Assassin's Creed Unity is 900p/30fps on both PS4 & Xbox One

Ohh. Yeah, I guess I did do that. My bad!

No its not a hypocrite argument, your just DCing anything sony. There were games that sporadically had servers on both systems but it wasn't a standard. only a few games form sony had them, not every game. same with MS. TLOU? UC? KZ? GT? all were P2P. MS had halo, Forza, etc at P2P. only gears was a big name game with servers last gen that i can recall. But this gen MS set a new standard. every single MS game has them. FM5, FH2, SO, Titanfall etc. Sony has 0 games with servers and isn't gonna be putting them on any games this gen it appears. Devs will go lowest common denomator and not make 2 net codes, 1 for servers and 1 for PvP because its too much resources, SO Sony's lack of server supports makes games like CoD and such P2P when it should be running on azure.

Also your still an idiot for being completely wrong about the 4kTV thing and not admitting it,

More games on PS3 had dedicated serves the same with the PS2 even that online on both was free.

Oh please that standard had been on sony games since 2002 and free..hahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

If that was even close to be true the xbox 360 games would have lack party chat,and other features xbox live had over PSN.

No Asure is not mandatory and the reason developers probably don't want to go for it,is because MS probably had some kind of clause that either involves paying latter on,or that restrict games in some way.

Reason why EA use its own,and COD would be as well,COD was on 360 before it was on PS3 and was P2P sine day 1.

I am not wrong about 4K you are an upscaling blur the image ass.

Actually, I'm going to stand up for Stormy here. Although I don't agree with the things he says, he doesn't resort to petty insults.

Thanks. Isn't disagreeing what makes the forum interesting?

really like what? how many PS3 games had it? like i said the big sony games like KZ, TLOU, UC, GT etc did not have them. And same goes for MS. Most games didn't have them. period. It was a rare occurrence last gen on both platforms. This gen, MS has provided them for all the games that need them. Titanfall, FM5, FH2, SO, Halo MCC and made them available for anyone to use. Hell even the 360 and PC versions of titanfall use the XB1 dedicated servers.

Azure isn't mandatory, but its a resource that can be used to make games better on X1, a resource the PS4 doesn't have, there is no reason outside of devs not wanting to make 2 versions of a game to not use them. So in other words, PSN is holding back games on XBL from having servers.

also for 4k

tormentos owned again

From the link^

We seem to have rather stumbled into discussing the Samsung's 4K upscaling, so even though you’re probably salivating to hear about its native Ultra HD playback capabilities, we might as well go on now to take a look at how the upscaling performs.

The short answer is that it’s absolutely outstanding, opting for a somewhat different approach to that of Sony’s 65X9005A, but delivering it so brilliantly that deciding which one is best is futile. It’s just a matter of taste.

The first thing that hits you about HD pictures upscaled to Ultra HD (4K) by the Sansung UE55F9000 is their truly stunning level of detail and sharpness. Running the Samsung UE55F9000 right alongside a Sony 65X9005A, it’s very clear that Samsung’s upscaling approach delivers a more detailed finish.

But with the provided Movie and even, critically (since it’s the UE55F9000’s default setting), Standard presets, the sensational amount of detail Samsung’s processing adds to the picture is delivered with practically no nasty side effects at all. In short, you’re left staring agog at HD sources that have suddenly become 4K. Which is a pretty incredible achievement when you stop to think about just how many pixels the upscaling processing is having to calculate

All that really matters, though, is that in their different ways, both upscaling approaches are far better than we could have imagined possible from the first generation of UHD/4K TVs.

As a side point here, we should also mention that we managed to get a startling and unexpected boost from the UE55F9000’s upscaling picture quality when we fed it Blu-rays from the Samsung BD-F7500 ‘UHD/4K’ Blu-ray player. Although we have to confess that we don’t fully understand how it happens, apparently the TV and the Blu-ray player join forces in upscaling terms when they recognise each other’s presence. And the results are remarkable, as pictures look cleaner, more precise, more richly coloured and most surprisingly of all, possessed of better black level response and contrast.

people just dont get it .. Unity's core is not the same as its predecessors... For one thing they changed over 6 million lines of code for new features, then now your going to be able to see hundreds to a thousand of npc's at many points ingame that is a massive load on those weak ass cpu's in the X1 and PS4. So yeah they are a bottleneck

I don't think you understand that resolution has no impact on the CPU apart from maybe RAM access especially with post processing. A faster CPU would not fix this but faster RAM would. The PS4 has both faster RAM and faster GPU so...

Im not talking directly about resolution Im talking about the 30 fps cap.... And yes the cpu can limit the performance of the gpu even with faster memory and a strong gpu if the cpu is being bogged down. Does the PS4 have enough gpu grunt to do 1080/30 fps sure but Ubi does not want to start wars.... too late because Cows are up in arms.

I find it hilarious that an actual game dev is now publicly saying the same stuff that loosingends used to post here.

Oh STFU live was P2P since day 1, and before live even came out Socom was release like 2 months before it and ran on dedicated serve totally FREE,before xbox live even begin already sony was running socom on dedicated servers free while morons like you were charge $50 for P2P and you people didn't care that is a fact,in fact in many arguments i had last gen i always bring how live had few games on servers when PS3 was free and had more.

And hosting a staggering number of players since day 1 when Resistance landed 20 vs 20 no xbox 360 game was even close to that on 2006,then 60 players 8 players co-op,games with co-op vs PC,mod made on PC been supported while the same version of the game on 360 lack it.

So who was holding back gaming.?

Could the xbox 360 version of UT3 do this.?

So just a few games use azure. got it..lol

Please dude stop that is a review on who knows what site...lol

4k upscale blurs image i already prove it..

You are the one who doesn't get it this is UBI and they downgrade Watchdogs on Purpose on PC to not make the console version look worse they already did it they were catch and the hidden settings found,how much on denial can you be.?

I haven't see hundreds to thousand of NPC on any of the demos shows,so i don't see where you are pulling that shit oh yeah Ubi words..lol

No matter what the PS4 is stronger and if the CPU was the problem the xbox one should be having better performance than the PS4 period,CPU will not limit your resolution that is a GPU issue,what will limit your CPU is things at once on screen which still be a bottle neck on 900p or 1080p.

Your the one that does not get it can keeps on going about the mess of a game that was meant for the 360/ps3 era....

o you haven't seen it well you must be blind, yes we know your precious PS4 "the gpu" moderately stronger then the X1's gpu however they are both limited by their cpu's which seems you dont get hence the need for 30 fps cap... Chances are the PS4 could have handled 1080 but it would still have been 30 fps.

You can clearly see on that screen it isn't thousands,more like 200 or even less and the LOD is horrible you can barely tell the people far out.

The xbox one has a faster CPU if CPU was the problem the xbox one would ran better,period is not CPU is UBI and the fact that you refuse to admit it is a joke,stop your damage control lemming (yeah i did it) Watchdogs on PC is not the freaking same as watchdogs on PS3 or 360,the cheer visual difference was huge,the settings UBI hide were a big jump even compare to this new gen consoles.

I am not saying it would have been 60FPS but 1080p it could have been,then we have a confession by UBI that the game was hold out to avoid arguments man,the rest of the UBI story was just pure damage control because they mess up.

lol, making excuses again? that was only one scene and there will be scenes that pam out showing upto thousands.... That image also is compressed.

You cant be this dumb or maybe you could be... The X1 and PS4 have virtually the same cpu and both use the same architecture, same amount of cores as well. 100 mhz isnt going to make a real difference nor will the use of DDR3 or GDDR5.... Again you totally bypassed what I said Watchdogs was is not true next gen game and was originally built around the 360/PS3 as base hardware. the fact that they disabled certain settings dont mean crap because other companies do the same with many other games we see promotions and retail isnt even close. Prime example is Naughty Dog with UC3 or even the Original Crysis.Even with WD it does not prove that UBI is holding back your precious PS4 besides the resolution. fact is the PS4 and X1 are in the same boat with cpu limts get over it.

Shit, not even a year after launch and 900p is already becoming a standard for consoles. I don't even want to think about the situation in 2025. :D

Didn't Ubisoft had a deal with Sony to release exclusive contents for Watch Dogs and that cross gen game ran at 900p on PS4 .? Which caused a major butthurt (AC games always get exclusive contents on Playstation as well) . Pretty sure it is the other way around . Instead of M$ , Sony must've asked them keep fanboys in delusion that how much PS4 is powerful and how it is being held back by other consoles , otherwise it would've played it at 1080p . Yes , PS4 is more powerful than Xbox One but when you look at Watch Dogs then ... it makes you think that how they were supposed to run current gen only game at 1080p when they failed to do so with cross gen game , and also makes you remember that how WD was held back by both consoles .

Oh For god sake stop you posted a screen it doesn't show thousands of people.

Resolution is a job of the GPU not the CPU,if you are CPU bottleneck at 1080p you will at 900p to because you still drawing the same amount of NPC this is the reason for the whole rage on sites like neogaf,you run a CPU intensive task on you PC and where ever you are 1440p or 900p the application will be just as intensive.

This is what you refuse to see,the PS4 will be just as bottle neck at 900p as it will be in 1080p because the numbers of NPC didn't drop you reduce your CPU usage by lowering task that hit the CPU not the GPU,in this case rendering less object. This is a fact not my opinion.

Ubi admit to hold the PS4 version back and even with an admission you still on denial,you know for fact the rest of UBI statement was pure damage control period,resolution wise the PS4 will always beat the xbox one because it has more resources regardless of the CPU.

And 100mhz isn't much but 100mzh per core either is 600mhz more of performance the xbox one has over the PS4,it may not be much but is something which should make the xbox one avoid been inferior to the PS4 version CPU wise,which hasn't show to be the case.

No i wasn't talking about CPU performance which the PS4 has beat the xbox one and is there documented,i am talking about actual speed of the CPU which faster on XBO 1.75ghz vs 1.6ghz.

That is from a scenario not all of them,it is the same screen Tigahman use and other lemmings to,the PS4 in most task the CPU and GPU don't even need to share memory,they have their own bandwidth.

That is from developers conference on early 2013.

In no place sony says there that the maximum bandwidth is 140GB/s that is what morons like you assume,do you see that chart show the whole 176GB.s.?

How would the unified system architecture and 8GB GDDR5 RAM help in making a better game? Gilray stated that, “It means we don’t have to worry so much about stuff, the fact that the memory operates at around 172GB/s is amazing, so we can swap stuff in and our as fast as we can without it really causing us much grief.

http://gamingbolt.com/oddworld-inhabitants-dev-on-ps4s-8gb-gddr5-ram-fact-that-memory-operates-at-172gbs-is-amazing#hxjyY4zMCF2Mv318.99

So yeah Oddworld was operating the bandwidth at 172GB/s that is basically 4GB's shy of the 176GB's the PS4 has.

Not only that the PS4 is a HSA design which mean no wasted bandwidth in useless copy and paste of the same data,the xbox one isn't and the CPU can't see the data while it is on the ESRAM which mean no true HSA and having to copy and pasted more data which lead to more bandwidth consumption.

Dude the game will be as bottle at 900p as it will be at 1080p is the problem is the CPU,again run a test on your PC run a CPU intensive task like encoding a movie on 1080p and then lower you resolution to 720p and see if the CPU intensive task stopped been intensive by lowering the resolution.

The only way to reduce a CPU bottleneck is to lower your CPU usage,that mean lower number of NPC on screen lower your draw calls and things like that,if you are bottleneck with 100 NPC in 1080p you will be on 900p to with the same 100NPC,because the CPU utilization still is the same.'

Which is the reason why probably the frame rate was all over the place in AC unity xbox one demo been shown now.

Yeah and they hide the PC settings to avoid direct comparison with the PS4 version,the downgrade was so bad,that they had to downgrade the PC version on purpose to not make the PS4 version look even worse,sounds familiar.?

By the way Watchdogs on XBO wasn't 900p it was 792.

AC BF was 1080p on PS4 and 900p on xbox one,this is AC not a watchdogs sequel,so if the xbox one can run it at 900p the PS4 version can run at 1080p,stop making excuses for the xbox fake hermit.

lol el tormrntos does not understand how the cpu feeds the gpu.... so sad he has to become so desperate in thinking everyone hates the PS4... what im talking about the 30 fps cap you fool, also its a known fact that lowering settings and resolution also free cpu cycles from having to feed the gpu more data, allowing those free cycles to go the other other cpu intensive tasks speeding things up. 100 mhz extra per core means dick, in the grand scheme of things in how weak these cpu's are hence the need for fps cap. We all know the X1's gpu is weaker, but the 30 fps cap is all about the cpu limits not all about the gpu, if they had a stronger cpus both consoles could have gotten 60 fps at 900p for X1 and 1080 for PS4.

@tormentos

Now prove it or STFU .

Resolution is mainly a function of the gpu yes, but you must still stream the textures to the gpu. most streaming algorithms run on the cpu if you don't have enough cpu "cycles" because of other functions you will not be able to stream the textures. Thats not including any decompression needed or format conversion changes.

Still living in the past huh? I stated both the 360 and PS3 severely lacked servers. And no socom didn't have dedicated servers no no no. But really its irrelevant to today. as is 99% of your post as usual.

and No i proved you wrong on the 4k TV. you took a site that nobody ever heard of, that had 3 small pics with no details at all, I took a known site reviewing and actual samsung 4k TV talking about how much better upscaled 4k looked compared to 1080p native. Not only that, but you realize that you are saying you are right and myself, and everyone at companies like sony, and samsung are wrong, and that 4k TVs are useless, and that they shouldn't exist. You are one sad person. You need to go and get a life, but i doubt you have the intelligence to do that

Looks more of the same non game with no failing mechanics. basically just tutorial in disguise. and gameplay feature naval combat is gone. so even more non game now. thus proved.