• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Are Ubisoft the new top dogs when it comes to open world graphics?

ugoo18

Member
I had a waaaaay worse time with AC3 bug wise. I wonder what makes me so lucky?

My first ever experience with ACU bug wise was when you first gain control after that initial opening cutscene. I plummeted into the ground and desynced lol. For AC3 i honestly don't think i ran into any glitches let alone as frequently as i did with ACU. Granted it has been a little while since i played it but i definitely don't remember anything quite like what i've experienced with ACU.
 

Raptor

Member
I haev yet to play the new one but AC4 looked glorious on PS4, but Second Son looked better still.

So no I don't thikn they are top dogs, next week wll be the turn for Rockstar to wow me.
 
What modded game looks better?
Please don't tell me it's Skyrim.

GTA IV is pretty amazing modded
B12eeGpCcAAn1o0.png:large
 

Skyzard

Banned
^That's insane. Does it hold up in motion?
I feel like a lot of games look amazing in screenshots (especially at unplayable resolutions) but are a different experience in-game and don't hold up even graphically in different scenarios/angles etc.

Actually, when I read through the reviews, it seemed like most of them criticized the game for subjective reasons, and then they'd mention the technical issues only in passing. Basically saying "It has some bugs, but the real problem is the shitty story and characters." Which is fair enough.

It's good though! Okay, I've not completed it yet. I admit not reading too many of the reviews but I remember Alex from GB (who I'm a big fan off) how he was hung up on the bugs and said that 'maybe, maybe, maybe, mayyyyyybe it was a good game despite them' in the quick look.

If you don't believe me go play ACP or Watch Dogs on PS4. They look like blurry shit, and esp. in AC's case you can't even see any of the fine detail they've done to textures and assets because of terrible resolution and AA issues. Then on top of all that the game runs at 10-20fps so the controls don't even work.

It's cool that their games look insanely good on SLI 980s though. I'm probably never even gonna have one 980 :|

I haven't played FC4 yet so nothing I said applies to that*

Argh, that's what I was worried about. Although some people are still happy with it that's decent at least. But yeah that blurriness is not a great compromise.

Even on the PC high end, I've had to lock it down to 31fps. At 1080p it looked too blurry and without FXAA too jaggy. It needed the FXAA and high resolution for me.

970 should be alright btw.

I hope FC4 does better on consoles.
 

Astral Dog

Member
I hope not, Rockstar could deliver a game with better art direction. graphics, gameplay and performance than Unity,although with less NPCs.

Edit:Right now, yes, Unity is the best looking open world 0NE/PS4 game
 

jelly

Member
Open worlds aren't based on graphic. They are based on breadth and depth of interaction. None of which are within Ubisoft skillsets.

Even Far Cry 2 has more advanced aspects than FC4, and in FC4 the simulation is really, really thin.

"Theme park" and "open world" aren't exactly the same thing. In Ubisoft games there's very little "world" and a lot of self-contained gimmicks that compose the attractions of the theme park.

When things actually interact, they break. Just having a big map doesn't mean that it's "open world".

Nicely put, similar to my thoughts.
 

Damerman

Member
Unity is the best looking game I've played, ever.

ON PC with a GTX 970, Max settings, 4k downsampling and a G-sync monitor
 

K' Dash

Member
Eww, i hope not, Rockstar could deliver a game with better art direction. graphics, gameplay and performance than Unity,although with less NPCs.

Edit:Right NOW, yes, Unity is the best looking open world 0NE/PS4 game

And they say there aren't wrong opinions.
 

Skyzard

Banned
Open worlds aren't based on graphic. They are based on breadth and depth of interaction. None of which are within Ubisoft skillsets.

Even Far Cry 2 has more advanced aspects than FC4, and in FC4 the simulation is really, really thin.

"Theme park" and "open world" aren't exactly the same thing. In Ubisoft games there's very little "world" and a lot of self-contained gimmicks that compose the attractions of the theme park.

When things actually interact, they break. Just having a big map doesn't mean that it's "open world".

What is significant that is missing? It's not Shenmue good I know. The npcs don't go home and sleep afaik etc...

But I've had some great interactions with multiple groups. Although I guess they did advertise that - animals thrown into the mix. Although it is kinda annoying when the rhino auto targets you.
 

Yasae

Banned
Agreed but I want to give credit where it's due otherwise next time I worry we're going to be missing it, why go through the hassle. The review scores were so brutal for the bugs.
This is the game they chose to make an example of?
I dug up its two PC reviews - previously I thought there were none.

PC Gamer

Cons
-Poorly optimized, buggy, crash-prone, atrocious PC port
-Missing the history-in-the-making feel of previous entries
-Scaled down from Black Flag's massive world

CNET

The Bad
-The game suffers from clunky free-running movement. Climbing and descending aren't as seamless as they are intended to be.
-Unity suffers from terrible frame rate dips and other graphical weirdness.
-Compared to Black Flag, Unity feels uninspired and trite.
Only 2/6 points made against the game actually hold any water. But free running being clunky? A buggy, crash-prone port? Scaled down world???

The game they're describing I haven't played.
 

Muffdraul

Member
It's good though! Okay, I've not completed it yet. I admit not reading too many of the reviews but I remember Alex from GB (who I'm a big fan off) how he was hung up on the bugs and said that 'maybe, maybe, maybe, mayyyyyybe it was a good game despite them' in the quick look.

I think Ubisoft has made it very difficult for anyone who wants to be taken seriously in the gaming enthusiast world to say anything nice about them. As it happens, I don't give a fuck if anyone takes me seriously or not. I think Ubisoft are cocks, but I think a lot of the Unity criticism has been disingenuous. Whatever the framerate is on PS4, it generally hasn't been low enough to impact my enjoyment. And I'm not some fucking chimp who can't tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps.
 

DJIzana

Member
Never liked anything Ubisoft has produced. I tried AC4, graphically... meh. Only thing that impressed me was the clear water and maybe the underwater caves you got to explore.

Outside of that, they have no actual IP I legit care about. Company bores me....
 

Yasae

Banned
You can't stop me because I already stated it with some agreement in this thread.

GTA V is a marvel both on last generation and current gen. I expect the PC to be equally impressive.
I can call out a crazy opinion. GTA V is a rather nice looking last gen era game graphically. It being on XB1 or PS4 or PC is not going to change that even with its noticeable upgrades.
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
I can call out a crazy opinion. GTA V is a rather nice looking last gen era game graphically. It being on XB1 or PS4 or PC is not going to change that even with its noticeable upgrades.

lol.... yet not one review or personal impression supports your unsubstantiated "opinion". How about playing it instead of talking through your ass
 
Not really, they have many open world games yes but there all using the same kind of "paint by numbers" gameplay.
always the same layout in everything they do, it's painfull.
 
What is significant that is missing? It's not Shenmue good I know. The npcs don't go home and sleep afaik etc...

But I've had some great interactions with multiple groups. Although I guess they did advertise that - animals thrown into the mix. Although it is kinda annoying when the rhino auto targets you.

Animals are like small scripted bits. But you see very little variation on these sorts of things. What you call interactions are really just scripted events that pop-up in selected locations. They added enough, and so you have an illusion of a world.

It's an illusion of interaction.

"World" games versus "linear" games is simple: in linear games one elements leads to the next. In a true world game all elements are connected together. The result is: complexity.

Again, the Far Cry 4 scripted bits are just manually assembled bits. They are always contained in a fixed spot. So they fake the complexity that would define a true "open world".

Complexity, in general, means that every element in a system is connected with the others. More elements = more connections = more complexity.

In FC4 the protagonist isn't the world, because, again, the world is relatively static outside the scripted events. What is non-static is only the player. But this is exactly why it's not a true open world (nor it even wants to be one, FC4 is very obviously a theme park).
 

Yasae

Banned
lol.... yet not one review or personal impression supports your unsubstantiated "opinion". How about playing it instead of talking through your ass
Yikes.

I would play it actually, but you know how Rockstar has this 2 month delay on the PC port? That stupid thing Ubisoft used to do but knows better not to? Yeah, that. I guess it's my fault though, I don't have eyes in a graphics thread to see or money to spend on games which are artificially delayed.
 

UrbanRats

Member
^^^ They could've used a couple of months delayed, this time, lol.
---
No.
They're just first t the party.

I'd wait to see RDR2 and such, to really determine that.
 

Heigic

Member
Only if they can fix the stutter bug which reduces FPS down to ~30 that I've had in both Watch Dogs and Far Cry 4. It's infuriating.
 

Skyzard

Banned
I really wish the GTA IV mods would work easily with the steam version.
Animals are like small scripted bits. But you see very little variation on these sorts of things. What you call interactions are really just scripted events that pop-up in selected locations. They added enough, and so you have an illusion of a world.

It's an illusion of interaction.

"World" games versus "linear" games is simple: in linear games one elements leads to the next. In a true world game all elements are connected together. The result is: complexity.

Again, the Far Cry 4 scripted bits are just manually assembled bits. They are always contained in a fixed spot. So they fake the complexity that would define a true "open world".

Complexity, in general, means that every element in a system is connected with the others. More elements = more connections = more complexity.

In FC4 the protagonist isn't the world, because, again, the world is relatively static outside the scripted events. What is non-static is only the player. But this is exactly why it's not a true open world (nor it even wants to be one, FC4 is very obviously a theme park).

Is there a game that does what you're describing because almost every one I can think of doesn't really create a world like a Godly developer, just random scripted events.

Like what game has what it's missing?

I knew what you meant initially but I couldn't think of examples outside of very special cases like Shenmue, which were limited by how you could interact.

It's kinda unfair to expect them to create whole lives for individual NPCs when most can die. Sure you can ask for more variety and more randomization, more scripts...but I don't think that's what you're asking...
 

Skyzard

Banned
They are the top dogs at releasing unfinished, buggy, glitch and down right optimized games especially on PC.

And to answer OP's question, no, that title goes to Rockstar.

Then GTA V better not be a graphical letdown in comparison on PC, I'm going to hold you to it.
 

Mechazawa

Member
I'm legitimately surprised by how nice Far Cry 4 looks on PC in those webms. Thought it's last gen shackles were going to hold it back more.
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
The buildings look really, really good, but the animations look unchanged. It doesn't look as good in motion, to be honest.

yes, of course. the visuals DO look that good (specifically cars and buildings) but obviously it's still going to be limited by the 2008 engine.

Photo mode enhancements. I played two hours of the game last night and it doesn't hold a candle to what I'm seeing when I play the pc version of Unity.

not all of those have filters. also you realize you just compared the PC port of one game to the console port of the other. wait til you can do apples to apples, which would be shocking if PC GTAV falls to ACU. and that's without mods.
 

diaspora

Member
yes, of course. the visuals DO look that good (specifically cars and buildings) but obviously it's still going to be limited by the 2008 engine.



not all of those have filters. also you realize you just compared the PC port of a game to the console port. wait til you can do apple to apples, which would be shocking if PC GTAV falls to ACU. and that's without mods.

That's assuming Rockstar lets people mod the game at all.
 

Psoelberg

Member
How does AC Unity look on PS4?

The framerate get in between 15-20 sometimes, but most of the times when running on roft tops it stays somewhere close to 30. The game looks really amazing, though. The lightning and indoor scenes are the best I've seen on ps4 yet - better than Infamous, I think - probably because of the scale, and more dynamic and realistic lightning.
 
They are top dogs at manpower and getting their games finished before everyone else. The rest of the industry hasn't had a chance to catch up and release more than one open world next gen game.
 
Top Bottom