• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Asassin's Creed 5: Unity

It really scares me that people still believe that the human eye can't tell the difference above 24 FPS... Look at all the complaints people had of The Hobbit at 48 FPS, and that's a movie! And you can't compare film framerate to 3D real-time rendered framerate. 24 FPS in film is like the equivalent of 600 FPS in 3D rendering.
 
Movie FPS and game FPS are completely different things, it doesn't work the same.

Also film fps is easily tellable, the human eye can see way more then 24 fps, that's a known.

The main difference between 24 fps and 48 fps in film is that with high fps like that the "motion blur" in film is largely gone, especially in quick action scene, that was the main difference in The Hobbit, the 48 fps version didn't have the motion blur that most people are "used" to from films and that's why some people said the high fps one didn't look "filmic" like the 24fps version.
 
48 FPS Hobbit was a strange experience...I love new technology but like Stiler said it didn't look 'filmic' to me...everything looked too real and looked like a soap opera
 
Blade-Runner said:
So who prefers the cinematic experience of 30 fps for their PC games?

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/report-microsoft-sony-pressuring-ubisoft-for-30fps-on-pc/

Might be FUD, but this is Ubi we are talking about it so it wouldn't surprise me if it were true.
Click to expand...

Depending on the game I actually do prefer 30fps. In most cases when I'm using a controller I have no problem with 30fps. Now if I'm using a keyboard and mouse I can't stand 30fps, especially if I'm playing a FPS game.
 
Wasn't the big marketing buzzword a few years back, for video games, immersion? You were supposed to be immersed in the world and feel like you are there. Immersion does not happen at 30 fps.

Now, it's cinematic - sit back and watch the cut-scenes I guess?
 
I tried playing AC4 at 30fps and got fed up with it really quickly. Luckily triple buffering fixed that issue. I think I'm at the point where I need at least 50fps. Granted, steadiness matters more than an average FPS, though. I'd rather play something locked at 30 than something that ranges from 60 to 40 at random.
 
Youn said:
It can happen with proper motion blur, which is really what people should be mentioning each time they bring up frame-rate.
Click to expand...
It "works" in The Evil Within, but that doesn't mean this is what we should expect and be satified with. Even though it "works," I would still prefer it be able to run uncapped without issues.
polonyc2 said:
30 fps is playable...60 is ideal...that's always been my gaming mantra
Click to expand...
Why put a cap on ideal framerate? My mantra has always been that higher is better so long as the game engine can keep up.

Did anyone else want to slap those guys from Ubisoft in that picture? Looked like a bunch of snobby kids who needed some sense knocked into them...
 
Armenius said:
Why put a cap on ideal framerate? My mantra has always been that higher is better so long as the game engine can keep up
Click to expand...

once you get past 60 the differences are not that noticeable unless you're constantly looking at FRAPS or some other tool that measures your fps
 
more noticeable on CRT, for sure... remember quake at 200+Hz?
 
Blade-Runner said:
So who prefers the cinematic experience of 30 fps for their PC games?

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/report-microsoft-sony-pressuring-ubisoft-for-30fps-on-pc/

Might be FUD, but this is Ubi we are talking about it so it wouldn't surprise me if it were true.
Click to expand...

Unless Ubisoft wants to lift any caps then they won't get a cent from me. I'm all for putting in options to allow those who want to limit the cap to 30 but for those of us who want more it's a terrible choice. Screw Sony, Microsoft and any company like Ubisoft that tags along with them in limiting PC.
 
Youn said:
It can happen with proper motion blur, which is really what people should be mentioning each time they bring up frame-rate.
Click to expand...

Eh...motion blur/depth of field is the first thing I turn off in an options screen.
 
polonyc2 said:
once you get past 60 the differences are not that noticeable unless you're constantly looking at FRAPS or some other tool that measures your fps
Click to expand...

For me going from 60 to 120 provides a noticeably smoother experience, especially in FPS games like BF4.
 
Blade-Runner said:
For me going from 60 to 120 provides a noticeably smoother experience, especially in FPS games like BF4.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Going to my 144 Hz monitor has been a great experience. Even going from 60 FPS to 80 feels smoother.
 
Assassin's Creed: Rogue is more than the cash-grab it could have been

There's no attempt here to try and match Unity's fancy new-gen engine, refined control mechanics or co-op mode (in fact for the first time in years there is no multiplayer element at all)...Rogue's main attractions are its characters and story...It feels like a similar situation to the hastily-made Assassin's Creed: Revelations, which gifted a third game to Renaissance hero Ezio so Ubisoft could keep working on the more technically advanced AC3 in the background...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...is-more-than-the-cash-grab-it-could-have-been
 
A 680 is the minimum...what?
These spec listings are getting more ridiculous every day.
 
And the prize for most ridiculous smooth cinematic 30fps port of 2014 goes to....

Assassin's Creed: Unity
Required
64-bit operating system

Supported OS
Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8/8.1 (64bit versions only)

Minimum CPU
Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.3 GHz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or AMD Phenom II x4 940 @ 3.0 GHz

Recommended CPU
Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3.4 GHz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or better

Minimum RAM
6 GB

Recommended RAM
8GB

Minimum Video Card
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 or AMD Radeon HD 7970 (2 GB VRAM)]

Recommended Video Card
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 or AMD Radeon R9 290X (3 GB VRAM)

Supported Video Cards at Time of Release
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 or better, GeForce GTX 700 series; AMD Radeon HD7970 or better, Radeon R9 200 series
Note: Laptop versions of these cards may work but are NOT officially supported.
Click to expand...
 
Who think unity will be as good as Mordor when it come to combat and even more greater in Mordor, stealth?
 
PC requirements have been a joke since forever.. Anyone who believes them still is really naive.
 
I think the game will be more CPU heavy versus GPU...all that extra crowd AI seems like it'll give a quad or six-core CPU a workout...will this game have PhysX support like Black Flag?
 
Dion said:
PC requirements have been a joke since forever.. Anyone who believes them still is really naive.
Click to expand...

PC reqs are indicative rather than prescriptive, everyone knows that....but the fact that the minimum requirement is a GTX 680 screams unoptimised console port, which really isn't all that surprising coming from Ubi (the studio that now believes that 30 FPS provides a more cinematic experience).
 
Blade-Runner said:
PC reqs are indicative rather than prescriptive, everyone knows that....but the fact that the minimum requirement is a GTX 680 screams unoptimised console port, which really isn't all that surprising coming from Ubi (the studio that now believes that 30 FPS provides a more cinematic experience).
Click to expand...

This pretty much. I simply do not understand why they can't take the time to optimize the game for each platform.

In the end it doesn't matter, with DAI, FC3 and SOM keeping me busy for the next few months, AC5 can wait. In fact I might just wait until its on sale. All previous AC games have bored me to tears after a few hours.
 
seems like the 'big' change in combat in Unity is that you can now scale 'down' the side of buildings and not just 'up'...if that's the best they can do then I'm not sure how much of a leap forward in quality this is going to be
 
polonyc2 said:
seems like the 'big' change in combat in Unity is that you can now scale 'down' the side of buildings and not just 'up'...if that's the best they can do then I'm not sure how much of a leap forward in quality this is going to be
Click to expand...

What's that got to do with combat?

and no, the biggest change is no more counters, that was like the cornerstone of AC combat, sit there and counter, counter, and counter over and over.
 
Blade-Runner said:
PC reqs are indicative rather than prescriptive, everyone knows that....but the fact that the minimum requirement is a GTX 680 screams unoptimised console port, which really isn't all that surprising coming from Ubi (the studio that now believes that 30 FPS provides a more cinematic experience).
Click to expand...

Not once have I though Ubisoft's big triple A PC games were console ports. The only one I had a slight issue was with Watch Dogs. But was all fixed with a Launch option which took a whole 30seconds to fix.
 
most of the AC games have been delayed by a few weeks (at least) in order to optimize it for PC...the PC versions all had much better graphics and PC tech versus their console counterparts
 
Bismo Funyuns said:
And the prize for most ridiculous smooth cinematic 30fps port of 2014 goes to....

Assassin's Creed: Unity
Click to expand...

Sounds like very bad programmers, jeez. The game runs on a $30 netbook CPU in consoles but they can't make it run decent on a desktop PC? Save your money and put it on a game from a more competent development house imho.
 
Dion said:
Not once have I though Ubisoft's big triple A PC games were console ports.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your thoughts have to do with anything, most of Ubi's PC games are farmed out to their satellite studios whilst the main development studio focuses on the console versions. It should come as no surprise then that the games are developed around the limitations of console hardware.

Hell with unity the PS4 version is being handicapped to accommodate the Xbone version, whilst the PC version is being handled by Ubisoft Kiev who we can thank for the wonderfully shitastic versions of From Dust, Ghost Recon: Future Soldier and Ass Creed 3.

Dion said:
The only one I had a slight issue was with Watch Dogs. But was all fixed with a Launch option which took a whole 30seconds to fix.
Click to expand...

Considering your propensity to regularly white knight for Ubi, and the overwhelming amount of epic bitching that pervaded the internet in relation to how buggy Watch_Dawgs was, you will excuse me if I don't accept your word as gospel on this issue.
 
Blade-Runner said:
Considering your propensity to regularly white knight for Ubi, and the overwhelming amount of epic bitching that pervaded the internet in relation to how buggy Watch_Dawgs was, you will excuse me if I don't accept your word as gospel on this issue.
Click to expand...

And that's your problem. You listen to what the whiny bitches on the internet have to say. Also the same people who bitch that games aren't demanding enough for there hardware. And now they bitch when demanding engines make there awesome hardware not run absolutely perfect. And blame it on being a Console port.

AC Unity isn't even out yet and it's already called a console port. It's just ridiculous.

There is nothing in any of the major Ubisoft titles that would make me think its console ports. They have good PC options for video and they have full keyboard mouse support. They definitely aren't the best PC titles. But jesus they aren't as bad as people make them out to be.

People on the internet bitch to just bitch.
 
The AC games have usually been pretty good as far as pc ports go, lots of graphical options (especially black flag).

However Watch Dogs, now that was a shitty port.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top