Watch Dogs

demingo said:
Dragons, magic and other shit? Fuck yea, no issues there! :D
Click to expand...

There's a big difference,

Having fantasy things, in a fantasy world/setting keeps things within the "logical" for that setting and game.

Either type of game people can get into the worlds because the game abides by certain rules/logic that "fits" within that.

When you create a world and then you have something that takes out the logic or something that seems like it wouldn't "work" within the other parts of the world and setting that you've set up, it can take people out of it.
 
Stiler said:
There's a big difference,

Having fantasy things, in a fantasy world/setting keeps things within the "logical" for that setting and game.

Either type of game people can get into the worlds because the game abides by certain rules/logic that "fits" within that.

When you create a world and then you have something that takes out the logic or something that seems like it wouldn't "work" within the other parts of the world and setting that you've set up, it can take people out of it.
Click to expand...

Are we arguing that they shouldn't have bombs or that the bombs shouldn't be hack-able?

Because I see no reason why they wouldn't have a wireless transmitter or receiver and all Aiden has to do is send a signal to it, no real "hack."

Not like the all have bombs either.
 
Watch Dogs isn't a Jane's Combat simulator. Some things — the ability for Pierce to slow down time, the ability to crash a motorcycle into a street lamp at 180mph and survive nearly unscathed and the existence of wi-fi-enabled bombs — are fantastic elements.

It's not a big deal. 'Cause it's a game.
 
wonderfield said:
Watch Dogs isn't a Jane's Combat simulator. Some things — the ability for Pierce to slow down time, the ability to crash a motorcycle into a street lamp at 180mph and survive nearly unscathed and the existence of wi-fi-enabled bombs — are fantastic elements.

It's not a big deal. 'Cause it's a game.
Click to expand...

Yeah but it doesn't look like the E3 2012 demo. Are you forgetting that it doesn't look like the E3 2012 demo? Because it doesn't look like it. #TheyLied #Lawsuit
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
Yeah but it doesn't look like the E3 2012 demo. Are you forgetting that it doesn't look like the E3 2012 demo? Because it doesn't look like it. #TheyLied #Lawsuit

EBnilb6.jpg
Click to expand...

I just watched the E3 2012 Watch Dogs demo and most of what's in that demo is in the game now. What was lost is additional particle effects, smoke and wind effects, better shader and lighting effects and some action animations. Yes, the 2102 demo looked better but not by leaps and bounds. It's not like Ubisoft pulled a fast one on us like Gearbox did with Aliens: Colonial Marines.
 
StryderxX said:
I just watched the E3 2012 Watch Dogs demo and most of what's in that demo is in the game now. What was lost is additional particle effects, smoke and wind effects, better shader and lighting effects and some action animations. Yes, the 2102 demo looked better but not by leaps and bounds. It's not like Ubisoft pulled a fast one on us like Gearbox did with Aliens: Colonial Marines.
Click to expand...

And a lot of geometry was removed.

So .. Essentially everything? The little things you mentioned make up the majority of a modern graphics engine.
 
TheSandman21 said:
Well, the game does explain that CTOS guards are basically trained mercenaries, so that kind of helps explain why they have explosives.

Now having explosives that can be hacked in the first place.... THAT is the plothole.
Click to expand...

So far I've seen these dudes guarding office buildings, though, not military compounds. Explosives still don't really make sense to me. I guess they are just psychopaths who carry bombs because fuck you that's why.
 
There's a message on the radio that says they're ex-military, and they're not "explosives", they're grenades specifically (the guards throw them if you trigger them).
It makes perfect sense.

And it's the future. The girl at the start of the game even tells you everything has a computer chip in it these days.
 
Spidey329 said:
Rain and wet always look better because of the reflections. Does it improve the over saturated look of the day? I find myself intentionally playing at in game night time, as it looks that much better.
Click to expand...
The screens are also downsampled.
The 4K screenshots posted last week look pretty amazing as well.
 
Spidey329 said:
Rain and wet always look better because of the reflections. Does it improve the over saturated look of the day? I find myself intentionally playing at in game night time, as it looks that much better.
Click to expand...

The worst part about day time is the over the top, erractic, and sometimes broken bloom effects. So many times the entire sky is a glowing white haze of awfulness raining down on the surroundings. I HATE BLOOM and it's the worst implementation of it in this game.
 
styckx said:
The worst part about day time is the over the top, erractic, and sometimes broken bloom effects. So many times the entire sky is a glowing white haze of awfulness raining down on the surroundings. I HATE BLOOM and it's the worst implementation of it in this game.
Click to expand...

Any .cfg files we can hit and modify some of this?
 
StryderxX said:
I just watched the E3 2012 Watch Dogs demo and most of what's in that demo is in the game now. What was lost is additional particle effects, smoke and wind effects, better shader and lighting effects and some action animations. Yes, the 2102 demo looked better but not by leaps and bounds. It's not like Ubisoft pulled a fast one on us like Gearbox did with Aliens: Colonial Marines.
Click to expand...

Not s bad but certainly bad enough. Pretty stark difference imo. ALl of those effects are ones which are pc only options.
 
spaceman said:
Not s bad but certainly bad enough. Pretty stark difference imo. ALl of those effects are ones which are pc only options.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't fault Ubisoft for this nearly as bad as Gearbox. I didn't follow AC:M too much, but as I understand it pretty much every bit of pre-release footage shown off looked a lot better than the final product. There was no way of knowing you weren't getting what was shown off until after you paid and started playing the game (I think... someone feel free to correct me if this isn't the case... but this is the impression I got back when the game released). This is down right false advertising.

In Watch Dog's case, sure, the game looked better two years ago, but there has been a ton of media released in the past few years that pretty clearly highlighted what the finished product would look like. Aside from speculation on what platform we were seeing and if the PC version would be superior, I think we've all known for the past year now what Watch Dogs was going to look like... no one should have been surprised after dropping down their $60.

It's unfortunate that it did exists at one point as a better looking game, but I'm not really surprised either. My assumption is that back when the game was first shown off in 2012, Ubisoft was taking as stab in the dark as to what next-gen consoles would be capable of. Who knows how much information was shared regarding target specs, or when they were told what the final specs would be and given dev hardware. They probably created a small slice of the game to look like what they had hoped the next gen systems were capable, and they ended up overshooting. The reality is that a high end PC ended up being the only thing that could have ever hoped to run the game as it existed in 2012. Can you really blame them for not catering to that market? A lot of time, resources, and money would go into fully realizing that version of the game, all for an incredibly small percentage of their overall sales. They are a business, they have to cater to what is going to be most profitable... or else we won't be playing their games at all. Sucks for us with nice rigs, but thats just the way it is.
 
when i get my gpu issues figured out this game is going to rock my computers' and my world. freakin love ubisoft's COD games and AC4BF are just out of this world good.
 
Plague_Injected said:
Those graphics look horrendous.
Click to expand...

Yea, that's why I'm mad at how bad the performance is. Still though, it has a lot of smoke.

MrCrispy said:
Yup. Why does a pc game released in 2014 requiring 4GB Vram still have jaggies? This game *should* look like pre-rendered cutscenes or engine demos, it doesn't even look good as their E3 demo from years back.
Click to expand...

It's 2xMSAA. Honestly the screenshots made it looked more aliased than it is.

Stiler said:
ENB's work in it,

I found this one:
http://sfx.thelazy.net/games/preset/1686/
Click to expand...

So it just makes everything darker?
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
I like where this is going but it makes the entire scene too dark.
Maybe just emphasizing the shadows and lighting more, WITHOUT sacrificing overall brightness, would be the best result.
Click to expand...

Agreed.. The best SweetFX presets are the subtle ones.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
I like where this is going but it makes the entire scene too dark.
Maybe just emphasizing the shadows and lighting more, WITHOUT sacrificing overall brightness, would be the best result.
Click to expand...

I think they are trying to hide the jaggies. Darkness is probably the easiest way. :)
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
I like where this is going but it makes the entire scene too dark.
Maybe just emphasizing the shadows and lighting more, WITHOUT sacrificing overall brightness, would be the best result.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is a bit darker, but imo the "day" time in WAtch Dogs is way too bright/washed out, it saps all the colour out of ht egame how it naturally looks without any enb.

If they just tweaked the overall "darkness" a bit it'd be perfect.
 
Stiler said:
Yeah, it is a bit darker, but imo the "day" time in WAtch Dogs is way too bright/washed out, it saps all the colour out of ht egame how it naturally looks without any enb.

If they just tweaked the overall "darkness" a bit it'd be perfect.
Click to expand...

It says the brightness is 75. Maybe that can be tweaked in the file?

Speaking of ctOS, I just passed a SwitchNap (large datafarm) here in Vegas, security was out talking to someone in a truck. I never noticed how paramilitary their security looks .. Full military style gear (black on black, tactical pants and outfit) driving blacked out hummers. Reminded me of this game.

One thing that has annoyed me is the fact the lights/blockers/etc will highlight blue and say "neutralize" when the perfect time to hit it is. That takes a majority of the fun out of it, does that go away or is there a way I can turn that n00b alert off?
 
i just reinstalled windows 7 after getting sick of 8's interface and the game now stutters significantly less. disabling the page file still didn't do anything for me.
 
that is impressive how much better that makes the game look
makes me wonder how Ubisoft missed that
 
Durvelle27 said:
This game is a real hog

10354224_779725875391297_5350679740514050770_n.jpg
Click to expand...
It's possible that there's a memory leak or some other bug, or that it's running out of VRAM and causing performance problems.

But if neither of those were true, why would you care? Are you trying to run another game and alt-tab between them? Why is unused VRAM desirable?
 
I've just realized there are no racing mini-games, which is disappointing.
There's also nothing to spend your money on, aside from guns/clothes/parts which aren't that expensive. I have $200k funds after just dicking around for a few hours.

It also makes hacking people obsolete since if I need anything I can just go buy it.

Contrast that to AC4, where I spent the ENTIRE GAME broke. So much stuff to buy. :/
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
It's possible that there's a memory leak or some other bug, or that it's running out of VRAM and causing performance problems.

But if neither of those were true, why would you care? Are you trying to run another game and alt-tab between them? Why is unused VRAM desirable?
Click to expand...

Once he hits his VRAM max, it is going to stutter like crazy or blow up the display driver, that is why.
 
cageymaru said:
Anyone try this performance tweak?
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1820711
Click to expand...

Someone posted a similar tweak for ArmA 3, and personally I didn't see much of a difference. The issue is that much of the time if your RAM is too "fragmented", it will default to using small pages anyway. The only way to "reset" it that I've found is to do a fresh reboot and immediately start the game. Even then I didn't see a big performance increase...it may have made it subjectively smoother, but FPS wise there was no difference.

I'll try it in Watch Dogs, though...why not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top