Assassins Creed 2 only supports DX9

[EastCoasthandle]

After reading the interview it's obvious that AC2 will be a straight port. I like the particular answer regarding Steam's Survey were he's trying to justify his reason to support DX9 only. If the system requirements for AC2 hold true you will need SM 3.0 or higher. When compared to Steam's survey they are specifically catering to 14.35% (27.21% are DX10 cards running on XP).

You can read the interview here

 

[assaulter_99]

Seriously I don't care about it being dx9, 10 or 11. As long as the controls are ok, I'm good. We already know the game will look good, so...

 

[EarlZ]

DX9 or DX11 the visuals will be just 1:1 anyway, a newer version of DX on games starting from 9 didnt really improve image quality, as long as it does not run like a pig and the controls are decent then Im sold, even if i didnt finish or play more than 3hrs on the first one.. hehehehe.

 

[EastCoasthandle]

You do realize that a straight console port can run like a pig.

 

[KainXS]

so . . . . . assassins creed 1 supported DX10 and part 2 doesn't . . . . .

 

[newtekie1]

After reading the interview it's obvious that AC2 will be a straight port. I like the particular answer regarding Steam's Survey were he's trying to justify his reason to support DX9 only. If the system requirements for AC2 hold true you will need SM 3.0 or higher. When compared to Steam's survey they are specifically catering to 27.21% .

You can read the interview here

Wait, where are you getting 27.21% from?

According to the SHS, 48.94% use have a DX10 GPU and OS(DX10 capable system), 27.21% have a DX10 GPU and a DX9 OS(XP), and 14.35% have a DX9 SM3 GPU. That means this game is catering to about 90.5% of gamers. If they removed the DX9 path and went with a pure DX10 rendering path, that would limit the game to about 48.94% of gamers...

It is obvious from the article that they pretty much had to pick one rendering path and stick with it, they didn't have the time or budget to do more than one rendering path, so I'm fine with DX9.

You do realize that a straight console port can run like a pig.

It can, it also might not.

 

[EastCoasthandle]

Wait, where are you getting 27.21% from?

According to the SHS, 48.94% use have a DX10 GPU and OS(DX10 capable system), 27.21% have a DX10 GPU and a DX9 OS(XP), and 14.35% have a DX9 SM3 GPU. That means this game is catering to about 90.5% of gamers. If they removed the DX9 path and went with a pure DX10 rendering path, that would limit the game to about 48.94% of gamers...

It is obvious from the article that they pretty much had to pick one rendering path and stick with it, they didn't have the time or budget to do more than one rendering path, so I'm fine with DX9.



It can, it also might not.

14.35% is based on AC2 which requires SM 3.0 or higher according to the system requirements set for the game thus far. If that is correct then his estimation of 40% (a number which is showing decline anyway) is incorrect. I didn't include all DX9 video cards because according to the information regarding the game's recommended requirements (so far) all DX9 cards are not recommended. 27.21% are DX10 cards running on XP. In a nutshell by using their survey they are admitting to ignoring a much larger of percentage of gamers who do have a video card capable of more then just DX9.

 

[AsRock]

so . . . . . assassins creed 1 supported DX10 and part 2 doesn't . . . . .

Did'nt nVidia cry last time about the .1 ?... And maybe it's because not all nVida cards can run DX10.

Don't care even if it looks the same as long as the story follows up good and secondery quests are more though though i'll be happy.

 

[assaulter_99]

All reviews tend to say that they took all the best parts of AC and stripped the boring parts, just like ME2. So basically, its a much better game, more refined and less boring. Well that's what I ve read

 

[EastCoasthandle]

All reviews tend to say that they took all the best parts of AC and stripped the boring parts, just like ME2. So basically, its a much better game, more refined and less boring. Well that's what I ve read

Yeah, it's like how they make 1% and 2% milk! They skim all the fun out of it, develop it then re-add "their fun" back into the game and it's ready for purchase!

 

[AsRock]

All reviews tend to say that they took all the best parts of AC and stripped the boring parts, just like ME2. So basically, its a much better game, more refined and less boring. Well that's what I ve read

But they took out shit i wanted in it at the same time hence why i have not brought it yet.

As long as all the side quests are done much better it should be a better game overall as they were soooooo boring. But ya never know they might remove crouch and other nice to have options.

They needed to add stuff to ME2 not strip it LMAO.

 

[Phxprovost]

so basically between this and their lovely new drm you might as well save your self the trouble and either not play it or get it on console....which seems to be their plan all along

 

[TheMailMan78]

90% of statistics are made up.

 

[kid41212003]

It doesn't surprise me. It's Ubisoft after all.

http://www.vg247.com/2008/10/08/ubisoft-creative-director-piracys-basically-killing-pc/

“To be honest, if PC wasn’t pirated to hell and back, there’d probably be a PC version coming out the same day as the other two,” he said, talking of the voice-controlled RTS."

“But at the moment, if you release the PC version, essentially what you’re doing is letting people have a free version that they rip off instead of a purchased version. Piracy’s basically killing PC.”

“Yeah, at the time of release,” he said. “You know, the level of piracy that you get with the PC just cannibalizes the others, because people just steal that version.”

I don't really care about this game anyway, couldn't even finish the first game, too repetitively.

 

[entropy13]

90% of statistics are made up.

And there are 56 INDEPENDENT, COMPETENT and SCIENTIFIC studies that support that fact.

 

[newtekie1]

14.35% is based on AC2 which requires SM 3.0 or higher according to the system requirements set for the game thus far. If that is correct then his estimation of 40% (a number which is showing decline anyway) is incorrect. I didn't include all DX9 video cards because according to the information regarding the game's recommended requirements (so far) all DX9 cards are not recommended. 27.21% are DX10 cards running on XP. In a nutshell by using their survey they are admitting to ignoring a much larger of percentage of gamers who do have a video card capable of more then just DX9.

They are not ignoring the much larger percentage of gamers, those gamers can still play the game. They are including more gamers, not ignoring.

And while the recommended specs don't include the lower end DX9 cards, I'm sure a lot of them will play the game just fine, and there will probably even be a decent number of people that do so.

 

[EastCoasthandle]

They are not ignoring the much larger percentage of gamers, those gamers can still play the game. They are including more gamers, not ignoring.

And while the recommended specs don't include the lower end DX9 cards, I'm sure a lot of them will play the game just fine, and there will probably even be a decent number of people that do so.

The context of him mentioning the steam survey (be it accurate or not) is that he was attempting to justify why they support DX9 only when asked about DX11 only. Here, read the quote below:

PCGH: Your Games does still support Windows XP and the DX9-API. When do you think game development will be at a juncture where it's more viable to put all the effort into one rendering-path using only DirectX 11 (with downlevel-paths) and drop support for XP?

David Champagne: I guess when most of the gamers will have switched to DX11. According to Steam HW Survey, 40% of the gamers are still playing under Windows XP. I think we'll have to wait a bit...

His attempt to try to include all of DX9 is inaccurate because the game he's promoting only recommends support for SM 3.0 or better. Perhaps he should have answered the question in another way. But in all the 40% he throw out there (a percentage in decline) is wrong because he's only accounting for users who had DX card capable of SM 3.0 using XP only. Many of which have already upgraded to Win7. In only a few months that number went from the high 50% range down to 40% range indicating a decline in XP users on their survey.

When accounting for user who have setups that have video cards that can do DX10 and DX9 in XP his claims becomes specious because steam's survey indicates that 56.54% use either Win7 or Vista which are capable of DX11, DX10 and DX9. In which is indicative that they either plan to or already have a video card capable of more then DX9. A percentage showing increase every month!

 

[newtekie1]

The context of him mentioning the steam survey (be it accurate or not) is that he was attempting to justify why they support DX9 only when asked about DX11 only. Here, read the quote below:


His attempt to try to include all of DX9 is inaccurate because the game he's promoting only recommends support for SM 3.0 or better. Perhaps he should have answered the question in another way. But in all the 40% he throw out there (a percentage in decline) is wrong because he's only accounting for users who had DX card capable of SM 3.0 using XP only. Many of which have already upgraded to Win7. In only a few months that number went from the high 50% range down to 40% range indicating a decline in XP users on their survey.

When accounting for user who have setups that have video cards that can do DX10 and DX9 in XP his claims becomes specious because steam's survey indicates that 56.54% use either Win7 or Vista which are capable of DX11, DX10 and DX9. In which is indicative that they either plan to or already have a video card capable of more then DX9. A percentage showing increase every month!

Yes, I understand that, but your logic sucks...sorry it does...

So you believe that the better alternative is to ignore those 40% of gamers, when it is possible to include them? Just because that 40% number is getting smaller, we should ignore them and limit the number of gamers that can play the game? That is idiotic logic.

You were just going on about how horrible it is for them to be "ignoring" anyone with a rig capable of beyond DX9, yet in the same breath you want them to ignore anyone with a rig not capable of DX10 or better.

 

[arnoo1]

does anyone know that the game is from ''games for windows LIVE''

 

[EastCoasthandle]

Yes, I understand that, but your logic sucks...sorry it does...

So you believe that the better alternative is to ignore those 40% of gamers, when it is possible to include them? Just because that 40% number is getting smaller, we should ignore them and limit the number of gamers that can play the game? That is idiotic logic.

You were just going on about how horrible it is for them to be "ignoring" anyone with a rig capable of beyond DX9, yet in the same breath you want them to ignore anyone with a rig not capable of DX10 or better.

Tis a strawmans argument here. I've not indicated ignoring anything only stating that his 40% number is not accurate. If anything they should include support higher then DX9.

 

[assaulter_99]

does anyone know that the game is from ''games for windows LIVE''

Afaik, Ubisoft doesnt use that. The first one didnt have it for sure. So no is a safe bet!

 

[newtekie1]

Tis a strawmans argument here. I've not indicated ignoring anything only stating that his 40% number is not accurate. If anything they should include DX11 support along with DX9.

Thats the thing, you obviously don't have a grasp on the big picture, or ignored huge sections of the article.

I don't know how many times I have to say it, but they did not have the time or budget to handle more than one rendering path. The only had the budget and time to optimize one rendering path, so they picked DX9.

So, by you saying that they should have gone with DX10 at least, you are saying they should have ignored all DX9 and XP users.

As for his number being inaccurate, go to the Steam Hardware Survey, right on the main page it says XP is still the most popular OS with 42% of the users reporting in January still using it. How is he not accurate? That would be a huge section of gamers to ignore by forcing DX10 as a requirement.

 

[EastCoasthandle]

Thats the thing, you obviously don't have a grasp on the big picture, or ignored huge sections of the article.

I don't know how many times I have to say it, but they did not have the time or budget to handle more than one rendering path. The only had the budget and time to optimize one rendering path, so they picked DX9.

So, by you saying that they should have gone with DX10 at least, you are saying they should have ignored all DX9 and XP users.

As for his number being inaccurate, go to the Steam Hardware Survey, right on the main page it says XP is still the most popular OS with 42% of the users reporting in January still using it. How is he not accurate? That would be a huge section of games to ignore by forcing DX10 as a requirement.

Attempting to ad hominem your strawman's argument, in the end, will only show that you disagree (with all the inaccuracies that go with it). No point has been made.

 

[newtekie1]

Attempting to ad hominem your strawman's argument, in the end, will only show that you disagree (with all the inaccuracies that go with it). No point has been made.

It does more than show I disagree, it shows that I'm right and so is the developer, and you are wrong...

 

[JUDOHAWK]

“To be honest, if PC wasn’t pirated to hell and back, there’d probably be a PC version coming out the same day as the other two,” he said, talking of the voice-controlled RTS."

“But at the moment, if you release the PC version, essentially what you’re doing is letting people have a free version that they rip off instead of a purchased version. Piracy’s basically killing PC.”

“Yeah, at the time of release,” he said. “You know, the level of piracy that you get with the PC just cannibalizes the others, because people just steal that version.”


This pisses me off. I love how they lump in all PC gamers into the same mold. Using that excuse as to why they are treating the PC community will get no sympathy from PC users. I doubt a game like Bad Company 2 will be pirated to hell and back on PC. You'll get pirates that will dl the Single Player, but it'll still pretty well on PC.