Ubisoft promises Far Cry 4 on PS4, Xbox One is equal to high-end PC

[AHaskin14]

Why is it that every company is now making their claim to how good it will be compared to pc???? the console players jealous?

[pk-man]

Vote with your wallet, people! The only way to stop Ubisoft from pulling BS level of crap over and over again is to stop buying their games.

[Poohy14]

why ubi why?

[Albatross]

This really comes down to them being lazy asshats. They don't want to spend extra time making sure the PC port/version works good and looks good because that means more time out of their pockets. If they make all the games function and look the same, it is better for them in the long run. No game for PC that has a version on a console should ever be watered down to keep up with lesser hardware. They will regret this horrible decision later on down the road, I am absolutely sure of it.

[TheRetiredSlave]

The more I've been thinking about this, it actually doesn't sound like it could be *too* far off from the truth.. The biggest thing is that there was no mention of the rendering resolution or the framerate.
 
From the demos we've seen thus far, the graphics of FC4 don't seem to be *too* much better than FC3, so we might expect that performance could be somewhat similar. Digging through old articles on Tomshardware, they benchmarked the 7870 as running Far Cry 3 on Ultra Details with 4x MSAA at 1080p and they got an average of 28.4 FPS (source).. We know that the PS4 has a GPU that's roughly similar to a 7850, though with more efficient APIs/drivers and turning MSAA completely off, I don't see why it couldn't run Far Cry at something roughly equivalent to PC High/Ultra at 30 FPS, even at 1080p. Since the XBO is notably less powerful, turning the resolution down to 900p may be enough to maintain an average 30 FPS, without needing to gimp the PC version *too* much..

 

Or am I just completely wrong with all this?

 

 

We'll mainly just have to wait and see how it actually runs.. I'll be trying to run it at 1440p 60 FPS because PCMasterRace, but console gamers generally don't complain too much about low res and/or low framerate. 

[juretrn]

But why should people with 290x's/780Ti's stand by the same graphics as a platform with 1/3 of their computing power?

[deathjester]

I expect recommended CPU of a 6300FX and an AMD 7770 GPU, seeing 2 cores are locked to the OS on a console's SDK and a desktop AMD 7770 can run Diablo 3 at 1080p and a Xbox One can't, 

 

Instead we will get purposely bad code that requires a 4770k for good FPS and need a 780ti (6gig VRAM version) to play ultra.

 

Funny how the Farcry 4 shots look to have the same depth of field as the worse patch. Guess they enabled E3 settings for the bullshots.

 

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

Hope it wont be as heavy as FC3 

[Vitalius]

But why should people with 290x's/780Ti's stand by the same graphics as a platform with 1/3 of their computing power?

FINALLY! Someone starts asking the real questions.

[TheRetiredSlave]

But why should people with 290x's/780Ti's stand by the same graphics as a platform with 1/3 of their computing power?

 

Because the consoles are most likely running at either a lower resolution or a lower framerate (or most likely both).. 

[deathjester]

Because the consoles are most likely running at either a lower resolution or a lower framerate (or most likely both).. 

 

900p to 1080p is not 3-4x. That is a SINGLE card let alone SLI/Xfire.

 

A stock 7870 can put out nearly double the TFLOPS of a Xbox One GPU. It is listed as 2.56 TFLOPS on AMD's site and the Xbox One is 1.31 (that is with the boost from removing the Kinect), and the PS4 is 1.84. 

 

These consoles are literally garbage compared to a decent desktop GPU, even an older one. 

 

API helps CPU, not GPU. We saw how little AMD Mantle meant for our I5's/I7's already. Sorry bud. Ubisoft is working HARD to get such little performance out of the PC hardware. Ubisoft is not new to porting for the PC.

[TheRetiredSlave]

900p to 1080p is not 3-4x. That is a SINGLE card let alone SLI/Xfire.

 

A stock 7870 can put out nearly double the TFLOPS of a Xbox One GPU. It is listed as 2.56 TFLOPS on AMD's site and the Xbox One is 1.31 (that is with the boost from removing the Kinect), and the PS4 is 1.84. 

 

These consoles are literally garbage compared to a decent desktop GPU, even an older one. 

 

API helps CPU, not GPU. We saw how little AMD Mantle meant for our I5's/I7's already. Sorry bud. Ubisoft is working HARD to get such little performance out of the PC hardware. Ubisoft is not new to porting for the PC.

 

The reply that I quoted mentioned both the 290X and 780TI.. Users with these cards are most likely running games at 1440p 60 FPS, which is over 5x as high as 900p 30 FPS, and 3.5x as high as 1080p 30 FPS (just calculating simple pixels-per-second).. The 780TI has ~4x (at stock clocks, >5x with a good OC) as much theoretical processing power as the XBO's rating. So then, if theoretical processing power and pixels-per-second have any meaning in the real world (not that they necessarily do), would it be so difficult to assume that they could run similar-ish graphics settings, albeit at very different resolutions and framerates?

 

To clarify, I'm not saying that Ubisoft isn't nerfing PC at all and I'm not saying that the consoles are some kind of amazing supercomputer, all I'm saying is that if you let the framerate and resolution slide, you can run games at much higher settings than you could otherwise.. I'm not saying that code optimizations and efficient APIs/drivers are going to create massive performance increases; I'm saying that an extra few percent here and there can really help with turning a few options up a bit..

 

While it is true that Mantle didn't really help the i5s and i7s, Techspot got a 38% performance increase in Thief with a 8350+280X, and a 46% performance increase with a A8-7600+280X (source).. You're right that Mantle was overall unimpressive, but with the right hardware combinations it could actually make a rather noticeable difference..

 

 

Ubisoft doesn't need to completely nerf the PC version to achieve similar graphics settings. Yes, they probably could have pushed the PC version a lot farther, but at the moment I don't think their statement necessarily means that they're intentionally screwing over the PC version.. Also, it should be noted that we're still very far away from its release, so a lot of stuff can still happen.

[Bob]

EA makes games with good graphics and lots of bugs, Ubisoft makes games with artificially bad graphics and lots of bugs. 

[Mateyyy]

Hi Ubisoft!

 

_|_

 

Bye Ubisoft!

[jesperbj]

I can't describe how disappointed I am with Ubisoft right now. I've always respected them for doing cross platform and putting games on Steam, even if they force their own service on top of it. But this unacceptable. First they cheat us with Watch_Dogs, then they deny it and put out a ridiculous statement and then they do the opposite of what they say, with this. I love the Assassins creed games and Far Cry 3... I was disappointing with Watch_Dogs, but I think it's okay... But in the future Ubisoft will have a very hard time to convince me to buy their games. One way they could redeem themself would be removing Uplay from Steam, but that's probably never gonna happen. 

[Osga21]

Awww, this is such bullshit! Why are they capping the pc? Everyone knows that current generation consoles are seriously underpowered when compared to a pc, who are they trying to fool?

[Sharkyx1]

Everybody Everybody stop the presses

This is exactly the same as far cry 3, it had no enhanced features over the Console version

Its just now ubisoft is being upfront about it

[nfsundergroundd]

only solutions dont buy their f....ing games.. but just download the crack version ofthe game and u good to go..

[Mauri]

Ubisoft is starting to get worse than EA.

They can have my money again when they start making good PC versions.

At least EA cares about PC gaming and fixes there stuff when it's broken.

Woah there. You're missing "in 10 months" at the end of your sentence.

[ACatWithThumbs]

Woah there. You're missing "in 10 months" at the end of your sentence.

They started fixing from day one it just took long to get all problems solved.

They never said that the game was bug free or didn't have problems.

Ubisoft and Activision on the other hand don't talk about bugs nor fix them at any point and time.

 

[xentric]

Now this make more sense after this news:

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/170479-ubisoft-massive-sweden-leak-on-division-downgrade/

 

They will just downgrade the game on the PC on purpose. 

[BallGum]

The only way I see this as vaguely salvageable is if they make the PC version as good as possible, and then run the same game but at 720P 30FPS on the consoles.

[Sir Redemption]

This would be like watch dogs, handicapping PC, ubisoft wut u doin m8

 

This is actually what they did...

 

Link: http://www.destructoid.com/watch-dogs-e3-2012-graphical-effects-discovered-in-the-pc-version-276689.phtml

[G9x001]

Well I'm going to look at the brighter side of things.

At least I won't have to spend $500-$600 on a new R9 390x or GTX880ti just to run the game at 60fps on medium settings.

or will I have to buy an over priced Intel CPU.

I love ubisoft games assassins creed gives me a hard one. the best game franchise ever released In my opinion  

and I like Uplay.

you go you good French company you go.

 

[Trik'Stari]

I for one will be boycotting ubisoft until the end of time. And encourage everyone else to do the same.