View Full Version : Why are Ubisoft and Phillipe Bergeron lying through their teeth to PS3 Owners?

11-14-2010, 01:23 PM
As the title suggest, this post might be a little bit harsh, but I feel this reflects how many PS3 gamers might feel after picking up a copy of AC:Brotherhood for their console of choice in the next couple of weeks.

Some time in mid October, Phillipe Bergeron, the level design content director for Brotherhood made a statement claiming that Assassins Creed 2 was an afterthought on PS3 and that the team hadn't quite shown it as much attention as the Xbox360 version. While the screen tearing and slightly washed out look of the title led credence to his statement, I felt that the game was nonetheless extremely enjoyable and a marked improvement when juxtaposed against its predecessor - both technically and gameplay-wise.

Now what gets me is that Mr. Bergeron in his statement claimed that AC:Brotherhood was not to follow in AC2:s footsteps in terms of reduced technical performance, and that PS3 gamers would see more evenly matched products between 360 and PS3 builds this time round. As far as I was concerned, AC2 was good enough for me, but I welcomed the statement - who wouldn't?

So much to my surprise when I was at Gamex (Stockholm based games convention) a weekend ago, the title was playable on PS3 (quite rare for unreleased multiplatform titles I might add) so I presumed Ubisoft had lots of confidence in its product. Unfortunately, what I saw was in complete contradiction to what had been stated online - the title was running at a framerate of roughly 20-25 frames per second with CONSTANT screen tearing throughout - I'm not kidding, there wasn't a second where the output wasn't affected by it.

To make matters worse, we still had a slightly washed out look and Quincunx AA topping it all off. Maybe some people don't spot these features, but I have a keen eye for them, and it didn't take me long to start feeling somewhat stupid.

So, to the point - why are Ubisoft and Mr. Bergeron lying through their teeth to PS3 gamers? I don't like being played for a fool and I cant imagine many other consumers doing so either - Like I said, Assassins Creed 2 was just fine and I enjoyed the experience, much as I will likely enjoy Brotherhood, but why on earth would you make a statement that holds no water? What is there to be gained? Definitely not consumer confidence.

Now I'm not the type of guy to make a post like this without a link referencing my sources so here's what I'm referring to:

The statement:
Bergeron's statement as presented by IGN (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/112/1128511p1.html)

A subsequent screenshot comparison merely confirming what I saw at GAMEX:
Lens of Truth's AC:Brotherhood HD Screenshot Comparison (http://www.lensoftruth.com/?p=24345)

I'm curious now as to whether or not there will be some kind of mature response to this post, and I'm very much looking forward to a response from a Ubisoft representative who could shed some more light on this matter.

The series has sold very well on both platforms, so why lie a large percentage of people who support the franchise?

NB: This is NOT a troll-attempt of any sort, nor am I looking for a barrage of posts comparing the 360 and PS3 hardware. I am perfectly aware of both systems' strengths and weaknesses and own both of them. I would simply like to know why a statement was made that has no truth to it.

11-14-2010, 02:22 PM
Since I haven't played it yet, I cannot comment on tearing and such, but regarding that screenshot comparison...there is no difference between the two...the only difference is the gamma settings on PS3 that are a bit off...

11-14-2010, 02:34 PM
to be honest the only difference that i see is the brightness, which can be adjusted on any tv

11-14-2010, 02:41 PM
i need to see it before i judge plus alot of LOT comparisons i hold with a grain of salt because for the most part knocking down the gamma or brightness by one or 2 lvls in-game usually makes both look the same.
and + we dont know if there will be a patch for the DLC of the ps3 version that is also a performance patch... if someone has the game early on ps3 and can verify that they can use the dlc then its something that will need addressed quickly. my 2cents

11-14-2010, 03:01 PM
Perhaps he wasn't - I have yet to play the game so I can't tell you for sure but... the shear amount of technical improvements that have gone into the engine since AC2 can't be overlooked. Better characters/animations, ssao, sunshafts and a new shadow system all add to the strain and I'm surprised they've managed to fit that all in.

Also I don't see anywhere in the article saying it was going to be vsynced - in fact I don't know why anyone would assume it would be especially since the 360 isn't either. I agree on QAA though, I have no idea why developers insist on using it (2xAA is sufficient).

Of course as I mentioned I haven't played it so it very well could end up worse than AC2 but judging by how that was I doubt it.

EDIT: I'd also like to mention that perhaps they were playing an older build.

11-14-2010, 03:12 PM
In some of the comparison shots I thought the PS3 looked better and in others the Xbox looked better. Xbox seems to look better when the lighting in the scene is lighter while the PS3 seems to look better in scenes with darker lighting.

I don't think the statement is a lie. They didn't say it would be perfect. They said that it would be closer matched and in some areas the PS3 might even be better.

The PS3 is getting a LOT of ACB love. So it seems kind of petty to come in and complain about mildly different graphics when you guys got the beta and exclusive DLC. Give us the beta and DLC and I'll happily trade graphics too because they don't look that bad to me at all for either system.

11-14-2010, 03:23 PM
whats wrong with 20-25 FPS: Movies are recorded at about 24 FPS and they look fine.

honestly, aside from a slight difference in brightness contrasts, there isn't a huge difference IMO. I got the PS3 version becuase I would get the beta (which looked and Played FINE) and with the PS3 version I also get DLC.

and besides:
http://www.gametrailers.com/vi...ssassins-creed/59367 (http://www.gametrailers.com/video/console-comparison-assassins-creed/59367)

In AC2 there wasn't any huge difference that was noticeable during play outside (in fact, there are parts of that video where the PS3 version almost looks ever so slightly better.)

PS: I have both consoles

11-14-2010, 03:24 PM
360 version looks too grainy for me

11-14-2010, 03:32 PM
also did anybody notice the jagged edges on the 360 version? what happened to the AA 360 fanboys are always bragging about?

11-14-2010, 03:39 PM
You'll notice jagged edges on both versions. It's not something 2xAA or QAA will completely get rid of http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

11-14-2010, 03:42 PM
yes but it's something the 360 fanboys normally think would http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

11-14-2010, 03:48 PM
fanboys will make stuff up and pick on specific points which aren't even noteworthy. For all consoles.

Remember to check out our stealthy brotherhood MASTER ASSASSINS and become part of the TRUE BROTHERHOOD at http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...388/m/5091031298/p/1

11-14-2010, 03:58 PM
stop chattin dodo mate!

11-17-2010, 09:49 PM
Returned ACB to Gamestop for an exchange because there was no way the video quality could have been that bad... Now I see all the posts where I guess it is. AC2 looks great on my TV, but ACB is almost unplayable. Disappointed is a major understatement. Ubi owes all PS3 players a huge apology, and a corrected version of the game. This sucks.

11-17-2010, 11:04 PM
I actually think PS3 version looks very slightly better. But that might be just me. And if not better then atleast equal and that's not a problem to me. By the way I don't think almost ANY of games made these days would have so horrible video quality that it's completely unplayable. If you compare these games to like something that's made in 2000 they're awesome. And people have been able to play games even then so why not anymore? Yes yes I understand that Ubisoft promised ACB will be based on PS3 and even if you think 360 version is better, does that ruin the game completely? It's still great graphics and a game that's a lot of fun.

11-18-2010, 04:56 AM
You'd either have to be half blind or a total idiot not to see the differences in the 360 version and PS3, look at the crossbow handle in the 6th picture, notice the level of detail? See how the ps3 pales in comparison? If you don't you should get your eyes checked out.

11-18-2010, 05:48 AM
Guys, I have a PS3 copy of Assassin's Creed Brotherhood. Theres nothing wrong with it. On the contrary, its better than AC2's Graphics engine. I remember killing a guard, (AC2) and when he hit the floor, he'd have a sort of spasm flying everywhere! Thats gone. I'd have some parts get out of synch or glitchy in AC2 but now in ACB its really much improved.

11-18-2010, 06:04 AM
Quick question... Do you have a copy Eroticnightmare?

I cannot see anyway in your thread that you even OWN a copy... basing this entirely on experience of a demo at an expo is very poor. Yes there are websites that "compare" and "test" the games but at the end of the day... c'mon SON!!!

11-18-2010, 06:44 AM
im playing it on ps3 and it looks amazing. havent had any frame drops really but I am only on chapter 3

11-18-2010, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by Blackglasswar:
Quick question... Do you have a copy Eroticnightmare?

I cannot see anyway in your thread that you even OWN a copy... basing this entirely on experience of a demo at an expo is very poor. Yes there are websites that "compare" and "test" the games but at the end of the day... c'mon SON!!!

If he has a copy he hasn't installed it on his PS3, I added him and he didn't have the game. It's either sitting somewhere in his house unopened or he doesn't own the game.

11-18-2010, 09:22 AM
If he has a copy he hasn't installed it on his PS3, I added him and he didn't have the game. It's either sitting somewhere in his house unopened or he doesn't own the game.

And they didn't want to start a flame war... how can anyone comment properly on a game they don't have and expect it NOT to sound like a flame war!

11-18-2010, 02:35 PM
I am mostly disappointed with how the game looks. It's not horrible, but I feel like the graphics could be a lot better. Is this all that the PS3 can muster? I don't expect an open-world game necessarily to look like Uncharted 2, but I'm not satisfied.

The amount of pop-in with objects, textures, polygons, and shadows is pretty jarring and hard to ignore. Additionally, there are noticeable intermittent framerate drops and quite obvious screen-tearing. There's seams in a lot of places; there's even seams in the mini-map.

I love the story, characters, mythology, gameplay, music, and design, which is why I feel like they could do so much better with the graphics.

I made the same comments after ACII and was hoping for an improvement in this sequel, but it looks pretty much the same.