flaxknuckles
Member
Nah, Saints Row 1 came out in 2006 on 360. I think GUN was the first sandbox game that gen.
-
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.
Ubisoft: Watch_Dogs will run at 900p on PS4 and 792p on XB1, both at 30fps
- Thread starter nynt9
- Start date
Nah, Saints Row 1 came out in 2006 on 360. I think GUN was the first sandbox game that gen.
I wouldnt say GUN was a sandbox. It was kind of open yeah, but it was super linear as hell.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Ah yes, wasn't SR2 a pile of shit PC port? have it in my steam library from a humble bundle haven't bothered to touch it. Can't imagine 1 was much better.
Morphine_OD
Banned
I hate it how people counter the beauty of ISS by "low on content" argument. Content is money x time. Beauty and optimization is talent x money x time. More is not always better, If I had to choose, I'd take ISS and Last of Us over GTA and Watch Dogs any day.
chickdigger802
Banned
ahhh yeah, was just thinking what saints row 1 was on lol.
didn't recall SR1 being much of a looker.
EGOMON
Member
That actually sound more plausible, if only this game was a new-gen only oh well am still going to buy it
ComputerMKII
Banned
It's not true HD and my monitor was built for working at 1080p and 60 fps.
backflip10019
Member
I caved today and preordered on Xbone with the $15 free digital deal on the MS store website. Feel like I would've ended up with it anyway, so might as well take advantage of the deal when it's still good.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
I think we need to put some things in perspective. How many gamers, for example, are looking forward to Persona 5 on the PS3? I know I am. Will we care that it won't be 1080p at 60fps? Will it have any effect on it likely being yet another unbelievable installment in that amazing franchise? Would people cancel their pre-orders if Sony announced Persona 5 for PS4 at E3, and it turned out to not be 1080p?
It can't be that our standards have suddenly risen so high that anything not 1080p is now suddenly beneath us all as gamers or so profoundly assaults our ability to appreciate the games we play. We can't so quickly forgot how many games we just recently still consider to be absolute lookers on last gen machines. Games not being 1080p certainly didn't stop people from enjoying or believing the following games like Last of Us or Halo 4 looked amazing, and look at Xenoblade Chronicles on the Wii. That game looks absolutely magnificent, and I don't even think that's running at an HD resolution. Things like this put the whole resolution craziness into perspective. I know we're dealing with next gen machines, and people have expectations, but we have to also be realistic and acknowledge that the consoles are showcasing the fact that they are much more powerful machines in many more ways than just native resolution. They're pulling off a level of graphics fidelity and overall complexity that the previous gen systems simply won't match, even if the devs did their absolute best to make the game work on previous gen systems. Different games with different teams have different points at which they can't get anymore out of the system. They will gain experience and learn, and then possibly do even better next time, but I think we shouldn't forget what's most important.
And Infamous, which I've seen this game compared to so many times, is really nothing at all like Watch Dogs. The comparison is highly flawed They are both open-world action adventure games, but they are two very different styles of openworld action adventure games. There aren't nearly enough similarities to bridge the vast differences between the two games.
LMFAO! I like how he kinda looks disappointed as he puts the money back in his wallet.
Then I suggest you buy a computer and hook your monitor up to that.
I'm a regular on their forums and have to say that I don't read their previews, but their reviews seem to be slightly lead by money. This is surprising to me, I consider Ubisoft has served them well in the past.
Probably just this time they didn't get the amount they were expecting and shit's on.
We'll see on their review, but don't give them much credit, not worth.
Exactly. My wife and I have cancelled our PS4 Watch_Dogs pre-order last night, and will be picking it up on Steam come release day. We understand Ubi has had to make compromises, and we're perfectly fine with those speculating that the PS4 just isn't quite there in terms of hardware requirements for this game.
I agree completely, and a lot of attitudes I've seen reflected in this thread represent sort of the worst aspects of, er, neogaf, I guess.
Making a game is complicated, and it's the product of a billion decisions. A huge, huge game like Watch Dogs seems to be, with a very involved, dynamic world with tons of crap going on, multiply that a few times over. They make decisions to deliver the best experience they can. Why wouldn't they? Do you think they decided to crank it down to 900p and get bad press for it just because they're lazy? They've been working on this game for 5 years.
Moreover, the difference between 900p and 1080p is not dramatic. I'm not certain I could even tell the difference. So why base decisions around it? Did any of you think Ryse looked like a blurry mess?
A hundred times, this.
GameAddict411
Member
Thats not how game development work, they will have to consider the limitations of the least powerful console the game is releasing on. If not they will face major problems, hell it will never run.
flaxknuckles
Member
It was. It runs alright with a few tweaks. Make sure if you decide to play this glorious game, you check out the bottom two links first.
Make it run not like shit:
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1715922
fucking awesome Gentleman of the Row mod:
http://idolninja.com/sr2.php
Ulysses 31
Member
Then you'll have to make due with the PC version.
Of course not. Ryse looked fantastic at 900p, and Watch Dogs will look fantastic at 900p, and even 792p, as well.
flaxknuckles
Member
It looked pretty toasty when it came out. Then Volition made the sequels look like cartoons instead of going forward with the more realistic art style.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Because he only talks about indies? Because that's his job? Because the Xbox One can't even run some of those games at 1080p?
Or they have higher standards for games being released in fucking 2014 on brand new hardware.
I have little doubt anymore that instead of taking the PC version and scaling it down for each console, they have taken the PS360 versions and scaled them up for the new console. We already know there is little game world differance between last and current gen.
I have little faith in Ubisoft for anything now, I'll happily play their Raymans and stuff like Child of light, but I have no real faith in their talent. Hopefully The Crew and The Division won't be Ubi'd to death too. The unsuprising announcement for GTA5 will no doubt show what real programmers can get out of the systems, and when they announce, I hope these devs hang their heads in shame.
I have little faith in Ubisoft for anything now, I'll happily play their Raymans and stuff like Child of light, but I have no real faith in their talent. Hopefully The Crew and The Division won't be Ubi'd to death too. The unsuprising announcement for GTA5 will no doubt show what real programmers can get out of the systems, and when they announce, I hope these devs hang their heads in shame.
Jackbooted
Member
Many of the opinions here are very unfortunate with regards to cancelling a pre-order due to the resolution of a game. Does a game really become less fun if it isn't 1080p? What caused this sudden shift in focusing so much attention on resolution that gameplay is being considered a second consideration? The consoles haven't even been out a year and the level of disappointment is hitting historic levels, I dread to see what it's like 2-4 years from now as beefier games show up...
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Thanks might get round to it sometime.
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
Still waiting on Maxwell 800 series before I upgrade, so PS4 it is.
BuggeryBugz
Member
Are you asking questions, or are they statements? And what does the xbox one have to do with it?
And it's been said before, but if your standards are so high, play the game on your PC.
Their higher standards should start saving up for an actual computer then.
The reality is neither the XO nor PS4 are state-of-the-art machines, nor should either of them be expected to behave as such. Yes, they're basically computers now, but they're mid-range computers.
If you want 1080p/60fps in every game you play, you're gonna need to plop down more than just $400 for the privilege.
Nydius
Gold Member
Actually, it started as a PC title because they didn't know what the specs for next gen were going to be when they began development. E3 2012 was all PC rendering on a GTX 680, iirc. By E3 2013 they had PS4 footage from PS4 dev kits.
The rest of your post might be accurate as we really know very little about the last gen versions except that they're slated to come out at the same time as every other version. I can't see them working on 5 different versions in tandem so I imagine the X360 and PS3 versions were partially (perhaps even overwhelmingly) outsourced.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
The responses to his tweet don't mention anything about indies.
He was made a statement that 1080p/60fps games on the PS4 will be the norm.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
It is. I mean I can understand being annoyed by the lack of 60 fps, something that actually effects the smoothness of gameplay but it's only 900p. I'd gladly go for that if it meant smoother gameplay. I'd rather they go 720p and attempt to reach 60 fps (even I they'd probably fail due to the CPU) But that's just me.
Why would Xbox One owners care. I doubt they simply bought the console due to native resolutions. I'm sure the fact the console has many non native games that's it's not as much of an issue. Even Titanfall has this same awkward resolution.
NaughtyCalibur
Member
As someone who often goes back to play old classics, I don't disagree. A good game is a good game, and as long as you can see and read everything clearly, resolution shouldn't stop you from enjoying it.
But I don't blame people who pre-ordered Watch_Dogs and bought a next gen console (some splurged on a new HDTV along with it) for feeling a bit cheated here. It's a pretty minor thing, sure; but it's completely justified for people to feel like they didn't get the most bang for their buck, and thus lose interest altogether.
It's all about maximizing the experience for these disgruntled gamers. Unfortunately, in order to really do that, these people should have sat out on next gen consoles for at least the first few years and instead built a $1200~ gaming rig.
Love it! Absolutely agree.
Folks need to come to terms with the fact that these $400 consoles will not measure
up to high-end gaming rigs. Especially with regards to third-party games.
SuperSonic1305
Member
All but one game on PS4 is 1080p and it was a launch game. It's not unreasonable in the slightest to expect the same from Watch_Dogs. It is pure incompetence on Ubisoft's part.
Isn't it just a tiny bit disingenuous to compare a FPS title, which hinges gameplay upon fast updates and clarity against something that is going to be a rather slow paced text driven RPG?
Mr. PlayStation
Member
Does anyone remember in which interview the animation team behind Watch Dogs confirmed Full HD for the PS4 version?
R3TRODYCE
Member
I actually cancelled my PS4 W_Dergs preorder to get it on the XB1 because of my friends list so when the news hit that it's not 1080p on any console it really took away any regrets that I had.
Maybe a little. But I was agreeing more with his viewpoint of graphical fidelity and complexity over resolution. Resolution is only a piece of the overall pie.
Confused Cheeseburger
Member
If you recall last generation, there were games that didn't even hit 720p well past the launch window. Halo 3 @ 640p, Call of Duty @ 600p, GTA IV @640p(On PS3 ayway). I just listed some of the most beloved games of the 7th generation, all games that came out well past a year into the 360/ps3 lifespan. We won't even put up with one of 2 sub-1080p outliers on a system that is 7 months old? The more time passes, the crazier and cartoonish this thread is starting to look. Really if you have a significantly capable PC, I don't really even know why you are here to look down on everyone else. And those of you with the most severe reactions to the resolutions, does the gameplay matter as much as the resolution? And yes, I am aware Watch Dogs' visuals were clearly part of the original pitch that caught damn near everyone. But so was the gameplay, and if the gameplay never caught you, you might want to question a few things as that would imply you were content with a pretty yet boring game. Yes, of course the game doesn't look as good as the 2012 tech demo. You'd think this was the first time that ever happened with the sustained reaction to what we have now. But, to say the game does not have anything going on for it visually is disingenuous and claiming it is slightly shinnier than GTA V if anything is just as reductive. I'll say it again, until we see the massive amount of game under wraps in WD, it's too early to dismiss the entire package.
Be careful you don't end up with a generous helping of Crow Salad making statements like this. We have no idea if this will be the only 900p game to come out on the PS4 this generation.
There might be a legitimate reason why it's 900p, or there might not.
Nydius
Gold Member
In a way it IS unreasonable. Let's face it, what you want is 1080p/60fps with all the next gen bells and whistles like high AA/AF, AO, shadowing, particle effects, and everything else. I know this because every time a video was released that showed off the wind effects or other weather effects in the game, people jizzed in their pants.
Despite the benefits of being dedicated and linked with the GPU, I'm not sure it's realistic to expect full 1080p/60 and all the modern graphical bells and whistles from systems that use a slightly modified pair of AMD notebook CPUs (probably closest to the A4-5100 design in terms of specs). Seems to me that this generation for console gamers will be defined by graphical sacrifice for resolution or vice versa.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
I think It's because of the fact SD to HD is significant jump whereas HD to Full HD isn't as much of a jump.
If these consoles were state of the art like last gen they'd be worried about attempting 4K like PC's currently are rather than struggling with 1080p. Then again high end components are more expensive so it's understandable from a business point of view but less so from a consumer. Since your getting less bang for your buck.
I'm pretty sure a more accurate statement would be a modified A10. For the most part all A4's are only dual-core.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Watch Dogs is a cross gen game. It wasn't developed solely for these consoles and it is certainly not the best game graphically at this point or that will ever be released on the console. There will be far better looking games running at 1080p this year and every year after. It doesn't even look close to the reveal and we shouldn't be expecting 1080p? Give me a break.
1408x792p = 1,115,136 pixels
1600x900p = 1,440,000 pixels
1440000 - 1115136 = 324864 pixel difference