's).
[editline]13th November 2014[/editline]
I love how the people just yelled and applauded when you boarded the ship. Pretty enthusiastic people. [B]The ships were also basically motor boats with immidiate acceleration.[/B][/QUOTE]
yes, lets spend literally months sailing to each port, that would make it great.
[QUOTE=ijyt;46479185]What's wrong with the animations? There's no weight behind them, it looks like the player just floats from jump to jump.[/QUOTE]
I do not know why but after Brotherhood I feel like most animations got worse. I always loved the smoothness of movement and combat in Assassins Creed. But with Revelations the animations started to get worse and more ridiculous, tons of clipping errors and often the sound does not even synchronizes properly. It just not looks as smooth anymore and the feeling is just off. I thought it was absolutely horrible in Black Flag, sure the naval combat is nice but the movement and combat took many steps backwards.
Also I do not get how people never talk much about this, I do not know why. Perhaps because I always enjoyed the combat so much and notice any kind of difference pretty fast.
What bothers me the most is that these games have so much potential, but nay they just have to rush them out instead of letting the devs take their time.
It's a shame really.
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;46478938]I understand that perfectly, but the way he talks about how his hardware isn't "up to scratch", isn't true. His processor and graphics card aren't the problem (but I'm still on the fence about SLI, Ubisoft games have always been a little weird with it), it's the game's coding that's the problem because it doesn't utilize his hardware in the right way.[/QUOTE]
I feel like after all this time that I know TB on some level.
And he's not really being serious. He's pointing out if you wanted to play it like Ubisoft advertises, you'd need an astronomical machine due to how badly the game is optimized. He's not saying his hardware is the problem. He's saying the fact that his hardware isn't managing it... is the problem.
I think we're splitting hairs, but he's putting the blame fully on Ubisoft.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;46480259]yes, lets spend literally months sailing to each port, that would make it great.[/QUOTE]
Dude, I'm not saying it should take hours to get out of the port, but you literally jump on and then you're at maximum. You could make that [I]slightly[/I] less jarring realism-wise, and still have it work fine in-game.
The art team did a fantastic job with this, everything looks just beautiful. Sadly the technical side pisses all over that.
Yeah this is a game that really should be enjoyed at 1080p 60fps.
Tried it on PS4, earlier today.
Terrific lighting, detailed environment design, great facial animations during cutscenes.
Playing the game is something else, though. Frame rate bounces up and down constantly, npc's tend to glitch out (spawning midair, walking against walls while spasming, that kinda stuff). Controls are par for the course, I guess.
A personal pet peeve is the constant switching between languages. People in the streets speak French, but in cut scenes, everyone speaks with highly contrasting British accents, with a few "monsieurs" thrown in. Better than have everyone speak English with an irritating French accent, I guess, but still...
[QUOTE=darth-veger;46481877]The art team did a fantastic job with this, everything looks just beautiful. Sadly the technical side pisses all over that.
Yeah this is a game that really should be enjoyed at 1080p 60fps.[/QUOTE]
1440P @ 96FPS is a whole 'nother level.
Sadly anywhere other than looking at whilst climbing a wall high enough from the streets it's just a dream.
[QUOTE=junker154;46480278]I do not know why but after Brotherhood I feel like most animations got worse. I always loved the smoothness of movement and combat in Assassins Creed. But with Revelations the animations started to get worse and more ridiculous, tons of clipping errors and often the sound does not even synchronizes properly. It just not looks as smooth anymore and the feeling is just off. I thought it was absolutely horrible in Black Flag, sure the naval combat is nice but the movement and combat took many steps backwards.
Also I do not get how people never talk much about this, I do not know why. Perhaps because I always enjoyed the combat so much and notice any kind of difference pretty fast.[/QUOTE]
AC3 had the best combat animations. None of that show-offy shit (except for a few things). Everything Connor did was quick and precise and straight to the point.
Too bad AC3 was boring as fuck.
[QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;46482989]AC3 had the best combat animations. None of that show-offy shit (except for a few things). Everything Connor did was quick and precise and straight to the point.
Too bad AC3 was boring as fuck.[/QUOTE]
I agree, his moves are really cool and smooth. Combat feels really nice and cinematic, shame that the game is so medicore. Also Connor is just such an awful character, I'm planning on playing the game again though. Hope I can pull through.
[QUOTE=Yogkog;46476298]Regardless of the optimization problems, I still think the amount of NPCs on screen at the same time is pretty impressive[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure Gears of War had crowds 5X the size of this 5 years ago.
[editline]13th November 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;46482989]AC3 had the best combat animations. None of that show-offy shit (except for a few things). Everything Connor did was quick and precise and straight to the point.
Too bad AC3 was boring as fuck.[/QUOTE]
As much as I hated Connor as a character I actually really enjoyed AC3. Story was pretty balls too but as a game I quite liked it.
[editline]13th November 2014[/editline]
Oh and the ending was a total pissing in the eyes of fans.
[QUOTE=Wickerman123;46483250]I'm pretty sure Gears of War had crowds 5X the size of this 5 years ago.
[editline]13th November 2014[/editline]
As much as I hated Connor as a character I actually really enjoyed AC3. Story was pretty balls too but as a game I quite liked it.
[editline]13th November 2014[/editline]
Oh and the ending was a total pissing in the eyes of fans.[/QUOTE]
Gears of War's "crowds" were nothing more than barely modeled enemies super far in the distance that you could gib. And by gib I mean they would explode into blood and nothing more. Aka the crowds weren't very detailed compared to AC:U.
[QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;46485533]Gears of War's "crowds" were nothing more than barely modeled enemies super far in the distance that you could gib. And by gib I mean they would explode into blood and nothing more. Aka the crowds weren't very detailed compared to AC:U.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, AC:U is actually doing something pretty complicated with so many NPCs doing their own thing at once independent of eachother outside of interactions with one another. This isn't Dynasty Warriors, where dozens of troops surround you with pitifully braindead AI, and it's more than other sandbox/open world games usually ever go for. I think it was a bit too ambitious in this case, though.
"I used to be able to put in a cheat code, now I have to put in a credit card"
well said
A game a year is too much for me from one series and judging by reviews, sounds like its too much for them too. I feel bad for the artists on the team, Unity [i]looks[/i] fucking incredible.
I just don't understand how Ubisoft can fuck up this badly on a game that they've been making duplicates of for years now...
No Assassin's Creed game since 2 has been a vast improvement over the last unless you count Black Flag, which improved itself by adding boats to keep you interested past the horribly bland repetetive standard Assassin's Creed fare. But the actually core of the game was still the same shit.
You'd think with so many similar games at this point they'd have made one with a better core by now.
Aw, but I am really looking forward for this release. D:
I preordered the PC version of the game hoping it would be any good, guess I should turn it back
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
