Watch Dogs PC Modders Find Hidden "E3" Settings, Improve Performance - Update

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Glad to see this article is back up.

Are Watch Dogs owners still raising hell about this? I sincerely hope so. This isn't something that should just die and be swept under the rug. Ubisoft needs to be constantly questioned until it gives a proper response about why it downgraded the PC version (we know that Twitter update is a load of bull).

Side question: How are the quality of other Ubisoft PC ports on average? I don't own many Ubisoft games (any that I do own are deep in my Steam backlog), so I have no clue about the quality of Ubisoft ports. If Ubisoft ports are generally crap, then this might really be a case of severe incompetence. If Ubisoft has had decent ports, then this is most likely an indication of malice. I'd be willing to bet money on the latter though; Ubisoft has a history of treating PC gamers badly and its relationship with Sony raises a few red flags.

iseko:
[quote="dragongit" post="7.852945.21098825"]
It's like building a perfect house. Then saying it is too high. But instead of just removing a level. Every level needs to lose 30cm. It's insane...

K, that's probably the greatest analogy for writing a program ever. I feel like I learned a semester of computer coding in 5 seconds.

OT:
I don't see how having similar graphics between systems is better PR than being exposed of purposefully downgrading a specific system's version. Probably the greatest of the AAA industry's problems; the marketing contractors have more control of a game than the actual developers.

UBISOFT.....UBISOFT! The liars that are saying that "too much resource cost" to make females an option in the new Assassin's Creed game.

LIARS!

They're lying through their teeth in stating that they didn't "downgrade" the game when one version is found to be a complete upgrade of the game, and that version is labeled with their E3 presentations. Despicable douchebags, Ubisoft is.

Rabid_meese:

Ultratwinkie:

Rabid_meese:
The settings in question that were in the code weren't there for launch probably because of stability issues. The mod that fellow released does, if what I've read, contain files that he also created.

And as for that line of code that's going around - bullshit. A screenshot is literally useless. That could be from anything from anywhere. A little more proof is required before demonizing a company.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=838538&page=21
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=4843210#post4843210
image

Its a real screenshot from the shader files, specifically deferredambient.inc.fx located in the shaders.dat file. A compressed file that can be unpacked into readable files. Anyone can go and unpack that file and see it. Its been confirmed.

A simple google search can find it.

"Hey, this guy is saying screenshots are meaningless bullshit. Lets show him he's wrong by showing him more screenshots"

Again. A screenshot of the code means nothing. Is there proof this is from the game Watch Dogs? How would this code have leaked? A few people have brought up that the code, in this manner, would not be shown unless Watch Dogs had its source code leaked as well. If it was leaked, where is the proof that the people put in the comment "for the PC, who cares".

Authenticity is something that is nearly impossible to prove in this manner, short of cracking the code yourself and taking a look. And even so - what is the context of the line? How are you sure that it wasn't a joke? Can you prove that these files were not embedded into the code for a future HDR download, and not enabled by default because it needed optimization work? The default PC launch has been plagued by performance issues, which seem to be mimicked with this mod, as well as even further drops on machines that aren't high end.

There is no definitive proof of the authenticity or proof of malice. The downgrade could have happened for a plethora of reasons - from optimized performance, aesthetic choices, or for later optimization purposes, and a single screenshot does not make for damning proof in an age where anyone can edit anything.

They assumed it was compiled in another part of the game. This is the shaders, where that doesn't happen. The code is right there and confirmed by multiple modders. Its all there in a google search.

We also know its the shaders because the mod only effects the shaders, and the post processing. Its the shaders that are missing in the final release.

And by the way, how did you know that "feministWhore" wasn't a joke in Dead Island? An insulting joke is still insulting. Especially when the PC version runs like shit.

Anyone can unpack the game and see it. Its proven. if it wasn't, neogaf would have caught it. Steam forums would have caught it. Even the news would have caught it.

Rozalia1:

And speaking with the context of the other posts...why would they (the console division) when doing so well resort to sabotage that if found out would get them in very big trouble and reverse all the goodwill they've created?
Real life doesn't always result in Dick Dastardly stoping to cheat.

Noone that commits fraud expect to be caught either. people are short sited, even people working for big companies.

Real life is always somone stopping to cheat, because humans are egoistic creatures with lack of foreshadowing which becomes clear in retrospect, but by then its too late.

then once again, i never said there was a conspiracy, merely pointed out you were wrong about the console companies doing fine.

Milky1985:

This has no bearing on the main point. The point being argued was that the WiiU architecture was different and hard to work with (which is btw something devs that actually work with it say isn't true, its not as easy as the PS4/XBone, but is better than PS3 by a long way) . My point is that hte PS3 was a lot lot harder to work with .. and people still made games for it. Its power is nothing to do with this discussion, its the architecture.

well, yes, in that context PS3 was the worst platform to develop for due to its architecture. From what developers said that i read the reason WiiU is hard to develop for isnt its architecture but rather Nintendo being dicks and refusing to cooperate while MS/Sony is trying to help them with stuff like driver updates ect.

BrotherRool:

Also Steam sales (and multiplatform PC sales in general) are a small fraction of console sales which is why PC keeps getting loaded with cruddy ports.

this is wrong and heres why:
every single sales counting method we have counts ONLY retail sales. this is mostly because online sales cannot be counted (for example steam refuses to release numbers to the point of signing developers under NDAs to not tell anyone). while consoles are dominated by retail sales, PC market is dominated by digital sales, which means that majority of PC sales simply get ignored, giving the look of consoles selling better. What is better is to look at profits by platform that exist in some companies financial reports. For example in EA financial reports for last few years they had more revenue from PC than from consoles (combined). so, logically, it must either sell more or for more money. since as you pointed out PC games are generally cheaper, this means higher sales.

as for that ars technia steam gauge, their method is actually more innovative than i expected, but its still just guessing and extrapolation. and it completely ignores deleted accounts or accounts that are set to private (default setting).

Guitarmasterx7:

On topic, I haven't played this game, but I hear the problems run a bit deeper than the graphics. I've seen a video poking fun at all the problems this game has and most of it was relating more to shoddy AI and weird clipping issues.

well there is the thing like Mafia I has done many things better in 2002 than watch dogs did in 2014

TerribleAssassin:

Odds are they won't have done, someone will have de-compiled and added it as a joke but because the Internet, people think that it's definitely the code in-game and people who know stuff about compilers are wrong.

it was a comment in shader code that isnt compiled and merely put in .dat archive. this was explained in this thread. even the exact filename was pointed out so if you got the game you can go and check it out.

Rabid_meese:

"Hey, this guy is saying screenshots are meaningless bullshit. Lets show him he's wrong by showing him more screenshots"

Again. A screenshot of the code means nothing. Is there proof this is from the game Watch Dogs? How would this code have leaked? A few people have brought up that the code, in this manner, would not be shown unless Watch Dogs had its source code leaked as well. If it was leaked, where is the proof that the people put in the comment "for the PC, who cares".

he pointed to exact filename where the code can be found. go and find that file and check for yourself. what do you want some govenrment approved copy of the code in the file posted on forums or something?

truckspond:
Wow... Ubisoft PR has obviously not seen the numerous comparison videos between the graphics at release and the graphics with the minor tweaks to the config file that make up the entirety of the "Mod". Using the word "Mod" implies that something was added to the game. This is not the case here - Nothing is added, the stuff is just taken out of hiding

wrong. twice.
first of all, the mod does not just tweak config files, but also introduced thep ersons own created files.
Mod is shorthand for modification. it does NOT imply that anything was added. it implies that something was modified - the config files.

Strazdas:

BrotherRool:

Also Steam sales (and multiplatform PC sales in general) are a small fraction of console sales which is why PC keeps getting loaded with cruddy ports.

this is wrong and heres why:
every single sales counting method we have counts ONLY retail sales. this is mostly because online sales cannot be counted (for example steam refuses to release numbers to the point of signing developers under NDAs to not tell anyone). while consoles are dominated by retail sales, PC market is dominated by digital sales, which means that majority of PC sales simply get ignored, giving the look of consoles selling better. What is better is to look at profits by platform that exist in some companies financial reports. For example in EA financial reports for last few years they had more revenue from PC than from consoles (combined). so, logically, it must either sell more or for more money. since as you pointed out PC games are generally cheaper, this means higher sales.

as for that ars technia steam gauge, their method is actually more innovative than i expected, but its still just guessing and extrapolation. and it completely ignores deleted accounts or accounts that are set to private (default setting).

Steam Gauge isn't affected by deleted accounts or accounts set to private. It would only be affected by that if people who set their accounts to private are significantly more likely to buy games than people who don't, and we're talking a 50% increase in game sales or something to have any kind of noticeable improvement.

Whats more the vast majority of accounts are not set to private. Out of the 100,000 accounts they examine each day 90,000 of them are publicly viewable.

Finally they have checked with publicly known figures and contacted developers privately to find out their figures and in each case their estimation has been accurate. For all intents and purposes the steam gauge can be treated as reliable data.

Stats brain is also supposed to be a very reliable source of statistics (although they don't publish their sources, they only name them) and their statistics confirm that PC sales are a small proportion compared to console sales.

sagitel:
Whell the game actually runs BETTER when those stuff are in it. Its just idiotic. And the reasin bethesda gets a free pass on people fixing their games is that they dont lock you out. They know you want to change the game and they allow you. (They even released a development kit for crying out loud. You dont see ubi does that kind of thing) and im not gonna talk about the shitty drm ubisoft uses.

Ps. I've never heard of locked stuff inside of skyrim's code. Can you give me some sources to read on?

I didn't knew the game runs better. In that case... like you guys said, it's mind-boggling. I used to think the Ubi guys just suck at PC optimization, but maybe they have some mental illness on top of that...

p.s. There are several mods at Nexus, that unlock dialog lines with NPCs, excluded from the game for no reason. On STEP's page there are some .ini tweaks that would unlock you a few graphical goodies as well, nothing as extreme as WD tho'. And that's just what comes on top of my mind.

Being the kind of person that I am (IE, I don't care about graphics, I care about gameplay and story) I up to this point haven't cared enough about the Watch_Dogs graphics scandal to comment.

I still don't think graphics matter that much, but I can see where PC gamers would be pissed that their port would be hit like this.

I've loved Ubisoft's stuff for the last few years since about 2010, and even I think this has been a bad month- idiotic morons talking about polygons for female characters, this whole thing, their E3 being rather boring, but that applied to E3 as a whole- not a great time to be a fan.

Still, at least people now have the option to get the mod so, assuming Ubi wises up and puts this out for the public beyond the mod, people will FINALLY shut up about how graphics are more important than the story or the gameplay.

I mean... Just what?

They had to know this was going to happen. They HAD to know it. Was this part of some deranged plan? Did they think no modder was going to look too closely at the code of an extremely popular new release?

What the fuck?

So their plan seems to have been to:

Step 1: Release a shining E3 trailer showcasing your graphics.
Step 2: Intentionally handicap your own game, despite this creating an immense amount of negative PR due to step 1.
Step 3: Make sure that the code proving what you just did is easily available, thus creating even more negative PR and completely destroying your reputation.
Step 4: Ensure that steps 1-3 only negatively effect your company and create no benefits whatsoever.
Step 5: ??????
Step 6: Dont make profit since you apparently hate doing that.

What the hell did they think was going to happen? This is a decade long multibillion dollar company, how the hell are they so bloody incompetent?

Use_Imagination_here:
I mean... Just what?

They had to know this was going to happen. They HAD to know it. Was this part of some deranged plan? Did they think no modder was going to look too closely at the code of an extremely popular new release?

What the fuck?

So their plan seems to have been to:

Step 1: Release a shining E3 trailer showcasing your graphics.
Step 2: Intentionally handicap your own game, despite this creating an immense amount of negative PR due to step 1.
Step 3: Make sure that the code proving what you just did is easily available, thus creating even more negative PR and completely destroying your reputation.
Step 4: Ensure that steps 1-3 only negatively effect your company and create no benefits whatsoever.
Step 5: ??????
Step 6: Dont make profit since you apparently hate doing that.

What the hell did they think was going to happen? This is a decade long multibillion dollar company, how the hell are they so bloody incompetent?

The same reasons for why every single empire ever fell. They became complacent and stopped caring. Then didn't react in time when the many problems started biting them in the ass.

Strazdas:

well, yes, in that context PS3 was the worst platform to develop for due to its architecture. From what developers said that i read the reason WiiU is hard to develop for isnt its architecture but rather Nintendo being dicks and refusing to cooperate while MS/Sony is trying to help them with stuff like driver updates ect.

Odd this as there are also plenty of reports from developers of Nintendo being helpful and actually changing a lot from last time, with stuff like unity support (and paying for the license for devs), saying one is not helping while the other two are just doesn't seem to hold water. But this is STILL ignoring the point that last time the PS3 was the worst to develop for.... and people still did. Using "its harder to develop for" as the argument in this case doesn't hold water because of previous examples and non of your arguments have actually managed to cover that. Instead you have argued different points and shifted the goalposts.

So I see in the new update Ubisoft is sticking with the 'The stuff you did makes it worse because we say its worse' bullshit.

Yes, the mod does indeed make the game less enjoyable. Not because it makes it worse, its because it makes people realize how much they wish they could have not given you any money.

Rabid_meese:

Ultratwinkie:

Rabid_meese:
The settings in question that were in the code weren't there for launch probably because of stability issues. The mod that fellow released does, if what I've read, contain files that he also created.

And as for that line of code that's going around - bullshit. A screenshot is literally useless. That could be from anything from anywhere. A little more proof is required before demonizing a company.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=838538&page=21
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=4843210#post4843210
image

Its a real screenshot from the shader files, specifically deferredambient.inc.fx located in the shaders.dat file. A compressed file that can be unpacked into readable files. Anyone can go and unpack that file and see it. Its been confirmed.

A simple google search can find it.

"Hey, this guy is saying screenshots are meaningless bullshit. Lets show him he's wrong by showing him more screenshots"

Again. A screenshot of the code means nothing. Is there proof this is from the game Watch Dogs? How would this code have leaked? A few people have brought up that the code, in this manner, would not be shown unless Watch Dogs had its source code leaked as well. If it was leaked, where is the proof that the people put in the comment "for the PC, who cares".

Authenticity is something that is nearly impossible to prove in this manner, short of cracking the code yourself and taking a look. And even so - what is the context of the line? How are you sure that it wasn't a joke? Can you prove that these files were not embedded into the code for a future HDR download, and not enabled by default because it needed optimization work? The default PC launch has been plagued by performance issues, which seem to be mimicked with this mod, as well as even further drops on machines that aren't high end.

There is no definitive proof of the authenticity or proof of malice. The downgrade could have happened for a plethora of reasons - from optimized performance, aesthetic choices, or for later optimization purposes, and a single screenshot does not make for damning proof in an age where anyone can edit anything.

Also we don't know the context of this shader. This may be a shader that isn't used in the PC version (you still need to put a default value there to make sure it compiles properly) or is only used on minimal settings - in which case - who cares.

Also since there ARE super good PC shaders in place that are activated by the mod is it evident the shader writing DID care enough to write them.

You can't have it both ways, either they are too lazy to write good shaders or they disabled the good shader because consoles.

This whole thing is so great! I hope it teaches devs/publishers a few lessons (and hopefully the right ones).

They should really just have made the old stuff available as a "ultra" or "future" setting. Hell, they could even have patched the option in after a week or so and added a disclaimer that it may severely impact game performance. That way they wouldn't have had to fear "worse" reviews if it'd run like shit because the reviews would already be out. They would also have gained some good-will from PC gamers and most importantly: It would have been good publicity to push the game sales a little more.

They could even have bragged about "iconic future-oriented design blabla marketingBS".

Instead, they fucked up. I'm sure heads will roll, especially the ones that commented that code (if the screen is real). And then they might just again forget the lesson like they normally do -.-

Oh my god, are they freaking serious?
Lowers performance, despite the fact that many peoples performance has improved upon getting this mod.

Ubisoft, you are worse than EA now.
Congrats.

The dev team is completely dedicated to getting the most out of each platform, so the notion that we would actively downgrade quality is contrary to everything we've set out to achieve. We test and optimize our games for each platform on which they're released, striving for the best possible quality.

I'm calling complete and utter bullshit on this statement. Anyone who has seen Totalbiscuits video about the game and the fact that he couldn't get a consistent framerate at even 60fps on the higher settings knows what I mean. If that's their idea of optimizing then they have some mentally handicapped monkeys writing their code for them.

Oh God that response...

Some pretty basic features like more fully dynamic lighting where enabled by this mod. There are very few users reporting any performance differences at all, some even talk about performance gains. The modder has not added any new files but he did have to do a decent amount of compiling, tweaking, digging and fiddling to get these all to the surface. It wasn't as simple as turning a 0 to a 1 in a config file so it looks like this code was deliberately abandoned and buried at some point. The lack of inclusion of some features is kind of baffling though, genuinely head scratching, since an armature modder could make them functional in a matter of weeks. But there is no denying the truth. What has been shown in pretty conclusive and damming.

There are two scenarios here, both of them reflect Ubisoft really badly:

Total Incompetence and Disregard The first explanation for this event is abject stupidity and laziness. At some point a crunch time came for the Watch_Doge team and There features were seen as 'unfinished' or taking a little extra work. Instead of doing any kind of special testing or optimization for the PC version of the game they simply disabled these features and went of the console testing of the game, making the 'ultra' settings simply overly inflated LOD settings numbers (like taking shadow-map size far beyond what you can really see or what the engine wants to do). THe Ubisoft team was either too lazy or was given so few resources that the PC version was effectively scrapped in favor of just 'getting it out of the door'. The Uplay problems also seem to attest to this, as does the MASSIVE pop-in.

Malice and false Parity The other explanation is that someone, somewhere thought that having extra and different effects on the PC that were impossible to enable on the consoles was bad for their partners. The PC port team was told to make a game that was on par in terms of effects to the console version and not to spend any time and energy improving it, but to indeed remove any settings (no matter how complete or functional) that made the game look leaps ahead of the console version. Whilst i usually don't like to buy into conspiracies, the level of completeness of some of these features and the fact they were simply disabled is a giant red flag.

Which is it Ubisoft? Are you too lazy, incompetent and stupid to make a decent PC game or are you simply morally bankrupt enough to deliberately make your games worse? Because the evidence can't really point to anything else.

So their response was basically "It COULD have been bad for the game".

They don't have a fucking clue. It's just damage control.

Oh and once again they're treating us like idiots thinking we'll swallow their bullshit

I've made my decision to boycott this game entirely.

I feel like most of the people doing the reporting on the game's performance with the mod are using much better computers than I am, because when I tried the mod I noticed major performance issues . This doesn't surprise me really, as it makes more sense that AAA titles are in fact not optimized for it's highest settings that a minority of players can use, and instead optimized for a more middle of the road gaming rig.

I feel really torn on Ubisoft at the moment. On the one hand, I feel like they're getting the raw end of the stick when it comes to PR lately. On the other hand, I find the games they make boring as hell, as they've managed to distill everything I hate about Sandbox games into all their major titles. Some irrational part of me actually wants the negative press to get focused on a company I like so so I'm at least defending something that doesn't put me to sleep.

That's probably a lie.

So apparently a comprehensive Settings menu is an entirely foreign concept to the devs at Ubisoft?

It's funny how they can even defend their actions with "higher quality = decreased performance."

Ultratwinkie:
Found some code in W_D:

image

Reddit is planning to flood ubisoft with refunds, chargebacks, lawsuits, and a shit load of other shit. They are now trying to get to every single executive they can find and flood their inbox with complaints. I personally hope they hit Ubisoft where it hurts.

If Ubisoft gets slapped with a lawsuit and loses their W_D profits, I'd be so happy.

Or of course a huge multiplatform boycott that sends the message that consumers aren't idiots and they should stop lying to their customers.

Seriously, WHO DOES THIS? There will be those players who don't even know what code is or how to access it but certainly the modders (who look through everything anyway) would find this. That was a shot across the bow to all hardcore PC gamers and now they're on a march. Whoever put that in the code is likely gonna get a talking to.

Meanwhile, I'mma just watch. Wasn't going to pick up Watch Dogs anyway so I'm just an amused bystander.

Heaven forbid they give PC users the option to lower their graphics settings if it preforms poorly. I mean it isn't like we haven't been doing that since forever...

Steven Bogos:
Snip

I suspect this situation is something akin to on-disk DLC.

Ubi downgrades the PC release so that it has visual parity with the console versions, then 2-3 months down the line releases a small DLC/patch (perhaps even free) that upgrades the PC version.

I hope to get access to this at some point. Haven't played WD in a week or so. Would be neat to come back to it when it's all shiney.

Steven Bogos:
unused render settings that were deactivated for a variety of reasons, including possible impacts on visual fidelity, stability, performance and overall gameplay quality. Modders are usually creative and passionate players, and while we appreciate their enthusiasm, the mod in question (which uses those old settings) subjectively enhances the game's visual fidelity in certain situations but also can have various negative impacts. Those could range from performance issues, to difficulty in reading the environment in order to appreciate the gameplay, to potentially making the game less enjoyable or even unstable.

TotalBiscuit, while angry at ubiSoft for hiding the settings, actually completely agreed with this reasoning. Primarily, as much as the Bokeh depth-of-field makes screenshots pretty, the foreground focusing is SO sharp that if there's a garbage can next to you the camera focuses on it, making it near impossible to see ANYTHING else on screen. He recommended turn it on for pretty, off for gameplay.

What I'm trying to figure out is what kind of overworked idiot makes a comment in their own code bashing on PC gaming in the released version? It's fine to have an opinion on something like that, but people are going to read the comments in the code whether they are programmers or not.

To repeat a phrase I've heard before...

"Either they're evil or incompetent. Which is worse"?

Sadly, those 4 million sales they've had probably means the only lesson they've been taught is they can get away with it.

*reads Update 2*

Bullshit.

It would've been believable if the game actually ran better while unmodified, but the fact that the mod actually IMPROVES performance just shows how full of shit Ubisoft is right now.

Also, no one answered my last question: How good are Ubisoft PC ports on average? Don't take into account if they use DRM, I just want to know their performance.

Trishbot:
To repeat a phrase I've heard before...

"Either they're evil or incompetent. Which is worse"?

Sadly, those 4 million sales they've had probably means the only lesson they've been taught is they can get away with it.

bad publicity is never going to benefit them tough, so they better think it twice before doing like this again, because honestly, this smells like a parity deal, the mod hardly affects performance, so either their internal tests were horribly inaccurate or like a said, they handicapped the game on purpose, likely to please one of the console manufacturers, because now that ubi has their own digital distribution platform and even using just steam, they get a bigger cut out of every sale compared to console sales, in fact any sale made via Uplay means ALL the cash goes to them

Rabid_meese:

Ultratwinkie:

Rabid_meese:
The settings in question that were in the code weren't there for launch probably because of stability issues. The mod that fellow released does, if what I've read, contain files that he also created.

And as for that line of code that's going around - bullshit. A screenshot is literally useless. That could be from anything from anywhere. A little more proof is required before demonizing a company.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=838538&page=21
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=4843210#post4843210
image

Its a real screenshot from the shader files, specifically deferredambient.inc.fx located in the shaders.dat file. A compressed file that can be unpacked into readable files. Anyone can go and unpack that file and see it. Its been confirmed.

A simple google search can find it.

"Hey, this guy is saying screenshots are meaningless bullshit. Lets show him he's wrong by showing him more screenshots"

Again. A screenshot of the code means nothing. Is there proof this is from the game Watch Dogs? How would this code have leaked? A few people have brought up that the code, in this manner, would not be shown unless Watch Dogs had its source code leaked as well. If it was leaked, where is the proof that the people put in the comment "for the PC, who cares".

Authenticity is something that is nearly impossible to prove in this manner, short of cracking the code yourself and taking a look. And even so - what is the context of the line? How are you sure that it wasn't a joke? Can you prove that these files were not embedded into the code for a future HDR download, and not enabled by default because it needed optimization work? The default PC launch has been plagued by performance issues, which seem to be mimicked with this mod, as well as even further drops on machines that aren't high end.

There is no definitive proof of the authenticity or proof of malice. The downgrade could have happened for a plethora of reasons - from optimized performance, aesthetic choices, or for later optimization purposes, and a single screenshot does not make for damning proof in an age where anyone can edit anything.

Well he did just tell you how to look at the file yourself. What more do you want? Go look it yourself if you don't believe him. If you're not willing to do that, then you can't say he's wrong, because you didn't bother to check. It's up to you to prove that image is faked, not him. He even told you where to look. There is literally nothing more he can do to prove it's real. In this instance, if you really don't believe him, you're going to have to check yourself, in the unmodded game files.

Also, authenticity is not impossible to prove in this case. There are people who could easily explain that code, what it did, how it's linked and anything else you'd like to ask. I could buy that it could be for a future HDR download if Ubisoft wern't so adamant that they didn't kneecap the PC version or that using this mod will break the game, which it doesn't and we all know it's been downgraded from the original.

Besides, there presumably wouldn't be an HDR download in the works if they're adamant there isn't a downgrade from the E3 version to begin with, an HDR download that brings it inline with E3 would be admitting they're wrong and lying.

Futhermore, of course there are going to be drops on machines that aren't high end with this mod enabled. What sort of statement is that? This mod enables higher graphics settings. If you can't run it well on (for arguments sake) "High" graphics settings, it should be obvious it's going to run even worse on "Ultra". For the people that /can/ run Ultra, people have been reporting better performance than before.

There's almost no explanation Ubisoft could give that would make this look good for them. Even if we take Ubisoft completely at their word that they deactivated these features because they lead to problems with game performance, caused glitches, etc, it would still mean they spent time on features that they never used (for a significantly delayed game) which they scrapped instead of fixing, even though they had already advertised them as part of the game. I'm sure this type of thing sometimes happens in game development, but not to this degree for a title advertised so much on graphical fidelity to begin with.

Best case scenario they look like a studio that got far ahead of themselves and accidentally misjudged their own competence at getting their own features to work properly, and then didn't bother to fully remove the things that they never got working. And that's giving them the benefit of the doubt.

If the features even work partially, Ubisoft should have made them available in the game's settings, rather than try to hide them completely.

In my honest opinion; I think that after an already lengthy delay to get the game out the door, some higher-up made the decision, upon discovery that the game couldn't run the way they wanted on the consoles, ditched efforts to get the higher end effects and features working on PC. I've run the mod and I can tell you my performance is still the same variety of ass as before, but there are plenty of effects that make the game looks nicer, many of them very glitchy and clearly unfinished.

It's all very frustrating to think about.

My two cents.

N

Piorn:
OOOOOH NOOOOO, They used the hacking knowledge from Watchdogs and time-travel-pirated the Watchdogs HD version that was supposed to come out next year!
Or the HD DLC that was supposed to come out next year!

Also, I don't think it's malicious intent or anything. I wouldn't be surprised if the Console Manufacturers paid them quite some money to make it look like the current console generation isn't already obsolete Hardwarewise, and somehow produces the same graphics as PC.
That backfired nicely.

That would be malicious intent. Being bribed might as well be anyway.

so new the update from ubisoft basicalyl read as "yes we know there are settings that improve graphics and performance but we still dont want you to use them because we said so". yeah this wont end well for Watch_Doge.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here