As a future Wii U owner, I remain (probably) unaffected by this. I was expecting my graphics to look worse.
-Continues with day.-
-Continues with day.-
Jimquisition: Watch_Dogs: A Vertical Slice Of Steaming Bullshots
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Wondering if the planned episodes will address the hypocrisy I've noticed in the Jimquisition of late. But that's probably hoping for too much.
This is my most appreciated episode of Jimquisition yet. This is my biggest pet peeve with the gaming industry, and it's not just because I'm a graphics whore. Let's not forget that it's not simply graphics that get overpromised in bullshot trailers and "real-time" demos. Not the the final game was bad, but go ahead and compare the AI in the retail Last of Us vs. the early demo. Someone from Naughty Dog actually replied to a message board comment prior to release that all the AI in the early trailer would be present in the retail game and "has only improved." Well, that's just a lie. That's even worse than overpromising with a "target", that's fucking lying through your teeth (or fingers, in this case).
The truly sad part to me is that these devs have to work really hard to get something ready to show off, taking away precious time & resources from working on what will actually end up in the game.
The truly sad part to me is that these devs have to work really hard to get something ready to show off, taking away precious time & resources from working on what will actually end up in the game.
You just made my morning. XDLittle Duck said:
OT: It's really a pity... Ubi was just working on crawling its way off my shitlist, after the PC release of the underrated AC:Liberation. Now I have to go back to asking myself... "do I really want to reward this company's behavior with my money?"
Having not seen the E3 trailer, but kinda underwhelmed by what hardware was offered as the PS4/XBone, I'm actually not surprised. Maybe the developers were told they were getting something more powerful and then had to begrudgingly set the graphics at "only a tad better than the PS3"drizztmainsword said:
The PS4, at best, is, and I use this term lightly "half as powerful" as the average gamer PC, and only more powerful than the average desktop computer sold at the same price as a PS4.
We hit peak hardware at the PS3/Xbox360/WiiU/i7-2nd gen(PC), The CPU and Video card vendors have not released any groundbreaking "actually new" hardware for two cycles already. (There's a 10% difference between the current generation and the previous generation cpus, and less than 2% difference between the previous two. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/directCompute.html AMD has reused the same tech for three generations now, and that is what the game consoles are using). Multi-threading is still a lost cause in games.
Whatever comes out next for a console is going to be *groan* "in the cloud" and streamed to us. Then the ISP's will be taken to task for their high latency and crap bandwidth offerings.
I don't own these consoles, so I'm not too worried about any of this. Sucks for those who were banking on graphical fidelity, though.Necromancer1991 said:
Guessing the PC version is going to have options for increased resolution, SSAA or MSAA, and the like.
When the E3 trailer came out I said, "That looks damn good, but I doubt the actual gameplay will look as good as that cinematic trailer." Only to be called a hater and insulted because, "That was gameplay" and I should shut the hell up because I had no idea what I was talking about.
Pbbbbbbbbbbt!
Pbbbbbbbbbbt!
I'm actually amazed that you almost immediately brushed off the opportunities to make the Aliens: Colonial Marines parallels with this one, Jim.
It's safe to say in this market that any game that attempts to change ANYTHING, even the little logos that represent who is sponsoring it, is grounds for immediate concern from anyone who is interested in the game or is even the least bit invested in it's development. We're all being treated like miniature stockholders without any of the benefits at this point anyway, being expected to dump sixty dollars onto game preorders based on song and dance routines that may not even end up in the final game anyway (word to the wise: never preorder anything), but then having the gall to insist that what they distribute was the clear definition of the final product to begin with.
Oh, and then they call us entitled for not wanting it. Then Kotaku/IGN/etc makes a funny internet article with fart jokes calling everyone who didn't like the final product an imbecile.
It's safe to say in this market that any game that attempts to change ANYTHING, even the little logos that represent who is sponsoring it, is grounds for immediate concern from anyone who is interested in the game or is even the least bit invested in it's development. We're all being treated like miniature stockholders without any of the benefits at this point anyway, being expected to dump sixty dollars onto game preorders based on song and dance routines that may not even end up in the final game anyway (word to the wise: never preorder anything), but then having the gall to insist that what they distribute was the clear definition of the final product to begin with.
Oh, and then they call us entitled for not wanting it. Then Kotaku/IGN/etc makes a funny internet article with fart jokes calling everyone who didn't like the final product an imbecile.
That whole practice is a load of bullshit.
When people mention the gameplay in response to something like this... the pre-orders, your vision of what the game is going to be can only be based on it's graphics.
The fewest people (ie. no body really) will get to play a game like WD before it's released unless it has a demo of course so all the people can go by is the graphics and the vague promises and PRbullshit ramblings of what the dev/pub fancies spouting.
In theory you could have a dev/pub show a totally CG rendered video and then release a game with PS1 era graphics and it would be no different than what is happening all over the place now. Sure the extremes in my example are exaggerated but the theory remains the same.
UBI's response to all of this is plain flabbergasting. I'd probably be pissed if I would have pre-ordered the game. Luckily I've never done that for this and many other reasons, so thank god for that. And thank god for Jim.
When people mention the gameplay in response to something like this... the pre-orders, your vision of what the game is going to be can only be based on it's graphics.
The fewest people (ie. no body really) will get to play a game like WD before it's released unless it has a demo of course so all the people can go by is the graphics and the vague promises and PR
In theory you could have a dev/pub show a totally CG rendered video and then release a game with PS1 era graphics and it would be no different than what is happening all over the place now. Sure the extremes in my example are exaggerated but the theory remains the same.
UBI's response to all of this is plain flabbergasting. I'd probably be pissed if I would have pre-ordered the game. Luckily I've never done that for this and many other reasons, so thank god for that. And thank god for Jim.
As an aside, that's exactly how politics isn't played in Australia, where there is a desperate scramble to be the underdog before every election. Always thought it rather odd that the US and Australia are so different in how candidates talk about their chances.medv4380 said:
Publishers have certainly spoiled the audience with the 7th gen. Game marketing suddenly became all about how pretty the graphics instead of how good the gameplay was. Even the bit-wars weren't this bad. Remember how Sega and Atari used to hype up their consoles' graphics (blast processing and the "Do The Math" campaign)? Now we have another generation of lying to people, all because customers bought into the graphics hype.
I mean seriously, if I someone really cared about graphics, why not just get a PC? You'll be playing most the games on it anyways, so I don't see any real issue, aside from the cost, but nowadays you can get a bargin bin graphics card that can outperform the current-gen systems.
I mean seriously, if I someone really cared about graphics, why not just get a PC? You'll be playing most the games on it anyways, so I don't see any real issue, aside from the cost, but nowadays you can get a bargin bin graphics card that can outperform the current-gen systems.
After Rome 2 was released unfinished I?ve become a lot more cynical regarding pre orders and trailers, I simply don?t trust publishers enough to give them my money or get exited before I know if the game is good.
The fact that this doesn?t really surprise me anymore is kind of sad when you think about it.
The fact that this doesn?t really surprise me anymore is kind of sad when you think about it.
I'm not going to change my mind. They didn't really "lie," and unless somebody can prove that they knew they couldn't pull all of that off, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt (though I would always appreciate transparency on the issue). The graphics presented in the E3 demo looked cool, but didn't really present anything new. The graphics technology wasn't the thing that I found interesting about the demo. Not even a little bit. I was interested in the gameplay mechanics and animation systems on show. You could take those components and put it on top of stick figures and I'd still have been incredibly interested in it.grimner said:
As for preorders, you should *never* preorder something. Making economic decisions based purely on advertising is poor consumer behavior, and publishers are going to capitalize on that poor consumer behavior. If you don't want them to do that, gamers shouldn't create the demand for it. And yet, when preorders go up, people pay for them. Fools spending their money foolishly is their own damned fault. You don't trust people you give your money to for a product, you figure out if the product is going to meet your needs, and then make the decision. I'm not going to buy the game until reviews are out at the very least, and so should everybody else.
They Crytek thing is something completely different. They built that game anticipating the hardware that was going to come out, using techniques that weren't yet feasible on the hardware available at the time. Their decision in the sequels to continue to emphasize graphics while constraining their level design is probably because in order to make things that pretty run well or at all on current hardware, you have to bake in a good chunk of it, selectively allowing certain things to be dynamic. That takes a lot more man-hours to build, and the high-quality assets require more time to produce as well. That makes large areas expensive both in terms of man-power (and thus money) and in terms of memory. There is also the moronic non-game design trends popularized by Call of Duty. Modern Warfare essentially made the last push into the current formula for making FPS campaigns, and everybody under the sun has been copying them.
In any case, anger is the incorrect response to all of this. Disappointment would be far more appropriate, and the people that are seething mad about this whole farce of a debacle are rather out of touch with reality. If you don't like a game, don't buy it. It's as simple as that. If you're really disappointed that you can't play precisely what you want, either come around to understanding that such a thing is impossible or start making it yourself.
Oh, but it is their problem. I know I was watching this title as a possible preorder, but I was holding off until closer to release. I like the concept and it looks interesting. I would have said about even odds I would preorder this game. Now that chance is zero. Not because the game looks slightly less good but because I now know Ubisoft is going to lie to me about this title in order to get my money. This means I cannot trust anything they say or show until after the game is released. And if I am not getting it day 1, I am almost certainly going to wait about a year for lower price, if I ever get it at all.bunnielovekins said:
It also means that I am less likely to preorder their games in the future - they are proven liars, I am not going to trust them with my money.
I am certain there are tons of people out there that are thinking the same way I am - I know 4 others personally. This is most certainly their problem.
And if the game ends up the best thing since sliced bread? Make your decision when you have actual information to look at, not before. You're preemptively making the reverse decision of preordering, and it's just as silly.DrOswald said:
Thank you Jim, for that bit with the names in brackets and how you pronounced them. Seriously, I have no idea why people put those there or what their used for.
I first thought you would rant against the people who noticed the footage in the two trailers weren't alike and declared WATCH_DOGS a total failure, and tell them to calm THE FUCK down. And I'm glad you did at the end there. It still won't stop me from getting WATCH_DOGS. Preordering it is kind of iffy.
I first thought you would rant against the people who noticed the footage in the two trailers weren't alike and declared WATCH_DOGS a total failure, and tell them to calm THE FUCK down. And I'm glad you did at the end there. It still won't stop me from getting WATCH_DOGS. Preordering it is kind of iffy.