Well it better, because so far people have been pretty underwhelmed with the appearance of the console version. I can't help but think this is some kind of last ditch effort to restore some hope.
Watch Dogs Looks Better on PC Than PS4/Xbox One, Says Director
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
i'm the same, i rarely update drivers. i only tinker with settings because i'm OCD like that, most recent games could be left at the preset mediums with no game play issues.Clovus said:
Only thing i have to tinker with is old games to get them running.
I remember at one point it felt like my PS3 needed a system update every time I switched it on
I've a 7770 HD 1GB GDDR3, thing it will survive the first wave of "next gen" ports. anyone know what the equivalent card is to match the new consoles? I've heard R9 270 should do it.
I doubt it, seeing as the 460 is about 4x faster haha. The question is, really, what the PS3/360 versions are going to look like when the PC version obviously isn't even allowed to scale down that far (the minimum specs are basically my PC I had circa 2009, which compared to last gen consoles was a complete beast).Rack said:
Ya, the R9 270 surpasses both consoles (from console performance in the first wave of games, it's very obvious the APU design hurts the GPU performance anyway, so whilst the PS4 should roughly match an R9 270, it falls behind by quite a margin). May be worth just waiting until the next GPU generation in the summer/autumn (for GTX8xx and probably Rx 3xx too), seeing as it's not like many demanding games are coming out before that happens.Mr Ink 5000 said:
If that were the case then the 460 would be recommended spec. PC developers are capable of almost superhumanly poor optimisation when the mood strikes them, getting a PS3 game to run like crap with 6gb ram and a 460 is childs play to them.TheComfyChair said:
Console games that also have previous generation cousins typically do poorer than PC versions. Lots of split effort between all the porting whereas the PC version has only the one. Also, PC versions allow for a lot of scaling up of graphics if you have the resources which can always be improved if you're willing to spend the money.
Still, under the hood this is likely to all be 7th generation game engine unless they actually created two engines for the game.
Still, under the hood this is likely to all be 7th generation game engine unless they actually created two engines for the game.
What is this?
Is this supposed to be mindblowing? Or is he just once again touting the 'PC is superior' motto because as we all know, no game looks better on PC.
And when we say PC we don't mean the ones that the majority of PC consumers by at the store for $400.00. We mean the PCs, that can cost upwards of $1-2k that deals with more techno jargonbabble than the average consumer would even care to know about and requires a fuck ton of RAM or god help you in running your game.
Is this supposed to be mindblowing? Or is he just once again touting the 'PC is superior' motto because as we all know, no game looks better on PC.
And when we say PC we don't mean the ones that the majority of PC consumers by at the store for $400.00. We mean the PCs, that can cost upwards of $1-2k that deals with more techno jargonbabble than the average consumer would even care to know about and requires a fuck ton of RAM or god help you in running your game.
It's like this site is trying to annoy me now. Every news article seems to be "Probelms with console versions" or "PC still better than console LOL".
I won't buy it straight away for my PS4 as I'm saving for Infamous but I understand that its gonna look better on a PC. I just don't need to be constantly reminded how 'terribad' my console is.
I won't buy it straight away for my PS4 as I'm saving for Infamous but I understand that its gonna look better on a PC. I just don't need to be constantly reminded how 'terribad' my console is.
I don't believe that, I have been using the same PC since 2007/2008 and the only thing I have had to replace was my mouse and a hard drive. I might have to upgrade to a new video card in the near future so I can play games at a better quality, but then I should be fine until the next generation of consoles (aside from parts dying).Clovus said:
As far as "drivers, patches, and settings" I really don't spend any time on that either, Windows handles most of the patching it just gets frustrating when I want to turn off my computer and it takes 10min because there was 14 patches that Tuesday. The other drivers I have besides my video card are never updated with with "nVidia Experience" its like updating Windows, it will download the update in the background and I just have to install it.
I find the people that talk about frequent updates about PC either a) assume that when new hardware is released they must buy the bleeding edge hardware or b) has a person they talk to about PC hardware and that person makes them think they need to update that hardware. Now years upon years ago before DirectX it was a problem having to buy a new video card for a game, but now its not an issue.
I highly doubt this game will pre-cache 6 GB worth of game data in order to -actually- need that much in the minimum specs.
If it does than... well... damn. Maybe I need to upgrade. 8 GB suddenly doesn't seem so much.
If it does than... well... damn. Maybe I need to upgrade. 8 GB suddenly doesn't seem so much.
I would say you are falling a bit behind. The Core2Quad isn't exactly new, and 8gb of ram is pretty much the new standard with many, many DIYers using 16gb. You could probably get the game to run on weaker specs, but your experience will probably be shit. I would not call those minimum specs unreasonable.Caliostro said:
Frankly sir, that just sounds like an ignorant hate speech. First off, if you are playing on console I can guarantee you that my Skyrim looks a lot better than your Skyrim and the same goes for a lot of other games also (I just like to use Skyrim as an example).Dragonbums said:
Secondly yes we are not talking about a $400 machine they try to sell you at lets say best buy. But you certainly do not need to spend $1k+ on a machine to be able to run games better than a console. If you know what you are looking for you can a machine that will match the performace of an Xbone for about the same price as it and even going as far up as $600-700 you can get a machine that can easily beat both of them.
The bar only raised this sharply due to Devs having 8GB to play with on the consoles now as opposed to the 512MB they had to cram everything into on last gen consoles, I wouldn't expect games to require more than 6-8GB any time soon.Krantos said:
Which they claimed was running on a PS4 devkit. A claim they revisited a year later at the next E3.Angelous Wang said:
Deceptive marketing is still deceptive marketing.Ferisar said:I didn't know graphical fidelity was a draw in the Souls franchise
It's supposed to be damage control. They're getting busted for a game that looks significantly worse than prior in-game footage, and they're backtracking.Dragonbums said:
As we enter the new gen, we're seeing more and more spec sets with minimums around that level. It's not the norm, but it soon will be.Caliostro said:
They better be optomized if they going to require that much ram.
I been slumming on a c2d 4 gig ram 440gt for the entire last console cycle, up until this week.
I just ordered yesterday an i7 3.7 ghz ivy, 770gtx, 8 gig of ram, i fully expect this to run just about every game this gen maxed out or darn near it.
you could drop down to i5 and etc and save you a good chunk of money and build just about the same rig.
i think devs will more and more embrace pc as microsoft and sony look to cut out retailers and hog all the profits for themselves. Sony and ms see dollar signs when they think online stores and digital distribution. this is half what i attribute the new found religion on pc these days some form alot of traditionally console only devs.
and is dark souls 2 out for pc that we can flame it for not looking as good as what we thought the trailers looked like? far as i know its only out on consoles we have not seen the pc version it could have better gfx than the console versions period we wont know until it comes out...
I been slumming on a c2d 4 gig ram 440gt for the entire last console cycle, up until this week.
I just ordered yesterday an i7 3.7 ghz ivy, 770gtx, 8 gig of ram, i fully expect this to run just about every game this gen maxed out or darn near it.
you could drop down to i5 and etc and save you a good chunk of money and build just about the same rig.
i think devs will more and more embrace pc as microsoft and sony look to cut out retailers and hog all the profits for themselves. Sony and ms see dollar signs when they think online stores and digital distribution. this is half what i attribute the new found religion on pc these days some form alot of traditionally console only devs.
and is dark souls 2 out for pc that we can flame it for not looking as good as what we thought the trailers looked like? far as i know its only out on consoles we have not seen the pc version it could have better gfx than the console versions period we wont know until it comes out...
I think people now cared too much about how good it looks than how smooth it looks, I'd much rather have a worst looking game at 60fps than a prettier one on 30fps.
What I find interesting about this is that so early into the 'next'-gen life cycle, we have a major publisher of a major game admitting that the PC version will look better.
It's not surprising the the PC version will be better, but it is surprising that someone of this status has come out and said so.
It's not surprising the the PC version will be better, but it is surprising that someone of this status has come out and said so.
1) How does it sound like hate speech?, is this how gamers dictate what they don't like to hear from people who differ from you?.Hawk of the Plain said:
2) No you're claiming ignorance when you can't simple check to notice he is not a guy but a girl if you'd taken 3 seconds of your time you'd have noticed that, thank you for pointing out your own ignorance.
3) this is obvious backtracking from ubisoft, look at the PC gamers that actually care because it shows graphics apparently only matter from this game, nope no gameplay just pure and simple graphics (btw I game on PC just in case you decide to declare heresy because I'm on the other side of the opinion spectrum).