Assassin's Creed Valhalla Will Run 'At Least' 30 FPS On Xbox Series X

As long as the gameplay is good, that's all that matters to me..

That's the nail in the coffin for all the "all games will run on 60 fps" theories!

A very strange comment, considering this is the case for Assassin's Creed games already. I find it hard to comprehend how a CPU four times more powerful, will net you NO improvement in frame rate. This isn't even Just Cause 3 we're talking about here.

I'm not even a frame rate demander, but this is indeed a weird statement, seeing as it was made VERY clear that any and all Xbox Series X games would and/or should run at 60fps. No more 30fps, they said.

Well...

@gingataisen With a bump in CPU/GPU power comes wiggle room to crank up asset detail and resolution settings until at least 30fps is maintained.

Basically, Ubisoft is favoring graphical fidelity over framerate.

@justifier If Ubisoft kept the game at the same settings as Series X only at 1080p...then that would be the case on base Xbox One and Xbox One S. However, resolution will be scaled back to probably 900p and will probably use a dynamic resolution scaling system. Visual settings such as draw distance, shadow resolution, and maybe textures will more than likely be paired back.

@ThanosReXXX I think those kinds of statements only applied to Xbox Game Studios titles - the same as how "all games will target base Xbox One for the first couple of years". Third-party developers are free to do as they please.

A 60 FPS mode should be available!

@GamingFan4Lyf I dunno know though I feel like these days if you can you should try to give players a choice over performance over graphics. Like I get it for the XB1 versions but even games this gen are allowing more and more choice in this department. I know I’d rather 1080p stable over 4K unstable any day. And the comment “at least 30 FPS” suggests to me uncapped frame rate for better visuals. :/

I am disappointed!!! It is a lazy company! It is an old generation game! It's terrible to play 30 fps in any game! Ubisoft is done for me

@Justifier you're right!!! Absolutely!! What these companies think we are? Dummy people spending f.. money for ***** promises? You can see that 30FPS is terrible, stuff takes time to appear on the screen, it seems old generation and terrible playing experience. Would you spend your money to buy this game? Not me anymore.

I wonder how long after the Series X releases we will see cross gen releases go on for... Do you think about a year, then only games like Fifa Legends Edition/Just Dance and a few movie tie-in games will be released on the Xbox One... I have a feeling the Switch to next Gen will be quicker than the last..

Do the last 2 AC games have 60fps option on the X??

If that happen it will only show how Ubisoft doesn't care for optimization at all! I just can't understand how the game will run on Series X the same way it will probably run on Xbox One X. Also, Bright Memory Infinite, made by a single developer will run at 4K, 60fps and with RayTracing. There is nothing hardware wise, that stop AC Valhalla from achieve 60fps, the only reason is lack of interest from Ubisoft.

I’d of expected no less than 4K AND 60fps with the power Series X possesses. I’d also like to think we’d no longer see options of favouring either resolution or performance when the Series X can do both. If developers release their games running at 30fps on the Series X I’d immediately assume they are just being lazy and not putting the extra effort in as we know the Series X is capable of 4K and 120fps.

@GamingFan4Lyf
SeX has more of everything. Unless Valhalla is meant to be a 1080p, 20fps experience on Xbox One X, why should it run the same? Expect this statement to be "clarified" soon.

@mousieone I completely agree! I have a 1080p TV anyways. Super-sampling is nice and all, but I'd much rather have a smooth gameplay experience first and foremost.

That being said, I don't personally care if a game is 30fps if the reasoning behind that 30fps is because that's the artistic vision of the developer. I do expect that to be a completely locked 30fps, though.

Game developers should always develop a game to have a little extra headroom to meet that locked framerate. In my opinion, if you develop a game with a 30fps cap, the game should have the headroom to run a game at a minimum between 35-40ish fps using an unlocked framerate only to lock it down to 30.

@gingataisen It wouldn't be "the same" as Xbox One X, though.

To put it in PC terms, base Xbox One would be the game on Low - Medium settings at a target 30fps (though expect drops), Xbox One X would be Medium - High (or even High - Very High) at a higher resolution and a near-locked 30fps, but maybe not quite handling 4K. Series X would 4K Ultra settings with...I hope, a locked 30fps... though it does sound like it could have an unlocked on Series X (nice for TV's with Variable Refresh Rate, but bad for people without it).

As I said, Ubisoft is probably choosing to cap the game across the board to 30fps and is simply choosing to up the settings as the power ladder increases.

@GamingFan4Lyf yeah I guess I mean I agree with you to a point. But I don’t think 30fps can be considered “a creative decision” though? There are only rare instances where it could be consider “creative decision”, and those are generally Indie games. As point proof, most of time when the PC version of a game comes out it allows for the better frame rates, so if it was truly “creative” why give one group of players a choice and not another?

@mousieone Great point! Not something I thought about at the time of writing.

Games like Okami will always be 30 frames per second whether on the PS2 or Xbox series X because of the way a lots the game systems are linked to the frame rate. I wonder whether assassins Creed Valhalla has made similar choices preventing it from being scalable.

@gingataisen it's like I said.

1) Ubisoft favours 30fps for Assassin's Creed games. That's the internal target.

2) They are protecting themselves if they don't hit 60fps. They've set targets for 4k/ 30fps, so that people can't complain when the game launches at those benchmarks.

3) last gen games didn't all run at 4k/60fps. It's always best to assume that the resolution target is one gen behind. 360/PS3 ran at sub 1080p. XB1/PS4 ran below 1080p while still at 30fps in some cases. XB1X/PS4pro struggled to hit 4k in instances too.

4) With power improvements come graphical improvements. Just because current hardware can handle current graphics at a certain level, doesn't mean next gen can graphics handle next gen at a higher level.

5) "at least 30fps" probably means it's a 4k/30fps or 1080p/60fps game. Since it will be running on current gen (1080p) hardware, and most people are still playing on 1080p tvs.

The short of it is, I said not to expect a 60fps only future. We've had two game announce frame rates. One is a racing, which target high frames anyway, at 60fps standard and 120fps option. And AC:Valhalla, which is an third person action adventure that typically target 30fps. This has been the standard for years. Until we see otherwise, don't expect otherwise.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_One_X_enhanced_games

For those complaining that "the xbox one x can do 4k/60fps, so there's not excuse for XBSX games not to", please flick through this list and note how many games Do Not run at 4k/60fps. It's either 4k/30fps (or 1080p/60fps choice), dynamic resolution, or unstable frames. There are games that do run at 4k/60fps, but it's hardly the standard.

If you've enjoyed your XB1X, it's not because of all the 4k/60fps games on it. So I think you'll enjoy your XBSX, even if half the games still run at 4k/30fps.

I have been wondering whether more and more games will offer graphical settings in the next generation. It seems to make sense for there to be options like...

1080/120 vs 4K/60 or 1080/60 vs 4K30

@Biohazardous379 I assume it will run at a lower graphic setting and a dynamic resolution to mitigate frame dips.

@GamingFan4Lyf Good point, and might very well be the case. Personally, I'm not really bothered by it, because I don't believe in the "all games SHOULD be 60fps" trope. Fast-paced action games such as fighters, shooters, racing games and so on DO need it, and they also benefit from it the most, but turn-based games, slow-paced adventure games, puzzle games, and other types of less fast moving games can look and run perfectly fine in 30fps.

Anyway, all I meant to say with my earlier comment is simply that I noticed that it's the exact opposite of what Microsoft claimed, and if that statement was only true for their own titles, then they should have made that more clear.