AC Origins looks worse than Unity

Quite a feat really. It is a much better game but even after 4 year, Unity remains the best looking AC game and still one of the best looking games period. Looks like Ubisoft really overestimated the consoles huh?

Unity was a pretty amazing looking game.

Huh?

If I'm not mistaken Unity was Ubisoft's showcase of how all their next gen titles would be, but then they realized that both XBONE and PS4 weren't that powerful, especially the CPU. So they had to backpedal on some fronts of the game, but even then still remained a technical progress in some aspects compared to other later Ubisoft titles, that had to lower/get rid of some stuff, or go around with different techniques, in order for the games to have better performance.

@glez13: Thank you.

Unity is visually stunning game. Interiors are breathtaking in detail.

But hey, Origins is worse than unity in every single way. It feels like they changed the dev crew for the game or something. You know, fired all the veterans and then hired some new blood who could not program a VCR. Just like Bioware did with Mass Effect Andromeda.

4 years later their engine should be better optimized though.

AHAHAHA no

So Origins is a better game and you want to harp on the graphics, just so you can shit on consoles lol. Some "master race" you guys are :(

Might get it to play on my X1X. Will look great on my 4K OLED no doubt.

Well that's the idea and I can understand were Juub1990 is coming from. Ever since this gen started, Ubisoft really has been kissing asses both PS4/Xbox One and shit on PC ports. Ever since Watch Dogs was there first introduction for next-gen, they downgraded for the console over PC and that right there, they have been backpedaling left/right.

Rather he was shitting on console or not, it doesn't change the fact that Ubisoft is yet again just being lazy on not optimizing there games on both current-gen consoles & PC. Ubisoft did a lot better on last-gen but for this gen, not really much.

And no, this isn't me saying I'm shitting on current-gen consoles, it's the fact that Ubisoft is showing there BS when it comes to there current-gen games and not optimizing them.

I thought Unity was amazing looking. The problem was never the graphics but some bugs in the first couple moths.

And what does your post have to do with the OP? I mean how is it relevant?

Oh dear juub, you said yourself the game is better, can't you just enjoy that?

The game being better doesn't preclude it from being worst graphically though. These aren't mutually exclusive.

And by it looking worse in your opinion (I have it but will wait until my X arrives before I play it) really lessen the game. Not only that but from all reports although it's a Ubisoft game different devs worked on this one.

@i_p_daily: Exactly what point are you trying to make? That I don’t have the right to talk about the game being worse graphically?

Also lol @you who seemingly doesn’t care about graphics but will get an Xbox One X.

My thoughts exactly. If any console gamer really cares about power that much, they should be going to PC, not a PC wannabe console. Graphics maybe one thing, but I for one prefer better framerates to better graphics myself. (But we can get both on PC)

Why are you so sensitive, you can "talk" all you want. My point is if the game is great why should how it looks bother you.

Yes i'm getting an X, but not for it's graphics as I've stated many times I don't care for graphics, the joys of starting console gaming on the good old 8 bit system makes me appreciate games, not just the graphics. But I see in future a Forza Horizon 2 situation happening, so that's why i'm buying it.

Well that and the missus wants an XB1, so it's a win win situation :)

@davillain-: Read my post above.

@i_p_daily: The game looking worse than Unity bothers me because as I said before, graphics and gameplay aren’t mutually exclusive. It also bothers me because 4 years after Unity, Ubisoft seems to have gone backwards in the graphics department.

Well I can't say I feel your pain because graphics are low on the scale for me. There is one person in this thread that disagrees with you, maybe it's time to have a conversation with him/her as they posted videos to challenge your opinion, so you shouldn't waste anymore time with me.

Yeah, Unity is breathtaking even to this day. It had many performance issues though. I guess it's graphics were too demanding for the hardware available.

The game itself is kinda underrated too imo. Personaly, without having played Black Flag, Syndicate and Origins (and having no will to do so since I'm burned out of AC for the moment), Unity is my personal favorite. Paris was beautifull and the French Revolution was my favorite setting thus far. The characters were also good for the most part and I cant comprehend how people dont like Arno to this day... it's a better character than Ezio, imo. It has the same witt as Ezio but feels more grounded and professional. It's voice actor also did a pretty good job imo. I liked it

edit: And a sequel beeing worst looking then the previous game is nothing new with AC games. AC1 was waaay better looking than AC2. I guess Ubisoft wants to bring hype with a 1st game in the series with it's looks in the beggining of a generation but then when performance isnt good (AC1 had many performance issues aswell) they lower down its graphical fidelity to fix performance. AC1 > AC2 and Unity > Syndicate/Origins graphics wise but AC2 > AC1 and Syndicate/Origins > Unity performance wise

They aren't updating the Xbox version...

trust me it will look the business on your OLED TV.

@Vatusus: I like Arno. My personal favorite is Edward. Never really cared for Ezio.

Unity and Syndicate were the low points of the AC series. Origins is better at almost everything, and looks great.

Unity looks much better than Syndicate but not Origins. Perhaps the Parisian architecture and palatial interiors are a little more spectacular than the lower, less sophisticated, more open cities of ancient Egypt, but Origins trumps it in every other way possible - superior lighting, textures, shadows, AA, draw distance, etc etc. It also runs way better with far less bugs and frame rate issues. I'd say it's the best looking open-world game I've played thus far.

unity was too much for these weak ass consoles to handle so they had to cut down the visuals

Definitely not. If there's one point where Unity trumps Origins it's absolutely in the lighting. The quality of the materials was also quite higher. Concrete, pebbles, wood were all significantly more realistic in Unity. In Origins the materials really don't look very good.

@Ballroompirate: Looks incredible to me

Have to agree here. I remember just stopping in Unity and looking at how the stones in the street looked and how water was reacting to the individual stones. Syndicate really felt like a much older engine in comparison, but I suspect that's because it was the other dev group who made that one. Origins looks better than Syndicate but Unity has much more impressive overall feel graphically. Origins just plays much better apparently (haven't played it).

It had performance issues on PC aswell...

Every game has performance issues on weak PC's.

It was not just on weak PCs. The game was badly optimized. It was rushed both on consoles and on PC. Only several patches later was it somewhat playable on all platforms

It still dips to the 20's frequently on consoles.

Game still runs like crap on consoles, especially on PS4. That test is from patch 4 which to my knowledge was the last performance patch according to release notes.

Something has to give in order to achieve 4k on XBone 2.

Yes. Your point? Framerate isnt the only technical factor used when judging technicaly a game. The game was riddled with bugs and glitches, even on PC when it came out. Framerate is just a drop in an ocean of bad optimization

@Ballroompirate: Lol those environmental textures. Those look awful. Was that PC?

Unity had terrible draw distance and character pop ins. Very distracting.

Lighting was nice though.

First half was consoles, other half was on pc, the guy literally said which was which if you took the time to watch the 2nd video.

Also the environment textures are better in Origins, the only thing that is iffy in Origins is the facial textures.

That may explain it. I only watched the first half. Was planning on picking this game up for PC, but was waiting for it to be below 50 bucks.

The same thing happened with the first AC game. On PC in directX10 it looked way better than the follow ups until AC3 then black flag passing it.

Funny cause I hear people say AC III looks better than Black Flag.

Idk, Origins looks pretty good to me. Its doesn't have the massive crowds and complex building of Unity but the foliage, lighting and overall attention to detail is amazing.

Does it? Never played 3 and I thought Black Flag looked pretty good, my favorite AC game too

I'm not sure about that, it's more to do with Paris having more intricate buildings than Ancient Egypt. But when you consider the scale of the game (Origins is BIG) and the style of the game I will take Origins any day.

And thats before I mention the gameplay, story, longevity. Origins is miles better. Miles.

Can't say I agree:

Origins looks absolutely stunning.

Weren't you saying Shadow of Mordor looks better than Shadow of War too ?! Which isn't true either :/