Author Topic: Assassin's creed.  (Read 78898 times)

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #200 on: Monday, December 17, 2007, 02:05:02 PM »
Nothing, really.  It's just an achievement.  Whenever I revisit the game, I try to find a few more flags, but I'm done looking for them in earnest.  They should have made some additions so that it didn't become such a meaningless and tedious chore.  Here's one idea.  After fully synching up (max lifeline), and collecting, say, 75% of the flags on your own, your eagle vision should see faint spots of a special color in the general direction of the remaining flags.  When they are all over, it's entertaining to chase them.  But when you have 3 missing ones hidden over hundreds of square miles, it gets beyond ridiculous.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #201 on: Monday, December 17, 2007, 07:44:52 PM »
I concur.  Also, the fact that nothing unlocks when you get them all is stupid.  I originally thought there'd be some kind of bonus, but seeing that there wasn't one eventually made me stop caring.  It's fun finding them, but like you said, no real reason to complete it.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #202 on: Tuesday, December 18, 2007, 12:17:05 PM »
The positive impact of the game continues.  This alone makes me happy I bought it, if it keeps EA from devouring another victim.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #203 on: Tuesday, December 18, 2007, 07:29:11 PM »
It makes me want to buy another 30.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline iPPi

  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3,159
  • Roar!
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #204 on: Wednesday, December 19, 2007, 01:10:27 PM »
This is great news.  I think it's great that Ubisoft is not afraid to do something different for their games and take risks.  In this case, it is clearly paying off.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #205 on: Wednesday, December 19, 2007, 01:15:15 PM »
Yes while I hate Ubisoft, they aren't as evil as EA... though as developers they are quite up there.

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #206 on: Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 08:46:12 PM »
RUMOR for PC Version.

Rumor of what the PC Requirements might be.
These rumored specs are high.
As in CRYSIS-high.

Please tell me this won't be yet ain't another Ubi rushed-port job....

Quote
Assassin's Creed (PC) Specs Revealed?
[Ure "Vader" Paul]
12:55 pm EST @ January 16th, 2008
Okay, let's just skip right to the juicy details. Here are the, so far rumored, system requirements for the PC version of Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed (thanks VE3D for the heads up):

    Minimum System Requirements:

    - Windows XP or Vista
    - 2 GB RAM
    - Dual core processor (Intel Pentium D or better)
    - 256MB Direct3D 10 compatible video card, or Direct3D 9 card compatible with Shader Model 3.0 or higher

    - DirectX compatible driver
    - DVD-ROM dual-layer drive
    - 16 GB free hard disk space
    - DirectX libraries (included)
    - Vista compatible sound card
    - Keyboard, Mouse
    - Microsoft Xbox 360 Controller (optional)

    Recommended System Requirements:

    - Intel Pentium Core 2 Duo, or better processor
    - 3 GB System RAM
    - ATI HD2900 series, Nvidia GeForce 8800 series, or better video card
    - 5.1 sound card
    - Microsoft Xbox 360 controller
    - Supported Video Cards at Time of Release
    - DirectX10 compatible cards, recommended ATI HD2900 series, Nvidia GeForce 8800 series
    - Direct3D 9 card compatible with Shader Model 3.0 or higher

16 GB of free hard disk space? Make room for Altair! If true, aren't they overdoing it just a tad? Crysis, for instance, required 12 GB and that seemed like way too much.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #207 on: Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 10:45:28 PM »
.....3.....GB....RAM....?

Fine, Scottws wins.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #208 on: Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 10:56:25 PM »
Ludicrous.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #209 on: Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 11:10:18 PM »
Both consoles have 512MB RAM. This is a bit silly.

Still, I am kinda glad they did this. I'd rather they be honest than release games with absolutely shitty performances.

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,920
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #210 on: Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 11:13:51 PM »
Both consoles have 512MB RAM. This is a bit silly.

Still, I am kinda glad they did this. I'd rather they be honest than release games with absolutely shitty performances.
True, but still dang! I hope the recommended are just for the "Ultra High" setting or something.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #211 on: Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 11:24:48 PM »
Well I look at it this way. The game will perform like garbage, but for once Ubi are being straight about it.

It'd be interesting if Corsair start a new RAM package bundled with the game heh.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #212 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:04:16 AM »
Everyone bitches like crazy about piracy killing PC gaming.  I wonder how much market is actually being lost to ridiculous system requirements and games which perform like ass even if they barely meet them.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #213 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:06:22 AM »
Everyone bitches like crazy about piracy killing PC gaming.  I wonder how much market is actually being lost to ridiculous system requirements and games which perform like ass even if they barely meet them.


I think it's foolish to deny both have a pretty major impact.

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,920
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #214 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:07:54 AM »
Everyone bitches like crazy about piracy killing PC gaming.  I wonder how much market is actually being lost to ridiculous system requirements and games which perform like ass even if they barely meet them.
Good point. That's probably a bigger factor.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #215 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:10:29 AM »
This business of needing a killer rig plus a dedicated power line is new.  Games used to cater to a wider audience, even if the highest res and best look were only for the elite.

Quote
I think it's foolish to deny both have a pretty major impact.

I'm not denying that piracy is a big problem also.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #216 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:14:35 AM »
I don't know how much of that is true really.  I mean, games used to scale better when compared to modern games like Crysis, but I think the dominance of consoles has changed the market for PC games.  Now everyone is competing for the elite dollars, and the way to do that is with eye candy.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's bullshit as well, and I think it leads to sloppy programing because they assume people with the absolute latest card will buy it so they can get away without optimizing it for the previous generation.  When those people try the game and get fucked they'll go out and buy a new card because all of a sudden their old one is obsolete.  But really, how much more taxing could this be then GoW or UT3?

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,939
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #217 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:22:49 AM »
I still think we need to define what the fuck "minimum" means for minimum spec. There needs to be a baseline where people can judge. What can we expect to see AT minimum spec?

Something like...minimum spec means:

1024x768
All adjustable settings at lowest setting
30fps average

There. Now you can look at hardware that meets those requirements, and that is your minimum spec. So when someone pics up a game and looks at minimum spec, they know what they are going to get if their system just meets them. As it is you don't really know what minimum means. A lot of times its just "Yeah, it runs, but its practically unplayable even on lowest settings and res."

Do the same for Recommended Spec, just boosted accordingly.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #218 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:25:10 AM »
I think there is some overreaction for Assassin's Creed. The game isn't a specialty PC game, but rather a console port. Even on a console it chugs, so I can imagine it takes them a really powerful rig to run the game properly. I'd rather they admit the problem than lie on the requirements info.

What I am saying here is that it isn't like they have a choice.

Quote
Now everyone is competing for the elite dollars, and the way to do that is with eye candy.

If they are approaching PC gaming like that, then they've got it wrong. The best selling PC games are the ones that can run on any system. Games like WoW, The Sims, Civilization etc. are games that most users can run, and sales reflect this.

edit:

Good point Idol.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #219 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:32:48 AM »
If the PC developers only care about elite dollars now, then they have shrunk their market in a harmful way, to themselves.  Even if piracy were eliminated entirely, they're not going to have the money base they need.  If I'm in any way a representative sample, I know they'll be driving more people away from their scene and over to the consoles.  I've even started to ignore any buzz or press about new hardcore PC games.  It doesn't apply to me, and it's depressing.  So why even bother?  On the other hand, I know any competently programmed 360 game will run beautifully.  I may have to do settle for an analog controller and optical-disc streaming, but it's going to work right.

An analog controller would be the controller of choice for Assassin's Creed on the PC anyway.

Quote
I think there is some overreaction for Assassin's Creed. The game isn't a specialty PC game, but rather a console port. Even on a console it chugs, so I can imagine it takes them a really powerful rig to run the game properly. I'd rather they admit the problem than lie on the requirements info.

It doesn't chug.  It maintains 30 fps pretty consistently.  60 would be so much nicer (perfectly smooth) but 30 is fine.  When you consider that each fully populated ancient city is free to roam and climb in real time, this is no mean feat for any system.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #220 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 12:55:31 AM »
That's totally true, but that's also the hardest market to break in to.  How many Sims clones are out there?  The MMORPG market is over saturated for the most part, making it a risky venture, and games like Civilization can't be cheap to make.  Sure, a ton of clones of these games get released, but very very rarely with any money behind them and they are almost never successful. Because in order to compete with The Sims you have to be as good as the Sims.  Not only that, but you have to offer everything it offers, more, and make enough of a name for yourself in order to make someone stop playing something they were compulsively enjoying and give your game a try.

So, if you're a game company and you want to pump some money into a PC game, you probably want to take as little risk on it as possible and hope for a high return.  How do you do that?  You appeal to the type of person who buys 2-3 games a month, the type of person with quite a bit of disposable income, and the type of person who's prone to playing PC games.
 Generally, this is the type of person who has a somewhat new system because they just bought it or they're upgrading every 12-18 months.  What does this type of person like to play?  FPS, action games, and RTS games.  How do you compete with the other ones out there?  Well, it's a pretty generic formula for the most part, but what has always worked in the past was to make the game look good and people will buy it.  So you either develop your own engine or lease one that's already out there, push it a little past it's limit or just sloppily code it, throw in a sewer level, an escort level, some light squad-based gameplay, some lighting effects, a rechargeable flashlight, some middleware.  You go down to the movie store and look at old 80's action movies.  Find an obscure one with a title you like and call it that. 

Then when you're done and you realize your game is pretty generic and kind of runs like ass, you go back, throw some bigger textures in there, pump up the triangles, and add some pointless and inefficient post processing effects.  You go into an interview and claim that the game is made for the next generation of video cards, and that the ones from a year and a half ago won't even really run it at any really playable level, and just watch the hype build.

Next thing you know they're using it for benchmarking, and every answer to a "why does this run so slow on my current card?" topic on forums is answered with "SLI NOOB!  100% more money for ~20% more performance is where it's at!".  So you can sit back as Ram prices go down and people buy new cards and think to yourself how even though you didn't make any sales records with the last one, you at least broke even.  And now you know a bit more, you're a little more experienced and this time when you release your requirements before the demo is out you'll be sure you're the first on the block to have 3-way sli and 3 GB ram in the recommended section. 

No, it's not the easiest way to make the next big phenomenon, but it's the most market tested way to make a return on an investment.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #221 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 01:08:45 AM »
My point isn't the concept of these games, but rather the fact that they run on most systems.

The other thing is fucking Intel needs to equip its on board video with more power. One of the guys at Epic talked about how Intel just needed to invest another $5 in its on board video solutions to have them meet the min. requirements for most game.

But there seems to be a misconception regarding PC prices, and most it stems from assholes who write for these small sites that have reached popularity. Every comment from them seems to end with... that PC Game is good, but I don't have $5000 to run it.

That just creates the apprehension among those who don't game on the PC.

Here check it:

http://kotaku.com/345278/crytek-specs-out-an-affordable-crysis-pc

Also GPW tts a fair point regarding the PC development formula, and something I've been thinking about. How many true innovative games do we see on he PC? These days they are just following the same gameplay formula, with visual upgrades.

Quote
Next thing you know they're using it for benchmarking, and every answer to a "why does this run so slow on my current card?" topic on forums is answered with "SLI NOOB!  100% more money for ~20% more performance is where it's at!".

You are giving forum gurus far less credit than they deserve. Go to the forums of anandtech or THW and most of the advise is sensible both in terms of price and performance.

The only places that give idiotic advise like BUY A $5000 PC, are the fucking console loving PC hating jackasses.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #222 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 01:24:40 AM »
My point isn't the concept of these games, but rather the fact that they run on most systems.

Oh, I get that, but my point is that for every one of those solid games that runs on every system, there are a thousand or more shitty ones released a year that don't make jack shit. I imagine the risk assessment these people run when trying to figure out where to allocate funding generally tells them that a high end FPS is a safer bet when compared to throwing money into a low end game in order to try to steal people away from CS1.6 or The Sims.  Fuck, even CS:S couldn't dethrone CS, and it isn't because of the specs.  Why bother going after the people playing Counterstrike when you can go after those prone to buying and getting bored of a lot of different games?

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #223 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 01:29:09 AM »
Yea that's a good point.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #224 on: Thursday, January 17, 2008, 01:45:20 AM »
So, if you're a game company and you want to pump some money into a PC game, you probably want to take as little risk on it as possible and hope for a high return.  How do you do that?  You appeal to the type of person who buys 2-3 games a month, the type of person with quite a bit of disposable income, and the type of person who's prone to playing PC games.
 Generally, this is the type of person who has a somewhat new system because they just bought it or they're upgrading every 12-18 months.  What does this type of person like to play?  FPS, action games, and RTS games.  How do you compete with the other ones out there?  Well, it's a pretty generic formula for the most part, but what has always worked in the past was to make the game look good and people will buy it.  So you either develop your own engine or lease one that's already out there, push it a little past it's limit or just sloppily code it, throw in a sewer level, an escort level, some light squad-based gameplay, some lighting effects, a rechargeable flashlight, some middleware.  You go down to the movie store and look at old 80's action movies.  Find an obscure one with a title you like and call it that. 

Then when you're done and you realize your game is pretty generic and kind of runs like ass, you go back, throw some bigger textures in there, pump up the triangles, and add some pointless and inefficient post processing effects.  You go into an interview and claim that the game is made for the next generation of video cards, and that the ones from a year and a half ago won't even really run it at any really playable level, and just watch the hype build.

Next thing you know they're using it for benchmarking, and every answer to a "why does this run so slow on my current card?" topic on forums is answered with "SLI NOOB!  100% more money for ~20% more performance is where it's at!".  So you can sit back as Ram prices go down and people buy new cards and think to yourself how even though you didn't make any sales records with the last one, you at least broke even.  And now you know a bit more, you're a little more experienced and this time when you release your requirements before the demo is out you'll be sure you're the first on the block to have 3-way sli and 3 GB ram in the recommended section. 

Ahahaha!  Cynical, and probably true.  We think alike here, although I had not thought all that through like you just did.

Offline Jedi

  • Poster Child
  • ***
  • Posts: 664
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #225 on: Friday, January 18, 2008, 02:45:19 AM »
Hehehe


Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #226 on: Friday, January 18, 2008, 07:45:03 PM »
Oh nice, they made a new comic, and it wasn't even a shitty flash video of a face singing someone else's song. 

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #227 on: Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 07:11:39 PM »

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #228 on: Sunday, January 27, 2008, 10:42:26 AM »
Looks like the leaked min. requirements were pretty close to bang on

Sad.

Looks like I'll be waiting to get AC, when I likely buy a new PC.
And likely, when AC costs around...oh, say around $20 or less.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #229 on: Sunday, January 27, 2008, 11:18:00 AM »
Wow, that's ridiculous.  I hadn't paid any attention to this until now, but man... that's just idiotic.  They must have some people there who seriously don't know what the fuck they're doing.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #230 on: Sunday, January 27, 2008, 11:37:37 AM »
I was pretty startled when I read the confirmation.

3GB of RAM is just absolutely insane. Aren't they isolating anyone who has a 32bit OS?

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #231 on: Sunday, January 27, 2008, 01:54:32 PM »
I was pretty startled when I read the confirmation.

3GB of RAM is just absolutely insane. Aren't they isolating anyone who has a 32bit OS?
Wait...
I thought 32 bit OS's go up to a max of 4 GB????

Keep in mind, the 3GB is recommended, while the 2GB is required.


Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,244
    • OW
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #232 on: Sunday, January 27, 2008, 11:36:52 PM »
Oh yea? I was listening to the PCG podcast, and they were talking about how 32bit OSs couldn't go to 4GB? I think Scottws can clarify.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #233 on: Monday, January 28, 2008, 05:48:20 AM »
They can definitely go to 3 GB though.  The problem is that max addressable memory with 32 bits is 4 GB (2^32).  There is address space needed by the system itself which can't have user RAM mapped to it.

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #234 on: Thursday, March 27, 2008, 04:36:49 PM »
Is Jade going to work on AC2?

Who knows, but she is working on something...


Quote
Jade Raymond Not Working On Assassin's Creed Sequel?

In a new Q&A on Game Daily, UbiSoft CEO Yves Guillemot was asked if Jade Raymond, the producer on their best selling open world action game Assassin's Creed, would be working on a sequel. Guillemont responded with, "She's currently working on a new project but it's a little too early to share more about it." Guillemont also said that Michel Ancel, the creator of UbiSoft's Rayman series, is "working on several unannounced projects, and I'm afraid I cannot tell you more at this stage."

EDIT, 3-28-2008:
ACPC Preview on GameSpot

GameSpy preview on ACPC
« Last Edit: Friday, March 28, 2008, 05:47:08 PM by MysterD »

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,939
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #235 on: Monday, March 31, 2008, 07:30:38 PM »
Shank, motherfucker! SHANK!

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #236 on: Wednesday, July 02, 2008, 06:34:09 PM »
Well, great game and great ending...if the second one was already out.  As it is, fuck them for leaving it like that.

Actually, it wasn't that bad, just really surprising.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #237 on: Wednesday, July 02, 2008, 06:39:50 PM »
I wish I could see the ending, but the game totally bores me now.  It's a very cool thing really, and I'm not as hard on the game as some have been, but it did eventually wear thin for me.  I've got no desire to finish it.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #238 on: Wednesday, July 02, 2008, 08:36:37 PM »
I wish I could see the ending, but the game totally bores me now.  It's a very cool thing really, and I'm not as hard on the game as some have been, but it did eventually wear thin for me.  I've got no desire to finish it.
Do you mean earn the right to see the ending?
Or just see the ending period (even if you didn't earn your way there)?

I mean, I'm sure the AC ending has been like many other games' endings -- posted by some person on Youtube.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: Assassin's creed.
« Reply #239 on: Wednesday, July 02, 2008, 09:03:25 PM »
I wish I could see the ending, but the game totally bores me now.  It's a very cool thing really, and I'm not as hard on the game as some have been, but it did eventually wear thin for me.  I've got no desire to finish it.

Yeah, it kind of started to wear thin on me near the end.  Not the whole thing - just that some of the tasks were tedious and I stopped trying to get a 100% completion and just did what I had to.  There are some changes I'd like to see them make in the future that could make a lot of the little tasks in the cities a lot better.