Support NeoGAF

[kinggroin]

Phenom II x4 at 4ghz
4GB ram
GTX 670


That's what I'm going to attempt to run this game at. Should be interesting.

 

[Syrus]

at900 and 800p

 

[ekim]

What does NG mean?

 

[Zeppeli]

The PC master race is going to get real salty once they start realizing that their rigs are going to be playing games optimized for mid-range PCs (PS4 and Xbox One) for the coming years. Let the bottle necking begin.

Really, dude? A mid range PC can already outperform the Xbox One for the same price (see: 750ti budget builds), and by this Fall/Winter you can expect that budget cards will outperform the PS4 as well.

Besides, I'd rather be bottle necked than play at sub 1080p and sub 60fps

 

[Nealand Liquor]

You do know you're going to eat your words eventually right? This is the same bullshit console gamers were spouting last gen. And 2 years in PC games already looked and ran much better.

3 years in, they featured hundreds of dynamic lights vs 2, thousands of particles vs none, 4 times the texture resolution, a ton of texture effects that were non-existant on consoles, AF, WAY better AA, WAY better LOD levels and no or little pop-in, millisecond load times, way better view distance (And FOV to boot), more AI, better pathfinding, more accurate physics, 1080p+ 60+ FPS, etc, etc.

I don't understand why you do this to yourselves. The PS4 is banging right now. No doubt about it. But this is a losing battle for you, so why even fight it?

Not to mention that I doubt the settings are truly all high. EA said the same thing about BF4 and that was a pack of lies. We'll see I guess.

Is this the PC equivalent to a console list war post?

 

[Zeppeli]

Is this the PC equivalent to a console list war post?

Care to explain why you think that? Because it's not even remotely close to that.

 

[Kinthalis]

Is this the PC equivalent to a console list war post?

What's a console list war post?

I'm responding to the guy who started by claling PC gamers "Salty".

 

[Chobel]

What does NG mean?

Next Gen

 

[Fried Food]

I believe it. The volumetric lighting is what really diferentiates the pc and console versions. Of course, they haven't shown any footage with volumetric lighting like we say in the inital e3 2012 reveal

 

[LordOfChaos]

He said next gen

I know

I wasn't asking if that also looks like PC high settings, just asking what it would fall under on the PC side of things. And I wonder if it will be any better than the 7th gen consoles, or worse like far too many ports.

 

[UpUpDownDown]

Cool.

May give it a rent sometime.

 

[Haunted]

uhh, whats NG?

current gen

 

[Stallion Free]

I wonder if my decent rig can handle high at 1600x900 and hold 30 fps mostly.

 

[TheD]

No, he can run the game fine with his system.
His GPU is likely a bit faster than what is in the PS4 and his CPU craps from a great height on the PS4 CPU.

 

[Havel]

Ultra most likely = SSAO + PhysX + SSAA. Probably no change in lighting or textures, aside from some more light shafts.

 

[bobawesome]

You do know you're going to eat your words eventually right? This is the same bullshit console gamers were spouting last gen. And 2 years in PC games already looked and ran much better.

3 years in, they featured hundreds of dynamic lights vs 2, thousands of particles vs none, 4 times the texture resolution, a ton of texture effects that were non-existant on consoles, AF, WAY better AA, WAY better LOD levels and no or little pop-in, millisecond load times, way better view distance (And FOV to boot), more AI, better pathfinding, more accurate physics, 1080p+ 60+ FPS, etc, etc.

I don't understand why you do this to yourselves. The PS4 is banging right now. No doubt about it. But this is a losing battle for you, so why even fight it?

Not to mention that I doubt the settings are truly all high. EA said the same thing about BF4 and that was a pack of lies. We'll see I guess.

Take a deep breath and step away from the computer for a minute.

 

[Lulubop]

Ultra = 2012, believe!

 

[Kinthalis]

Ultra most likely = SSAO + PhysX + SSAA. Probably no change in lighting or textures, aside from some more light shafts.

Actually it's probably HBAO+, Physx + TXAA + probably higher quality lighting (if they are to be believed, which they aren't).

 

[Gemüsepizza]

*At a higher res and framerate

Right. Because all PCs are the same and have 1000+ € components inside.

The majority of PC players aren't going to be running it <900p and <30fps if they can hit high

First of all, the PS4 version is = 900p and = 30 fps, not <. Second, how the hell would you know that?

 

[Kinthalis]

Take a deep breath and step away from the computer for a minute.

I'm not upset. Re-reading, I don't think I came off as upset. I'm simply elucidating the original poster, about the silliness of his statement.

If anyone is upset, it's probably him. Don't see the need to go off calling people salty for no reason, unless you're mad about something.

 

[Apophis2036]

It's about the PR spin, baby. No one actually believes it.

Let's wait until we see the first batch of exclusive games that werent built with incomplete dev kits / dev tools before we write the consoles off shall we. For first gen games built on ridiculous deadlines on ever changing devkits I think Ryse, Killzone and Infamous are great looking games and hold up against anything on PC.

 

[Kinthalis]

Right. Because all PCs are the same and have 1000+ € components inside.

Because you need $1,000 components to beat a PS4?? Lol.

 

[Some Nobody]

You do know you're going to eat your words eventually right? This is the same bullshit console gamers were spouting last gen. And 2 years in PC games already looked and ran much better.

3 years in, they featured hundreds of dynamic lights vs 2, thousands of particles vs none, 4 times the texture resolution, a ton of texture effects that were non-existant on consoles, AF, WAY better AA, WAY better LOD levels and no or little pop-in, millisecond load times, way better view distance (And FOV to boot), more AI, better pathfinding, more accurate physics, 1080p+ 60+ FPS, etc, etc.

I don't understand why you do this to yourselves. The PS4 is banging right now. No doubt about it. But this is a losing battle for you, so why even fight it?

Not to mention that I doubt the settings are truly all high. EA said the same thing about BF4 and that was a pack of lies. We'll see I guess.

Only battle I care about winning is with my wallet. My motherboard is outdated so I'd need to completely overhaul my PC damn near, so I'll ride with high/medium/low or whatever until the next gen. IQ's important but not THAT important.

 

[Raonak]

Nice, my watch dogs hype has been slowly reigniting again - not sure if that's because i want it or because there hasn't been much big PS4 releases since launch, sans infamous.

 

[fluffydelusions]

Ultra = 2012, believe!

 

[Gareth Bale]

I think AC IV has a 'very high' setting for some of the graphics options.

But obviously this is a different engine and a different game so that probably doesn't mean anything.

 

[Havel]

Actually it's probably HBAO+, Physx + TXAA + probably higher quality lighting (if they are to be believed, which they aren't).

I wonder what 'higher quality lighting' means in their book. Insane amount of light shafts and overdone HDR are not really what I have in mind, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Because you need $1,000 components to beat a PS4?? Lol.

Well it depends on the game. Are there any Watch_Dogs benchmarks out there already? I wouldn't be suprised if you need a not so cheap PC to play Watch_Dogs with higher settings than the PS4 version has.

 

[Rivitur]

I can't wait to play high settings watch dogs on my ps5/xboxtwo

 

[Some Nobody]

Nice, my watch dogs hype has been slowly reigniting again - not sure if that's because i want it or because there hasn't been much big PS4 releases since launch, sans infamous.

Not gonna lie, they picked a very good time to release this. Haven't touched my PS4 since inFamous and after I finish this I probably won't touch it again until October.

 

[Afrodium]

You do know you're going to eat your words eventually right? This is the same bullshit console gamers were spouting last gen. And 2 years in PC games already looked and ran much better.

3 years in, they featured hundreds of dynamic lights vs 2, thousands of particles vs none, 4 times the texture resolution, a ton of texture effects that were non-existant on consoles, AF, WAY better AA, WAY better LOD levels and no or little pop-in, millisecond load times, way better view distance (And FOV to boot), more AI, better pathfinding, more accurate physics, 1080p+ 60+ FPS, etc, etc.

I don't understand why you do this to yourselves. The PS4 is banging right now. No doubt about it. But this is a losing battle for you, so why even fight it?

Not to mention that I doubt the settings are truly all high. EA said the same thing about BF4 and that was a pack of lies. We'll see I guess.

Woah, calm down man. I think you misunderstood me. What I'm saying is that despite the fact that the current gen-consoles aren't all that powerful when compared to the average gaming PC, it ultimately doesn't matter because the majority of games will be developing with the consoles in mind. This is, ultimately, shitty for people who invested a ton of money in their gaming rig because most games for the coming years won't require that horsepower. Yes, the absolute best versions of games will be on beastly PCs, but the progress we see will be significantly held back by the fact that the PS4 and Xbox One are just not super powerful.

I honestly don't care is someone plays games on a PC, PS4, or a goddamn iPhone, so get that console wars shit out of here. Last-gen there were many complaints about the PS3 and 360 bottle necking the development of video games. This feeling was alleviated in recent years because the generation was ending, but now it's about to start all over again.

 

[Kinthalis]

Only battle I care about winning is with my wallet. My motherboard is outdated so I'd need to completely overhaul my PC damn near, so I'll ride with high/medium/low or whatever until the next gen. IQ's important but not THAT important.

The money you'd save over not having to ay for multiplayer and cheaper games would probably do better than even things out.

But whatever floats your boat man, I don't know why you're trying to throw in another entirely different discussion into this. I was responding to his comment, not saying that you personally should go PC.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

Because you need $1,000 components to beat a PS4?? Lol.

The utter delusion regarding the PS4's power is insane. Hopefully it dies off soon.

 

[Krisprolls]

Take a deep breath and step away from the computer for a minute.

It would hurt less if they finally understood a console is not a pc and it's pointless comparing GPUs and CPUs.

Low level APIs, single spec optimizations or hardware / os / driver differences matter as much as raw GPU/CPU spec.

 

[10k]

Ultra most likely = SSAO + PhysX + SSAA. Probably no change in lighting or textures, aside from some more light shafts.

Usually ultra uses up more VRAM for textures, and you'll get HBAO+, SSAO, SSAA and PhysX.

 

[CyberPunked]

Right. Because all PCs are the same and have 1000+ € components inside.

Ah, another arbitrary number that console players pull out of there asses...

 

[Gemüsepizza]

The utter delusion regarding the PS4's power is insane. Hopefully it dies off soon.

Let's just wait for benchmarks, ok? But then please don't come crying about how the PC port of Watch_Dogs is sooo bad and how Ubisoft sucks.

Ah, another arbitrary number that console players pull out of there asses...

Excuse me? He was the one pulling shit out of his ass when he implicated that you automatically have higher resolution and higher framerates on PCs. Just take a look at the steam hardware survey. The PC isn't a static platform. There are countless different configurations, and Watch_Dogs isn't automatically better on a PC. It depends on your specific configuration.

 

[Kinthalis]

Well it depends on the game. Are there any Watch_Dogs benchmarks out there already? I wouldn't be suprised if you need a not so cheap PC to play Watch_Dogs with higher settings than the PS4 version has.

You'd probably need slightly better hardware than a PS4 to play at slightly better graphics/performance than a PS4.

That's probably in the $600 range.

 

[SMOK3Y]

Kinthalis, always good for a lol

 

[Kinthalis]

Woah, calm down man. I think you misunderstood me. What I'm saying is that despite the fact that the current gen-consoles aren't all that powerful when compared to the average gaming PC, it ultimately doesn't matter because the majority of games will be developing with the consoles in mind. This is, ultimately, shitty for people who invested a ton of money in their gaming rig because most games for the coming years won't require that horsepower. Yes, the absolute best versions of games will be on beastly PCs, but the progress we see will be significantly held back by the fact that the PS4 and Xbox One are just not super powerful.

I honestly don't care is someone plays games on a PC, PS4, or a goddamn iPhone, so get that console wars shit out of here. Last-gen there were many complaints about the PS3 and 360 bottle necking the development of video games. This feeling was alleviated in recent years because the generation was ending, but now it's about to start all over again.

Man, YOU started the console war bullshit here calling PC gamers "Salty". I simply responded to you explaining why people who thought the same thing last gen were wrong then, and are likely wrong now.

 

[leadbelly]

Yup same here.

I get it that devs don't want to undersell the next-gen versions of these games, but we have seen with games like Battlefield that it will most likely be equivalent to medium settings.

This completely different game using a completely different engine, developed for hardware that was not finalised and with immature tools, wasn't equivalent to high settings, therefore this totally unrelated game couldn't possibly be on high settings.

Maybe you should just wait.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

You'd probably need slightly better hardware than a PS4 to play at slightly better graphics/performance than a PS4.

That's probably in the $600 range.

Ok. So you think you can play Watch_Dogs at more than 900p / 30fps / high settings on a ~$600 PC? I doubt it. But we will see pretty soon when the benchmarks are out.

 

[Wishmaster92]

I want ultra settings for my ps4 version at 120fps.

Spoiler

jk

 

[Some Nobody]

The money you'd save over not having to ay for multiplayer and cheaper games would probably do better than even things out.

But whatever, floats your boat man, I don't know why you're trying to throw in another entirely different discussion into this. I was responding to his comment, not saying that you personally should go PC.

I don't use multiplayer so that excuse is...y'know, I've seen this discussion before and there's no point. All that matters are the games.


Come to that, Ubisoft tweeting this feels pointless. I care less about high settings and more about 1080p, honestly.

 

[Nethaniah]

Lots of salty console warriors in this thread.

 

[Kinthalis]

This completely different game using a completely different engine, developed for hardware that was not finalised and with immature tools, wasn't equivalent to high settings, therefore this totally unrelated game couldn't possibly be on high settings.

Maybe you should just wait.

Yeah, I have a feeling this is going to be the console game mantra from now on.

Just wait! You just wait, you guys. just, just wait! The API's will get better and the coding even CLOSER to the metal, you, you... just wait!

 

[Kinthalis]

Kinthalis, always good for a lol

SMOK3Y always good for.... eh... hold on, I'll think of something...

 

[Naminator]

This completely different game using a completely different engine, developed for hardware that was not finalised and with immature tools, wasn't equivalent to high settings, therefore this totally unrelated game couldn't possibly be on high settings.

Maybe you should just wait.

Thats whole lot of excuses.

 

[Bluekaveli]

Don't believe their lies.

 

[Afrodium]

Man, YOU started the console war bullshit here calling PC gamers "Salty". I simply responded to you explaining why people who thought the same thing last gen were wrong then, and are likely wrong now.

I said they're GOING to be salty. As in, when someone who spent $1000 on a gaming rig plays a game and its high settings look like what we've seen of Watch Dogs, he will be pissed because his computer can handle something that looks way better. You're acting like I shot your dog for saying that consumers would be mad that they're going to be sold products optimized for something far less capable than what they've paid for.