Play Watch Dogs the way E3 2012 did + controversy

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=390114

Ubisoft left in all the fancy shit when they toned the graphics settings down for retail release on PCs so some dude made a mod with said content and it is under constant development but quite playable based on what I see here.

Controversy starts 2 posts down.

New games are clearly not for me.

Other than the dynamic lighting effects I can't see any difference between modded and unmodded in actual gameplay.

Edit: Something for the why modern gamers suck thread:

Finished the game, never even noticed any of this. Talk about retarded nitpicking.

Let's not forget about these charming things:



Bigger version of above snippet.

Ubisoft is a crock of shit lying out of their teeth. Downgraded my ass.

Other than having fancy graphics... Well. What's more to nitpick? Besides, is it a fucking surprise that those boxes you call consoles are THAT powerful? Of course there is fine-tuning when it comes for PC ports, for better or worse.

I can understand that if port sucks balls. (See Saints Row 2. Apparently, it was prone to crash or froze, or so it is said.)

Glaice said:

Let's not forget about these charming things:

Bigger version of above snippet.

Ubisoft is a crock of shit lying out of their teeth. Downgraded my ass.

Unbelievable, a PR manager is lying about their product. Never heard of that before.

Lets burn them at the stake for that one-liner (serious? sarcastic?) in the code comments while we're at it.

Game is okay, could be better optimized for PC, from what I can see the features that the patch unlocks were blocked for good reason. Dynamic lights mostly work, but can crap out when there are too many of them, clearly buggy or even not fully implemented, but ermagerd, itsa downgrade.

CorSair said:

Other than having fancy graphics... Well. What's more to nitpick? Besides, is it a fucking surprise that those boxes you call consoles are THAT powerful? Of course there is fine-tuning when it comes for PC ports, for better or worse.

I can understand that if port sucks balls. (See Saints Row 2. Apparently, it was prone to crash or froze, or so it is said.)

No, that's not the issue. The issue is, from what I understand, that the fancy graphics options were available yet locked out of the PC port, to keep the PC port from showing off how much better the PC is, or something along those lines. It's not just, "Oh, PC has better graphics," it's, "And the company went out of their way to try to prevent the PC version from looking better than the console version, even going so far as to locking features out."

Given the performance issues reported on PC, you'd think that's what the controversy would be about, if there has to be one. But no, let's express outrage over the lack of even more demanding graphical options. People truly prefer to play pretty slideshows than slightly-less-pretty video games.

Physics are buggy. I can dig arcadey pinball physics for the vehicles, but going through solid objects while on foot is lame.
Interactable objects, vehicles and NPCs spawn way too close to the player (clearly visible pop-in while driving).
TotalBiscuit couldn't run Ultra at 60 FPS on dual Titans.

But no, lets whine about eye candy they cut, clearly in an attempt to insult the PC master race.

Phml said:

But no, let's express outrage over the lack of even more demanding graphical options.

It's not the lack of them, it's that they were always there and, for whatever reason, Ubisoft decided to take control away from the user and lock them off.

Belial said:

Physics are buggy.
Interactable objects, vehicles and NPCs spawn way too close to the player (clearly visible pop-in while driving).
TotalBiscuit couldn't run Ultra at 60 FPS on dual Titans.

But no, lets whine about cut eye candy.

All of those are equally bad issues, but would you like it if configuration options were deliberately hidden from you? Keep in mind, this stuff was never cut, merely deactivated, generally ready to go just waiting for the switch to be flipped.

Phml said:

People truly prefer to play pretty slideshows than slightly-less-pretty video games.

They're not slideshows if your hardware is capable.

Let me reiterate: this issue is not about graphics, it's about deception and dishonesty. Surely that's something we can all rally behind?

Deception in the gaming industry needs to stop, especially when it comes to Ubisoft or EA level bullshit.

Those evil game companies! Making discretionary entertainment products and not delivering the sun and the heavens! OUTRAGE.

BlueFeena said:

Those evil game companies! Making discretionary entertainment products and not delivering the sun and the heavens! OUTRAGE.

You're completely misconstruing the issue. How many times does it need to be restated that people are upset because they were lied to and not that they were expecting more than was already in the game?

I would apply your statement to something like the 30fps cap in Dead Rising 3, since the gameplay mechanics were tied into it, but here? No. These graphics were already in the game, but they were disabled and we were told deliberately misleading statements to the contrary by the publisher.

I just find it funny that everybody's running around screaming their heads off at Ubi / EA / whoever needs a good roasting this week / and yet, ya'll keep buying their games. Just kind of seems a little funny from where I'm sitting, you know? :) It reminds me of the time where I, along with everybody else, blew a blood vessel over Modern Warfare 2's lack of dedicated server support.

Then I realized, long after I bought the game, that I seriously didn't give a shit and a lot of the drama was for the sake of having drama. I haven't played Watch Dogs, and don't particularly intend to any time soon unless someone can make an incredible argument as to why I need a mediocre GTA clone -- so perhaps this is some kind of massive injustice against humanity and it really is worth everybody launching their keyboards out of a window or something -- but seriously?

I play video games to have fun; when I see this level of insane rage over a video game, I seriously wonder why I don't take up reading. :|

But more to the point: If you don't like the game's publisher / developer and don't enjoy their games, that's fine. However, I thought we established a good half a decade ago that EA and Ubisoft were the great Satan, so -- going back to my first paragraph -- why do you all keep buying their software?

On a slightly more technical note, I would like to point out that the single line comment found in the C++ file (sorry, C++ knowledge is pretty rusty atm) seems to have been taken by everyone a little... wrong. It appears to be a reference to the PC platform not needing to perform any of the operations that the Xbox has to, shown above in the code. Hence the comment, "Who cares?"

Edit: I really do hope you realize that any references to a game developer being worse than the devil incarnate is massive sarcasm, right?

Their game is an unoptimized mess, so they disabled features that weren't even finished, would kill the console and would crap out on PC quite a lot, because bugfixing lost to deadlines. The Deception, the Dishonesty! Margaret, you stupid cow, where did you put my goddamn pitchfork, there's a mob I need to attend!

They're not slideshows if your hardware is capable.

Considering dual Titans can't reach 60 FPS, I have my doubts on most people throwing a fit over this owning hardware capable enough to run Watch Dogs with extra eyecandy at decent framerates, even by the loose definition of decent = 30 FPS.

How many times does it need to be restated that people are upset because they were lied to and not that they were expecting more than was already in the game?

"Lies" through trailers and photoshopped screenshots have been common industry practice for longer than most current gamers have been playing video games. How many times can one person be "burned" before inevitably learning their lesson? There is a willingness to believe in the lie, to revel in the hype and to get outraged once the game ships; all for the sake of being part of the current social trend.

This isn't a case of expecting more than what was in the game - it's finding out there was more in the game than what they had access to. This is somewhat akin to finding locked DLC on the game disc. Not exactly, but it's like, the content was there, but gamers weren't given access to it. The reason this is a problem is concerns that since Sony and Microsoft both have brand new shiny consoles, no one wants the PC upstaging them and making people realize the consoles aren't as super-advanced next-gen whatever as Microsoft and Sony are trying to make them out to be.

BlueFeena said:

I just find it funny that everybody's running around screaming their heads off at Ubi / EA / whoever needs a good roasting this week / and yet, ya'll keep buying their games.

This.

Sometimes I feel like I am the only mother fucker that stopped buying certain game series/off of certain developers when it pissed me off.

Watch Dogs looked boring anyway. i'd rather play GTA SA instead.

Sodaholic said:

It's not the lack of them, it's that they were always there and, for whatever reason, Ubisoft decided to take control away from the user and lock them off.

All of those are equally bad issues, but would you like it if configuration options were deliberately hidden from you? Keep in mind, this stuff was never cut, merely deactivated, generally ready to go just waiting for the switch to be flipped.

My whole point is that they are not ready to go. Those screenshots people are posting are just as deceptive as Ubisofts. These features work just well enough to make those single screenshots, but in gameplay they fail miserably. Dynamic lights flicker or disappear entirely from vehicles when there are too many of them, DoF blurs the shit out of stuff seemingly at random, basically the only things that work (probably because they aren't based on unlocked stuff) are rain and NPC density tweaks.

geekmarine said:

The reason this is a problem is concerns that since Sony and Microsoft both have brand new shiny consoles, no one wants the PC upstaging them and making people realize the consoles aren't as super-advanced next-gen whatever as Microsoft and Sony are trying to make them out to be.

So the PC master race now has a conspiracy theory to cling to as well. If MS were worried about that they wouldn't be caught running Xbone E3 demos on a Titan powered PC.

Phml said:

"Lies" through trailers and photoshopped screenshots have been common industry practice for longer than most current gamers have been playing video games.

Have you heard porn and fashion photoshops their pics too? How dare they lie to us!

Wait, Belial, back up here. Microsoft isn't worried that PCs are better than their precious Xbone, and your proof that they're not worried PCs are better is that they secretly used PCs to preview the game?

It could be I'm missing the sarcasm there, but that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Look, I'm not some mouth-breathing PC fanboy. I own a PC, a Wii, and a 360, I have nothing against consoles. I'm merely observing that Microsoft and Sony probably would not appreciate having it pointed out that a decent PC nowadays can easily blow their newest consoles out of the water. The whole selling point of consoles in the first place, after all, is being able to deliver amazing gaming for a fraction of the price and hassle it'd cost to put together a decent gaming rig.

It looks like the console peasants are jealous...what a fucking joke. Now that GTA5 is coming to PC this game is going to be irrelevant anyway.

DooM_RO, did you see what the Steam page for GTA5 says?

"Grand Theft Auto V for PC will take full advantage of the power of PC to deliver across-the-board enhancements including increased resolution and graphical detail, denser traffic, greater draw distances, upgraded AI, new wildlife, and advanced weather and damage effects for the ultimate open world experience."

But anyways, why would Ubisoft intentionally leave out these options for the PC crowd? They know some of their fanbase can use the prettier options.

Glaice said:

DooM_RO, did you see what the Steam page for GTA5 says?

"Grand Theft Auto V for PC will take full advantage of the power of PC to deliver across-the-board enhancements including increased resolution and graphical detail, denser traffic, greater draw distances, upgraded AI, new wildlife, and advanced weather and damage effects for the ultimate open world experience."

But anyways, why would Ubisoft intentionally leave out these options for the PC crowd? They know some of their fanbase can use the prettier options.

Yeah, if Max Payne 3 is any indication, then the PC port of GTA5 is going to be amazing.

THIS is how you make a next gen port

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtZ5oBWpO90

geekmarine said:

I'm merely observing that Microsoft and Sony probably would not appreciate having it pointed out that a decent PC nowadays can easily blow their newest consoles out of the water.

Why would they waste time fighting against what's common knowledge since the PS2 days, and what's become even more obvious when they started building consoles from PC components?

Wait, Belial, back up here. Microsoft isn't worried that PCs are better than their precious Xbone, and your proof that they're not worried PCs are better is that they secretly used PCs to preview the game?

They needed a stable platform to run their stuff. If they were worried about the inevitable comparisons they wouldn't risk such a fiasco, they had to have been expecting it to leak out.

Unless I'm giving them too much credit and they're just that dumb.

Belial, have you ever talked to a console fanboy? They are outside their goddamn skulls. Any sane person would know PCs get better performance than consoles, but the rabid fanboys are convinced PCs are good for nothing but playing solitaire. Okay, okay, that's an exaggeration, but it is based on a truth that they have no concept that PCs are more powerful than consoles. So yeah, I could see the big companies doing what they can to hide that from the fanboys, because it might upset and confuse them.

geekmarine said:

Belial, have you ever talked to a console fanboy? They are outside their goddamn skulls. Any sane person would know PCs get better performance than consoles, but the rabid fanboys are convinced PCs are good for nothing but playing solitaire. Okay, okay, that's an exaggeration, but it is based on a truth that they have no concept that PCs are more powerful than consoles. So yeah, I could see the big companies doing what they can to hide that from the fanboys, because it might upset and confuse them.

Ya but if I want to play say Crysis 3 or another new game that would run sluggish on my computer I would go for a console port, although it wouldn't look the same as if it were maxed on a gaming PC, it would still give you a smooth experience. So consoles are a good alternative for people who don't have the money at the moment for an expensive PC. Although I do agree with you about the fanboys.

As a programmer I am sickened.

Any modern game made with the X360 and PS3 as the lowest common denominator, will have their game world designed around 512 MB of memory, and will inevitably compromise all of their promised feature so owners of ancient hardware can get a taste of modern gaming without the modernity, while modern gamers are left wondering why the fuck is it still 2006.

Cross-gen? Crossed off my list.

Doominator2 said:

Ya but if I want to play say Crysis 3 or another new game that would run sluggish on my computer I would go for a console port, although it wouldn't look the same as if it were maxed on a gaming PC, it would still give you a smooth experience. So consoles are a good alternative for people who don't have the money at the moment for an expensive PC. Although I do agree with you about the fanboys.

I totally understand that. I have no problem with consoles, I own a 360 myself (though these days it seems I spend far more time using my 360 controller on my PC - got an HDMI cable to hook up my PC to my TV too, so that's pretty sweet). And I know full good and well what it's like to not have a PC powerful enough to play the latest games, and how handy a console can be in that situation.

My point wasn't intended as an attack on the hardware itself, but rather the fanboys who think that because their Xbox can play the latest games while their crappy em=Machine cannot, it proves how superior consoles are in every way. I don't even really know if it's fully their fault - gaming has become so popular that there are tons of gamers out there who, before present-day consoles, probably would've known jack shit about computers and whatnot. And so they see these shiny consoles and buy into the hype and truly believe their consoles are better than anything else - that's what the game companies keep saying, right? And I don't think Sony or Microsoft has any real problem maintaining that illusion. It ensures the fanboys always buy THEIR latest hardware and play games on THEIR terms. Another important point - you keep the fanboys hooked on consoles and away from PCs, because more PC gamers means more piracy. And while used game sales, such as through Gamestop, may cut into their profits a bit, it's not nearly as devastating as piracy is.

This is PC-only, who cares.

Modern gaming summed up in one sentence.