Assassin's Creed - First DX10.1 Title

[v_rr]

CONFIRMED. This isn't NVidia bullying around to force ubisoft to remove DX10.1, this is because DX10.1 isn't done properly in assassin's creed!

Case Closed, no more to say really.

And you are ignoring everything that is said behind in the conclusion

The fact is that you don´t even notice nothing, excepting taking pictures and look very close to them.
Ubisoft should concentrate in done other things that aren´t working, instead of take something that is working good for everyone.

The consumer satisfaction is the most important role here.

Conclusion

Did we find the glitches that everyone has been talking about when making reference to the 10.1 path? In a way - we do have that missing dust that qualifies for that category, albeit we don't know yet if it's simply a driver bug or something wrong with the pathway itself. Other than that, there's the more intense lighting, but that actually seems to show that there's a bug with the DX10 pathway, given the fact that DX9 has the same, more intense, lighting as 10.1, and UBi said that 9 and 10 (and by extension 10.1) should be nearly identical visually (shadowing is different between versions).

The good news is that the dust-bug affects only a few scenarios and that, after testing with a run through Acre that avoids any areas which include the troublesome dust, we've determined that the performance benefits associated with 10.1 remain: it wasn't a case of the missing effect causing the performance improvements. This means that you can safely enjoy running your game through the DX10.1 pathway without fear that you're getting worse IQ (you'll be missing some dust, at least for now). More importantly, perhaps, the dust-bug fix should be trivial to implement - perhaps UBi, in light of recent interest with regards to the 10.1 path, will opt for fixing it right away as opposed to disabling the pathway just to re-enable it at some later undetermined point in time. From our perspective, this would certainly make the most sense. Rest assured that all further info on the topic will be presented as it becomes available to us.

DX_10 also have Bugs with light.

[DilTech]

The fact is, ubisoft's goal is the make the DX10.1 path look as good as the DX10 path. Presently it doesn't, and will require an entire re-working(and apparently new shaders for every level of AA, another reason so many companies presently aren't touching DX10.1), so it's being taken out to have the work done on it.

I don't see the problem here, take out something that presently doesn't work correctly, and implement it when they have it working properly.

Of course, this once again shows your sig isn't true at all v_rr, because now it's confirmed there is stuff missing in the DX10.1 path.

[v_rr]

The fact is, ubisoft's goal is the make the DX10.1 path look as good as the DX10 path. Presently it doesn't, and will require an entire re-working(and apparently new shaders for every level of AA, another reason so many companies presently aren't touching DX10.1), so it's being taken out to have the work done on it.

I don't see the problem here, take out something that presently doesn't work correctly, and implement it when they have it working properly.

Of course, this once again shows your sig isn't true at all v_rr, because now it's confirmed there is stuff missing in the DX10.1 path.

There is also stuf problems in DX_10 (lightning).
Read the hole thing please instead read only what interest you to say.

Conclusion says it all. No more no less.
This is just the search for bugs in DX_9, DX_10 and DX_10.1 and report them. All versions have their bugs.

You are taking as a fact something that is taked as "probably" in the article.

[Lupine]

Not bad. But definately done in the usual R3D flavor.

Please explain. Are you questioning the results obtained? The testing methods? The conclusions?

[Luka_Aveiro]

There is also stuf problems in DX_10 (lightning).
Read the hole thing please instead read only what interest you to say.

Conclusion says it all. No more no less.
This is just the search for bugs in DX_9, DX_10 and DX_10.1 and report them. All versions have their bugs.

You are taking as a fact something that is taked as "probably" in the article.

Come on man, are you really THAT blind? You should do something about it, it may affect your life in a non-pleasant way.

Get real.

[jas420221]

You are taking as a fact something that is taked as "probably" in the article.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but arent you taking something that is less than "probable" (nvidia paying off ubi to remove Dx10.1 path) and posting it (from my understanding) as darn near a fact?

Honestly, as far as Im concerned you can sit in the same room with the people that think 9/11 was a US govt conspiracy/those who think we didnt land on the moon, etc. Is the writing on the wall...sure. But your conjecture is just that, and in fact, even holds less water than the horses mouth (Ubi). I think most people would trust the company itself before some random d00d on a forum.

I dont know...I honestly dont care if Nvidia did it or not. Sure its shady business (if its true), but would I deny myself the best card(s) out there for my pricepoint b/c of it. Nope.

I said this across several forums and I will say it again: Cart before the horse people. Im more pissed at ATI for not bringing out a top notch card in R600. That is what started this whole thing (IMHO of course).

[v_rr]

Come on man, are you really THAT blind? You should do something about it, it may affect your life in a non-pleasant way.

Get real.

Nice argument.
Posts for trashing the other users only instead show some new items to the discussion.

Welcome to the ignore list

[STaRGaZeR]

Sorry for the late response, but here are my screenshots and conclusions after trying Assassin's Creed with a bunch of different settings. Let me start saying this game is buggy as hell in DX10 mode, you'll understand why. In both ATI and NVIDIA. The second thing I must say is that almost every review out there using Vista is suffering those bugs, VERY important ones, and should be corrected. It's very funny to test perfomance and IQ with this game, lots of variables to test. And I doubt I've seen them all.

First, how I tested it:

- All is done using Windows Vista Ultimate x64 SP1
- Intel C2D E8400@4.0GHz
- 4GB DDR2@1066MHz
- ATI HD3870@850/1200
- Catalyst 8.4 and 3DMark Vantage hotfix drivers (specific screenshots for each), 1280x1024 screen resolution.
- Catalyst Control Center (CCC) settings for all tests:

• Anti-Aliasing - Use application settings
• Anisotropic Filtering - Use application settings
• Catalyst A.I. - Advanced (absolutely no difference in FPS or IQ between Off, Standard and Advanced)
• Mipmap Detail Quality - High Quality
• Wait for vertical refresh - Off, unless application specifies
• Adaptive Anti-Aliasing - Unticked

- In game settings: All maxed except Multisampling (AA control), it'll vary between tests.


And the fun begins. Here you have my screenshots. You find the FPS impossible? Trust FRAPS, it's completely right. Also, keep reading, you'll find answers below

http://rapidshare.com/files/11301676...shots.rar.html

They're in PNG format, I took a few with Paint, the others were taken with FRAPS itself, hence the difference in size between some of them. Please, look carefully at them, think about what you're viewing and be impartial if you want to say something about them.


My comments about the screenshots:

- DX9 noAA vs DX9 4xAA: No differences in IQ between AA and without AA, or between Catalyst 8.4 and Hotfix drivers.

- DX10.1 noAA vs DX10.1 4xAA with Catalyst 8.4: AF is broken with Cats 8.4 and DX10.1, and the perfomance sucks, both screenshots show that. 4xAA is much brighter and also has a lighting bug, you can see fire and lights through solid objects.

- DX10.1 noAA vs DX10.1 4xAA with Hotfix drivers: Now with the hotfix, AF and crappy perfomance problems are solved. DX10.1 noAA is now directly comparable with NVIDIA cards. DX10.1 4xAA is still broken, it can be rendered in 2 different ways, due to a bug. Both are incorrect. The first one, if you open the game with AA already activated. This will result in a sobreexposed image and the lights through solid objects bug. The second one, if you open the game with AA disabled, and then activate it within the game. This will result in weird lighting in some places of the game, like in the Assassin's Master in his office, where the light through the window is not shown.

- DX10.1 4xAA Catalyst 8.4 vs DX10.1 4xAA Hotfix drivers: The AF bug is fixed in the hotfix. Both have the 2 different ways of rendering though.

- DX9 vs "proper" DX10.1 (without AA): DX10.1 is a bit darker, nothing else.


My conclusions:

- As I said, Anisotropic filtering was off in BenchZowner screenshots. He used DX10 4xAA with Catalyst 8.4, so no AF.
- Nobody should play this game in DX10/10.1 mode, less perfomance with and without AA.
- Ubisoft should fix all the problems in DX10.1 with AA. It's not a missing render pass, it's a whole pack of bugs that has to be corrected. DX10.1 without AA is now perfect with the hotfix drivers, only the AA is what needs attention.
- Everybody should play and test this game with 3DMark Vantage drivers, because with Catalyst 8.4 Anisotropic filtering doesn't work with DX10.1 and AA enabled.
- AA has incredibly low impact in this game perfomance, in both DX9 and DX10.1. In certain places you won't see any difference in FPS between on and off
- DX9 is a bit brighter than "proper" DX10.1 (DX10.1 without AA).
- DX10.1 with AA can be rendered in 2 different ways, due to a bug. Both are incorrect. The first one, if you open the game with AA already activated. This will result in the sobreexposed image you've seen in all the reviews out there. This mode also has a lighting bug, you can see fire and lights through solid objects. The second one, if you open the game with AA disabled, and then activate it within the game. This will result in weird lighting in some places of the game.
- Sometimes perfomance in Vista sucks ass. You start the game and the FPS are in the 60 range. Then, you open it again in the same place with the same options and you're in the 40's. I can make a review showing the ATI kicking NVIDIA's ass, or make one showing the ATI loosing by a wide margin. All due to the game bugs. This only happens with DX10, and looking at BenchZowner screenshots, it also affects NVIDIA cards. Why with a slower card I can have WAY more FPS in the same place with the same options and quality compared to a 9800GTX? I hope you get the idea. This is the game's fault. You can see another evidence of this issue in the TweakGuides optimization article here, with a NVIDIA card: http://www.tweakguides.com/AC_7.html. Look at the FPS between XP and Vista. There's something strage going around there right? No difference between DX9 and DX10 in Vista? Open the game without the bug and you'll have Vista DX9 like in XP and DX10 a few FPS slower Fortunately, with the lastest ATI hotfix you will play the game always with XP comparable perfomance, like in my screenshots.


- Bottom line for those who like quick conclusions: if you have an ATI card and you want to play the game with the best image quality as fast as possible, use 3DMark Vantage hotfix drivers with the above CCC settings and play the game in DX9 mode with all in game settings maxed, including AA. You won't have any of the bugs I mention above and you'll have 60-100+ FPS indoor, and 40-60 outdoors with very few minimum peaks of 30 using 1280x1024 resolution.


This is my little analysis of Assassin's Creed for PC, sorry if you find some confusing and bad explained things, as I said there are lots of variables in this game and it's hard to cover them all. I can also have forgotten something while I was writting this. Hope this also helps HD38xx owners a bit. I've finished the game right now and all was smooth as silk with the config above, I haven't seen any stuttering at all with those FPS

[jas420221]

Nice job Star!

So is it fair to say, IYourHO, that Ubi is taking this away more so b/c of the bugs, or b/c Nividia paid them off?

[MrHydes]

now i understand why they have cut the supoort of directX10.1 in this game

Nvidia should be boycotted by XS members

why is this thread closed? very important issue to discuss about this
game and others...

[Linchpin]

now i understand why they have cut the supoort of directX10.1 in this game

Nvidia should be boycotted by XS members

why is this thread closed? very important issue to discuss about this
game and others...

Because that thread is a pile of accusations not backed up with any facts at all.

[Jakko]

now i understand why they have cut the supoort of directX10.1 in this game

Nvidia should be boycotted by XS members

why is this thread closed? very important issue to discuss about this
game and others...

Well I chose a provoking thread title for that thread, that and the content in the thread led to massive trolling and flaming, even though a part of it has interesting discussion. In the end I requested for it to be closed, as hardly any constructive discussion was being added to it.

It seems to me that the iq difference on ati hardware between dx 10 and 10.1 is not big enough to justify the comments made by ubisoft about the flawed dx 10.1 implementation?

[Jakko]

Because that thread is a pile of accusations not backed up with any facts at all.

It's been widely known for a while now that there have been examples of problems in some TWIMTBP games such as not being able to pick a high resolution or incorrect display of certain shader effects, that can be solved by fooling the game into thinking you are running on nvidia hardware.

If this situation doesn't lead to suspicions towards nvidia for you, then that it fine, it does for me.

[fellix_bg]

TechReport got an update to the story:

Update 5/9/08: Since publishing this story, we've spoken further with both Nvidia and Ubisoft about some of the issues involved. Nvidia spokesman Ken Brown told us unequivocally that "no money changed hands" as a result of Ubisoft joining Nvidia's "The Way It's Meant To Be Played" program, because that program is entirely a co-marketing arrangement. As part of this program, Nvidia may promote Assassin's Creed for Ubisoft in various ways (including magazine advertising) and may offer engineering resources and development assistance. But, Brown said, the value for Ubisoft comes solely from such activities.

Brown further emphasized that Nvidia's "TWIMTBP" program has done many good things for PC gaming, helping developers improve image quality, compatibility, performance, and visibility for their games—an assertion that's tough to dispute, we must admit.

Brown also said Nvidia exerted no influence whatsoever on Ubisoft or the development team with regard to the DirectX 10.1 code path.

Ubisoft spokesman Michael Beadle confirmed to us that Ubisoft's participation in TWIMTBP was strictly a co-marketing deal, and that Nvidia did not pay Ubisoft any money as a result of the deal. He seconded Brown's statement that Nvidia did not influence the decision to remove DirectX 10.1 support from the first patch for Assassin's Creed. Beadle said the decision was made strictly by the game's development team.

Still up in the air is the question of whether Ubisoft will restore DX10.1 support to Assassin's Creed in a future patch. Based on what we've heard so far, I'd say that's not likely to happen. Ubisoft maintains no final decision has been made. Beadle made the further point that users of DirectX 10.1 graphics cards may simply want to avoid applying the patch to the game, if they're not encountering any problems with it.

[Linchpin]

It's been widely known for a while now that there have been examples of problems in some TWIMTBP games such as not being able to pick a high resolution or incorrect display of certain shader effects, that can be solved by fooling the game into thinking you are running on nvidia hardware.

If this situation doesn't lead to suspicions towards nvidia for you, then that it fine, it does for me.

Did I say it was just you? That thread derailed by the end of the first page imho.

[Jakko]

Good find felix.
Gets weirder and weirder, instead of explaining why DX 10.1 support may not come back after that patch, they deny nvidias involvement.

They could easily take away any suspicion by just explaining why they are doing what they are doing...

[STaRGaZeR]

Nice job Star!

So is it fair to say, IYourHO, that Ubi is taking this away more so b/c of the bugs, or b/c Nividia paid them off?

Sorry, I completely missed this thread

IMO, I won't say you NVIDIA is paying them, because I know nothing about it. My guess is, DX10.1 is working, and it's working right, but the bugs ruins everything. Ubi's decision is 101% stupid, if something doesn't work, fix it, not take it away. What's the point of first remove it and then restore it in another patch? Fix the damn thing in only one patch and case closed. This is that kind of game you only play once, so I won't install any patch BTW.

And Jakko please stop trolling. We already know you're going to boicott NV, seriously.

[Jakko]

And Jakko please stop trolling. We already know you're going to boicott NV, seriously.

It seems to me that you are having problems thinking straight.
Accusing me of trolling when, first of all I did not bring up the subject, and second I didn't mention boycotting nvidia whatsoever, could be described as, well, trolling.

So Stargazer, stop trolling will ya?

[STaRGaZeR]

It seems to me that you are having problems thinking straight.
Accusing me of trolling when, first of all I did not bring up the subject, and second I didn't mention boycotting nvidia whatsoever, could be described as, well, trolling.

So Stargazer, stop trolling will ya?

1. Read the thread title.
2. Think if you're talking about the thread title.
3. Go troll to another forum.

Will ya?

[MrHydes]

guys calm down... i think he as a point here,
and what he says makes sense at least for me.

if you aren't nvidia fan boy wont be hard to understand that
something stinks here!

cheers

[STaRGaZeR]

He has been spreading his BS all over XS. His own thread is closed now, so he has started another flame here. I'm not talking about if he's right or not, hope you understand that.

[stocius]

I gues the tilte of this thread ought to be changed to Was the first DX10.1 game

[Jakko]

guys calm down... i think he as a point here,
and what he says makes sense at least for me.

if you aren't nvidia fan boy wont be hard to understand that
something stinks here!

cheers

Thanks,
And never mind stargazer, he will call me a troll regardless of what is in my posts.

Regarding the topic, are there any comparisons between dx 10 and dx 10.1 when it comes to IQ on ati hardware only? I remember seeing screenshots, and I read everywhere that there is hardly any difference but it would be cool if we could see for ourselves.

[zanzabar]

Thanks,
And never mind stargazer, he will call me a troll regardless of what is in my posts.

Regarding the topic, are there any comparisons between dx 10 and dx 10.1 when it comes to IQ on ati hardware only? I remember seeing screenshots, and I read everywhere that there is hardly any difference but it would be cool if we could see for ourselves.

the game looks the same with the update except now it laggs a little, and the animus has things rendering in front of it (and u can disable msaa since its 10.0 now)

i have the 8.3 drivers the 8.4 were messing with my comp and my SS came out black and windowed looked vary bad and misleading of the fill screen quality



also money dosnt have to change hands right away or at all to get paid off there are other ways (bundled software, dev studios, ext)

[Jodiuh]

Well I came in here looking for impressions of the game as an OT. Instead I found a good idea about the ages, def 20+ and not crazy would be something I'd like to see happen.

So far this game is amazing and beautiful on my cheap Nvidia DXwhatever it picks, cause I don't care anymore. The loading times are MUCH improved over 360 and the mouse and keyboard work a treat. DX10.1 should be a non issue IMO because NV doesn't have it and the 8800GT's responsible for a "kick" in casual gamer's GPU requirements. W/ a baseline of 88GT, they could do so much more!