• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Digital Foundry - Watch Dogs vs. Watch Dogs 2012 Reveal

M.W.

Member
Hack if old:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-watch-dogs-tech-analysis

14 min PS4 opening scene analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SmhW_IqYt4

Watch Dogs: the Digital Foundry verdict

Watch Dogs meets most of our expectations of a next-gen title, but falls a little short on others. It's clear that the six-month delay has resulted in a significantly more polished title, but some parts of the visual presentation are still stronger than others. Night-time lighting counts as a huge high point, for example, delivering on the early promises made in its rain-soaked E3 2012 showcase. In concert with the Havok physics used for cloth simulation, ragdoll impacts and water, the world not only looks, but reacts in a way we hope future titles will expand upon.

But it's often the case that the game carries the distinct air of the 2013 launch window title it was originally meant to be. Technical aspects such as the weak texture filtering, pop-in and dithered shadows stand out in the face of an impressively constructed Chicago cityscape. Seamless online play adds an exciting dimension to the sandbox formula too, though not necessarily a brand new idea to the console scene itself; players are able to invade one another, complete missions in co-op, or compete in races. That said, the improved hardware makes delivery of this idea more tenable, where getting any frame-rate drop below the 30fps line in solo play requires some heavy stress-testing. The overall impression is that gameplay and frame-rate consistency are strong, on the tested PS4 version at least.

Does Watch Dogs truly deliver on the promise of its initial E3 2012 reveal? The short answer is yes. Cutting away the obviously pre-rendered CG inserts at E3 2012 leaves a slice of gameplay that is indeed a close match for the final game. In fact, the finished game comes out of the comparison very favourably, because that original demo only represented a tiny fraction of the overall offering; Watch Dogs as it ships is an ambitious project with a massive cityscape to explore and a vast array of tasks to carry out. The only downside is that, on a conceptual level, this still feels like a game that takes the template established by the last-gen Grand Theft Auto titles and merely embellishes it - often dramatically - as opposed to completely reinventing the genre in the way that many might have hoped. Whether it's the true next-gen experience you wanted is down your expectations, then, but on a technical level we do not feel duped by the original reveal.
 

KainXVIII

Member
dis+gonna+be+good.gif
 
It's a look that isn't far removed from current-gen efforts at times, but the killer blow is the use of low-grade texture filtering, causing surfaces a few paces ahead to appear blurred. Alongside the asset-streaming issues, this is an area we had hoped the PS4 version would handle more adeptly.

Is AF too hard for these consoles or what?
 

bombshell

Member
So the PS4 version is good enough it seems even with the hiccups and all that, need the XOne version for comparison though

Yeah, but Ubi didn't supply them with a Xbone review copy:

Access to the Xbox One release, and indeed code for last-gen consoles, was unavailable at the time of writing, meaning our full Face-Off feature is to follow in the coming days.
 

Loudninja

Member
GI noted the X1 version has some tearing. So I guess that means frame rate problems?
They mention some tearing on the PS4 version
Looking at performance in our extended 14-minute video, we see a near-monotone 30fps line through thick and thin, albeit equipped with an adaptive v-sync where screen-tear kicks in when performance dips under target. Admittedly the opening areas funnel the player through undemanding tutorial-focused areas, but our first chance at an outdoors car chase immediately reveals a flicker of screen-tear creeping in. It's difficult to notice as we're tailed by cop cars, and the frame-rate still holds diligently to 30fps either way - but the engine vulnerability is clearly there.
To force Watch Dogs' hand in this sense, we push it with more exciting range of stress-tests. This ranges from boat-rides around the docks to ballistic rampages through the city centre. Putting the grenade launcher to use causes tearing, as does driving through water hydrants to create a burst of alpha. But to really buckle the frame-rate - the lowest point on record being a constant 24fps - we need to drive through streets littered with car wreckages and armed police officers, accelerating through every object on the pavement. The drop from 30fps is sustained but hard-earned, proving it's the physics engine that drags performance down most.
A 14-minute performance analysis of Watch Dogs' opening segments reveals a sturdy 30fps. You'll occasionally get flashes of tearing when the engine is pressed by a high vehicle count, but there's little here to truly tax the PS4 beyond that. Scroll down further to see performance in more action-heavy scenes.
Does not sound like much of a issue though.
 
Cool that the framerates are so stable. Will be super interesting to see how big of a difference there will be between the PC on Ultra and the console versions in terms of visual fidelity.
 

Renekton

Member
Does Watch Dogs truly deliver on the promise of its initial E3 2012 reveal? The short answer is yes. Cutting away the obviously pre-rendered CG inserts at E3 2012 leaves a slice of gameplay that is indeed a close match for the final game. In fact, the finished game comes out of the comparison very favourably
Now to quote the posters who spam the downgrade word like a slogan...
 
Think the most important point to take is that Ubi showed the engine in its best possible conditions (at night in the rain) and that people weren't expecting quite how bad the engine fares in the daytime in non-dramatic lighting conditions.

It's not a downgrade, they just hid it.
 

kmax

Member
tldr: It's a beautiful game with flaws. It does hold up to the E3 reveal, and is a tight and solid experience visually.

I honestly expected worse.
 

Chev

Member
Is AF too hard for these consoles or what?

It'll incur a performance hit no matter what but if it's factored into the engine early there should be no problem. Infamous Second Son certainly didn't have a problem with it. Though it's worth noting AF can't be used with some virtual texture schemes so maybe Ubi's using one of those.
 
Character modelling and motion capture remain on-point with what we had expected from earlier E3 demos - no real change, but we had anticipated more from the beginning. Much like the Assassin's Creed series' cut-scenes, the hand-keyed facial animations are already starting to date when compared to the efforts of Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch or Quantic Dream.


:/
 

geordiemp

Member
900P 30FPS with occasional tearing and drops?

Disappointing tbh.

Did you read the article ?

Its mainly locked 30fps and you have to have lots of explosions / alpha / physics effects to get the frame rate to lower.

Have you read the PC performance thread ?

A GTX 770 4 GB getting down to 30 FPS with demanding scenes at 1080p at that's 3.2 TFlops....so what were you expecting from PS4 at 1.8 ?

Consoles when a steady 30 fps look fairly smooth.
 
Top Bottom