AC: Unity Digital Foundry Performance Analysis (PS4/Xbone)

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-assassins-creed-unity-performance-analysis

Unfortunately, Eurogamer was not able to evaluate the PC version in comparison to the Xbox One and PS4 versions, but they are usually good about updating their articles when they can. A "full analysis" is coming later in the week.

Surprisingly the Xbox One versions seems to come out ahead in terms of frame rate, but neither console is able to maintain 30 fps which is strange considering that Black Flag had no problems staying locked at 30. Both versions are 900p and according to Eurogamer are visually almost identical.

It's a real bummer to me. To the point where I'm actually holding off on buying it.

Oh well. Maybe by the time of next year's Assassin's Creed I'll have a good PC.

I wouldn't call it strange when comparing it to Black Flag, as that was running on an entirely different engine than Unity is. The game is clearly a graphical leap over Black Flag and the with the game being apparently very closely tied to CPU power, the Xbox Ones frame-rate advantage might be due to its slightly superior CPU over the PS4. Still a disappointment optimization-wise for both consoles and hopefully future patches can fix it.

I have trouble finding any Ubisoft related performance issues a surprise, regardless of platform.

24fps, more cinematic than ever.

What a train-wreck. Ubi really has to pull itself together.

Christ, for most of that video both versions were running below 30fps, and the PS4 version ran close to 20fps more often than not! What a terrible game on the technical side of things.

I played games with much worse framerate to the point were this doesn't affect me at all.

Wow... Really hope Far Cry is unaffected...

Pretty much agree. Playing it on PS4 right now, about 2 hours in, I have no complaints so far. Honestly it's a super impressive game.

@viciousbearmauling: Completely different engines. It should be fine.

I don't believe you, I've never heard of a game routinely going to 23 FPS. GTA had its dips but it wasn't this awful.

I can handle poor performance if I like the game's content itself, so this isn't a huge deal to me, but man, I'm really amused that after Ubisoft made a big deal about aiming for parity to "avoid all of the debates and stuff" that it's the Xbone version that performs better.

I can't help but go to the simplest, quickest assumption - that this is because of Microsoft's co-marketing dollars - but I'm guessing the explanation is actually much more complex than that (or at least, I'm trying to give Ubi the benefit of the doubt, rather than being a frothing internet jerk :P )

Between this news and the embargo, though, some of this ACU stuff seems super gross. :|

@korwin: next publishers will be saying 15fps makes games feel more like literature

It was pretty bad. Here's the Digital Foundry comparison.

So...believe it.

So. The Xbox version performs better, cool! Secret sauce.

There was supposed to be a day one update today, but I haven't noticed it get pushed out. I don't think its really supposed to help the framerate either, so they better do another big one.

I don't think it's all that surprising that this runs more poorly than Black Flag, the next-gen version of which was essentially just a crisper Xbox 360 game. That's not to excuse the shocking performance problems with Unity, though.

I don't know if this has ever been confirmed or not, but my understanding is that those co-marketing deals often include the promise of significant QA work by the platform holder. I wouldn't be shocked if that was the case here.

@mb: Yeah cant believe people are falling for all the hate. the amount of shit on neogaf bashing the game...like 5 threads "AC Unity FPS is "ATROCIOUS"

Previous gen consoles didnt stop people enjoying games at like fps in the 20s, when TLOU was released it had heaps of moments where it had FPS dip...

but nope becaues its Ubisoft and "next gen" : / people are acting like an agry mob with pitchforks.

bloody vocal minority... gamers make me sad.

and all that talk about Console gamers not caring about graphics, but all of a sudden everyone thinks they know whats best and everyone cares abotu games having uber good FPS and resolution.

Little interest to begin with.. burnt out on AC but this is a good reason to pass. Plus the QL of when they switch to Xbone looked rough as hell.

AC's frame rate has been good enough for me as well.

Back in my formative years I played a lot of games on my PC, which wasn't all that powerful but I'd still crank up the graphics so I could reach the highest fidelity while maintaining at least 20 fps. I got used to playing action games at 20 fps for so long that anything that stays above that doesn't really bother me.

the obession with numbers rather then how it actually over the last couple years is kinda depressing.

How did they make it perform worse on more powerful hardware? Jesus Ubisoft.

I really can't see the difference, the point where the PS4 version gets to 18fps after the smoke bomb looked just the same as the the rooftop part running at 30fps.

Seems like a modern Ubisoft game, no surprise here!

People shouldn't buy games that drop below 30 FPS. Hell, you should only buy games that are 60 FPS. Send a message to publishers and developers that all games should play well.

Did no one play the Souls games? The framerate in those game often made me not able to block properly sometimes but those games were great to me.

People that don't play games because the FPS goes below a 30 or isn't always 60 is fucking insane to me.

Agreed. Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2 both had FPS dips into the single digits. They were still wonderful games though!

I do understand that SWKOTOR gave you the ability to pause combat and that higher frame rates are required for action games to be playable but ~25 fps is still very playable...

@bloodtooth:

finally some sense... and people now are getting their pitchforks ready cause some cheeky developers put some joke referencing 1080P in the game.

oh lawd.

half of it is probably placebo with most of these people having enjoyed games that are floating around 20s FPS but now they are just conscious of it cause of all the negativity drummed up by people.

honestly, people are just out for blood, now wait for the division (which actually does look like smoke mirrors) and then people should get angry hehe

sometimes I think an emperors new clothes thing happens when it comes to framerate and resolution. Im not saying people are lying but when someone says "Look how bad this frame rate is" its almost a confirmation bias type effect (probably not the right term but hopefully someone understands what I'm rambling about)

And it was still inexcusable. Blighttown was basically unplayable.

@horseman6: For me only parts of that area were super annoying but it unplayable.

To be honest I considered canceling my pre-order due to all the talk about the game being broken. Luckily I had the sense to watch an hour or two of a ps4 gameplay and came to my own conclusion - the frame rate isn't great, but its certainly not a deal-breaker. I decided to go ahead and pick up my pre-order. The first couple hours have been pretty good!

On a side note - I don't do digital pre-orders and I discourage other people from doing so. Pre-ordering from a local store allows you to easily tell the local shop to cancel and refund your money if the reviews say the game is terrible (this was my reaction when Thief released to nearly universal negative critical reception).

Just because you aren't sensitive to low or variable frame rates doesn't mean others aren't. The fact that frame rate comes up so much should be an indication to you that it is indeed an issue for many, many people. Low frame rates on consoles are one of the main reasons I upgraded my PC last year and skipped both the Xbox One and PS4 and will probably never buy them.

I think a lot of reasons it comes out is because of things like these foundry articles and many wouldn't even notice if it wasn't strictly pointed out to them.

youre totally right though about others being more sensitive or it bothering others more then me or someone else. And thats perfectly fair. If the technical aspects of a game cause issues to you its hard to get past.

*shrug* PC gamers have been pointing out poor performance on consoles for decades and it doesn't seem to have changed anything. I don't think there is anything for you to be worried about even if it is true.

my comment is videogaming is not bowling, in video games we play games not frames.......... well in bowling you play games too but you get the point...... (I would like to add a bunch of pics to illustrate my point but then I would be adding more frames to this topic and I grow weary of all this frame talk)

on a side note if your worried about beast mode FPS and REZ if you were expecting top of the line out of a console you're doing it wrong.... I'm just glad that the game has a ton of characters of screen and a pretty big world(more buildings you can ran in & out of up and down stair out of windows compared to black flag)

The frame rates seem fine. Sad they arent at least a locked 30, but oh well. Your brain will adapt and ignore any perceived issues after a hour or so as long at its in a stable range. Its wide swings in FPS when it really becomes an issue. Havent played much, but seems to run well on the highest settings with my GTX 770, no AA, low shadows, and Vsync on. Have to wait and see for crowded environments. I only have a I5 2400 at 3100ghz which I think is actually below the min.

But thats like racecar drivers pointing poor performance in family sedans. Of course that sedan will be slower, but it's theoretically supposed to be a smoother and less complicated ride than a stickshift race car.

I realised recently that framerate matters to me hugely when playing on PC but not at all when playing on Console. I think it's because with poor framerate on the PC there's the sense that it's my fault, in some way. I put this machine together and I skimped on making it as good as I could somehow. Due to the non-flexible nature of Consoles there's no real obvious way to improve or decrease their performance and as a result I just kind of accept it.

Little bit of off topic self-examination there.

How did they not get to 20fps and think 'You know what - maybe a few less people on screen wouldn't be so bad after all...' ?

@jimbo: they didn't want to compromise their "Massive Crowd" vision. Instead they opted to change the LOD distance to a couple of metres...

@euandewar said:

I have a similar point of view, but it's more because I find a reduced or choppy frame rate much more perceptible in PC versions. For instance, a lot of games try to obscure a lower frame rate on consoles by using certain rendering tricks like motion blur to make the image appear smoother, to the point where a console game locked at 30 hertz and using motion blur often appears smoother than a PC game with a frame rate that fluctuates between 40 and 60 hertz. On the flip side, issues like out of order frame pacing are much more common on PCs, and can make a game running at anything below 60 hertz appear much choppier than the actual frame rate would suggest.

I find the framerate inconsistency to be the most jarring when it picks up rather than slows down. In a few hours of running around the city I've found it holds at a pretty steady, playable, rate with a few big dips in crowds. The games general sluggishness is most obvious when I'm all alone in small area and suddenly feel like I'm bouncing off the walls. PS4 btw.

I'm generally impressed with game otherwise, if they can patch it up its probably my second favorite AC after Black Flag.

That is why there is a *shrug*. Turns out all of this wailing and teeth gnashing isn't that big of a deal even though in almost every instance (this game maybe an exception?) the PC version doesn't have the same level of performance issues or compromises.

It turns out what really matters for console game is whether or not it "feels" correct and stable. People should be mad their version, regardless of platform, of ACU is glitchy instead or buggy instead of worrying about the frame rate. It sounds like *everyone* should be unhappy.

You know.... a part of me is just fascinated over how much raw tech is in this game. Like hair physics, clothing, soft body, rag dolls, crowds, lighting..... of course it's not going to run well, it can barely run well pre-rendered go look at some Pixar fur tests of Monsters Inc.

The performance on my PS4 version seemingly got better after the system software 2.02 firmware was released. Could be in my mind, but 2.01 definitely had issues. At one point my PS4 said that it couldn't load something because RAM was full. 2.02 seems to have solved that. Must have been some memory leak type of issue.

@extomar: Oh definitely. The reason I bought a console instead of a beefy graphics card was to get away from all this performance bullshit. I wanted to bask in the relative safety of optimized games that ran at solid framerates. The last thing I want is to be playing a game on my brand new next-gen console and getting the experience of playing it on an aging video card that just can't keep up when the action heats up or whenever I'm not in a tiny room.

It's even more ridiculous when you think that these console developers literally have to code the game for 2 hardware sets, thats it! They just need to optimize it for a PS4 and XB1. Considering how most PC centric developers are having to make sure their games work on a wide range of different hardware it's really ridiculous that they had this much trouble attaining a stable framerate on known, never changing, specs.

I get that people care about framerate, and you can feel free to follow suggestion (even though I doubt you do), but you can't make other people care as much about framerate as you. You're effectively suggesting that there is literally nothing more important about games than their framerate, but I doubt many would honestly agree with that. If a game does enough other things well to be fun a bad framerate is not going to stop me from playing it. (Unless we're talking like a consistent 5-10 fps that literally prevents you from playing the game.) That doesn't make bad framerate excusable, but no more than plenty of other poor game design issues. (And less than many.)

Although suggesting that no one should buy games below 60fps is fucking asinine. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a solld 30fps. If a great game running at a solid 30fps doesn't deserve to be played then gaming is dead.

@zeik: I am one of those that has serious reservations about buying games that won't even run at 60 fps. I have a 144hz monitor so much of the time I'm playing at 120 or 144. 30 is so distracting to me it just sucks all the fun out of the game, I refuse to deal with it if there is anything at all I can do to avoid it. Sometimes that means skipping games that run like shit.