Ubisoft has released a new set of screenshots for Assassin’s Creed: Syndicate. Assassin’s Creed: Syndicate is set in 1868 (the tail-end of the Industrial Revolution) in London, and players will take the role of tin Assassins Jacob and Evie Frye. Assassin’s Creed: Syndicate will be coming to the PC after the release of the console version. Enjoy!
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
this will be the best Assassin’s Creed game yet
Because…?
it would be the best AC if only:
1) it allows you to ride any chariot
2) it allows naval combat
3) it is optimized
4) it doesn’t follow the same cliche in recent ubi games, meaning no more revenge stories
5) no Microtransaction
(also i liked Brotherhood’s MP shame they didn’t improve it. would love Naval combat in MP instead of just removing MP all together)
it would be epic if:
– it allows you to ride any horse
– it allows you to switch between siblings at anytime like GTA V mechanic
– it changes ubi’s tower system finally to something better
but it’s Ubi so i am just daydreaming. the fact that they are dividing their manpower and budget between so many games, just goes to show they aren’t going all out on any of them.
Ubisoft games have been optimized if you had a reasonably high-end pc. Quit playing on your 10 year old laptop and blaming optimization instead of your poor hardware for performance.
Better yet, stay away from ubisoft ports if you have anything less than a 4GB GTX770.
check out DSO’s top worst optimized games of 2014. Watch Dogs and Unity are in there so i am not just talking about my own experience here.
What do you expect out of their crappy 680 sli(690) where one 680 was listed as the bare minimum. Sorry but unity is a game with accurate minimum requirements. I get 60fps with my 1519/3802 970 in ACUnity. Its not their fault if you have a million chrome tabs and other background processes or weak hardware and complain.
The whole “upgrade your hardware” thing needs to stop. I remember once I read on a forum about a guy who had performance problems in BF4 with his midrange system where he struggled to get even 20fps at medium settings and probably 90% of the posts were “upgrade your rig” arguments yet I had a similar PC and the performance was quite fine.
The point is that if you really think having high-end hardware justifies games like Unity, then you just mistaken. The game WILL run great on a 970, 980 etc. With such a system, you are easily able to brute force your way through the bad optimization. And the minimum requirements ARE inflated and garbage. My GPU is far from high end and still plays the game fine. Now not at maxed out 1080p 60fps or anything but still good enough for me at 900p. I even have all the settings maxed except for the textures.
You know what “minimum” should mean? Being able to just BARELY run the game at perhaps 720p 30fps low settings. There are many people out there who think that minimum means just being able to play the game so when they see something that says minimum 680, it actually scares them off because many out there don’t even care about graphics or framerate, they just want to be able to play the game.
I don’t think Unity is a 100% unpotimized mess, the problem lies with it’s scalability and the fact that it’s not optimized to run on lower-end hardware.
it does run on GTX 680 2GB perfect “Unity” Ultra!
not 60 FPS but 35-50 pretty much everywhere!
We know the game had really good CPU optimisation, vastly better than Black Flag, plus Unity isn’t frame-rate limited. A GTX 680 is really not that powerful any more in terms of what we have and Unity isn’t scaled back to last gen consoles either. Both consoles ran it poorly simply because they don’t have the CPU power to do it. Why are PC users angry at high requirements? It’s nothing new, it just means the game will scale better with better hardware on the PC.
Yeah the CPU optimization is great, I see all 8 threads of my i7 being stressed. Anyway, I still think minimum should mean 720p 30fps due to the fact that high minimums are what scare so many gamers away because they really think it’s what needed to just run the game at all but that’s just my opinion. W3 also has high minimum but minimum is still fine for 1080p 30fps with decent settings which still happen to be above the consoles so it’s possible that the high minimums are what they consider is needed for a decent enough experience.
The requirements would indicate its not optimized to run on lower end hardware. I don’t see an issue. You who treat the requirement appendix as a joke are basically complaining when your hardware config doesn’t match and the game runs poorly? lol nice try.
Minimum should mean nothing. Its upto the devs. A GTX680 can hold 30fps ish at the same settings as a GTX970 since 680×2 = 970, when keeping vram the same (4gb).
I don’t treat it as a joke. My point is that I can run the game at 900p with nearly maxed settings and still be above 30fps which shows that the game can run fine on hardware much weaker than the minimum gpu requirement. Not everyone sees minimums as still running the game good, many think their rigs won’t even be able to run the game at all.
I think if John had a GTX 980 then it might have had a different outcome, ACU runs really nice on GTX 970, easy 60FPS+.
i won’t call it nice, you should select FXAA and normal AO to able to run in at 60fps and it’s not constant 60fps
Same for TW3 and GTA 5, even a GTX 970 can’t run it at a stable 60fps everywhere. Only way I can keep GTA 5 above 60fps with 4xMSAA is keep in the cites, same with TW3, both GTA 5 and TW3 drop into the 40s in deep forest, foliage areas. Despite what people say, Novigrad isn’t the most taxing place at all.
you got it wrong, GTA5 & TW3 both runs ok with other hardware configs and runs just fine with inferior hardwares but ACU is only works with 900series if you don’t have a 970 or better you are screwed in ACU’s case but you still can play and enjoy TW3 and GTA5 on those hardwares
Well GTA 5 is a last gen game scaled for lower hardware anyway. As for ACU, R9 280 and above run it fine now.
optimization doesn’t have anything to do with last gen or current gen games, you have witcher 3 which isn’t the best optimized game out there but it works with different hardwares really well, same as GTAV, gta5 on PC isn’t really a last gen title it’s even better than ACU in some places, shadow of mordor is next-gen and it has nice optimization, maybe high end PCs can’t run the game 60fps on ultra but even mid to low PCs can run the game just fine. but ACU is just s**t, game runs terrible even on mid to high end PCs, cutscenes in ACU runs at 10fps to 20fps on a GTX 660ti which is way more powerful than PS4, it runs terrible on all sorts of amd cards, it only works fine if you have a 970 or more in short: brute force. what do you mean it runs on an R9 280 fine now ? they didn’t even bother to fix the game and they didn’t released any fix for it.
AMD drivers were the problem, the Omega driver runs the game great and I used to have a R9 280. I don’t know what you mean by “brute force”, it runs really smooth on my 970(easy 60fps, I remember people saying you can get 60fps in ACU), better than TW3 which microstutters. I guess you not tried ACU recently, maybe the drivers have made it better because it feels a lot smoother now.
Check this video out, i3 4330, 750 TI easy matching the PS4 in ACU. https://youtu.be/hGKqL8KsR6g
You’re kidding, right ?
No I am not. I get 60fps with my 1519/3802 970 in ACUnity. Go Troll elsewhere, and get off the ubishaft hatewagon.
First, there are LOTS again LOTS of people complaining with high end PCs (Ubicrap forum and game website comments). I’ve seen people saying they have i7 and i5s even extreme edition ones partnered with 770s and up(high end back then coz 900s were still not out) that they were having FPS problems. If ever you are getting stable framerate NOW, that’s because the game has patches after patches, which took months after release BTW, before it came to that state of playability (I assume this is acceptable to you coz of your tone but many don’t).
Second I’m not trolling coz I’ve experienced the said issue first hand thus I, too, am in the hatewagon.
Its not because of the patches, its because 347.52 nailed down texture streaming in ubisoft games, mainly wash_dogs and unity. The trick to unity is to stay away from AA and PCSS. Though PCSS is a gem in its own way, as it substantially improves the shadow LODs compared to the vanilla non-existent.
Even before 347.52 unity was running fine on my rig, 60-66fps, 347.52 brought it upto 72fps, where I could enable PCSS and still enjoy above 60fps.
pure bullsh*t, all of it. get up and stop sucking ubisoft’s c**k kid. stupid f**k
So if a game published by ubisoft is running fine on my rig I am sucking their c**k and am a kid?
Dude, did you not even read the technical analysis on this very site? CPU core utilisation was once again very poor. I could achieve 1080p 60fps on my 980, but it was still crap port with poor optimisation. Hence we have had Ubishit kissing ass claiming this will be optimised better…. Again.
Dudes beard looks like hair works. Ubisoft looks good for stills yet will most likely be a train wreck in motion
nice bullshots
it’s bullshot, they use better AA and some more effects and better shadows and some photoshop, close to final product but not in real time.
Yes but look at the motion blur on the woman’s coat and boot, while the rest of her isn’t while she is in mid air.
Sorry but that just doesn’t happen in games where parts of the body have motion blur and other parts don’t. It’s promotional screens after all, and they’re post processed in an image editor and downsampled to the target resolution. It’s quick and easy.
Yeah the video didn’t look good but Ubisoft said they’re not doing the whole ‘looking the best it can in alpha and slices’ any more, they claim they’re showing real gameplay. Perhaps that’s why it didn’t look that good because you could see the pop in and aliasing a lot in the E3 video.
it’s a new trick, it make bullshots closer to real game but still they are edited
Cant wait for like 80% negative reviews 😀
Downgrade is coming 🙂
Bullshots + it’s actually uglier than Unity.
Don’t mess it up like you did with FC4 and Watch Dogs
dont trust bullshots anymore.. will wait for reviews on day 1.. ubisoft best not mess with PC gamers again.
I miss Black Flag…it was fun.
Unity got me somewhat hyped with it’s style, setting and graphics. This doesn’t.
Bullshots and people should stop supporting this fat milking cow of a franchise. It’s getting quite ridiculous and comic-like now.
the girl with freckles is so hawt omg
I had 80-90% utilization on my i7-4770k. Once again bollocks.
Then it comes down to our words against yours. In which it looks like you’re alone in your stance —__—
Edit : I am talking about Ubicrap games day 1 and not after tons of patches
I had a gtx570 day 1 and couldn’t play the game at 320×180 with everything low, not even at 256×144 (yes you can have resolutions this low in nvidia control panel).
I played the game on december 11th. Not sure which patches were out till then. 344.80 was a good driver back then.
Uhh … you just contradicted yourself … uhhh ………..
it runs fine for you because you have twice more power than the game asked and you sucking their c**ks because it runs good for you with that machine. that doesn’t mean they optimized s**t
They asked a GTX780 recommended for the game, I have a 970 which on paper is a little behind 780, except it can overclock to the moon. The fact that it runs at 60 hell above 70 with pcss off means its optimized for higher end hardware. End of Story.
GTX 780 should be 1080p 60fps all the time for that game but it’s not, it runs like crap on a GTX 780, even on 970 you can’t get constant 60fps (not to mention dips below 40 or in mid 30s in cutscenes), frame rate might goes over 60, hell even over 90fps but that doesn’t mean the game runs at 90fps, it’s unstable as f**k (just like batman, i can get over 100fps in that game but overall it runs like s**t and dips below 20fps). the things you said are bulls**ts and not a fact, game was and still is not optimized for anything, if a high end PC can run it without too much problem it doesn’t mean it optimized for high end PCs, it means it’s unoptimized as f**k and you are brute forcing your way through the game, this is a Fact if it’s hard for you to get this simple fact then your an idiot, even ubichimp apologized for this unoptimized s**t they released but looks like fanboys and idiot f**ks like you needs to defend a bulls**t like this.
btw don’t forget to buy a 980ti or maybe a gtx1090 with 32GB vram for the next AC game moron.
Wow! That looks awsome Ubisoft……..
Still #notpreordering :p
“runs the game great”
not really
“it runs really smooth on my 970”
yeah a freaking 970, 970 should be overkill for this game but no, it just runs the game normaly, with that amount of power you are able to run ACU just fine that means with brute force. also even on 970 some cutscenes are under 40fps.
“I remember people saying you can get 60fps in ACU”
yeah with other cards, only possible on 970 or better cards (not on ultra) plus it’s impossible to get constant 60fps.