OFFICIAL Assassin’s Creed: Unity (Discussion)

[FordGT90Concept]

You can have the drive train to a geo metro attached to a jet engine, and travel at 70 mph.

Assuming it doesn't destroy the transmission and/or flame out from running so slow.

Eh, wot? AC1 was around modern-day Israel and Syria. AC2 was in Italy. AC2: Revelations was in modern-day Istanbul. AC3 was in New England. AC is mostly story driven but Ubisoft had to create a new engine here. Ubisoft likely intends to use that same engine in Watch Dogs 2 and other titles. The lower you set the bar for a new engine, the more incapable it is to reach into the future. This is the same reason why Grand Theft Auto 4 made a lot of computers struggle but that same engine produced Max Payne 3 several years later. Granted, the RAGE engine of MP3 and GTA4 isn't as crazy as what Ubisoft likely is working on simply because RAGE still supports old consoles.

I feel that I'm rambling. TL;DR: this is a new engine (based on Anvil) made for 2014 and beyond:

 

[MxPhenom 216]

As I recall, AssCreed has a tendency to run pretty terribly due to poor porting onto PC CPUs. I imagine we'll have similar issues like the Boston level all over again. Who knows, Ubi might fix this one.

Apparently they are saying they have hit the performance wall of current consoles.......

http://www.pcper.com/news/General-T...oft-Xbox-One-Already-Hitting-Performance-Wall

Ubisoft isn't known to be all that great at optimizing........

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Ehm, *cough*, AMD64...

The main point to take away from that link is that the CPU is the bottleneck, not the GPU. The CPU requirements seem to line up with that: quad-core processor at 3 GHz minimum. So why then, the ridiculously high GPU requirements? Maybe they are assuming people will play at 1920x1080? Even so, that doesn't make much sense because he said the CPU was the limit in the PS4 so if the PS4 had a Core i5-2500 in it, would it not be able to run 1920x1080? Something seems amiss.

Edit: Suddenly, the clouds lift and all is revealed:

The Jaguar CPU cores aren't high performance parts: single-threaded performance of Jaguar is less than the Intel Silvermont/Bay Trail designs by as much as 25%.

Bay Trail? BAY TRAIL!?!

By running on a desktop CPU, even a modest desktop CPU, that bottleneck is long gone and the GPU can reach for the sky. I guess that explains it then: minimum is for 1920x1080. PC gamers will see the engine in all of its splendor and console players will just get scraps.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Assuming it doesn't destroy the transmission and/or flame out from running so slow.

Eh, wot? AC1 was around modern-day Israel and Syria. AC2 was in Italy. AC2: Revelations was in modern-day Istanbul. AC3 was in New England. AC is mostly story driven but Ubisoft had to create a new engine here. Ubisoft likely intends to use that same engine in Watch Dogs 2 and other titles. The lower you set the bar for a new engine, the more incapable it is to reach into the future. This is the same reason why Grand Theft Auto 4 made a lot of computers struggle but that same engine produced Max Payne 3 several years later. Granted, the RAGE engine of MP3 and GTA4 isn't as crazy as what Ubisoft likely is working on simply because RAGE still supports old consoles.

I feel that I'm rambling. TL;DR: this is a new engine (based on Anvil) made for 2014 and beyond:

I'd ask you to line up a dozen random pictures from each of the Assassin's Creed games. Take those pictures, and shuffle them randomly. Now, get a person who has played all the games and ask them to identify which game they came from. Tell me, how many of them do you think they could correctly identify? 10%, 20%, maybe even 30%. It doesn't matter if you've got a new engine, when all you can make is samey games.


I acquiesce that a new engine may require more resources to run, because it is intended to still be useable in a decade. At the same time, you need to give me a reason to want to buy new hardware for a new engine. Assassin's Creed has never been capable of doing that. Their drive train is the software engine. Their hardware requirements are the power source. You can always put a larger power source into a crappy drive train to get it to work better. You need to set the speed target higher to justify that extra power though. Assassin's Creed has been cruising along at 70 mph for nearly a decade, and it has been through multiple drive trains and power sources. You'd think that somewhere along the way the mediocre results would have raised flags, but people still lap it up. It's that monument to mediocrity that I cannot stand.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I'd ask you to line up a dozen random pictures from each of the Assassin's Creed games. Take those pictures, and shuffle them randomly. Now, get a person who has played all the games and ask them to identify which game they came from. Tell me, how many of them do you think they could correctly identify? 10%, 20%, maybe even 30%. It doesn't matter if you've got a new engine, when all you can make is samey games.

If you got a place to host it (PHP/ASPX + database), I might just take you up on that offer...

I acquiesce that a new engine may require more resources to run, because it is intended to still be useable in a decade. At the same time, you need to give me a reason to want to buy new hardware for a new engine. Assassin's Creed has never been capable of doing that. Their drive train is the software engine. Their hardware requirements are the power source. You can always put a larger power source into a crappy drive train to get it to work better. You need to set the speed target higher to justify that extra power though. Assassin's Creed has been cruising along at 70 mph for nearly a decade, and it has been through multiple drive trains and power sources. You'd think that somewhere along the way the mediocre results would have raised flags, but people still lap it up. It's that monument to mediocrity that I cannot stand.

Because, if you game, you're inevitably going to upgrade eventually anyway. When I upgrade (next year hopefully), I don't do it for one game, I do it for many (Thief, The Sims 3 w/ all expansions, and Star Citizen are on my list now).

There's a huge leap between AC and AC2 in terms of gameplay. Watching that video I linked previously, ACBF to ACU appears to do the same.

The story is what sells AC more than anything else. Maybe ACU will make the gameplay more engaging, maybe it won't. The fact they actually mentioned the word "stealth" (something that is appallingly absent) in that engine demo video may suggest it does.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Just changing the time period in the franchise with each installment has changed the experience a fair bit, but I don't like it when they don't evolve the melee moves along with it. AC2 brought in great RPG nuances. In AC 3 they went overboard with laborious crafting. AC 3 and IV brought in some interesting naval battles, but IV was quite a step down in melee.

I think Revelation was probably my least favorite so far. The hook felt contrived. It's use as a stabbing weapon didn't make much sense and the sidekick was off putting. I also HATED den defense and it didn't really fit. It was also ridiculous that if you failed at it, it was easy as pie to just waltz in and take it back single handedly via melee combat.

It's not just graphics that are being highlighted here. The melee looks really fleshed out this time, as well as areas to explore. My rig should be able to run it, but probably not at max settings. That photo challenge sounds ridiculous though, because depending what you take a screenshot of, you could easily tell the difference by landmarks alone.

Had you suggested comparing mission types or melee moves, you might have had something.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Allow me to better explain myself.

First, this thread is about the high requirements of this game in particular. I stated that Assassin's Creed has not ever been the game that would make me upgrade, and I stand by that assertion. This game is not going to make me upgrade, no matter how pretty it looks.

Second, I don't care about the mechanics in the engine. The requirements have little to do with the mechanics. Case in point; Minecraft has deep mechanics, but almost no requirements. Minecraft will run on just about anything. I'm not arguing that the new game doesn't look like an improvement, just that it isn't particularly enticing. If your argument is that a new engine somehow allows better interaction, at the price of higher system requirements, I'm at a loss to see how you've made that link.

Third, each game does have unique areas and a styled main character. If you were to compare the woods of the Americas to the very first game I'd have to agree that there is a stark difference (between cities and natural settings). What I have a hard time discerning is where the difference is while strolling down the street. Assuming that you remove the main character, the streets of all of the main cities are pretty much the same. The only real differentiation, in my experience, is when you're above the city and looking at a decent sky box. Perhaps it was my play style, but I rarely got this opportunity.


Finally, bringing it all back, what makes this game special? When I play Hitman I kill people. When I play Minecraft I build stuff. When I play CoD I shoot people. What is Assassin's Creed? The most recent outing was a sailing simulation, with some killing of targets wedged in to make it fit with the title. Brotherhood was an RPG where you raised little assassins to do your work, whenever you couldn't be bothered to go out and kill people. The third game (III, not the numerical third release) was an attempt to make Mirror's Edge a commercial success, with the occasional assassination interspersed between free running in new and more "atmospheric" open levels. It seems as though what makes the Assassin's Creed games special is note the titular activity, but a loosely connected world which forces connections via murdering people. Color me skeptical, but I don't believe a new engine and higher requirements are going to make this series any more focused than it already is. I consider that a series failing, and I've got no reason to spend money on thing that can't decide what exactly they want to be.

All of this said, the most recent game was a better piracy simulator than most pirate themed games, so I have to give it credit for being as awesome as it was.

 

[Vario]

AC4 BF would have been better just having the pirate stuff and not having the Assassin stuff. Seemed dumb that everyone is walking around in a hood and cloak in the middle of the tropics. If they left the assassin stuff out they could have really polished the piracy part. I hated sneaking around stabbing stuff and following idiots by parkouring over shanty towns. Also the revisionist political correctness, while virtuous, was very out of place for a pirate assassin game.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Just changing the time period in the franchise with each installment has changed the experience a fair bit, but I don't like it when they don't evolve the melee moves along with it. AC2 brought in great RPG nuances. In AC 3 they went overboard with laborious crafting. AC 3 and IV brought in some interesting naval battles, but IV was quite a step down in melee.

I think Revelation was probably my least favorite so far. The hook felt contrived. It's use as a stabbing weapon didn't make much sense and the sidekick was off putting. I also HATED den defense and it didn't really fit. It was also ridiculous that if you failed at it, it was easy as pie to just waltz in and take it back single handedly via melee combat.

It's not just graphics that are being highlighted here. The melee looks really fleshed out this time, as well as areas to explore. My rig should be able to run it, but probably not at max settings. That photo challenge sounds ridiculous though, because depending what you take a screenshot of, you could easily tell the difference by landmarks alone.

Had you suggested comparing mission types or melee moves, you might have had something.

I agree with the general consensus in this post: AC series keeps trying new things and most of them have fallen flat on their face. The one exception is probably the naval combat and as you pointed out, ACBF capitalized on that. I'm curious to see how far they take the stealth mechanic in ACU. It could be the next naval combat or it could just be another idea that falls flat on its face.

I'd just start the game, turn the settings to max, load a save, and snap a picture where I'm standing. If it's too obvious, I'd probably just fast travel somewhere and snap it.

First, this thread is about the high requirements of this game in particular. I stated that Assassin's Creed has not ever been the game that would make me upgrade, and I stand by that assertion. This game is not going to make me upgrade, no matter how pretty it looks.

Nor would I. Many games are moving in this direction, not just ACU. I wouldn't upgrade for just ACU either.

Second, I don't care about the mechanics in the engine. The requirements have little to do with the mechanics. Case in point; Minecraft has deep mechanics, but almost no requirements. Minecraft will run on just about anything. I'm not arguing that the new game doesn't look like an improvement, just that it isn't particularly enticing. If your argument is that a new engine somehow allows better interaction, at the price of higher system requirements, I'm at a loss to see how you've made that link.

Minecraft has horrible mechanics and they're shallow at that. It loves to crash when running on JVM 32-bit at 1920x1080 or higher and at 1920x1200, any kind of major block movements cause FPS to drop to unacceptable levels on my system. The game is horrifically coded on a poor platform (JVM).

The main problem in Assassin's Creed has always been vertical movement. It often does what you didn't expect and often frustratingly so. The engine video made it clear they did a lot of work in this area and that likely revolves around path prediction. This takes engine resources. They've also made significant changes to the AI but to understand that, we'll have to play it.

Third, each game does have unique areas and a styled main character. If you were to compare the woods of the Americas to the very first game I'd have to agree that there is a stark difference (between cities and natural settings). What I have a hard time discerning is where the difference is while strolling down the street. Assuming that you remove the main character, the streets of all of the main cities are pretty much the same. The only real differentiation, in my experience, is when you're above the city and looking at a decent sky box. Perhaps it was my play style, but I rarely got this opportunity.

All of the AC titles encourage you to get to the roof tops. AC3 maybe not so much but AC1+2 definitely did.

Finally, bringing it all back, what makes this game special? When I play Hitman I kill people. When I play Minecraft I build stuff. When I play CoD I shoot people. What is Assassin's Creed?

Hitman has a crappy story but good mechanics; Minecraft has no story but it kicked off a voxel-based survival/creative genre. Assassin's Creed has a good story and mechanics that don't get in the way of it (much, anyway).

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

... Assassin's Creed has a good story and mechanics that don't get in the way of it (much, anyway).

I can agree to disagree with pretty much everything you've said, as you have valid points. Further discourse is unlikely to change either of our perspectives.

My only remaining point of contention is the above statement. I would love to take Ezio's knife and carve the vocal chords out of Desmond. Any time the story focused on Desmond, it died. If the story has to be revealed as a flash-back to a previous life, and your future character is more bland than milk toast, you've failed at story telling. AC can be summed up by plot points: go to A, kill B, repeat A and B arbitrarily, result is C in history, and we allude to Treasure X that is poorly defined in scope (but sounds amazingly powerful) but promises a pay-off "whenever these games stop printing money." I might love the A and B sections, but Hitman proves that amazingly fun game mechanics can often overcome a complete lack of story. Assassin's Creed graduated from the Hitman school, with a double major in Warioware. It's one decent idea, stretched to nearly a half dozen games, with enough random other bits stapled on to make it interesting. I can't call that a story, any more than I can call a movie an interactive piece of entertainment.



Edit:
Sorry, but one other note. The original Hitman sucked hard. Shadow detection was...broken is probably being generous. It's gotten infinitely better as time went on. Assassin's Creed has been on a roller coaster, for better and worse. It isn't anywhere near bad, but the scrubbing and adding of features means you never get enough time to get tired of a feature, nor do you get a consistent enough set of features to have definitive competitions between installments. It's genius for people who can't decide exactly what they want to commit to.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

As for the comments about what will make this game special, and what is AC? As much as I hate Ubi for sucking up to Sony and MS lately with this downsized PC trend, I have to give them kudos for what AC brought to gaming. It doesn't just tell a story, it paints it in detail and from varied perspectives. It's not just what you unravel in the events of the world, but feeling part of a detailed world itself. It's the kind of thing that no matter how many times you've done it, you look forward to the next structure to climb, esp if on a stealth mission doing so.

And as much as some like to belittle what are now common place in many games as far as landmark climbing, vistas that unlock map details, and parkour escapes, Ubi is largely responsible for popularizing it. We've all cussed at times at the clumsiness in which the latter is employed, but it's a reality check when you play games that don't do it quite as well. I'm playing Shadow of Mordor and revisiting Sleeping Dogs right now, and at times, both can be aggravating in that sense by comparison.

When it comes to graphics and overall world immersion though, I think it's safe to say Unity's rendering of Paris will have detail to immerse yourself in far beyond any other AC title. It all depends whether that is the kind of thing that moves you as a player. The things I look most forward to are their promises of advanced melee and smoother parkour though. I mean sure, I enjoy the stories and settings, but if the melee and parkour are too simplistic or frustrating, it tends to ruin the experience.

 

[BumbleBee]

nice looking game

http://www.hardcoregamer.com/2014/10/31/gorgeous-assassins-creed-unity-ps4-photos-leaked/115114/

 

[Frag_Maniac]

^If you look at the Bullshots before and after, most of the PS4 screens don't look so good, and after what happened with WD, I'm wondering how much the PC version will be dumbed down.

http://www.psmania.net/2014/10/assassins-creed-unity-bullshots-vs-in-game-graphics-comparison/

 

[BumbleBee]

I was looking at the crowd tech.

oh and the last Assassins Creed: Unity trailer dropped a BIG spoiler so stop watching them.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

...the last Assassins Creed: Unity trailer dropped a BIG spoiler so stop watching them.

I already know about what you're referring to. Meh, no big deal. More of a glitch than a major plot reveal.

 

[Drone]

Not even sure if I'm gonna wanna play this. The only AC game I played was Bloodlines on PSP which was pretty damn good and I also have original gog version but I don't think I'll stick to the series. Kinda repetitive and monotonic. Anywho there's a new trailer

 

[BumbleBee]

Not even sure if I'm gonna wanna play this. The only AC game I played was Bloodlines on PSP which was pretty damn good and I also have original gog version but I don't think I'll stick to the series. Kinda repetitive and monotonic. Anywho there's a new trailer

Assassins Creed II, Assassins Creed: Brotherhood and Assassins Creed: Revelations is like a self contained story and worth playing.

Assassins Creed III wasn't very good. Assassins Creed IV: Black Flag was good.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Anywho there's a new trailer...

Coop seems to make a lot more sense than mp in an AC game, as long as the enemy AI are challenging enough. Twice they refer to that claiming most advanced enemy AI ever in an AC game, and you'll have to work as a team well, but when they only show Arno and his teammates easily defeating them, I come away with a believe it when I see it perspective.

Already what I've seen though looks better than the average AC title, and certainly better than Revelations or AC3, Revelations definitely being the low point of the series for me.

It's looking like Unity and Advanced Warfare will be the titles known for revitalizing their respective franchises this year.

Fortunate for Activision, because it's looking like a lot of people are already forgetting about Destiny, some even calling AW more fun.

 

[BumbleBee]

I like the cat and mouse multiplayer in Assassins Creed. it's original and a lot of fun.

FarCry 4 and Dragon Age: Inquisition come out in 2 weeks.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

I like the cat and mouse multiplayer in Assassins Creed. it's original and a lot of fun.

Yeah I know some love that stuff, and similar aspects in Splinter Cell mp. Guess I'm biased toward this kind of game lending heavily toward a more coop type experience where you have a small team thrust into a situation with numerous enemies. I feel it's a better fit with the scope and scale of the game, and the French Revolution itself.

 

[Drone]

new trailer

 

[Frag_Maniac]

^Says "This video is not available".

 

[RCoon]

The game runs terribly on any machine not running an Intel with high single core clock speed and IPC. We're talking some pretty severe bottlenecking in some cases. Prepare for yet another Boston level set of benchmarks from various review sites.

I feel the developers need to rewrite their engine to use GPGPU processing for their AI instead of the the CPU. It runs worse the lower end the processor gets, which is why the console versions are limited to 30FPS. You could run this game on a 760 or lower for all intents and purposes, as the GPU horsepower required is minimal, and it only gets bottlenecked by CPU load anyway.

 

[64K]

ars tehnica gave this game a thumbs down. For people that really like the AC series it might still be enjoyable though.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/11/assassins-creed-unity-less-to-do-but-more-to-see/

 

[m0nt3]

I have seen some dips in the city down to 19 (during certain light reflections, especially around the assassin's base for some reason), but those situations are rare, I spend a lot of time around 26FPS in the city, certain areas hit 30, more if I go indoors. This is at all highest settings, certainly isn't GPU bound, enabling 4x MSAA helps utilize the GPU more. However, it still plays well enough, fortunately the lowest dips are not during combat. I am enjoying the game. Spend a lot of time just looking at the environment, buildings, and hoards of people.