Ubisoft Now Blames AMD For AC: Unity Poor Performance

Avatar image for Coseniath
Coseniath

3183

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 Coseniath
Member since 2004 • 3183 Posts

Ubisoft Now Blames AMD For Assassin's Creed Unity Poor Performance

Life is hard when you're a AAA publisher. Last month, Ubisoft blamed weak console hardware for the troubles it had bringing Assassin's Creed Unity up to speed, claiming that it could've hit 100 FPS but for weak console CPUs. Now, in the wake of the game's disastrous launch, the company has changed tactics -- suddenly, all of this is AMD's fault. An official company forum post currently reads:

We are aware that the graphics performance of Assassin’s Creed Unity on PC may be adversely affected by certain AMD CPU and GPU configurations. This should not affect the vast majority of PC players, but rest assured that AMD and Ubisoft are continuing to work together closely to resolve the issue, and will provide more information as soon as it is available.

There are multiple problems with this assessment. First, there's no equivalent Nvidia-centric post on the main forum, and no mention of the fact that if you own an Nvidia card of any vintage but a GTX 970 or 980, you're going to see less-than ideal performance.

Tech Report has rounded up a summary of the various reported problems. PC World reports that the GTX 760 is "really rough," thanks mostly to the huge numbers of crowds Ubisoft stuffed into the game and the resulting impact on frame rates. This game simply doesn't run particularly well on anything but the latest cards, and even then, turning on MSAA causes the frame rate to crater.

The bigger problem, though, is that posts like this imply that AMD users are the only people seeing issues. As someone who has played the game on both the NV GTX 980 and 780, let me promise you -- that's not true.

NPCs and sometimes entire crowds of people pop in and out of frame on the GTX 980. I've seen unkillable enemies, or enemies that were supposed to run away from me stand stock still instead, as though taking in the admittedly gorgeous scenery. Nvidia may have paid Ubisoft a goodly sum of money to adopt GameWorks, but that hasn't translated to great game stability -- at least, not yet.

Note: Just to be clear, the GameWorks features in Assassin's Creed Unity have no impact on stability, pro or con.

According to sources we've spoken to that are familiar with the matter, the main culprit in this situation isn't AMD or Nvidia -- it's Ubisoft. The company couldn't go directly on the record, but sources with information on the topic were willing to talk about the problem.

Draw Calls Damage Performance

According to our source, the problem with Assassin's Creed Unity is that the game is issuing tens of thousands of draw calls -- up to 50,000 and beyond, in some cases. This is precisely the kind of operation that Mantle and DirectX 12 are designed to handle, but DirectX 11 -- even 11.2 -- isn't capable of efficiently processing that many calls at once. It's a fundamental limit of the API and it kicks in harshly in ways that adding more CPU cores simply can't help with.

But the reason we're willing to call this out as a shoddy console port is simple math. The Jaguar CPU inside the Xbox One and the PS4 has low-latency access to the hardware -- but consider the difference between the CPUs inside a high-end PC and the far more modest chips inside these consoles.

AMD's Jaguar is actually a very well-balanced design, but it's still a dual-issue processor capable of executing a maximum of two instructions per clock. A modern Haswell is likely between 30-50% faster than Jaguar at the same clock speed -- possibly more, depending on instruction mix. Factor in the clock speed differences and the greater number of threads (a modern console will only have 6-7 CPU cores depending on OS allocation compared to four cores / eight threads on a high-end desktop Haswell) and the Intel chip is likely 3-5x faster than its console counterpart.

Low-level hardware access allows for impressive tricks and scaling, but it's not magic -- and a really high-end PC packs more than enough punch to offset the difference unless< the game is fundamentally handicapped in a way that no amount of modern hardware can really fix. Insane draw calls are precisely that kind of problem -- DX11 just isn't built for them, and throwing faster hardware at the issue will only result in modest improvement.

I'm willing to trust this explanation of the problem because it fits the facts. It's not like GeForce users are seeing great performance either, and draw calls are an issue that would affect both cards.

Ubisoft Needs To Acknowledge Nvidia Users Have Problems, Too

I get that Nvidia is a major Ubisoft partner and that the company's GameWorks middleware is heavily featured in ACU, but right now the implication of that AMD post (and the lack of an Nvidia counterpart) is that only AMD users are having problems.

There have been times when one company or the other launched with a vastly superior driver -- but this doesn't seem to be one of them. Issues are popping up on all cards from both companies, and Ubisoft needs to acknowledge that the problems are its own fault -- not AMD's and not Nvidia's.

To its credit, Ubisoft has announced a live blog that will track updates to the game and prominent issues in real time.

=========================

From Guru3D aswell: Assassin's Creed Unity not running well on AMD hardware

WCCFtech too: Ubisoft Points the Finger at AMD For Technical Bugs in Assassins Creed Unity

=========================

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

One guy on a forum said that he fixed all the framerate issues by going OFFLINE on the client???

Anyway, looks like with Ubisoft games the launches are not as good as they could be, so just buy the game a couple of weeks later when all the patches have been applied, problem solved.

Avatar image for thehig1
thehig1

7537

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#3 thehig1
Member since 2014 • 7537 Posts

@FelipeInside: kind of, there games still run like arse even when patched.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

58900

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 2

#4 uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 58900 Posts

Be nice if Nvidia allied it's self with an actual pc game publisher, as opposed to a console publisher who dumps shit.

Avatar image for HyperWarlock
HyperWarlock

3295

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By HyperWarlock
Member since 2011 • 3295 Posts

@FelipeInside said:

One guy on a forum said that he fixed all the framerate issues by going OFFLINE on the client???

Anyway, looks like with Ubisoft games the launches are not as good as they could be, so just buy the game a couple of weeks later when all the patches have been applied, problem solved.

To be honest, I've applied this rule to all video games recently. Just far too many bugs/server issues are slipping through the cracks before release. I like to wait at least a week until I've heard the community's verdict as well as certain reviewers. Games are just too costly these days to risk it.

PS: Hey guys

Avatar image for gerygo
GeryGo

12803

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By GeryGo  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 12803 Posts

And I thought Ubi couldn't get any lower than what they've became, I was wrong XD

Avatar image for woomar
woomar

172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 201

User Lists: 0

#7 woomar
Member since 2008 • 172 Posts

I don't see how they blamed AMD for the performance , and if they were wrong why didn't AMD clarify and say something different.

Anyways i've owned both brands and from my little experience from AMD , I noticed that AMD do not support older games like NVIDIA does , also the performance with OpenGL games are not as expected and the biggest issue is the stuttering in a lot of games , (I have an older CPU which might be a bottleneck for my GPU , but still I am not running a CPU demanding game) , so do I believe what Ubisoft said ? yes I do until AMD says otherwise.

I am not bashing AMD , AMD is great Nvidia is great , and remember that my experience with it still quite short so i might be wrong.

Avatar image for Daian
Daian

2901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By Daian
Member since 2005 • 2901 Posts

Let's face, they have gotten really bad at optimization, downright disastrous.

This game is GTA 4 all over again.

Avatar image for ribstaylor1
Ribstaylor1

2186

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#9 Ribstaylor1
Member since 2014 • 2186 Posts

If I was AMD I'd sue Ubisoft for defamation. As this is downright false information that paints their company in a bad light. The TC is right this isn't a problem with the cards or CPU's it's an issue with how Ubisoft is making and producing their games. These cards and CPU's especially on pc are far more capable of what we are seeing. But no one and especially Ubisoft is using the available resources to their fool advantage.

**** I really do hate that my government hands this company cash yearly, while giving them tax breaks.

Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

@ribstaylor1 said:

If I was AMD I'd sue Ubisoft for defamation. As this is downright false information that paints their company in a bad light. The TC is right this isn't a problem with the cards or CPU's it's an issue with how Ubisoft is making and producing their games. These cards and CPU's especially on pc are far more capable of what we are seeing. But no one and especially Ubisoft is using the available resources to their fool advantage.

**** I really do hate that my government hands this company cash yearly, while giving them tax breaks.

This. TotalBiscuit cancelled his "WTF Is...' series video for Unity because his SLI 980s could not play the game

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

@HyperWarlock said:

@FelipeInside said:

One guy on a forum said that he fixed all the framerate issues by going OFFLINE on the client???

Anyway, looks like with Ubisoft games the launches are not as good as they could be, so just buy the game a couple of weeks later when all the patches have been applied, problem solved.

To be honest, I've applied this rule to all video games recently. Just far too many bugs/server issues are slipping through the cracks before release. I like to wait at least a week until I've heard the community's verdict as well as certain reviewers. Games are just too costly these days to risk it.

PS: Hey guys

Heyyyyyyyyyy Hyper.


First Elann comes back (I talked him into it), and now Hyper is back.

Where have you been bad boy?

These forums are slowly becoming cool again... most of the idiot trolls have left or got banned.

Avatar image for HyperWarlock
HyperWarlock

3295

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 HyperWarlock
Member since 2011 • 3295 Posts

@FelipeInside said:

@HyperWarlock said:

@FelipeInside said:

One guy on a forum said that he fixed all the framerate issues by going OFFLINE on the client???

Anyway, looks like with Ubisoft games the launches are not as good as they could be, so just buy the game a couple of weeks later when all the patches have been applied, problem solved.

To be honest, I've applied this rule to all video games recently. Just far too many bugs/server issues are slipping through the cracks before release. I like to wait at least a week until I've heard the community's verdict as well as certain reviewers. Games are just too costly these days to risk it.

PS: Hey guys

Heyyyyyyyyyy Hyper.

First Elann comes back (I talked him into it), and now Hyper is back.

Where have you been bad boy?

These forums are slowly becoming cool again...most of the idiot trolls have left or got banned.

Felipe :) I'm glad to see you're still here.

Just took a year long break from all things gaming related, but I started to really miss it and thought coming back to GameSpot would be a good place to start.

It's been a while, but that Watch Dogs game looks promising! When does that come out?

PS: Have you pre-ordered ESO?

i kid

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

@HyperWarlock said:

@FelipeInside said:


Felipe :) I'm glad to see you're still here.

Just took a year long break from all things gaming related, but I started to really miss it and thought coming back to GameSpot would be a good place to start.

It's been a while, but that Watch Dogs game looks promising! When does that come out?

PS: Have you pre-ordered ESO?

i kid

LOL....

I actually enjoyed Watch Dogs, even though the final product didn't look as good as the E3 previews (still looked pretty good).

The story telling in ESO was fantastic, but what put me off was the weird instancing they had going.

Avatar image for top_lel
top_lel

886

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#14  Edited By top_lel
Member since 2014 • 886 Posts

AMD needs to take a stand here. If it doesn't, then it'll be AMD's fault. No one owns the right to outright blame your company for their incompetency.

On another note, news like these coming from Ubisoft do not even surprise me now. Not in the slightest.

Avatar image for Cwagmire21
Cwagmire21

5896

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 Cwagmire21
Member since 2007 • 5896 Posts

@wis3boi said:

@ribstaylor1 said:

If I was AMD I'd sue Ubisoft for defamation. As this is downright false information that paints their company in a bad light. The TC is right this isn't a problem with the cards or CPU's it's an issue with how Ubisoft is making and producing their games. These cards and CPU's especially on pc are far more capable of what we are seeing. But no one and especially Ubisoft is using the available resources to their fool advantage.

**** I really do hate that my government hands this company cash yearly, while giving them tax breaks.

This. TotalBiscuit cancelled his "WTF Is...' series video for Unity because his SLI 980s could not play the game

Yup. Pretty much nuff said.

Avatar image for deactivated-579f651eab962
deactivated-579f651eab962

5404

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16  Edited By deactivated-579f651eab962
Member since 2003 • 5404 Posts

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#17 cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

why is anyone surprised that a poorly optimized game is running even worse on AMD processors? AMD hasnt produced a CPU worth mentioning or buying in years....

Avatar image for Old_Gooseberry
Old_Gooseberry

3958

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 76

User Lists: 0

#18  Edited By Old_Gooseberry
Member since 2002 • 3958 Posts

AMD's been using the same cpu architecture for years, if ubisoft's programmers can't make a game run properly on their cpus they are ******** <----Word is a nono here on GS, please change. Klunt.

I wonder if Farcry 4 will have problems also? Farcry 3 ran fairly smooth for me.

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#19 cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

@Old_Gooseberry said:

AMD's been using the same cpu architecture for years, if ubisoft's programmers can't make a game run properly on their cpus they are retards.

or, you know, since you know nothing about game development there could be other factors.

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#20 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127503 Posts

@cyloninside said:

why is anyone surprised that a poorly optimized game is running even worse on AMD processors? AMD hasnt produced a CPU worth mentioning or buying in years....

This was about their GPUs, not CPUs, wasn't it?

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#21  Edited By cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

@horgen said:

@cyloninside said:

why is anyone surprised that a poorly optimized game is running even worse on AMD processors? AMD hasnt produced a CPU worth mentioning or buying in years....

This was about their GPUs, not CPUs, wasn't it?

both, though most benchmarks i have seen are comparing intel to AMD CPUs... and that intel CPUs are blowing AMD CPUs away, though still running poorly.

Avatar image for alucrd2009
Alucrd2009

787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By Alucrd2009
Member since 2007 • 787 Posts

far cry 4 working 60 fps without anyissue , anygame that uses multi core doesnt have any problems with AMD cpu's.

Avatar image for insane_metalist
insane_metalist

7797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#24 insane_metalist
Member since 2006 • 7797 Posts

Pathetic.. Ubisoft is at their lowest point.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Avatar image for insane_metalist
insane_metalist

7797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#26 insane_metalist
Member since 2006 • 7797 Posts

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

No, it's getting harder and harder to optimize games, and I'll explain why:

1) games are getting more and more complex (hence why more things can go wrong). Just compare the first AssCreed to Unity, the sheer more amount of content, gameplay, graphics, assets etc just makes it a far more complex programming job.

2) Not only do they have to optimize for hundreds of different configurations, but also now to hundreds of different apps running alongside the game. Examples, the online client, things like Raptr/Xfire, things like streaming services, recording programs, etc etc. Years ago it was just Windows and nothing else behind the game.

So, games are more complex, PC configurations are more complex. These days I'm actually amazed when games run silky smooth.

I'm NOT defending Ubisoft. Unity shouldn't have launched like that, but there are reasons why it's happening.

Avatar image for insane_metalist
insane_metalist

7797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#28 insane_metalist
Member since 2006 • 7797 Posts
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

No, it's getting harder and harder to optimize games, and I'll explain why:

1) games are getting more and more complex (hence why more things can go wrong). Just compare the first AssCreed to Unity, the sheer more amount of content, gameplay, graphics, assets etc just makes it a far more complex programming job.

2) Not only do they have to optimize for hundreds of different configurations, but also now to hundreds of different apps running alongside the game. Examples, the online client, things like Raptr/Xfire, things like streaming services, recording programs, etc etc. Years ago it was just Windows and nothing else behind the game.

So, games are more complex, PC configurations are more complex. These days I'm actually amazed when games run silky smooth.

I'm NOT defending Ubisoft. Unity shouldn't have launched like that, but there are reasons why it's happening.


Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

That is true, but let's look at two things as well:

1) if you know these guys are not the greatest at optimizing games, then be smart and buy the game a few weeks down the track. By then everything should be fixed and your experience won't be hampered.

2) the money you pay is also for support. So if the game doesn't work 100% as expected at launch, you still have free access to all incoming patches to fix these problems. Kinda like product warranty.

Again, I'm not defending Ubisoft. This game should have been tested for a few more weeks. But, I always try to make the best of each situation for myself and my enjoyment.

Avatar image for insane_metalist
insane_metalist

7797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#30 insane_metalist
Member since 2006 • 7797 Posts
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

That is true, but let's look at two things as well:

1) if you know these guys are not the greatest at optimizing games, then be smart and buy the game a few weeks down the track. By then everything should be fixed and your experience won't be hampered.

2) the money you pay is also for support. So if the game doesn't work 100% as expected at launch, you still have free access to all incoming patches to fix these problems. Kinda like product warranty.

I've stopped buying games day one about a year ago. I usually wait to see user reviews before any purchase. Specially after pathetic Ghosts release.

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#31 cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

PC gamers are stuck up, self involved, entitled little bitches. they think that because they spent 2K on their PC, they are owed a flawless experience or else. its best to just ignore it all because of how pathetic it is.

the issues with Unity are being blown way out of proportion indeed. yes the game could run better, yes there are bugs, yes ubisoft needs to take steps to correct these issues (and they are). no, it is not the worst running game ive ever seen, and no, it CERTAINLY does not have the most bugs.

what it DOES have going for it are excellent graphics and fun gameplay.

but, you know, whiney little cry babies will be how they are. nothing is going to change the mindset of the "pc master race". the title they use explains their entire problem.

I game on my PC more than my consoles. no i dont associate myself with these failures. i play games to play games. for fun, and for the experience. the only opinion i care about is my own. best some of you start doing the same and avoid being dragged down by these people.

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#32  Edited By cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

No, it's getting harder and harder to optimize games, and I'll explain why:

1) games are getting more and more complex (hence why more things can go wrong). Just compare the first AssCreed to Unity, the sheer more amount of content, gameplay, graphics, assets etc just makes it a far more complex programming job.

2) Not only do they have to optimize for hundreds of different configurations, but also now to hundreds of different apps running alongside the game. Examples, the online client, things like Raptr/Xfire, things like streaming services, recording programs, etc etc. Years ago it was just Windows and nothing else behind the game.

So, games are more complex, PC configurations are more complex. These days I'm actually amazed when games run silky smooth.

I'm NOT defending Ubisoft. Unity shouldn't have launched like that, but there are reasons why it's happening.

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

maybe you should look in to why you have such a temper in the first place then. a game being poorly optimized should not even be in your top 20 things to get mad over. ITS A GAME. dont like it? take it back, get your money back, MOVE ON. not even remotely worth getting upset over.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

@cyloninside said:

@FelipeInside said:

what it DOES have going for it are excellent graphics and fun gameplay.

To be totally honest, I have to agree with most of your post, especially that line.

Yes, the lag issues and some bugs annoy me when I'm playing Unity, but I have the ability to see past them and realize it's actually an awesome game... and the sheer amount of work that has gone into it amazes me.

@insane_metalist said:

I've stopped buying games day one about a year ago. I usually wait to see user reviews before any purchase. Specially after pathetic Ghosts release.

I've also stopped buying games at launch, and have being getting better results that way. I get the game down the track a bit more fixed and optimized, and if I'm lucky, at a few dollars off.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23829

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#34 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23829 Posts

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

That is true, but let's look at two things as well:

1) if you know these guys are not the greatest at optimizing games, then be smart and buy the game a few weeks down the track. By then everything should be fixed and your experience won't be hampered.

2) the money you pay is also for support. So if the game doesn't work 100% as expected at launch, you still have free access to all incoming patches to fix these problems. Kinda like product warranty.

I've stopped buying games day one about a year ago. I usually wait to see user reviews before any purchase. Specially after pathetic Ghosts release.

Solution is dont release it until its fixed aka "ready" ,.... but the main point that they knew they launched a bugged and incomplete product because they tried to limit first day reviews. then they blame AMD for bad performance.... really? Its not the reason that its harder to optimize the games. its the fact you have incompetent team working on the coding its the same team that has done the last few AC games on pc which have all suffered from poor cpu coding.

Spending money and waiting for a game to be playable is not a warranty.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35  Edited By FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

@04dcarraher said:

@insane_metalist said:

Spending money and waiting for a game to be playable is not a warranty.

Then don't buy it at launch.

Wait for reviews, wait for patches, wait till it's all fixed and THEN buy the game and you won't have an issue.

The game is totally playable btw, it's just that a few sections it seems to lag more than it should and slows down the framerate.

Avatar image for insane_metalist
insane_metalist

7797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#36  Edited By insane_metalist
Member since 2006 • 7797 Posts
@cyloninside said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

No, it's getting harder and harder to optimize games, and I'll explain why:

1) games are getting more and more complex (hence why more things can go wrong). Just compare the first AssCreed to Unity, the sheer more amount of content, gameplay, graphics, assets etc just makes it a far more complex programming job.

2) Not only do they have to optimize for hundreds of different configurations, but also now to hundreds of different apps running alongside the game. Examples, the online client, things like Raptr/Xfire, things like streaming services, recording programs, etc etc. Years ago it was just Windows and nothing else behind the game.

So, games are more complex, PC configurations are more complex. These days I'm actually amazed when games run silky smooth.

I'm NOT defending Ubisoft. Unity shouldn't have launched like that, but there are reasons why it's happening.

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

maybe you should look in to why you have such a temper in the first place then. a game being poorly optimized should not even be in your top 20 things to get mad over. ITS A GAME. dont like it? take it back, get your money back, MOVE ON. not even remotely worth getting upset over.

My anger issues aren't yours so don't worry about it, it's my problem.
How can you take a "digital" game back? Best thing to do is wait and see what players think of the game.

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#37  Edited By cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

@04dcarraher said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

That is true, but let's look at two things as well:

1) if you know these guys are not the greatest at optimizing games, then be smart and buy the game a few weeks down the track. By then everything should be fixed and your experience won't be hampered.

2) the money you pay is also for support. So if the game doesn't work 100% as expected at launch, you still have free access to all incoming patches to fix these problems. Kinda like product warranty.

I've stopped buying games day one about a year ago. I usually wait to see user reviews before any purchase. Specially after pathetic Ghosts release.

Solution is dont release it until its fixed aka "ready" ,.... but the main point that they knew they launched a bugged and incomplete product because they tried to limit first day reviews. then they blame AMD for bad performance.... really? Its not the reason that its harder to optimize the games. its the fact you have incompetent team working on the coding its the same team that has done the last few AC games on pc which have all suffered from poor cpu coding.

Spending money and waiting for a game to be playable is not a warranty.

nobody is forcing you to buy the game at launch. if you think games should spend longer in development, then buy the game after 6 months when it has been all patched up. its basicaly the same thing as a delay...

im not trying to make excuses for devs, because i do think games are getting sloppy lately... but you people act like game devs are holding a gun to your head and FORCING YOU to buy their games.

dont like the game? dont buy it! BUT SERIOUSLY stop acting like you are OWED a better game. the devs dont owe you shit, and neither does anyone else just because you spent a bunch of money on your PC. devs are people too. sometimes they put out a really stellar product, and sometimes it just doesnt come together. even the best companies put out bad products... infact sometimes they put out several bad products in a row. its the companies that learn from this, and get themselves back on track that are the good ones. perhaps ubisoft will learn from watchdogs and unity, and next year and the year after you will see a marked improvement.

look at bioware. amazing games, then dragon age 2 and star wars the old republic and arguably mass effect 3, generally considered their worst games ever. guess what we are getting this week? dragon age inquisition, which is looking like one of their BEST games ever.

look at blizzard. a LONG history of great games. then came some crappy xpacs for WOW, starcraft 3 split into 3 games, the utter fail that was diablo 3.... and now overwatch (BIG EYE ROLL).

AND bungie.... a bunch of great games on PC... and halo!.... and now this year the disappointment of Destiny :(

some companies learn, some companies dont. we will see which one Ubisoft is, because arguably until this year, their games have been generally excellent. rainbow six? ghost recon? splinter cell? the first few ACs? farcry? that is a lot of good will to throw away over 2 games in the same year.... but wait, i forgot im talking to "pc master race". all ill get in response is HURRR BUT MAH 1K DOLLAR GPUs... DIS GAME RUN BAD. *sighs*

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#38 cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

@insane_metalist said:

@cyloninside said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

No, it's getting harder and harder to optimize games, and I'll explain why:

1) games are getting more and more complex (hence why more things can go wrong). Just compare the first AssCreed to Unity, the sheer more amount of content, gameplay, graphics, assets etc just makes it a far more complex programming job.

2) Not only do they have to optimize for hundreds of different configurations, but also now to hundreds of different apps running alongside the game. Examples, the online client, things like Raptr/Xfire, things like streaming services, recording programs, etc etc. Years ago it was just Windows and nothing else behind the game.

So, games are more complex, PC configurations are more complex. These days I'm actually amazed when games run silky smooth.

I'm NOT defending Ubisoft. Unity shouldn't have launched like that, but there are reasons why it's happening.

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

maybe you should look in to why you have such a temper in the first place then. a game being poorly optimized should not even be in your top 20 things to get mad over. ITS A GAME. dont like it? take it back, get your money back, MOVE ON. not even remotely worth getting upset over.

My anger issues aren't yours so don't worry about it, it's my problem.

How can you take a "digital" game back? Best thing to do is wait and see what players think of the game.

call PSN or LIVE and ask for a refund? they will be happy to do so almost always within the first 24 hours or so. i have done it a few times, and so have others. i have never really heard of anyone having a problem as long as they dont wait a week.

Avatar image for insane_metalist
insane_metalist

7797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#39  Edited By insane_metalist
Member since 2006 • 7797 Posts

@cyloninside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@cyloninside said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

No, it's getting harder and harder to optimize games, and I'll explain why:

1) games are getting more and more complex (hence why more things can go wrong). Just compare the first AssCreed to Unity, the sheer more amount of content, gameplay, graphics, assets etc just makes it a far more complex programming job.

2) Not only do they have to optimize for hundreds of different configurations, but also now to hundreds of different apps running alongside the game. Examples, the online client, things like Raptr/Xfire, things like streaming services, recording programs, etc etc. Years ago it was just Windows and nothing else behind the game.

So, games are more complex, PC configurations are more complex. These days I'm actually amazed when games run silky smooth.

I'm NOT defending Ubisoft. Unity shouldn't have launched like that, but there are reasons why it's happening.

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

maybe you should look in to why you have such a temper in the first place then. a game being poorly optimized should not even be in your top 20 things to get mad over. ITS A GAME. dont like it? take it back, get your money back, MOVE ON. not even remotely worth getting upset over.

My anger issues aren't yours so don't worry about it, it's my problem.

How can you take a "digital" game back? Best thing to do is wait and see what players think of the game.

call PSN or LIVE and ask for a refund? they will be happy to do so almost always within the first 24 hours or so. i have done it a few times, and so have others. i have never really heard of anyone having a problem as long as they dont wait a week.

I don't game on consoles.. I use Steam.

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#40 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127503 Posts

@cyloninside: still not a reason to blame AMD entirely.

Avatar image for cyloninside
cyloninside

815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#41  Edited By cyloninside
Member since 2014 • 815 Posts

@insane_metalist said:

@cyloninside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@cyloninside said:

@insane_metalist said:
@FelipeInside said:

@insane_metalist said:

@FelipeInside said:

I've played about 30% of Unity.

So far the performance has been fine in most places, but in some it lags more than it should.

I honestly think though that PC gamers are taking this wayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of proportion (and why we get such bad rap sometimes). These performance issues will likely be fixed with a patch or two. Same thing happened with Ghost Recon Future Soldier at launch and then the patches fixed them.

It's funny to see how Ubisoft gets slammed for this when they launched the game at the same time as consoles, but then Rockstar gets praised and people can't wait for GTA5. Sad.

Rockstar and Ubi are both getting lazy, it's sad. I guess, it's "so hard" to spend a little more time on optimizing a game.

No, it's getting harder and harder to optimize games, and I'll explain why:

1) games are getting more and more complex (hence why more things can go wrong). Just compare the first AssCreed to Unity, the sheer more amount of content, gameplay, graphics, assets etc just makes it a far more complex programming job.

2) Not only do they have to optimize for hundreds of different configurations, but also now to hundreds of different apps running alongside the game. Examples, the online client, things like Raptr/Xfire, things like streaming services, recording programs, etc etc. Years ago it was just Windows and nothing else behind the game.

So, games are more complex, PC configurations are more complex. These days I'm actually amazed when games run silky smooth.

I'm NOT defending Ubisoft. Unity shouldn't have launched like that, but there are reasons why it's happening.

Honestly, that's not my problem. It's their job to optimize games before releasing them half way through. I am paying them money and I get half finished product. That type of shit makes me lose my temper a bit.

maybe you should look in to why you have such a temper in the first place then. a game being poorly optimized should not even be in your top 20 things to get mad over. ITS A GAME. dont like it? take it back, get your money back, MOVE ON. not even remotely worth getting upset over.

My anger issues aren't yours so don't worry about it, it's my problem.

How can you take a "digital" game back? Best thing to do is wait and see what players think of the game.

call PSN or LIVE and ask for a refund? they will be happy to do so almost always within the first 24 hours or so. i have done it a few times, and so have others. i have never really heard of anyone having a problem as long as they dont wait a week.

I don't game on consoles.. I use Steam.

well... yeah forgot i was dealing with "pc master race" for a second... sorry. steam is notoriously strict. buy your keys from other sites. origin will typically refund no problem at all. so will greenmangaming.com

Avatar image for insane_metalist
insane_metalist

7797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#42 insane_metalist
Member since 2006 • 7797 Posts

@cyloninside: You are in PC forums lol. I do buy occasionally from Origin and GMG but mostly from Steam. I can't complain about Steam though it's a nice community and always every couple of months they have huge sales. I'm looking forward to Holiday sales on Steam :D

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23829

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#43  Edited By 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23829 Posts

@cyloninside said:

nobody is forcing you to buy the game at launch. if you think games should spend longer in development, then buy the game after 6 months when it has been all patched up. its basicaly the same thing as a delay...

im not trying to make excuses for devs, because i do think games are getting sloppy lately... but you people act like game devs are holding a gun to your head and FORCING YOU to buy their games.

dont like the game? dont buy it! BUT SERIOUSLY stop acting like you are OWED a better game. the devs dont owe you shit, and neither does anyone else just because you spent a bunch of money on your PC. devs are people too. sometimes they put out a really stellar product, and sometimes it just doesnt come together. even the best companies put out bad products... infact sometimes they put out several bad products in a row. its the companies that learn from this, and get themselves back on track that are the good ones. perhaps ubisoft will learn from watchdogs and unity, and next year and the year after you will see a marked improvement.

look at bioware. amazing games, then dragon age 2 and star wars the old republic and arguably mass effect 3, generally considered their worst games ever. guess what we are getting this week? dragon age inquisition, which is looking like one of their BEST games ever.

look at blizzard. a LONG history of great games. then came some crappy xpacs for WOW, starcraft 3 split into 3 games, the utter fail that was diablo 3.... and now overwatch (BIG EYE ROLL).

AND bungie.... a bunch of great games on PC... and halo!.... and now this year the disappointment of Destiny :(

some companies learn, some companies dont. we will see which one Ubisoft is, because arguably until this year, their games have been generally excellent. rainbow six? ghost recon? splinter cell? the first few ACs? farcry? that is a lot of good will to throw away over 2 games in the same year.... but wait, i forgot im talking to "pc master race". all ill get in response is HURRR BUT MAH 1K DOLLAR GPUs... DIS GAME RUN BAD. *sighs*

Your singing to the choir I rarely buy games at launch, because of sloppy ports to decreasing quality in games. Just was pointing out those things

Avatar image for Qixote
Qixote

10843

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#44 Qixote
Member since 2002 • 10843 Posts

Performance issues or not, I am taking a pass on this AC title. At least maybe until it has a bargain bin sale price on Steam for $5, which probably will not take that long. The AC franchise has gone so stale, as any franchise would when they release one more titles on an annual basis. Black Flag was a good diversion, but in truth would have been better as a standalone pirate themed game than an AC title and left out all the typical recycled AC content it had..

Avatar image for neatfeatguy
neatfeatguy

4400

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#45 neatfeatguy
Member since 2005 • 4400 Posts

I grew tired of the franchise after half way through Revelations - I only got ACIII when my younger brother purchased it for me during a steam sale....

I didn't care about the story line anymore in Revelations, I just ran around in populated areas getting as many soldiers to chase me and then I would battle it out with them - I wasted many hours doing this before I finally decided to complete the story. Also, while the ships in ACIII was a nice addition, I didn't think it was that great of a thing (just not my thing I guess) and I ended up doing the usual, ran around and gathered as many bad guys as I could and then battle it out to see if I could take them all on without dying.

With this news bit about how Ubi blames AMD - I laugh every time I read it. Ubi done did f'up and are looking to point fingers at anyone except themselves. Just man up and say, "Yeah, our shit stinks and we are sorry. We are working as fast as possible to get these issues resolved."

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46  Edited By FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

@Qixote said:

Performance issues or not, I am taking a pass on this AC title. At least maybe until it has a bargain bin sale price on Steam for $5, which probably will not take that long. The AC franchise has gone so stale, as any franchise would when they release one more titles on an annual basis. Black Flag was a good diversion, but in truth would have been better as a standalone pirate themed game than an AC title and left out all the typical recycled AC content it had..

@neatfeatguy said:

I grew tired of the franchise after half way through Revelations - I only got ACIII when my younger brother purchased it for me during a steam sale....

I didn't care about the story line anymore in Revelations, I just ran around in populated areas getting as many soldiers to chase me and then I would battle it out with them - I wasted many hours doing this before I finally decided to complete the story. Also, while the ships in ACIII was a nice addition, I didn't think it was that great of a thing (just not my thing I guess) and I ended up doing the usual, ran around and gathered as many bad guys as I could and then battle it out to see if I could take them all on without dying.

With this news bit about how Ubi blames AMD - I laugh every time I read it. Ubi done did f'up and are looking to point fingers at anyone except themselves. Just man up and say, "Yeah, our shit stinks and we are sorry. We are working as fast as possible to get these issues resolved."

You guys don't know what you're missing.

I thought AC3 was great. It finally had a different character and concentrated a lot of story and background history of the natives. Shame it got poor reviews.

Then Black Flag came along which was awesome, and I'm not into pirates.

If you look past the bugs and performance, Unity is another great AssCreed game. They jump between servers missions are awesome and the assassinations have multiple ways to complete them.

No idea where you think the series has become "stale".

Avatar image for Qixote
Qixote

10843

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#47 Qixote
Member since 2002 • 10843 Posts

@FelipeInside said:

No idea where you think the series has become "stale".

For me it mostly became stale in Revelations. When I realized that Ubisoft has no idea where they are going with the Abstergo backstory. And when I realized the parkour controls were never going to be fixed and improved. And the maps were continuously going to be filled with the same recycled side activities. And the customization sucks (oh, look I can change the color of my outfit, big deal). And the eavesdropping and tail missions have become overused.Again I loved the Black Flag pirate content. But that is mainly because when I was being a pirate, I wasn't doing the usual stale AC stuff. . .

Avatar image for neatfeatguy
neatfeatguy

4400

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#48  Edited By neatfeatguy
Member since 2005 • 4400 Posts

@Qixote said:

@FelipeInside said:

No idea where you think the series has become "stale".

For me it mostly became stale in Revelations. When I realized that Ubisoft has no idea where they are going with the Abstergo backstory. And when I realized the parkour controls were never going to be fixed and improved. And the maps were continuously going to be filled with the same recycled side activities. And the customization sucks (oh, look I can change the color of my outfit, big deal). And the eavesdropping and tail missions have become overused.Again I loved the Black Flag pirate content. But that is mainly because when I was being a pirate, I wasn't doing the usual stale AC stuff. . .

+1

Also, the story just got dragged out, longer and longer - I don't even remember what the story was supposed to be about anymore, it just lost my interest. I more so enjoyed history tidbits about people and places that you came across in the games.

Avatar image for Bikouchu35
Bikouchu35

8344

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#49  Edited By Bikouchu35
Member since 2009 • 8344 Posts

Ran like turd just like watchdogs.

Oh well, Valkyria Chronicles time!