I’m pretty sure that a lot of you will be somehow disappointed with this news, however, let’s try to be optimistic for a change, shall we? Our reader ‘Inhuman0’ has provided us with evidence, suggesting that the PC versions of both Assassin’s Creed: Unity and Far Cry 4 are being developed by Ubisoft Kiev.
As Ubisoft’s Kiev official FB page claims, the studio is hard at work in order to ship the best PC experience to its fans. Thus, the company is hiring and is currently expanding. Moreover, and according to both its Wikipedia page and our own sources, the team is handling the PC versions of both Assassin’s Creed: Unity and Far Cry 4.
In case you’re not aware of, Ubisoft Kiev was responsible for the PC versions of Assassin’s Creed III, Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell: Conviction, Assassin’s Creed IV: Black Flag and Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon: Future Soldier. Now all of the aforementioned games had major performance issues, something that definitely worries us.
As you may already know, we consider the PC versions of Far Cry 3 and Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell: Blacklist among the best we’ve seen these past years (and way beyond what Ubisoft Kiev has offered). And the fact that the PC version of Far Cry 4 is not being handled by the main Ubisoft studio could mean ‘trouble.’
Let’s not forget that Far Cry 3 was developed with the PC as its lead platform, and came with a huge number of PC options. The fact that the PC version of the next Far Cry iteration is being handled by Ubisoft Kiev could mean that the PC will get a console port (meaning that there might be various performance issues). Still, we kind of expect to see the same PC options that were featured in Far Cry 3, unless of course Ubisoft Kiev messes things up.
For what is worth, we’ve got in contact with Ubisoft and requested PC Tech interviews for both Assassin’s Creed: Unity and Far Cry 4. Here is hoping that the French company will agree and provide some answers to our questions regarding the PC versions of these games.
Enjoy and stay tuned for more!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
OH SHIT SHIT SHIT SHIT..NO 16:10 SUPPORT, UBER-CRAP PORT..FUCK !!!
if that was the only issue, i’d still be buying ubisoft games. unfortunately, it’s far, far from being the only issue.
62fps framelimit on AC4 made me die a little inside, I really hope that they have realised that refresh rates above 60hz do exist out there.
Here we go again.after w_dogs,will have this!
encore une fois mf ubifail!!!
they think :”let the community loosers to make our bloody game worth for PC,we dont need to bother too much”.
…..
WD was not the worst, GR Future Soldier was unplayable when came out. It took many patches to fix it. AC on the other hand had also serious issues which have never been fixed by performance updates.
it still is if you try the dlcs i didnt, i heard stories of bluescreens though.
watch dogs is basically unplayable on PC unless you run at a mix of medium and low settings. the stuttering is unbelievably bad and game breaking in many instances.
It was the textures not the actual game settings, medium textures run smooth but they look like crap.
it’s the way the game loads textures. maldo (the modder) made the discovery as he was digging through the games coding. the game apparently loads each texture several times instead of once before the gpu has time to register it or some shit like that, resulting in the stuttering. he managed to correct the issue with a modified texture pack, but it’s still bugged. of course ubishit knows this, but they do nothing about it and will continue to do nothing about because they don’t give a damn about PC gamers.
This is incorrect. Users with C10 2000+Mhz RAM or a haswell overclocked chip with 4-6Gb vram had no issues on ultra textures. Those who did clearly don’t know how to tweak games, and review sites are obviously not going to correct themselves saying “oh-no we were wrong! High-freq ram is important and you must overclock your ringbus!”. GTFO AMD fagit, moan at your producers for not optimizing on your platform meanwhile I enjoy it on my Intel CPU the way its meant to be played.
My motherboard settings and RAM are optimised, I don’t even use the defaults so I’m not sure what you’re implying about my AMD setup. The idea a game needs some bios tweak to make it run good is just stupid, it’s called a broken game.
You call him an AMD fagit but fail to realise that the majority of high end Nvidia cards don’t even have more than 3GB VRAM, which is pretty pathetic since you were just talking about it running well with ‘4-6GB’. IMO Nvidia are great for optimization and overall stability, but AMD give you far more hardware for your money.
“Let’s not forget that Far Cry 3 was developed with the PC as its lead platform, and came with a huge number of PC options. ”
Yeah, and let’s also not forget about how utterly terrible the performance was and how many bugs, stutters and general shittasticly bad it was for months after release.
i don’t think they ever fixed the stuttering issues and certain graphical bugs…..say no to shitty ubisoft PC versions. i’ve learned my lesson.
FC3 had its issues (every PC port has) but it was definitely better PC port than many other UBI games got. This is definitely not positive.
far cry 3 was developed with the PC as its lead platform, but you definitely couldn’t tell with the way it turned out.
Really? Was it really?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE16ylSpfDw
Also, *every* PC port has issues if you’re terrible at your job or just don’t care.
True – I remember FC3 ran horribly on my PC at the time, with very few graphical options to tweak the experience.
What? The game had more graphical options than the majority of contemporary PC games… even an FOV slider and 3 different AO methods. What makes you think there weren’t enough options?
Having options does not mean the game has the right options. “Post Processing” is comprised of many different effects that can’t be individually altered.
How about an “OFF” option for AO? How about an “OFF” option for DOF? And I do remember having loads of problems with the FOV that could only be fixed with ini tweaks. It was a mess.
I’m currently going back through and playing FC3 and the FOV slider does work now, but I still needed to tweak the ini to disable AO, which wasn’t implemented correctly.
You have to keep in mind that having too many options will confuse those who are less technically inclined and just want to play the game. Those who want to go deeper can always tinker with the inis and stuff. I found that FC3 strikes a good balance between simplicity and customization when all aspects are considered.
You’re right, of course – like I said I’m playing through it again now and everything is fine, but now I have a computer that can run everything on Ultra. This wasn’t the case some years ago when the game was released – at the time my PC was spec’d higher than consoles, though. Having those options would have saved me a lot of time and frustration.
But to your point: I don’t believe they left out those options in order to appeal to those that are less tech-savvy. They left them out because they want a comparable experience between all platforms. Because of this they didn’t go that extra 5% (or whatever) and bother to add any new content just for PC users, such as a more detailed LOD. This means they didn’t have to bother giving the option to turn off the distance blur, which hides the low-res mountains in the background. Because this blur is always on (there’s no need to test it while off), when you turn it off it creates visual artifacting. Likewise, there are some other post processes that ‘break’ if you turn off one and not the other. All this takes testing, which equals money – money they were not willing to spend to make the PC experience optimal.
It will only get worse. With this new ‘next-gen’ console they can avoid these graphical options because ‘our game is next-gen, upgrade your computer,’ when your computer could run it fine if they had only included the option to turn off [this extraneous feature] or another.
I see your point regarding the “comparable experience”. Budget is always a factor when developing games, and a lot of times it’s not under the direct control of the designers themselves. Sometimes sacrifices have to be made either to cut costs or meet deadlines, especially when the game is multiplatform, whereas the benefits of the improvements are for a single platform.
I never had problem with FPS, though I could not start the damn game for 2 months xD got crash every time Ive tried. Still I say it was better port than most.
What kind of graphical bugs? Regarding stuttering, I haven’t experienced any. I was running the latest patched version though.
dude, it took them several months to finally reduce the stuttering to minimal levels, and by several i mean damn near a year. the problem is still extremely prominent with dual gpu’s, crossfire and sli.
graphical bugs? the strange way the engine loads assets making it look like it’s your gpu is producing artifacts is just one of them. there’s also the bsod’s, and other types of lock ups.
the game was a complete mess for at least 4 months after it’s release, which is the same way watch dogs is, the same way ac iv was and the same way ac3 was.
bottom line, ubishit sucks balls at optimizing their games for PC or they simply don’t give a shit. either way, i now refuse to buy their shitty products.
yup i also had stuttering, i dont remeber how i fixed it, i think it has to do with water.
Yeah, it was something to do with water setting had to be on medium or lower or it would studder like crazy, other that that though i had no problems even on my older system.
i figured that out thanks to fallout 3 stuttering
Were you running SLI or Crossfire? If yes, did you try setting the Vsync to 2? That option was designed specifically to counter stuttering on dual-GPU configs. I myself ran the game pretty fine on a 550 Ti during release week, so honestly I’m not really aware of these issues you speak of.
Right… I played Far Cry 3 a few weeks after release, on an i5 2500 and a single gtx 560ti. Settings weren’t on ultra, but they were damn good on medium-high and i got crystal 60+ stable solid fps, no stuttering, no bugs, no nothing, so… dunno where you’re coming from.
I tried every trick in the book and still couldn’t rid the game of stuttering
FC3 didn’t stutter for me, even once but i bought that months after release
Me neither!
It’s really stable now, but when it first came out it was unplayable.
You can’t judge anything from to small videos compressed to hell. Like comparing performance of cars by pressing the gas pedal only some distance. My first impression still is that the E3 version looked better but it’s really pointless to compare this quality. Give me actual proper screenshots in 1080p.
uhh… whaat ? You don’t need an uncompressed video to see that some of the details have drastically changed. For example, the vegetation has dramatically decreased, geometry has changed and post-processing effects that were present in the E3 “gameplay” footage didn’t make it to the retail release.
It’s not like we’re looking at how crisp and high-res the textures are or how the character models look like. The kind of details that will be hard to look at when looking at ugly youtube clips
”You don’t need an uncompressed video to see that some of the details have drastically changed”
True but the whole thing is still stupid mainly because majority of people don’t simply know about this stuff. Comparing any graphics through youtube should be illegal, it’s fucking frustrating to see those comments ”well it doesn’t look that different” on some last of us remastered comparison. Those people have never even seen 1080p 60fps and that doesn’t come through youtube or 1000×800 screenshots.
Are you sure those videos are running with the same graphical options? Not saying it isn’t, but I’ve seen my share of youtube videos where they lie about that.
Can’t trust every source in the market m8.
I did think that Far Cry 3 ran a little too slow when it came out (quite often I struggled to get more than 40 FPS, while Battlefield 3 was running quite far above 60 FPS at all times), but I don’t recall seeing stuttering or bugs at all. I didn’t play the MP more than an hour or two, but the SP worked fine for me.
I’m tired of these Ubishit stories
Then you probably shouldn’t be reading and commenting about them.
Get lost, you are the one who shouldn’t be here fagit. Go r@pe your mom or play on your xbox.
I didn’t tell him not to be here; I told him if Ubisoft’s stories tires him, he shouldn’t be reading them in the first place. So learn.
Also, you amuse me. Tell you what… you change your name to RapedBYCooling’sFaggot just like FuckedBYCoolingGibbon and I’ll go away.
Oh and by the way faggot, it’s spelled faggot and not “fagit”. So learn some more.
I was gonna say, “far cry 4 is your last chance ubisoft, if you screw that up, i am done with your games”
But now it seems there is no need for that. Ubisoft doesnt care about pc gamers.
Its like jim sterling said “they say they are sorry for delivering a bad product because it doesnt cost them anything to do it” So they can just keep saying that they are sorry even if they dont mean it and keep on doing the same crap they claim they are “sorry” about.
I dont have to check DSO perfomance analysis to know that both unity and fc4 are gonna be a mess on pc.
Unity is already a mess, that E3 demo was on PC and it was terrible, 16fps to 45fps with stuttering. but yeah i like to see FC4’s performance
It’s a real shame, as FC4 and ACU are two of my most anticipated games of this year. I may have to give in and buy them on PS4 if our worst fears are true, shocking to think that I’ll get better performance out of a £350 console than a PC with a £400 graphics card.
i don’t think you get better performance out of consoles than your 400$ card, what is your card and cpu ? i have 200$ card and i get better performance in all on them.
i get bad performance in watchdogs, 40fps to 45fps in ultra 1080p, but it’s better than 22fps to 30fps 900p on consoles and game looks better graphicly.
R9 290x + i5 3570k (OC to 4ghz)
For most games yes I’m sure I’ll get better performance, but in the past (especially with Ubisoft games) I’ve found that I run into far less problems with the console iterations.
For example back when Far Cry 3 released I bought the game on PC and my brother bought it on PS3. The game suffered from really bad stuttering, crashes to desktop and full lockups so I wasn’t able to comfortably enjoy the game, meanwhile my brother was playing it fine.
Higher resolution and framerates are one thing, but the game actually working as intended is another, I’d much rather know that the game will work correctly over having to gamble just so the game looks prettier.
Either way I’ll wait to see how the games are received on release and make my decision then.
yeah i heard about FC3’s stuttering, i bought that few month after release, when i bought it they already fixed the stuttering. yeah, better wait and see
If FC4 is a straight port then PC gamers are screwed. It’ll stutter like a gawdawful mess. Consoles and PC don’t work the same way, as we now know.
Remember when PC gamers got all excited over new consoles having “PC hardware” inside, making “ports easier”? Turns out that’s only true if the developer gives a damn. They don’t.
the industry and PC gamers are doomed, let’s face it. consoles have ruined everything.
Way to go on being positive m8! Not a good way of living your life 😉 It’s not as bad as you say really.
Ok so games cost more than ever, which means that they gonna make sequels and milk old ips rather making new games and also means really high sales required, but hey be positive about it.
All studios are sufferign and the last 3 years there have been more studios shut down than ever, but hey lets be positive, our gaming hobby is turning into hollywood with just as much focus to a borader audience but hey lets be positive.
Doesnt help, perhaps if we put more focus into whining they will take notice, but those corperate suits care only about proffit, they say “we are sorry” about the mess they created but dont really mean it, so they go own with their profits forecasts and if they fail, they shut down the studio and fire the devs.
But lets be positive eh?
Yes, always be positive, but I didn’t say be blind 🙂
Games cost more due to inflation and high developer salaries (which I agree). You can compare with the prices from the first years. I actually read a documentary about that once, but just can’t remember the name.
Studios suffer more, because there are more studios, more games, more competition overall. Of course, if the quality of the product is not good or the brainwashing marketing is weak, they will have losses. Good money management also is a factor during this times.
Nowadays we have games for many platforms (android, ios, pc, consoles, …), so that’s normal that a few companies won’t manage to keep up in this tough maket, but hey, at least the consumer wins for the amount of variety. How’s that for being positive 🙂
We should complain yes, in cases like watch dogs which they actually lied about the graphic fidelity, but I also like to focus on the good things Ubisoft did, like for example Assassin Creed 3 (which ran great in my machine), child of light (great co op to play with my wife), Splinter Cell Blacklist (which I enjoyed), rainbow six games, … Well my point is, not everything is bad and yes we should complain if we feel cheated, but better yet don’t buy the game unless you know for sure it’s a good quality product, but don’t be so negative all the time. I’m thinking about people health here as well 🙂
In the end, we do have thousands of good game going for us for the PC platform and I already have hundreds in my steam account which I’ll be playing for years to come and many more coming out every month. So, I choose to be happy with what I have now and with what I can buy if I feel like it’s a good enough product.
PS. I would never buy Watch Dogs because of what Ubisoft did, but im not really sad about it 🙂
easy money ruined everything, when you can make the same game and patch it and call it a sequel on consoles, why put actual work in it and improve it and release free dlc like pc games did?
The developers these days are not talented, the are not game developers, they just make interactive movies and dont understand gameplay or innovation, devs in the 90s were legends they designed gameplay systems and rules like table rpgs, they balanced them and tried new things, nowadays games have horrible skill trees and play alike, devs are not talented, plus so many of them work on a game that the final result is not focused at all, its a mess.
This gen will be the worst one yet, you will only get sequels to overmilked franchises due to development costs and incompetence and the low sales reflect that.
This is the first time consoles are rather close to PC’s, the one main point with new console hardware for PC was the possibility of much better ports.
It always sounded too good to be true and I never believed it .
These guys are indeed bunch of as*holes . Why not let Massive handle it .? I mean really .? Again Ubisoft Kiev .? AGAIN .?
massive is very likely swamped with work on Division, but UBI has lot of studios. What they should do is what Square Enix does, most of (if not all) PC ports are handled by nixxes and results are very good (TR,DE:HR,Hitman,..)
Isn’t massive busy with the Division? a better suggestion would be for Ubi to know how to f*cking code their games properly.
apparently they think the pc sales they get are good enough, dont give em anything they dont seem to want it.
Hopefully it will turn out a little better this time that they have new gen to port from rather than old gen. Although it is really a shame that this is happening, I love Assassin’s Creed and looking forward to Unity. Unfortunately by not supporting them we justify their attitude towards PC gaming, Worse sales will lead to even worse future releases.
FUCK UBISHIT. I’M NOT BUYING EITHER REGARDLESS.
Lets also NOT forget that UBIsoft Kiev had nothing to do with WATCH DOGS! Or have you all forgot about the stuttering, the abscene of patches, the graphical downgrading ?? Only game of those listed only Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon: Future Soldier needed massive patching and they did it even if it took 10 or so patches and 2 GB. Never had an issue with those others mentioned after the first patch (Usually released very quickly). So I honestly dont see “the problem” here. Quite opposite I see this as good news.
they had nothing to do with watch dogs, but they had anything to do with AC III, they game that even recommended systems couldn’t run. it ran 10 to 12fps. they never fixed it but with new hardware (that time) you could get to 60fps. hardwares that are much more powerful than AC3’s recommended ones. Ghost Recon took one year, and graphics in that game was s*it even then. AC IV on the other hand was better than AC III but it was horribly optimized they never fixed it. Splinter Cell Conviction was also horrible at launch. so we can judje them by their past works and all of them were s*it
I didnt have any issues exepect those that I stated above. Guess Im lucky or that my computer is strong enough.
maybe you are ok with any frame rate or as you said you have a pretty strong system
Of course I would not be happy with lag or anything similar: Perhaps you bet on the wrong horse when u went with the over priced/over hyped Intel as CPU?
On youtube theres a video from “Tek Syndicate” named:
“AMD FX 8350 vs Intel 3570K vs 3770K vs 3820 – Gaming and XSplit Streaming Benchmark” that explains whats up.
Please watch it!
no i’m ok with my 3570k. the problem i had with ACIII was with my older CPU not this one. that CPU was better than the cpu they recommended for AC III but 12fps was my top fps for that game (still 60fps in cutscenes – terrible optimization). of course now i can play AC III 60fps all the time, but DUH it’s 10times better than my last CPU. it’s not over priced and not over hyped, actually best CPU money can buy. could
Did you watch that youtube video where they tested them for real? (See above for easy trace) You see thing is I dont get these complaints at all, how could I be see lucky with the framerate/gameplay while others with Intel CPUs were so unlucky?
what the F are you talking about ? why should i see that vid ? i already saw benchmarks when i bought my CPU, there is no point to do that. did i said i can’t play AC NOW ? i said it WAS a mess back THEN when it’s released. how a new AMD/Intel CPU related to a game that was older than these products ? did i said i’m unlucky ? why are you making things up ? what the hell ?
I think you should watch the video as it shows how Intel manipulates numbers for selective benchmark tests on selective games, they show you an illusion of truth that does not exist. It is completely normal that you think your Intel is better than it actually is. Intel is a gangster company, only great at stealing from AMD and losing in court room battles vs AMD time after time which is why I would never buy a thing from Intel and neither should you. One day you will perhaps thank me instead for cursing me ?
lol, again what are you saying ? i don’t understand. how crappy PC ports from Ubisoft have anything to do with intel vs. AMD ? intel is the worst, ok ? happy now ? but answer me this:
Can you Play WatchDogs on Ultra in 1080p and 60fps ?
Can you Play AC IV on Ultra (PCSS,HBAO+ etc…) 1080p and 60fps ?
if not, then you have the same issues as me but you can’t tell the difference between crappy frame rate and smooth 60fps. all that matters to you is stuttering alone.
i don’t think my intel is better than it actually is, it is a great mid range CPU just like FX 8350. it’s better on single thread tasks, lower on multithread tasks but they are really close. in most games 3570k performs better than FX 8350, in some worst. but they are really close to each other. you are just a fangirl that’s it.
when did i cursed you ?
here are some benchs from Guru3D and tom’s Hardware and one other site:
I really think you should watch the video as it shows how Intel manipulates numbers for selective benchmark tests on selective games such as the benchmarks for the games you just showed. Im not a fan of anyone, as I see it AMD is the lesser evil as they are NOT gangsters like over priced and over hyped Intel crooks and thieves. Watch Dogs and AC4 max yes even uber sampling in Witcher 2 goes smoothly. Whats with the hostility man? I just think you got jewed on that over priced Intel card and that you should have bought a proper FX 8350 card at once. Lets hope it will be a worthwhile lesson for you. And please do not attack me, I am merely the messenger. Its also sad to see how hype and word of mouth so quickly gets messed up and lost in translation nowadays.
1. i don’t watch a paranoid person videos.
2. i have 3570k and i play games with it, share some of your benchmarks with me and i share mine with you. there is no need for making stories.
3. smoothly ? give me a frame rate. of course i can play watch dogs smoothly 38 to 45fps on ultra but it’s not 60fps. same as AC4. smooth is not a frame rate, it’s a feeling.
4. what hostility ?
5. intel card ? card ?
6. why should i attack you ? did i attacked you somewhere or said anything offensive to you ?
7. messenger of the god ?
Please calm down. We PC brothers and sisters have to stick together for its own very best. We have to stand united against the great Satan.
>:|
AC4 optimization was reasonable. If anything, blame AMD for making shitty CPUs with weak single threading.
Just buy a real good CPU. i5-2500k users are not complaining yet except in watch_dogs where haswell’s cache frequency and bus speed doubled and overclocked give it the advantage.
i am using intel cpus (3570k) and nvidia cards (660ti oced) all the time. AC4 wasn’t reasonable, it uses 3core instead of 4, that is bad optimization. better than 3 but still not there.
To be honest, I was using an EVGA 8800 GTS before getting my 780 and I could run AC3 just fine.
that is a lie. but 780,660,8800 , they won’t matter, you need a good CPU (way better than they recommended), that game was a CPU bound title
You’re a freaking lie dude!
idiot
Lets hope they insert a hard difficulty settings system into Unity because AC 4:Black flag was way too easy and took no effort to master.
sorry, not gonna happen. this game is all about press X to kill,hack,stealth,auto kill and auto run. anything that make it harder, even if it’s an option, new gamers find it hard to play and they don’t want that. they want to sell it to console audience and kids to play it easily with one or two button
Couldnt it very easyly be made optional on PC to make the game much more harder, as they did it with FC3 when they pumped up the difficulty with an extra hard difficulty setting ? I dont think most PC gamers likes to play games where the default setting is very easy, same thing with GTA 5 I run through that game dying only perhaps 5 times, thats imo way too easy, a game should be hard, tough and challenging. Perhaps Ubisoft should be contacted about this issue? Wonder where would be easiest way to contact them regarding this issue.
it would be very cool but they wont do it, their target audience are casuals so they don’t care about others. you want a challenging game buy Divinity. it’s beautiful,hard with high replay value
afer ac1 they all are easy.
That need to change! Should Ubi Kiev or HQ be contacted regarding cool hard difficulty settings?
write your email in french. they take it more seriously cuz they are french. or you can create a petition. but they just don’t care
Do you think they would take it seriously if I wrote in German?! French are nothing more than weak pathetic surrender monkeys as WW2 proved.
that was a offensive joke. if you are writing in German, then use Capitalized words
French are scum bags and cheese eating surrender monkeys, NOT a single country in Europe that likes those retarded clowns.
why are YOU so angry with them ? i have two french friends, they are nice people. you can’t call a nation stupid, they are all types of people everywhere not just one country
If any country in Europe is regarded as the ‘bad guys’ then it’s undoubtedly Germany, so keep your opinions to yourself. I like France and it’s people.
You just crossed the line. Arguing over games, consoles vs pc is one thing but that was totally unacceptable.
Nobody gives a f..k what you think Jew boy, go mass murder some more Palestians in Gaza you pos.
‘go mass murder’
Auschwitz?
forget unity,mordor is coming.
and Lords of the Fallen. exact same day as Unity
Holy shizzle I hope LotF is as good as Dark Souls, it looks really promising.
wasn’t PC the lead platform for FarCry 4 ? they lied again ?
great news, i’m now sure i wont buy them
yup just like watchdogs, its like jim sterling says it doesnt cost them anything to lie so they do it for good pr.
Thank God for Jim Sterling.
Where’s it mentioned PC is no longer the lead platform for Far Cry 4?
because all kiev do is porting games. when the main team doesn’t work on PC version then it’s not lead platform anymore, otherwise why they need kiev to do the job ?
in short, kiev is not developing FarCry 4 but Montreal does
Hmm, good point. I wonder what’s really going on. Did they change the lead platform like in Battlefield 3’s case, or something else…
i guess so, it doesn’t make any sense. if montreal (the main team) is saying the PC is the lead platform but they are not working on it instead Kiev (not the main team) working on it, then whats wrong with the lead platform ? 😀
EA did the same thing with BF3 ? i didn’t know that
Yeah BF3 started development on PC, but switched to console midway.
assasins creed: Maidan edition. you need to kill all your teammates at said, that is was not you.
guess its gonna be another single threaded crap, well at least it’ll be better than consoles overall , but still , why do i need a 300$ intel cpu for every pc game? and even then its not enough .. just hope these guys learned something from their past work
Don’t need to panic, PC version will be get individual attention from Ubisoft Kiev and I am sure Ubisoft Kiev is now better equipped and more experienced to deliver a quality PC port.
both unity and fc4 so i dont think it will get enough attention
AC4 was a great port, and suffered from Dx11 issues more. The single threaded problem is a draw call bottleneck for DirectX11 itself and Nvidia improved it with 337.50
Only AMD owners without good CPUs will moan about this port being bad, or laptop peasants.
Its not your fault though, this is the time as consumers you should demand AMD to increase CPUs with respectable single threading, but their fanbase is just poor people who probably couldn’t even afford intel’s God send k series and desktop e series CPUs.
“The single threaded problem”
Come on!!!
The game needs a good more modern CPU, my old Intel Q8400 struggled with the game and bottlenecked my GTX 660. My FX 6300 run it great now, doesn’t stutter or lag like it used to do so it’s not an AMD CPU problem.
Not interested in TarzanCry 3 anyway but Im hoping Assassins Creed Unity turns out ok. Ill never pre-order a Ubisoft game again though.
I was ok with the performance of AC III & IV. It’s not like the console performance was any better. The PC version was very playable in my machine, so I don’t really have any complaints about that.
if i see any issue im gonna pirate them from now on i had enough with this company
This is part of the issue, the reason they shit out each Ubi game on PC is because they know a ton of people will just pirate the game regardless of how well the port runs.
I think that the problem is not in Ubisoft Kiev, but in Ubisoft itself. While they will think that high-end PC and 400$ console should have a same level of graphics, nothing good will happen out of it.
Afaik UK didn’t worked on Watch Doge, and yet, it’s still suffers from bad optimization. Moreover, I’ve read that console version (which probably is the port from PC version of W_D) suffers from from the same stuttering issues. No one whines about probably because console players just got used to this kind of issues.
Agreed revelations by kiev worked fine, its how ubisoft makes games that ruin the pc optimization and then kiev will have to make sense of that unotpimized mess.
Id like to see the reports for stuttering on the console version.
I will not claim that since I don’t have PS4 and I didn’t played on PS4. I just wanted to check if PC is the only platform that having some problems and turns out it isn’t.
canadiangamer/net/2014/06/11/hey-ubisoft-wheres-the-watch-dogs-pc-patch/
reddit/com/r/watch_dogs/comments/26vbxa/ps4_occasionally_fps_drops/
reddit/com/r/PS4/comments/26ynby/am_i_the_only_one_getting_lagdrop_in_framerate/
forums.ubi/com/showthread.php/836004-stuttering-issue-game-or-ps4-defective-Forums
Could be worse.
Could be the team behind Watch Dogs, right? 😉
righ, but watchdogs was lead on pc despite the fact it didnt control or un like a pc game and dont forget that the delay gave them time to finish the game and put everything they wanted in it, despite the fact the game feels unfinished and even lacks weapon firing animations.
But hey its not like ubisoft lies to us right?
you forgot to mention, that Assassin’s Creed Black Flag, that was also been made in Kiev is one of the best ports in Ubisoft.
also Kiev did Mac version of Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell: Conviction, not PC version
please check information next time
no just no. You dont even know what you talking about
“please check information next time”
please read the article next time. and it was a sh*tty port not best port.
you forgot to mention, that Assassin’s Creed Black Flag, that was also been made in Kiev is one of the best ports in Ubisoft.
Guess who’s putting his pirate hat back on?
Why pirate it? Just don’t play it if you think it’s not worth playing it.
Solution is easy, don’t buy both the games. There are lots and lots of better games to play on the PC.