Ubisoft has revealed a new set of 4K screenshots for Assassin’s Creed: Origins. These brand new screenshots showcase some of the game’s environments, characters, arenas and… an elephant. Oh, and also a dirty horse.
In Assassin’s Creed: Origins, players will journey into Ancient Egypt and will discover the secrets behind the Great Pyramids, forgotten myths, the last pharaohs, and – engraved in long-lost hieroglyphics – the origin story of the Assassin’s Brotherhood.
Ubisoft has also revealed the game’s PC requirements, so make sure to view them if you haven’t.
Assassin’s Creed: Origins comes out on October 27th.
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
Looks fantastic imo. The world they’ve created, atleast visually, is quite something.
was about to say sth along those lines!
Lmfao go get your eyes fixed son…
Draw distance is really impressive, water looks like real and Egipt atmosphere with piramids and sunny oasis looks way more appealing to me compared to Paris or London in previous two AC games.
With the system requirements that they’ve posted I’m sure it will run at 4k 60 on your 1080ti.
Xbox X (6 TFLOPS) – checkerboard 2160p (half native 2160p) 30fps
If you want native 4K 30fps you need hardware 2x faster than Xbox X. So you will need 12 TFLOPS for native 2160p 30fp.
For 4K 60fps you will need 24 TFLOPS
No you don’t. You’re forgetting that we don’t have those weak Jaguar cores in our builds. 1080ti paired with an i5 or rysen is more than enough for it to run at 4k 60.
Wow, you ain’t got a single clue, just throwing numbers around and multiplying stuff left and right when in reality you don’t even know what TFLOPS is or how it works. Stop pulling sh*t randomly out of your a$$ please.
Running this piece of sh*t game in 4K at 60 fps will be a walk in the park for modern gaming PC’s.
It should be possible 2560×1440 60fps on single gtx 1080ti. Lets do some math
2560×1400 = 3.7 million pixels per frame
checkerboard 2160p (xbox x) – 4.1 million pixels per frame
Xbox have 6 TFLOPS and render 4.1M * 30fps. You want 3.7 * 60fps so you need at least 11-12 TFLOPS. I think you will have 50-60fps on your card
At first origins run on 3200x1800p, but then they added 4K native with dynamic resolution, and after optimisation xbox was so fast, that it stays at native 4K all the time (at least that’s what developer have said). Also 6.2 tflops on xbox doesnt translate to the same number of tflops on PC, because xboX architecture is much much more efficient. Even 1070GTX cant mach xboX settings, 65 fps in forza 7, while xboX average is 90 fps. Turn10 have listed 1080gtx in order to mach xbox settings, and my 1080ti is just 30% faster compared to 1080gtx. So Im not sure if 4K60fps will be possible on my single asus strix 1080ti. But the thing is, 4K native is waste of resources, and when done right even 1440p scaled to 4K can give 4K ilussion even one meter from 55 inch 4K hdtv. I Bought ps4pro one week ago and uncharted 4 in 1440p even one meter from tv looks perfectly sharp and most of the time Im watching my tv from 2,5 m distance, not one. It would be great if origins would use similar tech to checkerboard, for example watch dogs 2 on PC use that and picture still lookes amazing and performance is 2x better.
Go spread your pathetic lies somewhere else,
“4K native is a waste of resources”
Yeah right, your a$$hole sure spews lots of bullsh*t as usual..
Now go cuddle with your plastic playstation box of cheap hardware.
Sp4ctr0, that’s the worst piece of guesswork I’ve seen in a long time. You’re totally clueless. This portion of AC is not gonna be system demanding, just look at those cheap graphics. 1080Ti can already run most games today at 60 or near 60 fps in 4K at Ultra/maxed out settings.
Ubisoft games always look stunning pre-release tbh.
I’m seriously not impressed at all with those pictures.
If i were them i would never showcase pictures this up-close.
The abrupt difference between the main player poligon count and the NPCs makes it visually inconsistent, hopefully those pictures are not from the PC at max settings.
Nice bullshots…as always
I don’t think they’re bullshots. They’re not that impressive to be honest
What? How can these be bullshots? They look laughable bad.
Lmao since AC Unity they’ve been going backwards with the graphics.
This looks laughable.
“Laughable”? Get your eyes checked.
Unity looked great but ran like utter dogshi** because of the optimization and the implementation.
AC Unity also had a ton of interior “city” style areas where they could cull objects and still have Global Illumination working at full quality. Doing that in an environment this open would be a performance disaster.
Performance disaster..no one’s arguing about that. But unity did have better effects especially GI than whatever is shown here in origins. Sure origins is much much bigger than unity and having the same level of graphical fidelity would’ve lead to performance disaster but it’s 2017 already at least you would expect them to have better graphics than a 2014 game right? Especially in interiors.
And since this is ubisoft’s game you can’t really blame people for being skeptic now can ya?
The point is, the GI solution in Unity was ridiculously taxing on the PC and it was very high quality.
They detailed their solution in a siggraph paper and the reason they cant use that ever again (they used it in Syndicate but lowered the quality) is because it’s abysmal in open exteriors.
3 years isn’t gonna change anything if the algorithm was flawed from the start. The reason these screenshots don’t look as nice as Unity is because of how much better it presumably runs. Yes, I agree that Ubisoft got lazy. They should’ve re-architected a better GI solution but they didn’t.
“they should’ve architected a better GI solution but they didn’t.”
That’s what annoys people. Instead of making improvements they made a cut down version and implemented that. People expect improvements not downgrades.
Still from artistic point of view everything does look amazing. The open world indeed looks great even if the interiors doesn’t.
I completely agree with you on that.
But to say that this game looks “Laughable” because it doesn’t have the same, extremely taxing, GI solution that AC:Unity had is…. laughable.
It’s not just about the GI solution, about all elements of the graphics in Unity looks far better. So the visuals in Origins is laughable indeed.
Maybe not laughable but I am a bit concerned about the game. I am afraid that this franchise is going to get “consolizled” with this game and won’t support or push anything like Unity did or at very least tried, with mixed success but certainly way better than stagnation. Whatever you say about Ubisoft, games like AC Creed were pushing things, especially Unity, offering many future proof settings, supporting variety of non-standard solutions and configurations. Doing something more. Enthusiast work, not trying to be peasant friendly. If recent reports are true, Origins is not going to do any of that on PC.
It’s because they are working closely together with Microsoft, who wants to promote their new console. If Ubisoft pushed technology and visuals with the AnvilNext engine for Origins, the Kekbox X would be crawling, and we can’t have that now can we? Origins is first and foremost developed with the consoles in mind, especially the new Xbox. Graphics are scaled back so heavily to allow the new console to hit 30 fps in or at near 4K resolution… The PC version won’t get any extra perks or love, at best they will slap on some Nvidia GIMP works effects to it and that’s pretty much it.
I don’t think they will do even that, I haven’t seen any advertising with Nvidia. But don’t get the hate on Gameworks, things like Hairworks in TW3, PCSS in for example AC: Unity or VXAO in ROTTR are giving huge improvement for graphics fidelity, and they are optional, so the only hate comes from uneducated and blind people who cannot afford to use those features or they simply even can’t try because they have AMD nonsense in their system. Give me Gameworks, SLI support and ability to .ini tweak settings way beyond ultra like in the Witcher 3 and I will make this game look like it should in the first place, being probably the biggest AAA game releasing this year and next part of a series known from pushing things. We are not getting any innovation in visual quality until new consoles are released and old ones like PS4 and Xbox One are thrown to trash, I just don’t want to be limited on what we get now, I want to be able to push things as far as possible and as far as the engine goes, like in the Witcher 3 that gave complete freedom. Without all the tweaking and moddding ability Witcher 3 is not even that good, it is the complete freedom and ability to customize and push the game what makes it the greatest as of now.
Unity ran actually quite good on my 980Ti, around 30 FPS in 4K with highest details except for texture quality which I had to dial back one step. The Division and EGTTR ran worse actually.
“Doing that in an environment this open would be a performance disaster.”
Not really, ever heard of LOD systems? I can run CryEngine SDK Forest with SVOTI turned on and have good performance in 4K, and that level is quite big but thanks to the LOD system it wouldn’t cripple the performance. Plus, it looks 1000 times better than any assassins creed game.
Are you really saying it ran quite well on a 980Ti?? You have a beast of a GPU, of course the game ran well.
Also, it seriously sounds like you are confusing your terms. LOD’s are not related to Global Illumination whatsoever. LOD’s refer to the polycount and texture quality of assets as their distance (or screen-space) increases from the player/camera.
I was simply saying that using AC:Unity’s GI algorithm would be abysmal for an open world with so little architecture because it would mean less opportunities for culling the GI.
SVOTI is a COMPLETELY different algorithm and it’s far superior to anything AC offers. But it’s also completely irrelevant. My original point was the the GI solution that Ubisoft used in AC:Unity specifically was ill suited for large open worlds with minimal buildings.
Furthermore, the GameSDK Cryengine level is significantly more linear and much smaller than a true open world game. It was mainly used a tech demo of all the various parts of the engine.
980Ti isn’t a beast anymore, and my point was being that other games ran worse for me, so “utter dogsh*t” doesn’t really apply here.
LOD’s meaning level of detail.. go figure. A GI system can have different level of details depending on distance so using it for a game like Origins would work if scaled correctly.
I know the gameworld of Origins is bigger than the GameSDK level, but my point was that thanks to the LOD system for the GI, it had a maximum drawing distance and so on, it performed great on my system despite being used in a large environment. Linear or not, a big open space wouldn’t make the SVOTI perform worse, see Kingdom Come for example, a great example for where a GI system performs great in big open environments. So with that being said, the GI system of Unity could most likely be used for Origins if they tweaked it correspondingly.
“980Ti isn’t a beast anymore” LOL is that really your argument? And Unity isn’t a new game anymore. The point is, it’s an extremely powerful GPU and your standards for performance are 30fps, when most of gamers aim for 60.
“A GI system can have different LoD’s”. Seriously, dude, go read up on the fundamentals of rendering technologies. You’re absolutely clueless. The reason why the GI in cryengine is scalable is because it is voxelized. This is a feature SPECIFIC to cryengine and it’s years ahead of it’s time for doing that. (Even Nvidia VXGI performs worse than svoti). The GI system in unity is NOT voxel based and is instead a hybrid of screen space and view frustum based. This is why you can’t simply “add LoD’s to gi” in Unity. It simply doesn’t work. Their entire algorithm is just too taxing.
Lastly, why do you keep comparing to cryengine?? These are two completely different game engines.
I’ve wasted far too much time explaining cg to an ignoramus. Goodbye.
It’s so funny that you completely ignores the parts where I completely invalidates your pathetic claims and things you just make up.
Correct, the 980Ti isn’t a beast anymore, as you said it was.
Unity isn’t a new game, and your point being?
The 980Ti isn’t “extremely powerful” anymore, there are several cards out there that performs better. Yes, my standard for 4K gaming is 30 FPS on my current hardware, because I prioritize visuals before FPS. My standard for performance is at least 60 fps if possible, but not if visuals has to be sacrificed. I don’t care what other people aim for. When I play on my secondary monitor I run games at 120 FPS or more, since it’s a 120hz monitor. That’s for fast paced games where great precision is required.
“The GI system in unity is NOT voxel based and is instead a hybrid of screen space and view frustum based. This is why you can’t simply “add LoD’s to gi” in Unity. It simply doesn’t work. Their entire algorithm is just too taxing.”
No, it’s not too taxing on modern GPU’s and could very well be left in as an option. And the GI system used in Unity is called deferred radiance transfer volumes and it’s a lightweight GI system and it’s quite easy on the hardware. Here’s a quote from Luc Poirier at Ubisoft Montreal:
“Our Global Illumination is based on previous work that was done internally at Ubisoft (deferred radiance transfer volumes), but we improved it greatly. Using the navmesh, we automatically populate our world with thousands of probes. For each probe, we then compute the irradiance for 8 different time of the day. Those computations are done on the build machine GPU, so they are really fast: we can compute thousands of probes per minute. At runtime, on the player machine, we then interpolate these data to get the proper bounce lighting for a given time of day, world position and weather. This bounce sun lighting is then combined with ambient occlusion and sky lighting to achieve a full indirect lighting and a Global Illumination solution. This system works on both current gen and next gen.”
The same system is also used in Far Cry 3, which is a large scale open world game just like Origins, and the DRTV GI system worked just fine. So you’re once again proving that you’re just making things up and pulling assumptions out of your a**.
I compare to Cryengine since it’s a prime example of a great engine from a company that pushes technology forward, unlike companies like Ubisoft.
If they really had problems with GI performance they could just rework it, but they don’t since they don’t prioritize things like that, why? Because they focus on the consoles and promoting their games through Microsoft and its new console, they don’t care for pushing technology or visuals, which is very evident in Origins. And they also focus on high rendering resolutions so they cut corners in every element of the graphics, including the GI system of AnvilNext, to allow for the sh*tty consoles to render at higher resolutions. They could have just left the GI in for the PC version, but due to version/system parity they don’t, because money talks.
“I’ve wasted far too much time explaining cg to an ignoramus. Goodbye.”
Explaining? Looking at the history of our conversations it’s evident that I am the one explaining to you how, not only CG, but also how the real world works. Which makes that statement of yours even more pathetic. You can’t even tell the difference between cheap regular AO implementations and HBAO+. You can’t tell if there’s tessellation in the scene. You thinK the developers add gaussian blur to the water at close proximity. You think particles in water affects its surface reflectability. You think blur is applied to water depending on what distance you are from it. You think Unity runs like dogs*it on gaming system of its time. You think the 980Ti is “superpowered” and you don’t even know how to open a simple image in a browser correctly. You’re pathetic beyond belief, and you’re grasping for straws when trying to defend your pathetic made up claims. You’re desperately trying to defend the uttersh*t graphics in this game and, last but not least, you’re dodging the parts where I completely crush you and you keep ignoring to respond to where I invalidate your claims.
P
A
T
H
E
T
I
C
Now, follow your own advice and crawl back into the hole of which you came.
LOD’s AND culling. Anything that is not rendered is not illuminated. And less poly’s means less of them require illumination.
That’s not how this works. Unity’s GI (and most other solution) doesn’t work based on per-poly algorithms, it works on per-pixel algorithms. Having less or more poly’s won’t affect the performance of a screenspace/frustum space gi algorithm.
HOWEVER, culling does boost performance. That’s the reason Unity’s GI was even possible (and even then, performance was awful), because it took place in a city with lot’s of opportunities to cull stuff behind buildings.
Using that same solution in AC:Origins wouldn’t work performantly because of the large amount of flat open space. That’s why they had to dial back the GI.
Quote from Mickael Gilabert @ Ubisoft:
“We use precomputed probes that allow us to relight the scene
and approximate global illumination in real-time.
We designed the system to be light both on performance and
memory. The probe data consumes less than a Mb of system
memory, and shading on the GPU takes less than half a
millisecond.”
So yeah, it would work just great in Origins, they real reason they removed GI is not because of poor performance.
the design of the characters… their skin color.. screams blackwashing
Egyptians have an orange hue to their skin, some even gray or clay color
a typical arabian skin color (tan with orange hue)
but this N i g g e r i f i c a t i o n seems like another desperate attempt from Ubisuck to appease to SJW’s once more
the Sub-Saharan people were a minority in Egypt, not the majority like seen in the pictures…
There’s a fair bit of geographical ignorance out there. I’m embarrassed to say this but 10% of Americans can’t find America on the world map. There are some people wandering around thinking that Africa is a country and it’s all populated by black people. Even for the more intelligent people there is still much ignorance about Egypt. One example is my favorite Vampire collection of books by Anne Rice. When they made Queen of the Damned into a movie they cast Queen Akasha (an Egyptian Queen) as a black actress. Most people didn’t even question it.
i actually wonder if they teach American students about African continent geography in class
or do they teach them just about Europe N the states?
or not even that?
aren’t you from israel? why do you care about those sand n words.
Completely false. If you want to see what an Egyptian looks like it isn’t hard. Statues of black people where people chipped off a lot of their noses for a reason. The throne of Tut where he is obviously black. You can also look at people like 2nd century Saint Maurice, who Coburg, Germany chose as their coat of arms in 1493. Everyone knew Egyptians were black even up to that time They knew after that (for awhile) but modern Jewry created the racist interpretation of the Curse of Hamin the Talmud, that claimed black skinned people were cursed. This was used as an excuse to treat blacks horribly and Jews sold and shipped black slaves as far back as the Dutch East India company. They also sold white Christian Slavs into slavery as well to Muslims. Christianity adopted this teaching as well, thinking that the Jewish scholars knew best and you see it in religions like Mormons who taught that North American Indians were also cursed. Black people couldn’t even be a leader in their church.
Jews by their own admission in the Jewish Encyclopedia says “modern Jewry is Edom” from Essau who was “red”. If you look up King Herod, he was also from Edom. Frauds as the tribe of Judah and Hebrews. You can see what Hebrews looked like from wall carvings by the Babylonians when they took them captive. They have nappy hair, because they were black. Samson had 7 locks of hair (dreadlocks). Joseph was mistaken for an Egyptian by his brothers. Jesus was taken to Egypt to hide. Paul was mistaken for an Egyptian by a Roman soldier. Just like everyone knew Saint Maurice and Egyptians were black, they knew Jews were black. Madonna and Child in churches were black.
Who do you think runs the “SJW movement” on both sides. Breitbart, his CEO, Milo all have something in common. The funny thing is that the (((media))) on the other side calls them Nazi’s. You are looking at a whole 5 companies that control over 90 percent of the media now. The SJW crap is to cause division between blacks and whites, with people like George Soros funding Black Lives Matter. It uses black people and women as a shield to push LGBT, which won’t stop until pedos can practice what they do in Hollywood in the open. ANTIFA has ties to NAMBLA. You are looking at another (((Bolshevik Revolution))) which culminated with a socialist state with 20 million White Christians dead in Russia, in a holocaust the (((media))) pretends never happened. Look at the new Wolfenstein game. One of the “resistance leaders” is a Marxist. Nevermind that (((Communism)))) killed 94 million people in the 20th century. (((They))) control your games, movies and TV and if you have been tricked to hate other “goyim” then they already won. Left, right, they both kiss Israel’s @% and you all die for them and their fraudulent country. A country that puts up walls and where their people don’t intermarry and they only hire their own (lol at anyone else being represented in Hollywood producers and execs), while they call you all racists and bigots. A country that flies the Star of Saturn (Chiun), that you have been told is the “Star of David”.
The bull$hit you’re spewing is causing ozone depletion
jews were black? seriously? where did you read that bollocks?
as for the “jews control everything” there are like americans, left and right (and center but lets just keep it basic for now)
the jews in israel support European whites and despise muslims but THE MEDIA is owned by the left and so does is their Film industry
(a lot of israeli movie makers are now making pro muslims marxist crap, google Dancing Arabs and you’ll see what i’m talking about)
alright i’ve taken the time to craft a meme so you can understand the two types of jews that exist in israel
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/01d19e9028274db7fadceeeb38214b50148ef5cb9589850a4c12753191186212.jpg
as you can see, the weak and lazy decides to side with those filthy marxists and communist thugs
while the sane minded, are busy working for their living or serving in the military
they won’t side with nazis, but they will DEFINITELY side with nationalists
you and Bruce are wrong, first of all Egyptian were mediterranean which is different from whites and blacks and the people in the pictures are mediterranean not blacks maybe theres one that is mixed (Nubian+medirerranean) but not really subsaharian. Anyway since Egypt is in Africa, is normal to see black people in a reconstruction of late Egypt at the edge of the roman conquest. what you say maybe apply to just the early period. Also no one has the red skin color, the red you see in the drawings is just a color and not a depiction of a reality. Also they weren’t any Arabs Muslim yet since the Muslim conquest of Egypt was about 700 ys later…but they were many macedons and other mediterraneans after the Alexander’s conquest…I’m the first to call to white/black washing (like they did in most of the Roman movies where everyone is blond with blue eyes…) but here is just wrong and also It shows you have never went to egypt nor know many people from the mediterranean see.
Wow, these graphics are quite pathetic indeed, especially for a 2017 game…
Let’s see:
-Laughable lowres textures
-Bad shadow drawdistance
-No HBAO
-No tessellation
-Lowres water reflection-maps
-Cheap lighting
-Cheap anti-aliasing
+F’king jpeg compression even…
No surprise even this time Ubish*t!
To me it look like just another example of lazy developers, console hardware restrictions and platform parity just like usual from this developer. I’m sorry, but I can’t be visually impressed by this in the slightest. Not after seeing what games actually can look like and what modern game engines can deliver.
Well, it’s just not like Ubislop to milk a franchise for all it’s worth……oh, wait a damn minute.
With resolutions like 1440p and 4K even cheap AA looks great.
Really? Then why do I continuously look for better ways to fight aliasing on my 4K 24″ monitor? Even Crytek’s latest AA solutions doesn’t really cut it, with loads of flickering when using their temporal filtering and projection matrix jittering algorithms. Unreal Engine seem to have one of the best AA solution afaik, though it blurs the picture quite much. Supersampling is always something I’m trying to activate, but rarely have performance left for. In older games though, supersampling is a blast.
So no, cheap AA doesn’t look good even on 4K monitors, you will need sophisticated AA systems to fight aliasing even then.
24inch monitor is very small 4K panel, and you still see AA imperfections, yea right. Many people dont even use AA on 4K display, and post aa is more than enough
Well, perhaps you’ve got bad eyesight, I don’t. And I definitely see lots and lots of jaggies and noise in alpha textures in games at 4K on this screen.
“bad shadow draw distance” – Even the trees in the distance in the 4th picture cast shadows.
“No HBAO”- Dude, what are you even talking about? I would get it if you said no “AO” but “no HBAO”?? How can you tell what algorithm of AO they’re using from a screenshot? Regardless, you can clearly see AO on the staircase near the edges in the 2nd screenshot.
“No tessellation” – Again, how are you able to tell this from a set of screenshots when you can’t even see the wireframe?? Something being low-poly and not having tessellation are two VERY different things.
“Low res water reflection maps” – They’re called cube maps, but still, you can’t even tell if they’re low res because of how blurred they are (and they should be) in the only two screenshots there’s water in.
– “Cheap lighting” – What does that even mean
– “Cheap antialiasing” – these images are downsampled from 4K, I don’t even know how that’s possible. Show me a single portion of any one of those pictures that has any aliasing whatsoever.
-“jped compression” – Are you honestly blaming the compression of screenshots on the game’s graphics ….. –__–
Don’t waste your energy, most of the folks on this website just complain about games, I don’t know what are their standards in graphics, maybe they just want a tech demo rather than a game. They want a piece of land to be subdivided a million times so they can satisfy their graphic cards even if that tessellation don’t make a real impact on overall look of the game but then you suddenly see uproar about bad optimization lol.
Wow, just wow! Where do you come from? It’s definitely not from the PC gamer side of things. What standards do we have? Well to begin with:
1: No system/version parity (meaning the game should be tailored towards the consoles hardware specs and left unlimited for the PC version.
2: No f*king held back graphics or developers cutting corners to achieve something in favor for the consoles which makes it to the PC version as well.
3: No lazy developers like Ubisoft, who only cares about money and puts little to no love in the projects they’re making. They’re just sh*tting out game after game after game in popular franchises, and the ones taking the hit for it is the gamers. As long as the companies and developers ear lots of $$$ then quality and technology comes far down on the priority list.
4: Artistic love and technology-pushing graphics, just like we used to get from companies like Valve, Crytek, 4AGames, CDPR, before consoles and $$$ got such an important role in the gaming industry.
Is that too f*king much to ask for? Really?
Well Oscar always post funny opinions, just dont take his posts seriously
Said someone who just said something silly like “With resolutions like 1440p and 4K even cheap AA looks great”
??? What’s wrong with that statement? At higher resolutions, less and less AA is needed because of the Pixel density. It’s perfectly valid to say that at 2K even minimal AA would suffice.
What’s wrong with his statement? He said that at 1440p and 4K cheap AA look great, which isn’t true. Even on my 24″ 4K monitor, which has a high pixel density, aliasing is very much visible and some form of decent AA is needed, I tend to prefer SMAA when I need performance and supersampling when I have performance headroom. Cheap AA solutions like FXAA, 2xMSAA or low preset SMAA won’t be enough. So yeah, his statement is not valid at all.
4K on a 24in monitor has a PPI of 183. If you’re saying aliasing is very visible at THAT PPI, your full of it. Fxaa should be far more than enough at that ppi. I’m calling bs.
Another assumption pulled out of your a**
Here’s a GIF made from two off-screen pictures taken with a digital camera off of my 4K screen in Warthunder with AA turned on and off:
ezphotoshare(.)com/image/NddwI
Once again, you’re full of it.
SMAA with a low threshold and high amount of search steps, as well as SMAA + TAA filters are both sufficient most of the time yes, but not for alpha textures. I usually avoid TAA since it often introduces artifacts such a ghosting or flickering.
Anyway, cheap AA makes it better that’s not a lie, but it definitely doesn’t make it look great. For that you need TXAA or supersampling.
“Even the trees in the distance in the 4th picture cast shadows.”
Wooooow, the TREES? What about the f*king people? Aren’t people supposed to cast shadows from the sun?
“Dude, what are you even talking about? I would get it if you said no “AO” but “no HBAO”?? How can you tell what algorithm of AO they’re using from a screenshot? Regardless, you can clearly see AO on the staircase near the edges in the 2nd screenshot.”
It’s easy to spot the difference between cheap AO (used in some of the screenshots) and fully functional HBAO. There’s no AO in some of the scenes and in others there’s a very slight cheap standard AO implemented. Regardless pathetic for a triple-A game of 2017.
“Again, how are you able to tell this from a set of screenshots when you can’t even see the wireframe?? Something being low-poly and not having tessellation are two VERY different things.”
Again, it’s easy to spot when working tessellation is applied to objects or characters, see the elephant, the grapes, the bracers? No tessellation, ugly models plain and simple.
“They’re called cube maps, but still, you can’t even tell if they’re low res because of how blurred they are (and they should be) in the only two screenshots there’s water in.”
I’m pretty sure those are low-res reflections on the water, all smeared out and no definitions in the reflected objects. Water reflections should not look low-res OR blurred in a scene like this.
“- “Cheap lighting” – What does that even mean”
It means the lighting system within the engine looks cheap and simple or is scaled back significantly. Looks light-years behind the lighting used in many other games, especially Cryengine games. The lighting just seem quite off in this game, especially in the fifth picture.
“these images are downsampled from 4K, I don’t even know how that’s possible. Show me a single portion of any one of those pictures that has any aliasing whatsoever.”
They are not “downsampled” at all, they’re all 3840×2160 lol. Aha! You’ve been looking at these pictures via the silly picture-viewing-mode-slider-thingy that DSOG is using on this site? No surprise you haven’t been able to see all the flaws in the graphics then, LOL! You want aliasing examples? Sure here you go: abload(.)de/img/aliasingl6jyi(.)jpg
“Are you honestly blaming the compression of screenshots on the game’s graphics ….. –__–”
No, but I’m blaming the developers for showcasing their already ugly graphics with making it look even worse with bad jpg compression, and frankly making it harder to judge the graphics in overall.
1. If you’re talking about the people wayyy in the back on the 4th picture, then no at that distance they shouldn’t cast shadows. Your original point was that the shadows draw distance was poor.
If you think that whats shown in the screenshot is “poor” shadow draw distance, then you can enjoy a sub 30fps framerate (oh wait I forgot, you have a 980 Ti so optimization means nothing to you.) Having a shadow draw distance that far is gonna sh** on performance.
2. “It’s easy to spot the difference between cheap AO (used in some of the screenshots) and fully functional HBAO”
No. It isn’t. The HBAO+ used in previous AC games is cartoonishly bad. it looks so fake because of how strong the effect is, almost like a drawn on sharpie. If you look at reference images from real-life, AO is a very subtle effect. The AO in the provided screenshots is appropriate given the lighting conditions.
3. “Again, it’s easy to spot when working tessellation is applied to objects or characters, see the elephant, the grapes, the bracers? No tessellation, ugly models plain and simple.”
Again, this is called optimization. If you put useless tessellation on every grape and tusk, you’ll get great visuals for sure. Along with dogsh** performance. Furthermore, you personally wouldn’t notice this because you’d have a GPU powerful enough to just brute force a high framerate. But the rest of us with non-super saiyan GPU’s would suffer.
4. The reflections are appropriate for the angle they are being shown at. You’re not gonna get perfect mirror like reflections in a muddy sand filled lake and at such an extreme angle. reflections also blur as the distance from the caster increases so I’d say the reflections are “appropriate”. Again, if you want to have high-res reflections, that would mean a much higher res cubemap which would hurt performance as IBL also relies on the cubemaps.
5. The only aspect of the lighting that I see as a step backwards is the GI. everything else looks the same to me. Why do you keep comparing to Cryengine? That’s a completely different game engine with completely different (and better) algorithms. We should be comparing this game to it’s prior versions.
Yes, Unity looked better, but also ran abysmally on the vast majority of systems (not including PC’s with superpowered 980 Ti’s in them).
In the 5th screenshot, it seemed like there was too much illumination and that’s probably due to them removing the large scale occlusion effects of the older GI solution. Beyond that, I don’t see any major features of the lighting missing. Again, the GI system is the single most important factor in CG lighting in 2017 and that’s the one Ubisoft dialed back the most.
6. I’ll concede that I was using the image viewer on the site. because that’s showing the screenshots at a much lower-than-native resolution, they appear downsampled. How did you see the raw images? I had to go into “inspect element” on chrome to see the raw file. Regardless, yes the AA looks awful once you open the raw image. Although I blame the JPG compression on DSOG’s hosting. Not the Dev’s who made the screenshot. DSOG might be compressing images before it gets on their servers.
“1. If you’re talking about the people wayyy in the back on the 4th picture, then no at that distance they shouldn’t cast shadows. Your original point was that the shadows draw distance was poor.”
Ahaha, he’s not even far back. Heck even TES: Oblivion drew shadows from characters further away and that game is from 2006. So yeah, poor f*king draw distance, especially by 2017 standards.
“If you think that whats shown in the screenshot is “poor” shadow draw distance, then you can enjoy a sub 30fps framerate (oh wait I forgot, you have a 980 Ti so optimization means nothing to you.)”
Even if I wanted to run this game, which I don’t, I would have no problems to run it smoothly, it’s evident from looking at the visuals. Had no problems running other games with FAR better draw distance for the shadows.
“Having a shadow draw distance that far is gonna sh** on performance.”
Not really, rendering lowres shadows at that short of a distance doesn’t affect performance in any meaningful way.
2. “No. It isn’t. The HBAO+ used in previous AC games is cartoonishly bad. it looks so fake because of how strong the effect is, almost like a drawn on sharpie. If you look at reference images from real-life, AO is a very subtle effect.
I don’t know what kind of problem you have with your eyes, but the HBAO in Unity looked great: screenshotcomparison(.)com/comparison/119966/picture:0
The only thing fake here is you. You’re so pathetic and your claims and arguments doesn’t work or make any sense.
“The AO in the provided screenshots is appropriate given the lighting conditions”
To begin with, there’s no AO what so ever in the forth and fifth picture, and in the others there’s a very subtle cheap AO applied, and it’s NOT HBAO which was my original point. So you lost once again.
3. “Again, this is called optimization. If you put useless tessellation on every grape and tusk, you’ll get great visuals for sure. Along with dogsh** performance. Furthermore, you personally wouldn’t notice this because you’d have a GPU powerful enough to just brute force a high framerate. But the rest of us with non-super saiyan GPU’s would suffer.”
Dogsh*t performance for consoles and cheap PC’s maybe, but that’s where OPTIONS come in, if you can’t run tessellation then don’t turn it on, simple as that. But it should be an option in a triple-A 2017 title, which was my original point, you lost again.
“But the rest of us with non-super saiyan GPU’s would suffer.”
No, you would just adjust your settings accordingly to the performance you want, turning off tessellation or long range shadows draw distance for example. But you seem to be too stupid to be able to understand that.
4. “The reflections are appropriate for the angle they are being shown at. You’re not gonna get perfect mirror like reflections in a muddy sand filled lake and at such an extreme angle. reflections also blur as the distance from the caster increases so I’d say the reflections are “appropriate”.
Since when are low resolution reflections “appropriate” anywhere? And at that angle there are objects reflecting already can’t you see that? The problem being the reflections are too low res. Particles in the water, such as sand etc, won’t affect how the surface reflects objects, jesus are you really that stupid? abload(.)de/img/14ty3n.jpg
Seems like you are lol. Extreme angle? There’s nothing extreme with that angle, it’s a regular angle and there are reflections accordingly, but they are very low resolution and smeared out which isn’t anywhere near realistic at all.
Again you show proof of being extremely dumb, reflections doesn’t “blur” depending on distance, rather small details get harder to see depending on distance, and that distance isn’t even far out, like what 20-30 meters? The human eye is great at seeing details even several hundred meter out.
“Again, if you want to have high-res reflections, that would mean a much higher res cubemap which would hurt performance as IBL also relies on the cubemaps.”
Nah, having detailed reflections isn’t hurting the performance in any meaningful way, just look at the water in HL2 for example: guru3d(.)com/miraserver/images/reviews/games/hl2/Reflections.jpg That game is from 2004 lmao.
Another example is Far Cry from 2004.
5. The only aspect of the lighting that I see as a step backwards is the GI. everything else looks the same to me. Why do you keep comparing to Cryengine? That’s a completely different game engine with completely different (and better) algorithms. We should be comparing this game to it’s prior versions.
The lighting in Origins is flat and dull, it’s not dynamic, rich or creates any depth that I’ve seen in Unity and so many other games. Just look at the lighting in the fifth picture, everything about the lighting is wrong in that picture, and it looks totally off, with wrongly lit surfaces and over exposed lights. CryEngine is a prime example of how to make lighting look great, it’s not my fault that Ubisoft choses to scale the lighting system of AnvilNext back so heavily for this game. In Unity the lighting was way better, and I’m not just talking about the GI, but the lighting in general.
“Yes, Unity looked better, but also ran abysmally on the vast majority of systems (not including PC’s with superpowered 980 Ti’s in them).”
Once again you show that you don’t know anything of what you’re talking about, just more pathetic claims coming from you. Here’s a GTX 960 and a Core i5 running Unity at Ultra settings with more than 30 FPS which is totally playable: /watch?v=t1QeMiRWSCs
You just don’t have anything good to back up your nonsense with, you just make things up, which is really pathetic.
“6. I’ll concede that I was using the image viewer on the site. because that’s showing the screenshots at a much lower-than-native resolution, they appear downsampled. How did you see the raw images? I had to go into “inspect element” on chrome to see the raw file. Regardless, yes the AA looks awful once you open the raw image. Although I blame the JPG compression on DSOG’s hosting. Not the Dev’s who made the screenshot. DSOG might be compressing images before it gets on their servers.”
The most pathetic part, is that you didn’t even scrutinize the screenshots correctly prior to your pathetic attempts at defending the very much scaled back graphics of this game.
Secondly, you’re too stupid for me to even consider telling you how to open the images in their native resolution, someone who actually believes that particles in water affect its reflection abilities and believes that reflections magically blurs themselves depending on distance is almost not worth talking to IMO. You, are laughable, as is the graphics in this game.
The compression is not the fault of DSOG, it’s there on the source images of neptunegames. So there we go, another false assumption pulled out of nowhere by you, like with everything else. Your pathetic tries to defend the laughable graphics in this game fails miserable.
Lastly, here’s a screenshot from the same batch that DSOG missed to include, I put rings around problems with the inferior lighting system and also o problems where shadows doesn’t render at all:
abload(.)de/img/graphics2t7uxk.jpg
Aside from heavy aliasing, bad compression, flat and dull lighting, lighting errors, missing shadows, the screenshot lacks AO and the lowest LOD sprites allows 100% light through it making it look really bad. Shadows doesn’t have correct contact with objects even close up. The cheap scaled back lighting system along with the lack of good AO makes this partucular scene look really dull and bad.
Now go dig a hole and crawl down in it you fu*king clown!
Comments disappearing quicker than Greenman Gaming.
And now compare this shots to AC Unity: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/84ef808b8bf07aa0bad8db56e1d7df8b023cb859a69e70b70a28717796267fdc.jpg
is the unity shot from Console perchance? i don’t remember unity looking this pixelated (i did play post-patch on ultra though)
From PC version.
can’t be ultra then. because i remember it looking MUCH better than this
It’s not ultra, shadows on high (not nvidia PCSS, because I played on AMD card), and AA is FXAA, not TXAA (for the same reason). But even so, Unity looks better than Origins.
FXAA is utter $hite, now it makes sense why it looks so bad
make me
Remember M$ is in bed with Ubijunk on this one, so these are most likely WeakBox One X screenshots especially considering the low LOD at the distance and aliasing that you can clearly see on the 5th pic.
I wouldn’t expect the PC version to be better, the game was probably built around that machine.
I fail to see how this game is more impressive than The Witcher 3, but Ubijunk games have no soul so of course that also contributes to the bland look.
i have a review key for this that i still haven’t used,i’m going to give it to the most repulsive person i see either in irl or on the internet.
Look at the mirror then use the key *wink *thumbs up
I qualify for one of those, maybe both, why don’t you give it to me so I can enjoy a bit of masochism.
Oh Ubisoft and your bullshots.
Because we have to say that everything is good…
You are right but you don’t have to be a b*tch about it. XD
No, he’s an imbecile. He’s confusing draw distance with LOD’s. Having higher LOD’s levels at a further distance but at low quality is still a large draw distance.
Draw distance refers to the distance at which objects are rendered, not the quality of those objects. “Low res sprites” has nothing to do with draw distance, it has to do with performance and LOD quality.
The funny thing is that you people would complain about performance like you all did with AC:Unity if they made the distant objects better looking and used lower LOD levels.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
don’t you people me bud! I did not complain about graphics at all! I just said that I agree that these screenshot aren’t impressive. Even though I would buy this game since I love the setting. Anyway I think that most problems could be addressed with a better scalability, I mean in that way no one would complain, just add different texture packs or something like that and make as many effect etc as you can that can be turned off and on. I mean isn’t this one of the best thing of having a pc? the fact that you can adjust the game to your hardware?
I agree completely. And sorry if it seemed like I was adding you to the generalization. The flexibility of PC is a really great aspect of it.
“And sorry if it seemed like I was adding you to the generalization.”
You’re pathetic!
Apparently clarifying your intentions is pathetic.
Go back to whatever hole you crawled out of, get mature, and then come back later. Or better yet, don’t.
Yeah, the way you beg for forgiveness to someone like that, is.
The other pathetic thing is that you agree with him saying that they should include options for higher fidelity for the PC version for those with the raw performance to handle it, yet you tell ME that running GI is impossible due to performance, and tessellation must be cut back due to performance, and shadow draw distance as well must be cut back, and that optimizations must be done etc because “others don’t have superpowered 980Ti’s like me” which kind of is the opposite to Ubisoft including them as an option. Instead you’re literally defending Ubisoft for cutting back the graphics and not giving PC gamers even a choice. You could just have said: Yeah I agree Oscar, they should include options for that for those who wants it and can handle it, like you did with Prometheus. But yet you didn’t even mention it.
Now would you kindly crawl back to India you dirty little gayboy!
Wow of course you would stop that low. Racist insults are all you have, that’s what’s really pathetic here. And owning up to your mistakes isn’t pathetic, that’s called maturity. Clearly you don’t have any. In fact, you’re probably still not in highschool. Education goes a long way kiddo.
It might seem like I’m “dodging” responding to you directly because how incapable you’re mind is so let me clarify: Based on the way you throw around CG terms (texture atlas, sprite, lod) in completely irrelevant contexts, you’ve proven time and again that you know next to nothing about rendering.
As I said before, I’ve spent far too much time engaging and clarifying simple things to a complete buffoon. I won’t waste any more of my time. You can feel free to respond to me again, but FYI, you’ll look like even more of an imbecile (don’t know if that’s even possible though).
Nawww, did I hurt your little Indian feelings? 🙁
Pathetic!
You don’t know sh*t about me, and it’s pathetic how you try to make assumptions about me, just like you do with everything and anything in our discussions. Yeah, you’re avoiding to reflect or respond to where I invalidate you and prove that you’re just guessing and making things up, because you have nothing left to fuel your stuff with after I’ve debunked them.
I don’t “throw around” CG terms, I’m explaining to you what objects and textures are and how they differ, and what their technical terms are in CG, as you seem to not understand that. I also explain how the GI system in AnvilNext can be used on a larger scale and why, and even provided sources for it, unlike you who haven’t provided anything to prove your points or claims.
I’m just proving that YOU only make things up and pulls own assumptions towards things without looking it up or even trying to provide a source for your claims when I confront you about it.
“I’ve spent far too much time engaging and clarifying simple things to a complete buffoon”
Wrong, you spent far too much time clarifying things that you make up yourself without any proof or valid information to back it up with, which is pathetic and proves time and time again that you just pull stuff out of your brown little a$$.
You won’t respond anymore? Nawwww… Well that’s it then, you lost miserable. You started arguing about something and now you’ve backed yourself up into a corner with nothing left, so you bail out like the pathetic coward you are. Well you have to, since you don’t have any other options, because you already lost once you started arguing with me. Because I can prove my points and provide sources to my claims and validate the things I’m saying…. Unlike you Indian boy… You remain pathetic, and a loser. Hope that you learn something from this, so that you will think before you start yapping nonsense next time.
Now, dig a hole to India and CRAWL over there and don’t come back!
“Having higher LOD’s levels at a further distance but at low quality is still a large draw distance.”
I didn’t say the game didn’t have large draw distance, I said it had a bad draw distance. Sorry but that was just another pathetic attempt at getting to me, you fail as usual.
“Draw distance refers to the distance at which objects are rendered, not the quality of those objects.”
Guess what? In computer graphics, technically sprites isn’t objects. Sprites consists of sheets or texture atlases. You’re so dumb.
“”Low res sprites” has nothing to do with draw distance,”
Yes it does, as the further the distance is the more trees and other vegetation transforms into sprites. In most games with a slider for draw distance in the settings, if you turn it all the way up then LOD is adjusted accordingly, so LOD is tied with the draw distance settings. An example is in Cryengine games where cvars for LODs are adjusted based on which preset for object quality is set. A good draw distance allows objects to be rendered in a higher quality or at full quality even in the distance. A bad draw distance transforms objects into low quality versions or sprites even at close range, as it does in Origins, here’s an example of “BAD DRAW DISTANCE”
abload(.)de/img/textures_4bgokm.jpg
See how close those ugly low-res sprites are? That’s not an impressive draw distance for *objects* which in this case are *trees* Thus my original claim that the draw distance for objects are bad, (remember sprites is images or *textures* not objects). Thus making my point valid. See, I can actually back up my claims with valid points unlike you. You’re just a pathetic console hugger who are a bit messed up in your brain.
“The funny thing is that you people would complain about performance like you all did with AC:Unity if they made the distant objects better looking and used lower LOD levels.”
I’m pretty sure the most resource hungry elements of the graphics in Unity wasn’t its LOD or draw distance but rather other things. Bumping them up a few notches would probably not harm the performance that much.