It’s been almost two weeks since the release of Lords of the Fallen and after receiving numerous patches, it’s time to see how this action RPG performs on the PC platform. Before continuing, allow us to explain what basically happened and why our PC Performance Analysis got delayed.
As with pretty much all titles, we contact developers/publishers for review codes. Some publishers send us review codes for their games prior to their release, while others send us codes after a game gets out. We’ve been in touch with CI Games for a couple of months and requested a Tech Interview. Unfortunately, this interview never came to fruition as – according to the publisher – the development team was busy with the game. Naturally, we afterwards requested a review code for our PC Performance Analysis, however the publisher never replied to our requests. We decided to give the publisher some extra time (and further pressured for a review code), however the company handling CI Games’ PR never got back on us, which brings us to this delayed article.
Lords of the Fallen is powered by the Fledge engine and as always, we used an Intel i7 4930K with 8GB RAM, NVIDIA’s GTX690, Windows 8.1 64-bit and the latest version of the GeForce drivers. We’ve also applied the latest PC update for Lords of the Fallen, so our analysis is based on that version. NVIDIA has already included an SLI profile for this game, which basically means that you won’t have to mess around with third party tools in order to enable it. SLI scaling is – most of the times – satisfying, though we do have to note that we encountered noticeable performance issues in both Single-GPU and SLI modes.
Lords of the Fallen’s PC RAM requirements surprised us when CI Games announced them. According to them, the game requires at least 6GB of RAM. Was this another COD: Ghosts case? Or not? Well, we can confirm that PC gamers will need more than 4GB of RAM in order to – properly – enjoy it. As we can see below, the game itself used almost 3GB of RAM, meaning that those with 4GB of RAM – provided there is no lock – will face major swapping issues.
Lords of the Fallen scaled well on our hexa-core CPU, however we did not notice any major performance increase over a quad-core CPU. In order to find out whether this game scales well on a variety of CPUs, we simulated a dual-core, a tri-core and a quad-core system. Since Deck13 has not included any benchmark tool, we used a really open area with enemies on screen for our test purposes. In such areas, our hexa-core system was able to push 58fps, while our simulated quad-core system was 3 frames behind with 55fps. On the other hand, our simulated tri-core system ran those scenes with 50fps while our simulated dual-core system ran them with 43.3fps.
Still, Deck13’s title suffers from various performance issues that have not been addressed yet. NVIDIA’s Turbulence effects bring a significant hit, resulting in scenes with noticeable framerate drops. Surprisingly enough, we were noticing low GPU usage whenever those framerate drops occurred, which kind of puzzled us as we were not CPU limited. Thankfully – and contrary to various reports – we did not encounter any crashes at all, however we had to disable that particular effect in order to maintain smoother framerates.
Still – and while disabling those effects helped a lot – there were various scenes in which our framerate dropped to mid 40s. As you’d expect, our SLI scaling on those scenes was not optimal, something that made us wonder whether that was an SLI issue or not. Unfortunately, those same framerate drops occurred even when we ran the game in Single-GPU mode. For example, take a look at the following scene. While running it in Single-GPU mode, we see one of our GPU cores being used at only 60% (and as a result of that, the game was running with only 40fps).
For what is worth, Lords of the Fallen ran with 60fps (most of the times) on our GTX690 with Very High settings (High textures and without the Turbulence effects). On the other hand, a single GTX680 was unable to maintain even a 50fps experience on High settings. In order to get a smooth gameplay experience, we had to also disable Volumetric Lighting. Oh, and those wishing to enable the game’s Very High textures will need GPUs with 3GB of VRAM, otherwise they will encounter major stuttering issues on outdoor areas.
Graphics wise, Lords of the Fallen looks good though it does not justify its high GPU requirements. Thanks to PhysX, there are a lot of destructible objects. Most of the characters are made of a respectable number of polygons, ambient occlusion is being supported, there are some cool lighting and water shading effects, and the level design will remind you some other games like Darksiders. Lip syncing is average at best, and the overall voice acting could be better. Animations, on the other hand, are great with smooth transitions between them, and there are some cute special effects (though we’d wish for beefier explosions and spells). Last but not least, the game suffers from a really aggressive LOD system, thus resulting in noticeable pop-in of objects.
All in all, Lords of the Fallen still faces numerous performance issues. PC gamers will need a top of the line GPU in order to enjoy it, despite the fact that its visuals are not THAT great. It looks good, don’t get us wrong. However, it did not shock us with its visuals, especially if you take into account the fact that a single GTX680 is unable to offer a constant 60fps experience even on High settings.
Enjoy!
There is a ‘crack’ joke in this article. Did you spot it?
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
AC Unity is so much better optimized than this one and here i am talking with a single GTX 680 2GBVRAM
So true. Yet Unity gets all the hate.
I just don’t get it. Unity is pretty well optimized as far as I’m concerned. It is properly multithreaded and scales well with more powerful hardware. There is no CPU bottlenecking as we saw in AC4. My i5 2500k is able to maintain 60fps and above (which is hardly the most cutting edge processor).
Unity is demanding on the graphics card side of things, but the visuals absolutely do justify it. Frankly, Unity is the best looking game I’ve seen on PC. And another thing that is great is that the frame render times are steady and consistent so there isn’t any sort of micro-stutter due to frame latency spikes. This is another indicator of good optimization.
I look at all the recent games I have played–Lords of the Fallen, Shadow of Mordor, Ryse, Dead Rising 3, The Evil Within, AC Unity–they all perform roughly in the same ballpark. I’m not able to run any of them at a steady 60fps on my GTX 770. I have to either put up with variable framerates or cap them at 30fps for more consistency. I usually choose the latter option, which means they are all running at effectively the same framerate for me. Unity looks a lot better than most of them. Ryse is the only competitor, but I still think Unity looks a bit better and has way more going on.
haha what a bunch of lies. i have a 4790k, 32gb ram and a 680 and i can barely maintain 50fps on max settings, soemtimes dropping to 25 and even 1 fps on ocassions. Unity is horribly horribly optimized its not even funny.
yes, the visuals are great and everything, but it has massive pop in issues as well as terrible performance. you must be the perfect one, who claims bullshit like i can run the game at 60fps, so your rig must suck.
i love how you contradict yourself. at the top i am able to maintain 60fps and ABOVE and then you go saying and i quote: “they all perform roughly in the same ballpark. I’m not able to run any of them at a steady 60fps on my GTX 770. I have to either put up with variable framerates or cap them at 30fps for more consistency.”
haha. comments these days
aparently blocking the game from acessing the interent fixes stuttering in pc and piss4 versions.
What could you expect from a person, who says that everyone who has problems with AC: Unity are just trolls and idiots?
Paid 60€ to Ubisoft just to troll them on Steam. Seems reasonable.
FU and your crappy strawman.
lol. nothing else to say ? now bite him, come boy, bark at him :)) goood boy
Jeez, you people can’t even freaking read. I never said that I am getting 60fps in Unity. In fact, I specifically said that I cannot run it at 60fps.
I was referring to the fact that my processor, the i5 2500k, can maintain 60fps. I’m basing this off benchmarks. http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http–www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Assassins_Creed_Unity-test-ac_proz.jpg
I’m sorry if it angers you, but the facts clearly show that Unity is efficiently multithreaded and takes advantage of multi-core processors well. Even a relatively old CPU like my i5 2500k will not present a bottleneck for people trying to achieve 60fps in this game.
http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http–www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Assassins_Creed_Unity-test-ac_intel.jpg
“I just don’t get it. Unity is pretty well optimized as far as I’m
concerned. It is properly multithreaded and scales well with more
powerful hardware”
Yet the whole internet complains.
“Unity is demanding on the graphics card side of things, but the visuals absolutely do justify it.
No they dont it barelly looks like a next gen game.
“Unity is the best looking game I’ve seen on PC.”
lol no.
” another thing that is great is that the frame render times are steady
and consistent so there isn’t any sort of micro-stutter due to frame
latency spikes”.
Everyone has inconsistent fps and microstutters.
How much ubisoft pays you
Seriosuly how much?
Everything I said is true. Can you provide any kind of counter argument or are you guys just going to call me names?
“Everything I said is true”
more like lies from a shill
“Can you provide any kind of counter argument”
the whole internet, even ubisoft itself at BBC last night and their stock numbers
“you guys just going to call me names”
this is the least we can do for a corporate slave like you
As I thought. Incapable of actually presenting any kind of real argument. Just going to keep going “baaaah”…”baaaaah”…”shill”…”baaaah”…”corporate slave”…baaaah”.
You’re the liar. Pretending that your ignorant opinion is universally held by everyone, even Ubisoft. Lol what a load of crap. 46% of the 2,217 user reviews currently on Steam are positive. Many of those positive reviewers are saying the same things that I am saying.
“You’re the liar”
in these kind of cases, lair is the one who defend a broken mess and says the game runs perfect for him/her.
“Pretending that your ignorant opinion is universally held by everyone”
of course, but it’s not my opinion. that is a fact when ubis**t’s stock falls 9% because of ACU.
“46% of the 2,217 user reviews currently on Steam are positive”
yeap, that reminds me a telltale game style of positive reviews. they are agencies that make good reviews for games in metacritic and steam. funny thing is most of those positive reviewers are the first time reviewers + many of them are trolls, they bashed the game and gave it a thumps up.
“Many of those positive reviewers are saying the same things that I am saying”
nope, most of them even mentioned the issues but hoped for a fix soon, the only ones that are saying its good are people like you or paid reviewers. yeap, thats a job.
“in these kind of cases, lair is the one who defend a broken mess and says the game runs perfect for him/her.”
Nope, the game isn’t a “broken mess” or a “shitty port” or “poorly optimized”. I have provided facts and reasoning to back up my position, while you have provided nothing but bare assertions and ad populum fallacies.
“of course, but it’s not my opinion. that is a fact when ubis**t’s stock falls 9% because of ACU.”
Ok, this is pretty much gibberish, but I know what you are trying to say. It’s pure nonsense, though.
You don’t know that Ubisoft’s stock fell 9% because of Unity. Stock prices rise and fall all the time for a variety of reasons. But let’s say the stocks did fall 9% solely because of Unity, it still wouldn’t mean that the stocks fell because those people agree with you. It could have simply been a reaction to the ‘perceived’ quality of the game. In other words, people like you start complaining and other people who don’t know better hear it and assume that it must be true.
In any case, this is another ad populum fallacy. Even if every one of those investors that caused the fall in stocks fully agreed with you, it still wouldn’t mean the idea was correct. A stupid idea can be held by one person or a million and it won’t change the truth or untruth of the idea.
Sadly, there are a fairly large number of PC gamers that don’t understand how these things work. All they know is that if a game doesn’t run at very high framerates on their midrange PC it must be “unoptimized”. The fact that there are quite a few people that hold this erroneous belief doesn’t change the fact that it is indeed wrong.
The rest of your post is just absurd tinfoil hat-type conspiracy theory BS. So, because I disagree with you I’m a “shill”, and all those people who bought Unity on Steam and played it and wrote a review for it are just “paid reviewers”? Lol. Ok, well that’s one way to dismiss anybody that disagrees with you so that you can stay firmly fixed in your ignorance.
it isnt though. the game is terirbly optimized, your rig is nowhere near as powerful as mine and i hit 1fps dude…1 F’ING FPS when i threw a smoke bomb in the city. its absolutely ridiculous how badly optimized it is, maintaining 30fps is hard already. high and ultra make almost no difference, thats how badly optmized it is. on lowest settings, it still stutters like s**t. only thing that hasnt happened to me is a CTD, but at this point the game is just unplayable.
I didnt call you names, but you defend ubisoft too much, everyone is pissed off about unity. So either they are all wrong or you just trolling. I asked you for screenshots, yet you havent shown any.
Not everyone. Even a few thousand vocal people on the internet complaining about any given topic can give the impression of it being a widely held view, even if it’s not. There’s no easy way to precisely quantify this.
What I do know is that around half of the nearly three thousand reviews on Steam are positive and recommend the game. Many of those reviews say very similar things as I am saying: that the game looks amazing, that it runs pretty well on their system, that the hate is overblown, that there are some glitches but they are more of a nuisance than game breaking, etc.
Why would that many people recommend the game and write positively about it if it really were as broken and horribly optimized as some of you are claiming?
Face it, there has been a hate campaign against this game practically since the time it was announced. I think it’s pretty clear that this is playing a part in why this game’s issues are being exaggerated so greatly.
The second part of this is that it’s a generalized problem in PC gaming that some people don’t understand what the word “optimization”refers to. These people complain about virtually every graphically advanced PC game that gets released. So, is it really the case that virtually all the graphically advanced games that get released on PC are unoptimized messes or is it that some PC gamers don’t understand the technology involved and have unreasonable expectations? I believe it is the latter.
This is a problem because if this kind of thinking prevails eventually developers may cave into it and start presenting us with watered down ports that are easy to run, but don’t really push the graphical envelope.
I’m not defending Ubisoft, I’m defending what I believe to be the truth.
so you telling me that metacritic, steam and totalbiscuit are all liars? Not to mention the console versions are a mess too and there are a ton of videos showing bugs.
Come on, you still havent posted pics of those amazing visuals you keep bringing up.
“Unity is pretty well optimized”
stop talking with your a** please and shut up. even ubis**t knows they screwed it up. they stock falls 9% because of that mess. so you work with them or you just a slave.
“there isn’t any sort of micro-stutter”
this is exactly the opposite of ACU
“best looking game I’ve seen on PC”
you are sick, only a blind mentaly disorder can say that.
Well optimised, really? Well throwing 50,000 draw calls at DX11 that can only support 10,000 peek is NOT well optimised, no amount of CPU and GPU power can solve the issues, the API is the bottleneck.
NVIDIA and Intel marketing say otherwise, even NVIDIA say GTX 680 recommended low settings at 1080p. It’s all about selling more hardware and throwing more CPU/GPU power at the game
When even my old i5 2500k can manage 60fps and does not present a bottleneck in my system, I’m sorry but that’s pretty decent optimization in my book, especially for a large open world game like this.
This games scales up with more powerful hardware just fine. There are plenty of people getting 60fps in the game. So this is not a case of a poorly optimized game that can’t run well no matter what hardware you throw at it.
It runs well capped at 30fps too. It doesn’t suffer from latency spikes in the frame delivery and the frame-pacing is smooth. This is another one of the things I look for to determine how well optimized a game is.
The simple fact is that the game would run and look better if it wasn’t DX11 API bottlenecked. Manage 60fps, so what? not all the time, even I can peak over 40fps in places and my system is nowhere near as powerful.
Sure, but I don’t think that most people with a decent Intel processor are being bottlenecked anyway.
it’s being bottlenecked at the software level not the hardware level.
Well, the game runs similarly to a whole bunch of other games I have played on my PC–Lords of the Fallen, Shadow of Mordor, The Evil Within, Ryse, etc.–and looks better to my eyes and has more going on than any of them, so it’s going to be pretty hard for me to be upset with the performance.
Frankly, I thought my i5 2500k was going to start bottlenecking me in certain games, especially games like AC Unity.
Well, a “next-gen” game using your old i5 which is better than the console’s CPU anyway, so the game is not so next-gen” after all saying your i5 from 2011 can easy do 60fps.
thanks john. good visuals for a new engine without any hype for engine but again the game sucks and it still have lots of problems in terms of performance and many visual artifact. same as unity this game released a year sooner than it should be.
Should we really expect a single GTX 680 to deliver 60fps constantly? It is a card from two generations ago….
Yes it should in special at 1080p 60+
If a GTX 680 can’t do 60 FPS on 1080p Ultra no AA(latest games) no other graphics card out there its able to do that ofc in the limit of the 2 GB VRAM but let’s not forget are 4GB VRAM of GTX 680 out there so….. bad ports everywhere !
And trust me i rather play at 30 or 60 FPS capped than playing with tearing and stutter at 45-50 bad ports everywhere and when a good PC port its finally out a GTX 780Ti/GTX 680 for example : a GTX 780Ti gets on 1080p 110+ Ultra 4x MSAA and a GTX 680 70+ Ultra 4x MSAA and thats how the things are working out 🙂
And yea G-SYNC its expensive!
I agree, was just asking a question and putting it up for debate. Not siding with anyone.
two years ago, not generation idiot
GTX 6XX -> 7XX -> 9XX – I don’t know about you, but for me it also looks like 2 generation ago. If we talk about dates 680 has been released in March 2012 (32 months ago) – so it’s closer to 3 years rather than 2.
And still rocking out on good optimized titles that means the devs don’t give a crap about us i had the money for GTX 780Ti SLI but whats the point with this PC ports i mean com on grow up!!!!!
You’re right – it should rock out in games that doesn’t require more than 2GB of VRAM. I’ve just pointed out that 680 is 2 generations ago GPU.
And some that do require more than 2GB VRAM(some of them still runs smooth but that isn’t a PC port)
Damn you PS4 and Xbone One and your weak power with a lot of VRAM!!
PS: GTX 680 = GTX 770 GK 104
it wont work that way, kepler->maxwell , this makes it one generation, and that card (680) is still powerful & expensive and this games shouldn’t be a problem for it, if there is a problem, thats the game not the card. said that before, by this logic it’s ok we call gtx 980 an old and weak card next year. this kinds of logic is cancerous
It’s two generations in terms of graphics cards.. Next time don’t resort to name calling. It doesn’t make you look very intelligent. Especially when you didn’t grasp the meaning of my words to begin with.
Agree!
still no idiot. there was a kepler and now maxwell. that makes it one generation old.
Amir has an IQ in the double digits and is incapable of rational thought. Just ignore him.
it burns right ? now suffer shill
What burns? Your brain when you try to think rationally? I’m sure it does.
But, herp derp…”shill”. Now that’s something you can handle.
i feel you, you try so hard to make ubis**t’s money bliss. guess what, it won’t work anymore, but i get it, your just doing your job
stop trying to defend this kind of practice, you are the reason devs like ubisoft release broken a*s games, cause idiots like you keep buying them. unfortunately, there more idiots like you then sane people in the industry, thus the reason its going into the s**thole.
If you expect a 2 year old 500$ gpu to be crap, then you got money to burn.
Exactly!
yes, shadow of mordor was all bs in terms of how much vram u needed, 6gb for ultra textures, yet i was able to run it on ultra maxed out at 30fps with a 680 just fine. turn down the textures to high and it was 60 fps….a well optimized game should be able to run on a 680 with no issues, the PR bull**it needs to go, stop trying to sell hardware and make yourself look good when its been proven time after time that all these reuqirements are complete and utter bull**it.
when you have a game like UNITY that cant run on 980 SLI, then you are just being a greedy lazy piece of s**t.
This is my favorite steam review.
Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: APPCRASH
Application Name: LordsOfTheFallen.exe
Application Version: 0.0.0.0
Application Timestamp: 54525dc0
Fault Module Name: LordsOfTheFallen.exe
Fault Module Version: 0.0.0.0
Fault Module Timestamp: 54525dc0
Exception Code: c0000005
Exception Offset: 000000000d6fe7e4
OS Version: 6.2.9200.2.0.0.256.48
Locale ID: 1049
Additional Information 1: 0d25
Additional Information 2: 0d25f1b6907061c63ede11227afa2f30
Additional Information 3: 5bfd
Additional Information 4: 5bfdf44f1aa926b2a90266e1cb16c7de
What could be better then lose hours of farming EXP becouse of crash.
10 crashes of 10. Even second patch did not make this game complately playable. This made me delete my positive review.
You don’t really need to do any farming in the game, and I doubt you’d lose “hours of progress” with the autosaving and the fact that you have to save in order to respawn enemies.
I dont know, do you not need to save in specific points where you can upgrade your character? Also by not doing that and keep going there is a point multiplier to the xp you get?
That doesn’t take away autosaves though. You only lose your multiplier by re-filling your potions or dying as far as I’m aware.
extremetech/com/gaming/194123-assassins-creed-unity-for-the-pc-benchmarks-and-analysis-of-its-poor-performance/
Wow, this article is a really good read, thanks for sharing Nines! 😉
Ubisoft are such a bunch of c*nts. Working with AMD on this game would have been much better and Mantle would have solved their problems in regards to draw calls, yet they have the balls to come out and put NVIDIA tech into a game that is already doing stupid amounts of draw calls that DX11 never could handle but they did it away. Now, they’re adding tessellation to an already overloaded game, just like PhysX in Black Flag for smoke.
We know consoles can do more with their API, it’s nothing new but siding yourself with someone like NVIDIA who can’t solve your fundamental problems but only take money from them, and shoehorn more graphical features into the engine is stupid. Time and time again we keep seeing this with Ubisoft and NVIDIA, it’s got to stop.
Performance with my system:
I7 4770k @4,3GHz
Gigabyte GTX 780 GHz (the fastest 780)
16GB RAM G.Skill Ripjaws 2133
Fraps:
Frames: 27267 – Time: 298250ms – Avg: 91.423 – Min: 42 – Max: 115
I was runnig around Rhogar realm – the most open area in the game. Everything set to max (with Turbulance and CA disabled and PhysX set to CPU).
“PhysX set to CPU”
ACU is using GPU PhysX?
Don’t know – this is about LotF.
Yes. I read article about ACU and then this one. Then I thought that you are talking about ACU. My mistake. 🙂
sorry, wrong post
So it seems it needs 4 cores, looking OK to me
Nope, POS game still hardlocks my box with 780Ti SLI and i7 3770k @ 4.5ghz.
“I have provided facts”
nope you didn’t because you just said it runs good for you di**head.
“you don’t know that Ubisoft’s stock fell 9% because of Unity”
i actually know that. here is the link:
https://finance.yahoo…com/tumblr/blog-ubisoft-gets-crushed-after-abysmal-assassins-creed-165926902.html
that is the fact with proof. and they fell because of it’s performance and bugs, nothing more so stop makeing s**t up.
“bought Unity on Steam and played it and wrote a review for it are just “paid reviewers”?”
you called other 60% trolls, why can’t i call those 40% shills ? and when i said all of those people are shills ?
get your facts straight kid
“conspiracy theory BS”
search this on google
Telltale developers ‘caught abusing Metacritic’
computerandvideogames
joystiq
edge-online
and so on…
“nope you didn’t because you just said it runs good for you di**head.”
You’re wrong. I gave links to benchmarks, made comparisons to other games, made reasonable logical inferences and presented other facts that can be independently verified.
“i actually know that. here is the link:
https://finance.yahoo…com/tumblr/blog-ubisoft-gets-crushed-after-abysmal-assassins-creed-165926902.html
that is the fact with proof. and they fell because of it’s performance and bugs, nothing more so stop makeing s**t up.”
Again, your claim is unsupported. Linking to someone else that makes the same unsubstantiated claim doesn’t make it any more true.
You simply can’t say that the stocks fell “because of it’s performance and bugs, nothing more”. Only a moron would make such a claim.
Is it reasonable to think that the controversy surrounding the game did play some role in the falling stock prices? Sure, but I seriously doubt that was the only reason.
And again, even then it would be based on what stockholders are hearing about the game, not on their first hand experience with the game, so quite acting like they agree with you. Most of those investors probably haven’t even played the game, some of them likely aren’t even gamers.
“you called other 60% trolls, why can’t i call those 40% shills ? and when i said all of those people are shills?”
No, I didn’t. You are basing that off Nines’ ridiculous straw man.
What I actually said was that there are too many trolls out there to take every negative user review at face value. I also pointed out that there has been a massive hate train rolling against this game since long before it ever came out. These things certainly are playing a part in why this game’s issues are being so absurdly exaggerated.
I never said that every single person with an issue or poor performance was a troll. There ARE legitimate issues with this game in terms of glitches (although they are being exaggerated by some people). And the game IS demanding, which means that some people with certain hardware configurations are going to have problems getting it to run satisfactorily on their rigs. Then we have to consider that some people are being sincere when they complain about the performance, it’s just that they have unreasonable expectations about how new gen games should run. Those people wouldn’t be trolls, simply a bit misinformed.
“Telltale developers ‘caught abusing Metacritic’computerandvideogames
joystiq
edge-online”
I’m not 100% familiar with all of those examples, but I know that similar cases I have seen were misrepresented and over-exaggerated by certain writers in an attempt to create controversy and encourage more clicks.
I’m not arguing, though, that this industry is somehow free of all corruption unlike all other industries. I’m saying that your particular scenario is plain ridiculous and completely unfounded.
It’s absurd to think that well over one thousand people bought the game and have Steam accounts all so they can be “shills” and write fake positive reviews for Unity. If we are going to get into that kind of loonyville territory I can just as easily say that some rival publisher or a cult of Ubisoft-haters sent people out to buy the game, write negative reviews and badmouth it on gaming forums.
And quit lying about the percentages. It’s not 60% negative and 40% positive, it’s actually more evenly split at 47% positive and 53% negative.
You guys try so hard to pretend everybody agrees with you, but it simply isn’t true. And there are multiple clear examples that demonstrate this. For example, read this neogaf thread: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=930145&page=48 There are thousands of comments in that thread and many of them are saying the same things I am saying here. A lot of the more knowledgeable longtime PC gamers on neogaf are the ones saying the game runs well on their PCs and is pretty well optimized and looks fantastic.
I know that you and Nines and some of the other clueless users on dsogaming are going to ignore that fact and continue stewing in your ignorance. But that can’t be helped. You guys are likely third world ghetto PC gamers who are just pissed that your pirated copy of the game isn’t running flawlessly on your budget, cobbled-together PC.
“I gave links to benchmarks”
if that is a fact then i proveded more links + i never going to read all this s**t you posted. i have better things to do in my life.
“Linking to someone else that makes the same unsubstantiated claim doesn’t make it any more true”
:)) ok, so my links are meh and your links are fact ? it’s a finance report but to you it’s not fact but some a**hole in neogaf is fact.
congratz, you just won the moron of the year, now leave :))
“And quit lying about the percentages. It’s not 60% negative and 40%
positive, it’s actually more evenly split at 47% positive and 53%
negative.”
don’t lie to me, it’s 47.3% vs 52.7%
“your ignorance”
it’s called skepticism, you never learn because you are already a slave.
“PC gamers who are just pissed that your pirated copy of the game isn’t running flawlessly on your budget”
lol, i didn’t even waste my bandwith for pirating that s**t, if still 60% of steam’s legit buyers of the game are 3rd world pirates to you, then you should continue your slave root and eat any s**t they put infront of you. +my pc is the same as you with a better CPU, lol.
So you admit that you are a pirate. 3rd world pirate scum confirmed. No wonder you are so overly antagonistic and hateful towards the people making your games and have such a disgusting attitude of entitlement. You probably stole your PC too.
when did i admit ? last game i pirated on PC was 10+ years ago. i use this attitude towards slaves like you, does that mean i did something to your mother ? i could and she will fell in love with it, but do you like it ?
“waste my bandwith for pirating that s**t”
it means it’s not even worth pirating, let alone buying. two different things idiot.
still imagining things ? mental help recommended
I post data to back up my assertions and all you can do is keep flarping out insults or unsupported garbage.
I stated that my i5 2500k can maintain 60fps in this game and does not present a bottleneck and I posted benchmarks to prove that, yet you don’t admit you were wrong or even try to show where you think I am wrong.
wrong about what ? i suggested you to get help
Actually, it doesn’t, note that the i3 is above the AMD 8350, and the i3 is dual core and the 8350 is 8 core, so you see it’s single-threaded biased on Intel CPUs.
Battlefield 4 performs extremely well on AMD CPUs because it’s highly multi-threaded properly
But thread utilization is good even on AMD processors. http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http–www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Assassins_Creed_Unity-test-ac_amd.jpg
All we can conclude is that this game does not perform as well on AMD processors. Whether that is due to poor optimization for AMD hardware or because AMD architecture wasn’t as efficient for what they were doing would require a deeper analysis for us to know for sure.
So if you enable high textures that requires 3GB of Vram on a 2GB only card will they appear? (with stuttering of course)
I must admit that this game looks so good on PC. Honestly it don’t run on very high graphics settings but only on high. But I don’t care about that because this game looks great too for my eye.
yeah well, makes me want to get an Intel i5 Haswell/Z97 lately ,especially all these single-threaded game benchmarks I’ve been seeing.
I mean seriously, that i3 4330 getting 69fps and the FX-8350 getting 57fps makes my eyes water.
Hoping someone can clear this up for me. I complained that lord of the fallen is an unoptimised mess due to the fact on both my PCs (office/living room) the game doesn’t run at a constant 60fps which I believe my PCs should b able to do but I’m being told that I don’t truly understand what optimisation is, I don’t know about coding, I’m not a programmer and have no idea about game development. My question is due to someones lack of knowledge in how games are made is it true that they can’t tell if a game is optimised or not?