Watch Dogs

martingriff

J. Marston wrote: »

It's Ubisoft, just look at Assassins Creed. Lots and lots of collectables, I'm guessing.

At least in Assassins creed the collectibles came up on the map so you did not have to check much

Falthyron

New trailer released today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHPy9IpHOj8

Downgrade in graphical quality is definitely there and looks like it is here to stay. This was a must buy for me because I saw it as a leap forward in technology and I really want to see games being pushed graphically on PC. Now, it feels like some of the excitement has diminished and I am wondering if the game itself will be nothing special. After all, it is only Far Cry 3 + Assassin's Creed in Chicago. :P

KillerShamrock

Still looks impressive but as with all games since the next/current gen launch I cant help but feel its going to be hampered by its lowest common denominator i.e. the ps3 and 360. If these were taken out of the question I think alot of games out recently and soon could be improved upon.
I most likely will get it but not sure if its a pc or when I get a ps4 type of purchase.

2Mad2BeMad

hopefully if theirs a watch dogs 2 they will make it next gen only

jenjenten

Meh!......you can see the grapical downgrade here....its like night and day when you compare the E3 trailer from 2012. In fact, it looks like a PS3 game....more, it looks like GTAV!

The E3 demo really looked next gen, this looks like old gen....pass.

Falthyron wrote: »

New trailer released today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHPy9IpHOj8

Downgrade in graphical quality is definitely there and looks like it is here to stay. This was a must buy for me because I saw it as a leap forward in technology and I really want to see games being pushed graphically on PC. Now, it feels like some of the excitement has diminished and I am wondering if the game itself will be nothing special. After all, it is only Far Cry 3 + Assassin's Creed in Chicago. :P

Kirby

If it plays well and has a good narrative, I'll still play it. I love a good world to become immersed in for a few days.

Yes, It's very disappointing that its been graphically neutered.....but it happens. It isn't the first and wont be the last game to look brilliant in demo's and look fairly mediocre in the final version. Just look at Dark Souls 2 and compare it to the e3 demo's. It's still a great game worth playing.

The bottom line is that the profit from games like these doesn't come from PC or new consoles....it comes from 360 and ps3 because that's where the 150 million strong install base is and where they can charge 60 euro a pop. If you pump money into a AAA game, it has to be built for the ten year old consoles.

aaronjumper

I am not bothered at all, as I am more about the game than how it looks.
I'll still be picking it up and judging it by how it plays.

ShadowHearth

Looks interesting. Might pick it up on PC for 25eu on launch.

Though I still cant wash out the taste of Ubisoft Dick in my mouth... Yes it looks like GTAV in that trailer. I dont mind the actual graphics, but I just hate when they lie to us like that and that act like nothing happened.

Pac1Man

GTA: Windy City

aaronjumper

How many easily amused people are planning on picking this up?
I only ask because I know I will probably spend the first 15 minutes or so, just causing pile ups at junctions.

DarkJager

aaronjumper wrote: »

How many easily amused people are planning on picking this up?
I only ask because I know I will probably spend the first 15 minutes or so, just causing pile ups at junctions.

I'll spend the first 15 minutes robbing bank accounts and beating the victims to death with my fetish baton

xerces

Looking forward to this, not all that bothered about the decline in visuals since the E3 trailer, I'm playing on 360 anyway. Seems like an interesting world to explore and I like the idea of everything around you being connected/controllable through a digital network. If I find the driving mechanics a lot more satisfying than GTAV (its only major flaw in my eyes) then I'll be happy indeed.

aaronjumper

DarkJager wrote: »

I'll spend the first 15 minutes robbing bank accounts and beating the victims to death with my fetish baton

You dirty fecker! :pac:

Maye83 wrote: »

If I find the driving mechanics a lot more satisfying than GTAV (its only major flaw in my eyes) then I'll be happy indeed.

It will probably be similar as they will want people to have fun and be immersed, rather than spending the first few hours trying to get the driving mechanics down.

Zero-Cool

Trailer was class, very like the gta v welcome to los santos one. I thought the driving in gta v was perfect, will be very happy if its like that.

Gonna spend most of my time hacking peoples laptop webcams and watching them make toast.

Honestly I couldn't care less if the graphics aren't as polished as the original video. Gameplay is what matters and I'd much prefer a great game that looked okay overa great looking game with mediocre gameplay.

PeteK*

Have you seen the other threads elsewhere on this forum, comparing the graphics with what was shown at E3?

I'm wondering if I should get it for PS4 or PC. I don't own a PS4, I can't see myself using it much!

Maybe I'd get some Metal Gear Solid Games.. it'd be great if GTA played on it, too.

CiDeRmAn

The delay is a good thing, means I'll have a PS4 to play it on when it's out!
It's promising, to be honest, that they have delayed it to get the gameplay right, and we should demand more of this approach, rather being quasi-beta testers for unfinished games, unpaid but bug hunting for the publishers who have to stick to their annual release schedule and never let a little thing like a broken game get in the way of making money.

AIR-AUSSIE

To fair there is nearly always a graphical drop from marketing videos to the actual game. Happening for most of the GTAs.

Tipsy McSwagger

Game looks horrible compared to the E3 version, I might pick it up for €10 if it gets a decent graphics mod.

Kaizersoze81

Looks like a completely different game compared to the E3 trailer. Gta5 looks better to be honest.Cars look terrible, jagged edges and low res textures on them.

Taylor365

Hate the way people swallow the 'it was running on a playstation/xbox at the demo' garbage. Demonstrations are never run on consoles.

Graphics have been brought back to earth for consoles.

PC will have mods to bring it back to life i reckon.

:pac:

PeteK*

Taylor365 wrote: »

PC will have mods to bring it back to life i reckon.

:pac:

So you reckon PC have the best graphics, for that game?
Is that what you'd buy it for, the PC?

CiDeRmAn

Taylor365 wrote: »

Hate the way people swallow the 'it was running on a playstation/xbox at the demo' garbage. Demonstrations are never run on consoles.

Graphics have been brought back to earth for consoles.

PC will have mods to bring it back to life i reckon.

:pac:

Does anyone ever believe that line anymore?
They've been faking early game footage for donkeys now, pretending it's running at hardware at home when it's really running on a PC
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain", as the Wizard once said, hoping his audience remained gullible.

Taylor365

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

Does anyone ever believe that line anymore?
They've been faking early game footage for donkeys now, pretending it's running at hardware at home when it's really running on a PC
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain", as the Wizard once said, hoping his audience remained gullible.

Some people seemed to fall for it for GTAV and its unrealistic draw distance demo

I'd love to see a side by side comparison of Skyim run on xbox 360(HD pack, if there is such a thing) and PC (4k textures, ENB, CoT, RLO). Open a game up to modders and possibilities are endless.

gizmo

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

Does anyone ever believe that line anymore?
They've been faking early game footage for donkeys now, pretending it's running at hardware at home when it's really running on a PC
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain", as the Wizard once said, hoping his audience remained gullible.

If they explicitly say it's running on console or dev hardware then it's most likely running on that. Whether it's in-game or in-engine or representative of the final release is a different matter entirely however.

kevovek

The recommended pc specs look interesting. 8 core processor i7 @3.5GHz and FX8350 @4GHz I take it that's just them covering themselves? I'm sure it will run fine on a FX6300 @4.4GHz especially if mantle is implemented.

Sierra Oscar

kevovek wrote: »

The recommended pc specs look interesting. 8 core processor i7 @3.5GHz and FX8350 @4GHz I take it that's just them covering themselves? I'm sure it will run fine on a FX6300 @4.4GHz especially if mantle is implemented.

Yeah, seems to be a tendency for some developers to go overboard with the recommended specifications these days. As you say, covers their own backsides I reckon.

Baked.noodle

I really hope I will get away with 4Gb of RAM.

I mean, this is coming out on the PS3, Xbox 360 and the Wii U... Right?

Paddy@CIRL

Put this away in Xtravision today for the Xbox One. First game since the console's launch that I've been really looking forward to.

Zero-Cool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eC-0Upy3Kac

tok9

Yup.. safe to say this is last gen stuff, GTAV looks better...

which all means it's going to be a terrible game...





Text is not picking up on my sarcasm

ShadowHearth

A collection of speculations and plain guess poking. Some of the points being completely stupid.

I need to remind you lads that gta 5 does not look anything like it did in trailers too. A lot of stuff was reduced, details dropped, traffic and pedestrian numbers drastically decreased.

Analysing trailers right now is just useless.

Zero-Cool

ShadowHearth wrote: »

A collection of speculations and plain guess poking. Some of the points being completely stupid.

QUOTE]

I completely agree, these trailers are usually good but 'oh look, an electricity pylon, this means that more than likely you can use this to take down power in the entire city'. Now, maybe you can but there are a lot of leaps in the vid. Some good ones though like the hidden QR code in the environment.

tok9

Oh I don't really care about the analysis.. just find it hilarious how people react to trailers is all.

In the case of watch dogs.. graphics don't look as good.. game is ****.

I never thought GTA looked graphically impressive, even in the trailers.

Kiith

GTA5 wasn't as big a drop in visual quality as Watch Dogs seems to be.

I'm not saying it won't be great or that I won't buy it, it's just annoying to see it happen so often. This and Dark Souls 2 are major examples of massive downgrades in visual quality from earlier trailers. Games are supposed to get better looking as they get closer to release, not the other way around.

tok9

I honestly don't agree with that.

I think people have completely jumped the gun with Watch Dogs. Has there been a drop.. probably.. does it still look really good. Yes it does.

The difference in Dark Souls is phenomenal.. there are actually game mechanics that were promised and discussed before release that are not even in the game.

I just don't think there has been that much of a drop.

I'm still debating whether to actually buy it but if I do it won't be because it looks "next-gen", it'll be because I think the game will be good.

ShadowHearth

Kiith wrote: »

GTA5 wasn't as big a drop in visual quality as Watch Dogs seems to be.

I'm not saying it won't be great or that I won't buy it, it's just annoying to see it happen so often. This and Dark Souls 2 are major examples of massive downgrades in visual quality from earlier trailers. Games are supposed to get better looking as they get closer to release, not the other way around.

Agree. Gaming industry was always making bullshots, but it just got out of control lately. Thanks to Colonial Marines gamers started cop on with that ****. The main problem is not the actual "lower" graphics, but Problem is that they lie in trailers and give completely downgraded finished product.
Dark Souls got away with it, because it is a great game in the first place. The idea of PC version showing up gives it a bit of "safe landing", but problem is that they mentioned only increased FPS and Textures for PC and we can clearly see that the downgrade was a lot more bigger then that.

Falthyron

The original trailers that blew everyone away were shown prior to the final builds of the 'next-gen' consoles. I would imagine that UbiSoft (when building Watchdogs) were led to believe that the power of these unannounced consoles was x, y, and z. As such, they built a game reflecting the supposed hardware capabilities of these consoles. However, as the consoles came closer to release and for cost effectiveness their power was reduced substantially, it was then UbiSoft got their hands on the final release specifications and realised what was feasible. This probably explains the extra six months needed for development.

I applaud UbiSoft's initial attempts to make something look truly spectacular and realistic, I hope their vision and ambition doesn't diminish. But, this is a damning indictment on 'next-gen' consoles, and consoles in general. If the PS4 and Xbox One were a more prominent leap forward in technology, perhaps Watchdogs would be the way it was originally shown. Or perhaps UbiSoft shouldn't have bought into all the hype and promises being set out by Microsoft and Sony about consoles that were far from final specification.

Nevertheless, here we are and PC gamers can only hope that the PC version reflects UbiSoft's original vision. I am not a pro-graphics, anti-gameplay vocalist, or vice versa, but the original trailer for Watchdogs had that feeling of a 'leap' forward in gaming. It felt like a game, it looked like a game, and played like a game that was yet to be realised until now. It will probably end up being a great game, getting 8s and 9s, possibly even some 10s from reviewers, but for me, it has lost that little something I enjoyed from the moment it was first revealed. As I said, I can only hope the PC version will look like that original trailer, but cautious optimism is the safest bet right now.

gizmo

Kiith wrote: »

GTA5 wasn't as big a drop in visual quality as Watch Dogs seems to be.

I'm not saying it won't be great or that I won't buy it, it's just annoying to see it happen so often. This and Dark Souls 2 are major examples of massive downgrades in visual quality from earlier trailers. Games are supposed to get better looking as they get closer to release, not the other way around.

Alas that's not always the case, especially when you're dealing with open world games with a wide variety of systems in different environments. Optimisations can always be made at a late stage but in the end, graphical niceties are always easier to scale back than features or core functionality are to cut. One way to fix all of this is, of course, to not show off your game until it's further along in development but then again, we're dealing with one of the most hyped up games / new IPs in recent memory so there's an argument there that it could be deemed worth it to have shown it off when it did, despite the negative press the title has gotten recently for the supposed "downgrade".

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Agree. Gaming industry was always making bullshots, but it just got out of control lately. Thanks to Colonial Marines gamers started cop on with that ****. The main problem is not the actual "lower" graphics, but Problem is that they lie in trailers and give completely downgraded finished product.

It hasn't gotten out of control though, there have been three notable instances in the last year where earlier footage of a game was shown to not have been reflective of the finished product. Of those three, Colonial Marines is the only one which is even remotely deserving of the term "lie" for the footage shown, so much so that there's still an on-going class action lawsuit going on in the US over it. Watch_Dogs isn't even out yet so we have no idea if the early footage is more indicative of the PC version or whether the whole thing has taken a hit in their push to be a cross-generation game. Similarly, Dark Souls 2 PC version may yet restore some of the excellent lighting shown in the pre-release footage, in which case it would be more of an indictment of the capabilities of their engine and the last gen of consoles than any form of outright "lie" on their part. I guess we'll find out in 2 weeks, 2 days and 20 hours either way.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

gizmo wrote: »

I guess we'll find out in 2 weeks, 2 days and 20 hours either way.

*cries*

ShadowHearth

gizmo wrote: »

Alas that's not always the case, especially when you're dealing with open world games with a wide variety of systems in different environments. Optimisations can always be made at a late stage but in the end, graphical niceties are always easier to scale back than features or core functionality are to cut. One way to fix all of this is, of course, to not show off your game until it's further along in development but then again, we're dealing with one of the most hyped up games / new IPs in recent memory so there's an argument there that it could be deemed worth it to have shown it off when it did, despite the negative press the title has gotten recently for the supposed "downgrade".


It hasn't gotten out of control though, there have been three notable instances in the last year where earlier footage of a game was shown to not have been reflective of the finished product. Of those three, Colonial Marines is the only one which is even remotely deserving of the term "lie" for the footage shown, so much so that there's still an on-going class action lawsuit going on in the US over it. Watch_Dogs isn't even out yet so we have no idea if the early footage is more indicative of the PC version or whether the whole thing has taken a hit in their push to be a cross-generation game. Similarly, Dark Souls 2 PC version may yet restore some of the excellent lighting shown in the pre-release footage, in which case it would be more of an indictment of the capabilities of their engine and the last gen of consoles than any form of outright "lie" on their part. I guess we'll find out in 2 weeks, 2 days and 20 hours either way.

One of the reasons I dont play much of DS2 on PS3 anymore. I dont want to burn out. I will check reviews first though. :pac:

.ak

gizmo wrote: »

I guess we'll find out in 2 weeks, 2 days and 20 hours either way.

Isn't it out on May 27th?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

.ak wrote: »

Isn't it out on May 27th?

april 25th

Julez

.ak wrote: »

Isn't it out on May 27th?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

april 25th

I presume one of you is talking about Dark Souls 2 and one of you is talking about Watch Dogs, Watch Dogs is out May 27th.

tok9

.ak wrote: »

Isn't it out on May 27th?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

april 25th

I sense confusion.

Dark Souls 2 for PC is out april 25th

Watch Dogs is out on May 27th.

Zero-Cool

Season Pass info leaked. Sick of season passes.
http://go.ign.com/1itngMW

2Mad2BeMad

sheehy83 wrote: »

Season Pass info leaked. Sick of season passes.
http://go.ign.com/1itngMW

if dark souls had a season pass
I don't think anyone would mind tbh:pac: they'd make twice as much as their getting now

Zero-Cool

2Mad2BeMad wrote: »

if dark souls had a season pass
I don't think anyone would mind tbh:pac: they make twice as much as their getting now

Cmon now, Dark Souls is in a league of it's own, I'm already itching for DLC to be announced for it

PeteK*

Do you think there will be much difference in the PS3 and PS4 versions of the game?

Xenji

PeteK* wrote: »

Do you think there will be much difference in the PS3 and PS4 versions of the game?

Just the graphics, although some will say that is not much of a difference, both come with the exclusive content as well.