Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PC Gaming & Hardware' started by defiant007, Jun 5, 2012.
No, NASA has a D-Wave, but Ubi didn't do a quantum annealer port.
The ram has nothing to do with how it looks. That is the artist job.
New Engines are going to utilize more ram.. fact.. What the developer packs in there is up to them. Either way they are going to use what is available.
I am getting terrible stuttering on my 780, even when I turn things to "high" instead of ultra.
When driving especially it's very noticeable.
I've tried MSAA/TXAA, even turning AA off.
Still when driving around I notice stuttering.
It's also installed on my ssd.
Then do tell me what the point is of using tons of RAM when it really doesn't add ANYTHING. This game stutters and runs like shit, but using tons of RAM means it's optimized? Instead of telling me I'm wrong, could explain why using RAM is somehow useful?
How does having unused vram make your game run better?
Optimization is always a trade-off. You can optimize for less vram usage but you'll take a huge hit if you miscalculate and need to satisfy a request from system memory, or worse, disk. You can throw everything into vram even if you don't think you'll need it, but if you run out of room you're in trouble again.
Looking at a vram meter isn't going to tell you whether something is intelligently designed or not. But this discussion reminds me of when Vista first came out and people were whining about RAM usage, and trying to make an argument that their machine would be faster if they had 75% of their RAM completely unused.
Watch this video from 3:40 you'll be guaranteed laughs!
OH GOD it's Glenn Beck.
I use to like Glenn Beck, then he went into his religious kick and went off the deep end. Dear god, Watch_Dogs teaching you how to hack, WTF.
I never said using more ram makes it optimized. I said the devs are going to make use of more ram cause its available. Ask them what they added in there.
Also my game has zero stuttering. i5 2500k @ 4.2ghz + 660 Ti 3GB. All Settings on ultra/max + motion blur off + depth of field is off now too.
Regarding VRAM, isn't the point of it is to store large amounts of textures and 3D data? Especially when pushing resolutions at 1440p and higher, at higher settings?
When pushing for higher resolutions and larger textures, you'll be using more VRAM. Many of us have seen this in various games like Battlefield 4 at high resolutions and Skyrim with high resolution texture mods and effects, especially when pushing 1440p or 4K resolutions.
Sure, you can probably do more with less, or in other words, optimize the game's textures and 3D data to use less VRAM. However, if there is a large amount of VRAM available to the developers and the game itself, it shouldn't go all unused. Right? The larger VRAM would and should allow for better textures and 3D data to be rendered for the game-- everything from AA to particle effects, etc.
The same with having large amounts of system RAM in your computer. If you have 16GB, 24GB, 32GB or more in your system, why not take advantage of the available memory? It'll mean less paging to a virtual memory swap file and less hard disk I/O access. Correct?
Now, in the case of Watch_Dogs, however, the textures at Ultra setting aren't entirely great even when compared to the E3 2012 demonstration video. This is where optimization should come into effect.
If I have X-system with a high-end video card with 3GB or 4GB (or more) card, it would make sense to use the highest settings possible with the best resolution textures. The game should be optimized to find a balance between both VRAM usage and performance. What limits should be in place and what should be included in the game in order to have the game look good is something game developers should consider.
If I have a Y-system with a mid-range card and 2GB of VRAM, then the game should be optimized even at high settings to use the appropriate of VRAM without exceeding it. This is where I see, if going by the comments so far, where the developers went wrong in the optimization department.
It's why I said in another thread here recently that I wish games will run at its best and perform its best regardless of the underlying hardware I have in my computer. If I have a 2GB mid-range card, then game should run at its optimum with those limits in place. If I have a high-end card with 3GB, 4GB, or 6GB of VRAM, then the game should adjust accordingly and run at its optimum under those higher limits in place over a mid-range card with less VRAM.
For Watch_Dogs, and reading the comments and complaints so far, it doesn't seem that neither goal was achieved by the developer. There are performance issues on a wide-variety of computer hardware configurations and game settings depending on the installed hardware in one's computer. Some experience stuttering and low framerates when the game pushes the 3GB VRAM limit, hence a lack of optimization on the developers' part. Others experience no performance issues even on high or ultra settings, no matter if the video card came from Nvidia or AMD.
That leads to one and very likely conclusion, as if seeing a similar tale from Battlefield 4 before it is that this game has been poorly optimized with little to no regard to the underlying hardware installed in someone's computer. Driver fixes can only go so far and it'll be up to Ubisoft to get their large stubborn and ignorant heads out of their asses to fix the issues in this game.
Can you screen shot your settings and post them? Seems like there is nothing I can do to stop this game from stuttering like crazy. Makes playing it impossible.
Unfortunately it just makes me sad and frustrated that people like this exist. Unbelievable.
The good thing is, people no longer believe his shit. There was a time though when he was making the crossover from being a legitimate news guy to a pure entertainment shock value idiot that people hung on his every word. Now a days most know he's just the Jerry Springer of "news"
I have to admit, I did think this was a little silly in-game...
That's a great comic strip. It really makes me think of how non-techie's see their technology & the security regarding it.
I totally agree. He's absolutely insane. But I digress.
A lot of the hacking stuff is just not in reality.. How is he blowing up steam pipes with a phone? The entire city and every object he can "hack" would need some kind of receiver, transmitter, and some of the stuff would also need explosives attached to it with open security so he can just one button hack.
Well since refrigerators are hooked to the internet nowadays, I could imagine the heating grid for a city being wired the same way. Don't pay your electricity bill on time around here and they will turn it off without coming out to your house at 12:01 pm. Maybe the Steam valve has a regulator on it that he is overloading?
Now the bomb in your pocket thing needs to go. That's the stupidest thing I have ever heard of.
Of course not. I agree with cageymaru's post ^^^
Might be the best part of the whole game! Hacking bombs and watching them panic, classic. One guy even threw his bomb in the direction of another guard, and took him out.
On another note, how the hell do I access the additional missions? Signature Shot or even the stuff that game with the PS4 version?
That has actually happened numerous times in my game. It's pretty funny, though also kind of a "WTF" moment...do the AI have no knowledge of other AI around them?
This is all beside the fact that, WHY DOES A SECURITY GUARD CARRY BOMBS?
Their dialogue is pretty good about it too.
Tell my wife...tell my wife, I was fucking her sister!
There is a blurb you intercept from the local news station that explains that guarded government areas are contracted out to ex-mercenaries, some of which have war crimes on record etc etc blah blah and that there is some clash in the community if its safe for them to be employed or something.
Basically something so that the player can justify being "good" in killing them.
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.
Remember when Ubisoft said "PC is the lead platform"
Sebastien Viard, graphics technical director for Watch Dogs
As opposed to untrained mercenaries
The 'graphics technical director' using the word "apparently" in this context is frightening.
So they basically hired cheap coders? and/or didn't give them the time/resources to code the game right for multiple configurations?
Woah woah woah. HOLD ON.
You're telling me... Correct me if I'm wrong here... But, you're telling me there are people on PC who *don't have* 4+ GB VRAM?
- Sebastien Viard
I just barely upgraded to 256K of XMS on an ISA card... Now this?!?!
I really want to meet his weed guy.
Untrained mercenaries can't be trusted with "smart" explosives.
So it's not complex? Damn, I'd like to see your coding.
Probably referring to the "fantastic job" part of the quote...
Bomb in pocket, completely silly, unrealistic, no way I can suspend my disbelief for that!!!
Dragons, magic and other shit? Fuck yea, no issues there!
I guess we should be prepared for a similar disaster with The Division? Wowed everyone at E3, will be a pale shadow when its released?