Try assasin wuz kangz

>try assasin wuz kangz
>r9 390 GPU, supposed to be more than enough
>it run like shit
FUCKING UBISOFT

otherwise game is bretty gud gameplay wise, but fuck me the voice acting and story is shit.

Other urls found in this thread:

gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-vs-AMD-R9-390/3609vs3481
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Ubisoft games are CPU bound. The new Intel processors will be very good for Ubisoft games.

>wtf why cant i do ultra gwafix and 4k with my outdated gpu

>I7 5820k

I have no idea what am i doing wrong then.

I have a 4970k and a 1080gtx and I get constant 60fps at 1440p
Game runs better for me at release than probably 90% of other AAA games. It does have some bugs and shit though but I have no complaints about performance. I've heard Origins is especially CPU intensive.

>AMD
KEK!

fuck off nvidia jew

God damn this game is ugly.

ugliest game of the year imo

>2017
>60hz philips 900p monitor

Probably the Win8.1 bullshit.

>use street shitter GPU
>game runs like shit
Topzozzle, Rajesh.

>Assassin's Creed is top contender for GOTY

What does that say about 2017?

Nigga has a 390 which is comparable to a 1070 you fags.

It will run okay when AMD releases drivers for the game in Q3 2018

Did you not play mario, zelda, horizon, nier, prey, cuphead, nioh, pubg, gravity rush 2, or divinity?

This year has been fucking great.
I'm not detracting from Asscreed, just surprised in that opinion.

>no mention of Viking: Expeditions

its the copy protection checks that trigger when your character walks.

Thanks Ubisoft.

>390
>Comparable to a 1070
Kek, in what fucking universe?

I'm usually not exposed to weird euro-rpgs.

Thanks for the reccomendation.

I haven't played KangzCreed yet, but 2017 had more good games than the entire rest of the decade combined

Fucking fag, like fuck i won a 1070.
gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-vs-AMD-R9-390/3609vs3481

are u retarded

What’s that?
Imma just throw in Sonic Mania and some AHiT solely because one made me care about sonic again and the other one proves that kickstarter isn’t complete bullshit

Like god damn. It’s actually not that bad this year. I wonder why?

Nah, that includes 2010, which had RDR and Mario Galaxy 2.
Frankly, I'd say this year was about as good as 2010.

Middle of the console cycle is usually really strong.

It was like this in 2007 too.

which part of MORE did you not understand?

Nigger, 2010 alone had
>RDR
>Galaxy 2
>Bad Company 2
>Fallout NV
>Mass Erect 2 (if you're into that)
>Alan Wake
2017 has been good (though not if you're a westernfag), but definitely not as good as the prior 6 years combined.

WHERES MY FUCKING WII VERSION GODDAMMIT!!!

I want to marry Aya!

what the fuck.

Western has been just as good. Cuphead, Horizon, Wolf II, Sonic Mania, Ass creed, Prey, Middle Earth, Mario+rabbids, A hat in time, just to list a few.

What is it with weebs and drawing lines in the sand with games all the fucking time.

>Wolf 2
>Prey
>Anything more than decent at best

>Horizon
>Ass Creed
>Fucking Shadow of War
>Anything but shit
Westernfags have terrible taste.

You're clearly not that far into the game, user. Her and Cleopatra turn into selfish bitches.

Ps4
Pro
HDR
4k

distinct lack of waifus in this game

Fuck off. Alan Wake was repetitive trash. And fuck Mass Effect 2.

Prey, Horizon, Cuphead, and AssCreed are all better than those 2.

Out of those games only Cuphead, Sonic Mania, A Hat in Time, and maybe Mario + Rabbids are good.
The rest range from mediocre overhyped AAA shit to genuinely mediocre AAA shit that everyone forgot about (like Prey).
Horizon and Ass Creed are shit, especially the former, literally all the worst parts about Ubishit's open world games with some generic challenges tacked on.

Yeah i concur with the user. I really liked Aya at the start, her and Bayek had a great relationship going on but once you get further into the game Aya goes to shit. Dumb bitch.

>mediocre AAA shit that everyone forgot about (like Prey).
Alan Wake is utter shit that everyone forgot about, hilariously enough. Mass Effect 2 was mediocre overhyped trash. Everything you described can be aptly described to those two.
>Ass Creed are shit, especially the former, literally all the worst parts about Ubishit's open world games with some generic challenges tacked on
I can tell you haven't played it and are blindly just going off of past AssCreed experience. Red Dead Redemption has more repetitive side missions than Origins and less things to do in general. Also easier combat.

I played and beat RDR, Galaxy 2, Bad Company 2, Fallout NV, Alan Wake, and Mass Effect 2. Literally beat them all. I would still put this year above 2010.

Yeah, AC:O is tanking on PC because they literally put DRM on their DRM to keep people from cracking the DRM, and its literally murdering performance.

>Alan Wake is utter shit that everyone forgot about, hilariously enough. Mass Effect 2 was mediocre overhyped trash.
Hence why I added (if you're into that).
I agree that ME2 was shit.
>I can tell you haven't played it and are blindly just going off of past AssCreed experience. Red Dead Redemption has more repetitive side missions than Origins and less things to do in general
RDR also has a better story, better gunplay (in that it actually exists), better AI, better physics, and even runs better.
It also has better voice acting.
>I would still put this year above 2010.
I would only put this year above 2010 thanks to Jap releases like Nioh, Persona 5, BotW, Nier Automata, Mario Odyssey, RE7, Gravity Rush 2, Splatoon 2, etc. etc.
As far as western games, there's maybe 3 or 4 genuinely good ones this year.

I'd still fuck the shit out of them in a crazy threesome hatefuck.

You need the i7 8700k to get 60fps goyim.

>RDR also has a better story
Sure. Don't give a shit about stories, personally.
>better gunplay
Nah it's garbage solely on account that it's on console only. It auto locks on to targets. You can turn it off but then have to deal with shitty gamepad aiming. Also it's much easier. AssCreed presents somewhat of a challenge in its combat and you can actually aim with PC controls. RDR I beat with 3 deaths at most.
>better AI, better physics
No it doesn't. Both have pretty dumb AI. Physics in AssCreed and RDR are not comparable, to be honest. RDR doesn't even have to deal with climbing or water physics. There's certainly more going on in AssCreed.
>even runs better.
Ran like ass on my Xbox 360 and had screen tearing locked at 30fps. Assassin's Creed Origins has shit optimization, but it still runs at 60fps 1080p with my 1070 and Ryzen 1600.
>It also has better voice acting.
lol ok

Like I said, RDR has more repetitive missions and less content. The environment in Origins is better. As purely open world games AssCreed Origins is more fun to explore and play. Red Dead just gets more attention because it's Rockstar and doesn't have annual releases. Also because people gush over slightly above average video game stories. Also also it's fair if someone prefers Western theme over Egyptian theme and vice versa.

>AssCreed presents somewhat of a challenge in its combat and you can actually aim with PC controls. RDR I beat with 3 deaths at most.
Ass Creed combat is mind-numbingly easy, even in Origins.
>RDR doesn't even have to deal with climbing or water physics
There are no water physics in ACO though, and the actual physics, especially for ragdolls and characters don't even compare to RDR.
>Assassin's Creed Origins has shit optimization, but it still runs at 60fps 1080p with my 1070 and Ryzen 1600.
And it runs like utter shit on consoles.
>Like I said, RDR has more repetitive missions and less content.
More content != good content.
>AssCreed Origins is more fun to explore and play.
Define fun.
RDR is a much better game than ACO on all levels but technical, and in terms of optimization it's miles better.

Development started a LONG time ago. Back when people were suicidal due to 2014's drought, most games were entering the early phases of development.

Definite GOTY

A game with appeal beyond being a glorified picture book.

>Ass Creed combat is mind-numbingly easy, even in Origins.
Not as mind numbing as RDR. Origins isn't primarily about aiming so it's less shit.
>There are no water physics in ACO though, and the actual physics, especially for ragdolls and characters don't even compare to RDR.
Sure.
>And it runs like utter shit on consoles.
I think you forgot how utter shit RDR runs on PS3 and 360, especially PS3. Like dog shit. I'm talking about 20fps. At least I have a choise with Origins.
>More content != good content.
I knew you would say that, which is why I also stated RDR's missions are more repetitive than Origins. And there's less content. So the ratio of content to repetitive missions is worse. There's more activities and better side missions in Origins than RDR.
>Define fun.
More diverse activities. Arenas, chariot races, papyrus puzzles, War Elephants. RDR has just as much repetitive content. Except less activities in general. The topography and geography of Origin's map is better overall for exploration. Not to mention climbing, boats, and horses all offer better ways of exploring. Getting around the map is faster. There's also more attention to detail in Origin like vultures eating fresh dead carcasses and dessert illusions on account of heat exhaustion.
>RDR is a much better game than ACO on all levels but technical, and in terms of optimization it's miles better.
I can already tell you put video game stories on a high pedestal. Maybe you just prefer the Western theme or maybe you prefer console third person shooter gameplay.
>terms of optimization it's miles better.
Locked 30 (sub 30 on PS3) with screen tearing is not better than locked 60 with no tearing. Origins runs better on my PC than RDR runs on my 360. Console optimization may be better in RDR, but in actual practicality for me it really isn't the case because I have the choice of playing Origins on PC.