Watch Dogs Looks Better on PC Than PS4/Xbox One, Says Director

[Insideout Ink Demon]

I'm pretty sure I'm dong PC gaming wrong. From all the PC vs Console rants I've seen, you have to upgrade your PC several times a year. Also, I spend almost zero time on "drivers, patches, and settings". That's apparently a big problem too.

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.
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.

 

[TheComfyChair]

I'm sure it will look better if you have a top of the line i7 and a 670, but if you're slumming it on a q8400 6gb ram and a 460 it will look worse than the PS3 version.

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).

I'm pretty sure I'm dong PC gaming wrong. From all the PC vs Console rants I've seen, you have to upgrade your PC several times a year. Also, I spend almost zero time on "drivers, patches, and settings". That's apparently a big problem too.

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.
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.

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.

 

[Rack]

I'm sure it will look better if you have a top of the line i7 and a 670, but if you're slumming it on a q8400 6gb ram and a 460 it will look worse than the PS3 version.

I doubt it, seeing as the 460 is about 4x faster haha.

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.

 

[Lightknight]

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.

 

[Dragonbums]

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.

 

[VeneratedWulfen93]

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.

 

[Sanunes]

* I'm pretty sure I'm dong PC gaming wrong. From all the PC vs Console rants I've seen, you have to upgrade your PC several times a year. Also, I spend almost zero time on "drivers, patches, and settings". That's apparently a big problem too.

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).

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.

 

[Krantos]

Get rid of Uplay Ubisoft, THEN we'll talk.

(And those are some pretty reasonable specs for a 'next-gen' title.)

Those are minimum specs. Minimum. 6GB Ram is the minimum.

-_-

Here I thought my 8gb was gonna put me way ahead for a least a few years.

Worst thing about PC's is how quickly the bar gets raised.

 

[Alpha Maeko]

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.

 

[Gorrath]

Am I falling behind again or are those some rather beefy specs for "minimum specs"? i.e.: the absolute minimum a computer should have to be able to play the game.

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.

 

[Hawk of the Plain]

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.

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).

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.

Those are minimum specs. Minimum. 6GB Ram is the minimum.

-_-

Here I thought my 8gb was gonna put me way ahead for a least a few years.

Worst thing about PC's is how quickly the bar gets raised.

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.

 

[Colt47]

Well duh.

The "bullshots" after all were from a PC mock up version. Which they did actually say at E3.

It entirely possible that the PC version will look as good as E3, and it's only the console that have "downgrade" by comparison, even though it's not really a downgrade because they only ever showed the PC version and people just assumed.

Didn't we say that about Far Cry 3?

 

[Something Amyss]

The "bullshots" after all were from a PC mock up version. Which they did actually say at E3.

Which they claimed was running on a PS4 devkit. A claim they revisited a year later at the next E3.

I didn't know graphical fidelity was a draw in the Souls franchise

Deceptive marketing is still deceptive marketing.

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.

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.

Am I falling behind again or are those some rather beefy specs for "minimum specs"? i.e.: the absolute minimum a computer should have to be able to play the game.

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.

 

[cerebus23]

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...

 

[Gitty101]

Get rid of Uplay Ubisoft, THEN we'll talk.

(And those are some pretty reasonable specs for a 'next-gen' title.)

Those are minimum specs. Minimum. 6GB Ram is the minimum.

-_-

Here I thought my 8gb was gonna put me way ahead for a least a few years.

Worst thing about PC's is how quickly the bar gets raised.

Wouldn't say it's too dire a situation - 8GB is probably going to be the norm for the next few years.

*Eyes the 16GB system in front of him. Smiles nonchalantly...*

 

[ExtraDebit]

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.

 

[Folksoul]

What? A game that tires for "real world" photo realistic graphics looks better on PC? I am shocked! Shocked!

If the games design was quirky aesthetic over "realism" however, I'd call bullshit.

 

[mjharper]

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.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

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.

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).

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.

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?.

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).

 

[William Dickbringer]

A PC game will look better than its console versions with the settings cranked up?

I'm shocked.

This^

How does this stuff even qualify as news? Of course the PC version is going to look better, the PC is a more powerful platform (unless its an older PC).

Its like those stories along the lines of "EA executive says Simcity launch wasn't a giant pile of ass and disconnects." They're going to say that. Its their job.

well considering how they were under fire last week for how it didn't look as good as e3 demo this is probably to give people a piece of mind although I am gonna wait till the game comes out and listen to reviews before I buy