Why screw Ubisoft? I don't understand this mentality. Some of my favorite games of the past few years have been made by Ubisoft. Games like Splinter Cell Blacklist, Rayman Legends, AC4 Black Flag, Far Cry 3, and Child of Light were all excellent games.

Far Cry 3 is one of my favorite shooters. I had a ton of fun with that game. And it looks amazing on PC and runs at a flawless 60fps+ on my PC.

Again, so why should I screw myself out of good games that look amazing and run well on my PC just to be part of a stupid bandwagon?

I take back that part of my comment and I apologize. It was unnecessary and unfair. I was frustrated and I said something I shouldn't have, then I had to leave and wasn't able to give it any other thought or change it. Your comment reminded me of others I had seen and I think I partly mixed you up with someone else.

I've seen a lot of stealth trolling of the PC trying to paint the picture that PC games are mostly unoptimized messes, and that simply isn't true. For example, the Vanishing of Ethan Carter, Ryse, The Shadow of Mordor and Alien Isolation are some of the games I have played on PC recently and they all run very well on the PC. But that goes for 99% of the PC games I have in my library.

I do think your comment wasn't very fair, because two games does not represent a trend. Ubisoft has many different internal studios and I've already pointed out the fact that the majority of Ubisoft games run just fine on PC.

And that includes Far Cry 3. The PC version was a vast improvement over the console versions and it was demanding simply because it was an open world game with cutting edge visuals. The PC version can actually hang with current gen games visually, despite technically being a last gen game. That's how far ahead the PC version was from the console versions. In any case, I can run it absolutely maxed out with a solid 60fps. Even my previous card could hit 60fps by simply turning down one or two less essential settings. For me the game has a perfectly fine performance level for how good it looks.

I think some people have unreasonable expectations about how they think certain games should run and they don't take into consideration what the game is doing on a technical level that might explain why it is more demanding.

I don't agree that Ubisoft hasn't tried. It's easy to sit back at home and make all sorts proclamations, but we don't know what the process of making the game was like, what challenges they ran into, nor how hard they tried to make the game the best they could make it. What I do know is that Ubisoft has been one of the developers to most consistently push for cutting edge visuals and to add specific graphical features into their PC versions. Some of the best looking games I have on my PC are Ubisoft games.

I do think that Watch Dogs and AC4 could have been better optimized on the CPU and memory side of things and I hope they are putting in extra effort to improve their upcoming games in that regard. But those games were still perfectly playable on PC, and looked better than on alternative platforms.

I originally owned AC4 on the PS4 because I had just got my PS4 and wanted a few games to try out on it. But I eventually sold the PS4 version when I realized the PC version looked and ran better on my PC. I'm not saying the PS4 version is bad--far from it. It's actually looks and runs amazingly well on a mere 400-dollar console. It's a great option.

Anyway, I can see that there is definitely a bit of a bandwagon phenomenon going on and I think it is unfortunate. Ubisoft isn't perfect, but they've created some really fantastic games and they push graphics tech further than just about any other third party developer/publisher.

What's ridiculous is the fact that all these people jump to conclusions based on flimsy or no evidence.

I bet they didn't even watch the video. The game director said that the gameplay is pretty much the same on last gen and current gen consoles and PC, except for having more encounters on the more powerful platforms, but he also specifically talked about all the visual upgrades the PC and current gen consoles would have.

Some people just baffle me. It's like they haven't paid attention over the past few generations. If they had been paying attention they would know that developers almost always try to avoid saying that one version is better than another. This is just PR speak, just an attempt to be diplomatic and appear neutral and committed to gamers on all the platforms their game will release on. This almost never turns out to be the case, though, when we actually analyze the different versions. The more powerful platforms always show advantages and I'm very confident that this will be the case with AC Unity and Far Cry 4 as well.

Yeah it's really silly to not support a developer who intentionally gimps one version so that users on the other platform can feel better.

/s

I want developers to get what they can out each system. The differences now are bigger than the 360/PS3 days so it's only natural that more people would notice and comment on them, and yes possibly be bothered by them when their TV and console are capable of higher resolutions than the gimped version is providing. I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand.

Some PC gamers have had this same complaint for years, but the difference is that only a relatively small number of them stay on the cutting edge with their hardware so devs may or may not make the effort to take advantage of it. They upgrade and hope devs will use that extra muscle. Console gamers buy a new console and hope the same, and if the weaker console holds the others back of course people will complain. You can't tell me you wouldn't protest if PS4 and XB1 multi plats were forced to have parity with the WiiU versions, even if the gameplay was exactly the same.

The entitled gamer is the one who buys the weaker system and expects to have the same experience as the ones who buy the stronger system.

Edit - One more thing… "Did you have the same problem when playing your multiplats on PS3?"

That's a completely different subject. PS3's multi plat problems were about difficulty working with the hardware, not about intentional gimping.

shouldn't game developers be looking to make the BEST game they can regardless of what platform it's on? You know, pushing limits? Seriously, if this is the way it's already going, I dread a few years from now when games are more demanding.

and yes..

The xbox one will be feeling the effects before the ps4 does, yet the ps4 will still be held back.

This time I'm going to have to agree with you. The quotes themselves talk about the differences between last gen and current gen/PC versions of the game, and not that they have parity between current gen versions of the game.

Just a few more encounters on next gen, along with a better lighting, water, and physics engine for current gen/PC.

If they make a comment on parity between current gen with both running at a lowered resolution for that purpose, then I will change my stance and disagree with you.:)

Anyhow, on a side note, I've seen you comment on how silly the debate is since the whole AC:U thing happened, but you can't honestly say that if the situations were reversed that Xbox fans wouldn't be as upset.