Assassin's Creed: Unity PC Patch Worsens Glitches

[Rohit Jackdaw]

Recently, the fourth PC patch for Assassin's Creed: Unity was released. It was meant to fix a number of issues in the game world, but has managed to make a couple of them worse. One of the more notable entries in this patch's manuscript of shoddy development comes in the form of absolutely destroyed SLI Compatability.

While gamers can simply turn off SLI Compatability as a temporary fix, they shouldn't have to. SLI Compatability is a must for players who wish to run Assassin's Creed: Unity at 60 frames per second, as the title is very demanding. This makes the broken SLI Compatability a pretty big detraction.

I understand Ubisoft runs an extremely tight ship with even more intense development schedules. That said, too much time has passed since Assassin's Creed: Unity came out. Any problems on the PC or console versions of the game should have been remedied weeks ago. Ubisoft needs to get on the ball and get Unity fixed instead of readying its troops for the series' next entry, as they probably are.

There's nothing like taking a stroll through the game world and having the floor shudder underneath you. If this were a smaller issue, then I might be willing to cut Ubisoft more slack. That said, they've damaged an already-working aspect of Unity, which is unacceptable.

Seriously I had lost all my ambitions on the game. I was dreaming of a smoother gameplay since the day this patch was announced. Keep On Digging, Ubisoft.

Source : http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/25767/article/assassin-s-creed-unity-pc-patch-worsens-glitches/

[XTankSlayerX]

*Yawn*

 

Wake me up when Ubisoft does something right... I'm going to hibernate until GTAV, DyingLight, BFH, and PCARS drops.

[helpingaskewcokemansarcasm]

Gangnam style recently reached the integer limit for the number of views to be counted on YouTube, soon LTT forums is going to face a similar issue except for threads about Ubisoft.

[Laederem]

Gangnam style recently reached the integer limit for the number of views to be counted on YouTube, soon LTT forums is going to face a similar issue except for threads about Ubisoft.

Ubisoft did nothing wrong. 

 

They're doing something right to be one of the biggest and most successful game publishers. 

It's an incredibly innovative game, so a few minor issues are to be expected, but are promptly being addressed. 

[SpaceCore]

was this the same patch that dropped and was 40GB? the whole game by mistake?

 

are they hiring people straight from college after the veterans get fed up with their shit?

[thorpj]

Recently, the fourth PC patch for Assassin's Creed: Unity was released. It was meant to fix a number of issues in the game world, but has managed to make a couple of them worse. One of the more notable entries in this patch's manuscript of shoddy development comes in the form of absolutely destroyed SLI Compatability.

While gamers can simply turn off SLI Compatability as a temporary fix, they shouldn't have to. SLI Compatability is a must for players who wish to run Assassin's Creed: Unity at 60 frames per second, as the title is very demanding. This makes the broken SLI Compatability a pretty big detraction.

I understand Ubisoft runs an extremely tight ship with even more intense development schedules. That said, too much time has passed since Assassin's Creed: Unity came out. Any problems on the PC or console versions of the game should have been remedied weeks ago. Ubisoft needs to get on the ball and get Unity fixed instead of readying its troops for the series' next entry, as they probably are.

There's nothing like taking a stroll through the game world and having the floor shudder underneath you. If this were a smaller issue, then I might be willing to cut Ubisoft more slack. That said, they've damaged an already-working aspect of Unity, which is unacceptable.

Seriously I had lost all my ambitions on the game. I was dreaming of a smoother gameplay since the day this patch was announced. Keep On Digging, Ubisoft.

Source : http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/25767/article/assassin-s-creed-unity-pc-patch-worsens-glitches/

Time to put on our diggin' shirts again

[Rohit Jackdaw]

was this the same patch that dropped and was 40GB? the whole game by mistake?

 

are they hiring people straight from college after the veterans get fed up with their shit?

Yeah the same. The PC version of the patch was released just a few hours ago. Only on XBOX ONE the patch is 40 GB as it downloads the whole game again. On PS4 and PC it is much smaller. Itnimproved framerate a bit but introduced a number of other issues.

[bob345]

And ubisoft continues on their quest to the center of the earth

 

[Master Disaster]

Hang on a minute. They said they were basically gonna redesign most of the Paris map to fix performance, they do it and people are surprised that their SLI profiles no longer work? Jesus this witch hunt is getting silly now, its not up to Ubisoft to provide a working profile, Nvidia make the driver plus the patch only dropped yesterday. Give them a chance and I'm sure they'll release a new working profile in a few days.

As for the "glitches" the patch supposedly "worsens", care to elaborate? I mean your headline clearly uses the plural meaning more than one yet you only mentions one issue which wasn't even present pre patch.

[mvitkun]

Ubisoft did nothing wrong. 

They're doing something right to be one of the biggest and most successful game publishers. 

It's an incredibly innovative game, so a few minor issues are to be expected, but are promptly being addressed. 

So releasing a game with issues, and then multiple patches that don't fix them, isn't wrong?

Even if you don't start the debate about the optimization, because maybe it truly is that demanding for good reason, they've still allowed the game to stay broken despite its two month delay and four patches in the month that followed its release.

To say that they've done nothing wrong is like saying it would be fine if BenQ released monitors with stands that had defects which caused the monitors to fall, and then after finding out about these defects chose to issue a voluntary recall and then didn't fix or replace monitors that were sent in and instead only claimed that they'd fixed the issue or that the stand was unaffected.

 

People (usually) buy a game because they intend to play it in the near future, selling them a game that isn't ready to be played is wrong.

If you want to delay a game then delay it until a majority of the issues are ironed out or don't delay it at all, delaying a game makes it harder for customers/end users to sympathize with the company/group when their game remains broken despite the aforementioned delay.

The video-game industry seems to have problems deciding whether they want to be on-time or rock solid, so they 

release the game late --> promise to release patches on time -->delay patches for QC --> do not fix the game with the patch

That is wrong.

[Lord Baal]

Ubisoft did nothing wrong. 

 

They're doing something right to be one of the biggest and most successful game publishers. 

It's an incredibly innovative game, so a few minor issues are to be expected, but are promptly being addressed. 

They've done lots wrong they released a completely broken game and now a month later they've still not managed to fix it. "It's an incredibly innovative game"  lol How so?? It's just more of the same thing and the game's so broken you can't say a few minor issues... Black flag>Unity 

[Master Disaster]

They've done lots wrong they released a completely broken game and now a month later they've still not managed to fix it. "It's an incredibly innovative game" lol How so?? It's just more of the same thing and the game's so broken you can't say a few minor issues... Black flag>Unity

LMAO. I challenge you to back that claim up. On every level Unity couldn't be further away from BF. You sure your not playing Rouge?

[Lord Baal]

LMAO. I challenge you to back that claim up. On every level Unity couldn't be further away from BF. You sure your not playing Rouge?

It's Assassins creed none of them are innovative or very different they're all just the same damn game in different locations with minor auditions here and there and what I had meant is Black Flag is far better then Unity not to mention Unity was launched and still remains a broken game even a month after release Ubisoft have had a bad year and done pretty much nothing right.. From they PR crap preaching 30fps to their 2 major games both having some major issues.

[Master Disaster]

It's Assassins creed none of them are innovative or very different they're all just the same damn game in different locations with minor auditions here and there and what I had meant is Black Flag is far better then Unity.

Black flag took place almost entirely on a ship with a Welshman (who sounded more american) who didn't care about the creed at all and just wanted to make money.

Unity was in Paris and about an assassin trying to find out who killed his templar guardian.

They're not even close to the same damn game in different locations, in fact I'd argue the only similarities between them are assassins/templars and parkour. That's like saying BF & COD are the same because they're both set during a war.

[Lord Baal]

Black flag took place almost entirely on a ship with a Welshman (who sounded more american) who didn't care about the creed at all and just wanted to make money.

Unity was in Paris and about an assassin trying to find out who killed his templar guardian.

They're not even close to the same damn game in different locations, in fact I'd argue the only similarities between them are assassins/templars and parkour. That's like saying BF & COD are the same because they're both set during a war.

Lmfao the mechanics of the game are the same the game play is the same as it's always been in every AC game the loctation and story are different that's not innovation and technically you could spend very little time on the boat in Black Flag if you just fast travel around so technically most of the gameplay was on land using the same mechanics it always has and is by far the most fun AC to date and the only one I liked at all. I couldn't give half a shit about the story of Unity it's still just running around the same boring city do the same shit you've done in every AC game to date just in a new location.

It's more like saying COD is just the same game reskinned every year in a different setting with the odd feature added or removed which well it is or like saying Far Cry 3 and 4 are essentially the same game in different locations with a different story which well again they are.

[Laederem]

So releasing a game with issues, and then multiple patches that don't fix them, isn't wrong?

Even if you don't start the debate about the optimization, because maybe it truly is that demanding for good reason, they've still allowed the game to stay broken despite its two month delay and four patches in the month that followed its release.

To say that they've done nothing wrong is like saying it would be fine if BenQ released monitors with stands that had defects which caused the monitors to fall, and then after finding out about these defects chose to issue a voluntary recall and then didn't fix or replace monitors that were sent in and instead only claimed that they'd fixed the issue or that the stand was unaffected.

 

People (usually) buy a game because they intend to play it in the near future, selling them a game that isn't ready to be played is wrong.

If you want to delay a game then delay it until a majority of the issues are ironed out or don't delay it at all, delaying a game makes it harder for customers/end users to sympathize with the company/group when their game remains broken despite the aforementioned delay.

The video-game industry seems to have problems deciding whether they want to be on-time or rock solid, so they 

release the game late --> promise to release patches on time -->delay patches for QC --> do not fix the game with the patch

That is wrong.

No, not quite. 

[DeViLzzz]

It is simple people.


STOP BUYING THEIR GAMES!

 

I don't care if Far Cry 4 looks good as I said prior to that game coming out don't give them your money or they won't learn anything.  Seriously!  By buying anything from them it only gives them the means to continue much of the bad they do.  They need to hurt in the wallet huge to get it.

[asker509]

It is simple people.

STOP BUYING THEIR GAMES!

I don't care if Far Cry 4 looks good as I said prior to that game coming out don't give them your money or they won't learn anything. Seriously! By buying anything from them it only gives them the means to continue much of the bad they do. They need to hurt in the wallet huge to get it.

Let's be honest most people are going to buy a game before they can realize it is broken or not be aware it is broken

I think the only solution is for gamers to be taken seriously in court and be able to sue for a broken product look at skyrim for ps3 took them a year to make it playable and I doubt Bethesda cares or consumers will remember

[Lord Baal]

Let's be honest most people are going to buy a game before they can realize it is broken or not be aware it is broken

I think the only solution is for gamers to be taken seriously in court and be able to sue for a broken product look at skyrim for ps3 took them a year to make it playable and I doubt Bethesda cares or consumers will remember

Let's be honest that's because most people are freaking stupid.

[JAKEBAB]

*Yawn*

 

Wake me up when Ubisoft does something right... 

I wish i could say i will be alive by then but atm im a bit skeptical

[Master Disaster]

Lmfao the mechanics of the game are the same the game play is the same as it's always been in every AC game the loctation and story are different that's not innovation and technically you could spend very little time on the boat in Black Flag if you just fast travel around so technically most of the gameplay was on land using the same mechanics it always has and is by far the most fun AC to date and the only one I liked at all. I couldn't give half a shit about the story of Unity it's still just running around the same boring city do the same shit you've done in every AC game to date just in a new location.

It's more like saying COD is just the same game reskinned every year in a different setting with the odd feature added or removed which well it is or like saying Far Cry 3 and 4 are essentially the same game in different locations with a different story which well again they are.

 

Well were gonna have to agree to disagree on this one, ACU was far far far away from ACBF in almost every way (IMO). Don't make the mistake of thinking I'm defending ACU by the way cause I'm not, it was dull and forgettable but claiming its the exact same game as ACBF is simply not true.

[brownninja97]

*Yawn*

 

Wake me up when Ubisoft does something right... I'm going to hibernate until GTAV, DyingLight, BFH, and PCARS drops.

just a warning, give up on project cars, the physics are weird. Its mainly the pacing of it, see gran turismo is known as slow, people say there isnt much sense of speed in it, Pcars is about half that, that completely puts people off when trying to determine how fast they should go into a corner. Also no mod support and its a racing game for pc, its like they want to be need for speed

[rashdanml]

It's Assassins creed none of them are innovative or very different they're all just the same damn game 

While the core game mechanics hasn't changed, it has certainly been improved over time. The old games didn't do downward freerunning very well, it was mostly just a straight drop. Unity introduced more fluid downward motion. The core game mechanics doesn't need to change - if it became drastically different, it'll cease to become an Assassin's Creed game. Core features include: freerunning, common assassination techniques, Assassin-Templar struggles, among others. These features will never go away from the series and will always be improved upon - anyone with half a brain and who isn't short-sighted will see the improvements made from game to game. 

 

None of the games are copy-pastes of each other, as some tend to claim. Likening Assassin's Creed to Call of Duty isn't fair, as Call of Duty games are visibly copy-pasted for the Single Player, and in most cases, multiplayer content with minor changes. 

 

Unity has a lot of improvements in Assassination missions. All of the previous games gave you a set amount of objectives - do this, do that, reach target, kill target. Unity's blackbox mission system is outstanding. You're given the final goal, and you have to find a way to reach it. No markers, no hand-holding, nothing. It's brilliant. 

[Lord Baal]

While the core game mechanics hasn't changed, it has certainly been improved over time. The old games didn't do downward freerunning very well, it was mostly just a straight drop. Unity introduced more fluid downward motion. The core game mechanics doesn't need to change - if it became drastically different, it'll cease to become an Assassin's Creed game. Core features include: freerunning, common assassination techniques, Assassin-Templar struggles, among others. These features will never go away from the series and will always be improved upon - anyone with half a brain and who isn't short-sighted will see the improvements made from game to game. 

 

None of the games are copy-pastes of each other, as some tend to claim. Likening Assassin's Creed to Call of Duty isn't fair, as Call of Duty games are visibly copy-pasted for the Single Player, and in most cases, multiplayer content with minor changes. 

 

Unity has a lot of improvements in Assassination missions. All of the previous games gave you a set amount of objectives - do this, do that, reach target, kill target. Unity's blackbox mission system is outstanding. You're given the final goal, and you have to find a way to reach it. No markers, no hand-holding, nothing. It's brilliant. 

It's still not incredibly innovative as was claimed which was the point i was disagreeing with it's just the same game play with minor improvements nothing that justifies how terribly broken and buggy it's been. I never said there wasn't minor improvements there are in just about every sequel ever made even Far Cry 4 has some minor improvements over 3 nothing you could call innovative. The guy I was replying to had said comparing AC:BF to AC:U was like comparing COD to battlefield it's not it's far more like comparing COD to COD or Far Cry 3 to Far Cry 4 so in that context I was correct.   

[rashdanml]

It's still not incredibly innovative as was claimed which was the point i was disagreeing with it's just the same game play with minor improvements nothing that justifies how terribly broken and buggy it's been. I never said there wasn't minor improvements there are in just about every sequel ever made even Far Cry 4 has some minor improvements over 3 nothing you could call innovative. The guy I was replying to had said comparing AC:BF to AC:U was like comparing COD to battlefield it's not it's far more like comparing COD to COD or Far Cry 3 to Far Cry 4 so in that context I was correct.   

You're downplaying the changes by quite a bit. 

AC3 introduced nearly a 1000 characters on screen at the same time. It was pretty limited though. Most of them did the same set of things (Battle of Bunker Hill comes to mind). 

AC4 didn't have that feature, but it did have some intense Naval combat and weather interactions. 

Unity introduced 1000s of characters on screen, each doing its own thing, interacting with each other, with randomly generated conversations, etc. All of that needs to be kept track of, on screen. 

 

It's not easy to develop a game when corporate is breathing down the developer's neck to push the release. Mistakes happen. The games have become visibly more complex over time. 

It's not ground-breaking innovation, but it has still improved enough to justify the development time and cost, and be lenient about the mistakes made.