• 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

Pandemic

Member
You must be kidding right? Right?

Goddamn why are you even bothering with PS4 version? It's PC all the way.

Hahaha, unfortunately I'm not mate.

I'm terrible with comparing specifications, but cheers for the response mate, greatly appreciate it.

Guess I'll swap my pre-order over! And work out a little cheaper too, heh.
 

lmbotiva

Junior Member
I'd go with the PC version, definitely. You'll be pulling 1080p with most settings maxed, no problem.

with an UBI game i wouldn't count on it, i have the same CPU OC at 4.2 and i have a gtx 770 4gb and i could barely run AC black flag at 30 frames with everything maxed
 

Jedi2016

Member
Are they fucking kidding? They can't even get a last-gen game to run at 1080p now?

Starting to be more and more glad I didn't bother with a pre-order. I'll probably end up just skipping this game entirely. Good, I've got too much other shit to play right now. Fuck 'em.
 
Witcher 3 is semi-confirmed or very strongly rumored to be sub-1080 isn't it? Probably wanna put Ubi's MMO Clancy FPS (The Division) on there too.
With what CD projekt was able to accomplish with Witcher 2 on the xbox 360, Witcher 3 could have one pixel and it'd still look amazing. I have full faith I will play that game and won't be disappointed graphically.
 

Pimpwerx

Member
Huh. I'm less impressed with this now. Resolution isn't going to break the deal if it's still pretty, but I only plan on buying technical showpieces alongside indie titles. This might be reduced to a rental. Was gonna preorder next week. I'll probably wait to hear if it's a good game first. PEACE.
 

Garland7G

Member
I think their QA department needs a makeover much more than their engineers, quite frankly.

This is simply not true.
Having worked in QA for years, I can honestly say that all these things would have been found by the team. They sit there for 8 hours a day testing a single area/mission/mode for the duration.
During the last 6 months before a game ships, they contract out even more (the majority actually) QA members. Once the game is (about) 3 months out, development goes into 'crunch mode' where the QA is expected to play the same stuff for up to 12 hours a day (including weekends).

If the company is on their toes, then QA would get a new build every morning and the first they do is check (if any) of the bugs submitted (and marked fixed by devs) were actually fixed.
Two weeks prior to release the game is sent to Sony/xbox etc. for certification.
Having worked on the Sony side in this example, I can say that those two weeks are basically the same as described above, 8 hrs a day on the same mode/missions etc. If the game is a real disaster and fails cert, then Sony employees go into 'crunch mode' once the new build arrives.
This whole time the devs still have their QA working on the game (plus contracted QA) A game needs a certain (I forget sry) amount of hours of testing per build.

What I'm getting at here is that QA finds the shit, reports it into DevTracker, and either the team can (and does) fix it or they can't for some reason (and people blame QA).

TLDR: All the shit gets found and reported, if it gets fixed or not is up to the devs.

/rant
As for watch dogs, I'll still get it at launch, the 900p sucks, but I'm sure the team did the best they could. (bullshots and target renders however need to stop).
 

vpance

Member
Should've went for dynamic res. When you start moving they can drop the res and it would feel like you're getting "hacked".
 

McLovin

Member
Man... gtfo of here with that. If the next-gen versions are getting last-gen performance, we can probably expect sub 720p 20-25fps on the last-gen versions :/
 

Kibbles

Member
so should we start calling this gen the 7.5 generation? seriously this is embarrassing that Sony and MS would release consoles that are unable to hit 1080p/60fps with ease, they seriously expect these consoles to last 5-8 years like previous generations? glad i'm holding off on buying either console.
It is embarrassing but they are here to stay for another 8 years so...
 

Sean*O

Member
Hmm, if Xbone can have an odd res like 792p why can't PS4 have something like 1000p LOL

Seems like they are maximizing one platform but not the other. ;-)
 

Pimpwerx

Member
This is simply not true.
Having worked in QA for years, I can honestly say that all these things would have been found by the team. They sit there for 8 hours a day testing a single area/mission/mode for the duration.
During the last 6 months before a game ships, they contract out even more (the majority actually) QA members. Once the game is (about) 3 months out, development goes into 'crunch mode' where the QA is expected to play the same stuff for up to 12 hours a day (including weekends).

If the company is on their toes, then QA would get a new build every morning and the first they do is check (if any) of the bugs submitted (and marked fixed by devs) were actually fixed.
Two weeks prior to release the game is sent to Sony/xbox etc. for certification.
Having worked on the Sony side in this example, I can say that those two weeks are basically the same as described above, 8 hrs a day on the same mode/missions etc. If the game is a real disaster and fails cert, then Sony employees go into 'crunch mode' once the new build arrives.
This whole time the devs still have their QA working on the game (plus contracted QA) A game needs a certain (I forget sry) amount of hours of testing per build.

What I'm getting at here is that QA finds the shit, reports it into DevTracker, and either the team can (and does) fix it or they can't for some reason (and people blame QA).

TLDR: All the shit gets found and reported, if it gets fixed or not is up to the devs.

/rant
As for watch dogs, I'll still get it at launch, the 900p sucks, but I'm sure the team did the best they could. (bullshots and target renders however need to stop).
I love getting inside info like this. I wanted to do QA in college, but it sounds boring. PEACE.
 

Nokterian

Member
I'm dying

Thank you Ubi, made my morning.

I think this fits your reaction.

George-Costanza-Winking.gif
 

EvB

Member
Hmm, if Xbone can have an odd res like 792p why can't PS4 have something like 1000p LOL

Seems like they are maximizing one platform but not the other. ;-)

Presumably the 792p resolution plays well with a particular AA implementation.
 

mephixto

Banned
It is embarrassing but they are here to stay for another 8 years so...

Embarrassing? Why?

They have to make a choice, better framerates and res or better IQ. They went for the better IQ cause it's the most noticeable.

Fanboys want both, but ofc they don't want to pay the price (~$600-$700).

As someone said before in another thread, you play games, not resolutions.

Deal with it.
 

RodentBR

Neo Member
I thought it would 1080p on PS4 and 900p on Xbox One.

I've already pre-ordered the Xbox One version, but I really don't care about the resolution as long as the game is fun.

Any words about the resolution on the old-gen consoles? I guess it will be something like 600p.
 

GoaThief

Member
seriously this is embarrassing that Sony and MS would release consoles that are unable to hit 1080p/60fps with ease
You do realise that even if a console was packing a titan some developers would add so much eye candy that 1080p/60fps would be difficult to hit. There are always choices in development, some people had unrealistic expectations regarding what targets studios will prioritise.

To be fair the system requirements for Watch Dogs on PC are really hefty, I have a OC'd 2500k @ 4.5ghz, 480gtx, 8gb RAM which is getting on a bit but no slouch and according the requirements I'll be getting a low end experience at 1080p and no 60fps. Seems like the PS4 will offer parity, if not better at a very reasonable price. That shouldn't be sniffed at despite the slightly disappointing resolution.
 

Codeblew

Member
Well it could have been worse I suppose. UbiSoft could have come out with some Capcom like excuses used for DmC like saying something along the lines of "Watch_Dogs looks/feels like 1080p. Also, 1080p is tiring for your eyes, thus 900/792p"

There's that I guess :/

Too many pixels to pay attention to at 1080p. It leads to eye strain.
 

Bad_Boy

time to take my meds
Is it possible they will patch it to 1080p as they did with Assassin's Creed IV?
Im having my doubts. If there was a patch coming and they thought there was a chance to hit 1080p I think they wouldnt have announced this at all until the last minute.

I really want to vote with my wallet on this. If this game still sells well it will give other devs an excuse not to hit 1080p.
 

booxohan

Neo Member
so should we start calling this gen the 7.5 generation? seriously this is embarrassing that Sony and MS would release consoles that are unable to hit 1080p/60fps with ease, they seriously expect these consoles to last 5-8 years like previous generations? glad i'm holding off on buying either console.

It`s nice to make a profit day one. Any higher end tech would of made the PS4 another "$599.99 US Dollars" embarassment. As with Microsoft, the focus on Kinect 2 and eSRAM also makes the console expensive. I expect this generation to last max 6 years with support afterwards. So yeah. I agree with you on holding off until there are newly acclaimed games worth buying, and price cuts.
 
its getting ot now. I know who is developing it but Nintendo will publish this title in the west.

My point is, that they will never release two Zeldas within the span of a few months. The next real Zelda will come next year maybe, Watch Dogs on WiiU this year. And i dont care about that Hyrule Warriors thing. If the new mainline Zelda is indeed coming out this year like you said, i will buy you a copy as a present :)

quoting this for future use lol..............but as much as I want it to release this year.....due to the free copy XD.........it's going to be spring..........just because its Nintendo, I'm going to get spited for it and because Nintendo doesn't want you buying me a copy of the new Zelda lol
 
I can't believe every game isn't at TVs' native resolution, let alone Ubisoft's new flagship franchise.

quoting this for future use lol..............but as much as I want it to release this year.....due to the free copy XD.........it's going to be spring..........just because its Nintendo, I'm going to get spited for it and because Nintendo doesn't want you buying me a copy of the new Zelda lol

I'm betting next winter.
 
Am I the only one that doesn't care about pixels and instead is simply pissed off at the constant false advertising that is thrown our way?
 

mooksoup

Member
Am I the only one that doesn't care about pixels and instead is simply pissed off at the constant false advertising that is thrown our way?

It was a mistake. That they corrected. It was probably written by someone in marketing who has no idea what a frame or a p is.
It's not a grand conspiracy.

Looking forward to finally getting my hands on this after the weird, twisting route it's taken to get here.
 
People should wait until we see some comparisons between the PS4 and XBone versions. Maybe the reason WD is 900p on PS4 is because they have made the visuals that much better than the XBone version ?. Maybe it's 30fps locked on PS4 and unstable 30fps on XBone ?. Who knows.

Bashing Ubisoft's developers before we have even seen the final game in action in high quality direct feed videos is a little out of hand imo.
 

Guri

Member
I don't want to sound provocative to anyone, but the truth is that the hardware on both consoles is inferior to the top PC hardware by the time they launched. And please don't think that's something usual. Until last gen, consoles launched with hardware more powerful than PCs. I'm sure devs will learn more about each console from now on, but they'll likely use that not to increase resolution or framerate, but for better textures/particles/lighting/other effects.

My PC from 2012 is better than both consoles in terms of hardware. It concerned me to see Tomb Raider struggling to reach 60 fps on PS4 when I did that with no problem. So I'm not sure if we can blame Ubisoft for this, since other devs have been facing the same issues. I still want to buy one console, so I can play games on PC and other exclusives on a specific console and I always knew that, by the time I buy it, PC hardware would be better, but I'm disappointed that happened exactly when PS4 and Xbox One launched.

I'm not concerned as of it now, but as games demand more and more, I hope they can at least reach the resolutions and framerate they're reaching now.
 

Typomancer

Neo Member
Really wanted to try this one on either the PS4 or PC, looks like it’ll be the PC this time… but god dammit, I hate Uplay so much.

Last game I bought which uses it was Anno 2070 and the Uplay application was causing the game to crash on launch for a whole day until I somehow fixed it. After that I didn’t even want to play Anno 2070 anymore because it was such a frustrating experience.
 
Maybe I'm an idiot but I have the XOne and about 6 games and I never once thinkg when playing AC or other games...wow...this resolution sucks.

I don't know man...maybe I'm weird like that. Then I come here and every other thread is about the sky falling...
 
Top Bottom