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

[Jandau]

To the people asking WHY this happened: It's because Sony and/or Microsoft pressured Ubisoft to keep the PC version in line with the console one AND/OR because Ubisoft themselves want their games to be bought on consoles more than on the PC. Which is all mildly understandable - consoles offer more control over a product to the publisher instead of the consumer. It's more of a closed and controlled platform. A better looking/performing PC version would draw people to that platform, which doesn't help publishers and console manufacturers.

But that's not what puzzles me; the reasons as to why this happened are quite clear.

What baffles me is the fact that Ubisoft thought nobody would notice! Seriously, by this point it's quite evident that there is (and to be honest, has been for a looong time) a demographic of people with high levels of skill when it comes to software code and who love to take apart games and see what's in there. You can't hide shit from these people, they live to dig through it all and find every bit of cut content. They've been doing it since gaming got rolling. You can't assume all your customers are idiots in this business. ESPECIALLY in THIS business, where a lot of the people you cater to work in the same industry as you, or related branches.

Granted, Ubisoft DOES seem to think everyone is stupid, as evidenced by the assorted kerfuffles surrounding the new AssCreed...

 

[ScaredScorpion]

Found some code in W_D:

They were really so stupid as to leave something like that in the code and then release the game to a playerbase famous for scouring through code for just about anything under the sun? Did they really think that was gonna go unnoticed?

I seriously doubt they did. No way decompiled code would look like that, the comment wouldn't be there, and that #else stuff is specifically compile-time logic that would vanish in the final files (that's literally the point of that syntax). So either W_D shipped with uncompiled C knocking about (veeeeeery unlikely), the source code leaked (which might be the case, but the coders would have no reason to expect it and sanitise their comments), or that snippet is made up/from somewhere else.

Without looking at the actual code myself(having problems finding the original posting of it, just references) looking at the screenshot there, that looks like shader code, not engine code.

Shader code isn't compiled like the native engine code.

As for the topic on a whole? Pfffthahahahahahahahahahahahaha haha aaahhh hahah. Man. I bet there's a couple of people that will be getting pink pieces of paper this week.

Not knowing the language it's in I could be wrong but that code doesn't look legit anyway, weird order of #else and #endif. It could work (if this was the last bit of a nested set of if else's) but it'd require more outside of that piece of code to be functional.

 

[Grabehn]

Every person that is able to think a little bit knows that the "Consoles look like high-end PCs" BS is BS, they might look like ones from 2-3 years back, sure, but doing this? Is just really really sad how someone could be that desperate to look good, and yet fail so hard at it.

It's like these companies still think people will believe that games are being played on consoles when they show their "awesome game graphics" when it's been known for a while that most "Visual" demos are being run on PCs.

 

[The White Hunter]

why would Ubi do this to themselves? if there wasn't some legit technical reason (and honestly are you going to belive them at this point?)

5 bucks says they'll come out with a statement that says they changed the graphical settings of the PC version to be more in line with the console versions.

everything I just said and an even bigger WHYYY???

Only pirates play on PC after all?

I honestly have no idea but the last time an Ubisoft game didn't run like arse on my PC never happened in the first place. I'm still not going to buy Watch Dogs.

 

[Rozalia1]

The difference is that the Wii U is selling so poorly and its so weak that no developer wants to do anything with it. Nintendo just walked in on the worst generation, and its basically the xbox 360 in terms of power. Nintendo was never a mainstream console for mainstream ports anyway. The Wii was the console of shovelware.

Microsoft on the other hand has been mainstream and has for 20 years. Not to mention that multiplats need to be on the most consoles as it can to make money. If they want the money microsoft offers, they have to support it. They support it because its been gaming tradition. The difference is that people bought the xbone and continue to do so.

They are forced to support xbox the same way Japan is forced to support consoles.

And Ubisoft would get less money if PC gaming died. It gets 100% of the profits from PC copies, where console copies take over 30% for retailer and distribution fees.

Consoles are full of fees, and thats why games are so expensive there.

So why are loads of those companies also putting their games on the PS360 when the Wii U "is too weak". No they can easily manage to put it on the Wii U, they just choose not and you champion that fact as it means "a better experience for you". Yet you hate this fact where sabotage happened?
So yay on them sabotaging Nintendo, but nay on them sabotaging the PC? Sounds childish to me.

If you support their efforts against Nintendo, than you have no right to get angry at them screwing you unless you're going to be a blatant hypocrite.

20 years? You including windows, or that really old console they had way back when? You forgeting that Nindendo is basically synonymous with gaming, they are very much mainstream.

That is on the face of it. They'd be giving up control, and you should know how scared they are of PC pirates. Can you imagine how they'd feel in a PC platform only world?
Yes I know when reading that you'll be typing console piracy as a response, but you already know what the easy responses are to your questions.

To the people asking WHY this happened: It's because Sony and/or Microsoft pressured Ubisoft to keep the PC version in line with the console one AND/OR because Ubisoft themselves want their games to be bought on consoles more than on the PC. Which is all mildly understandable - consoles offer more control over a product to the publisher instead of the consumer. It's more of a closed and controlled platform. A better looking/performing PC version would draw people to that platform, which doesn't help publishers and console manufacturers.

Really getting tired of this...where is your (and everyone elses)evidence that there is any forcing going on by the big three (I notice you're at least smart enough to not put Nintendo there).

Also these graphics would draw people to the PC platform... are we in the 1990s? You really believe that the big three has undergo a campaign to hide the fact better graphics are possible on PC?
Graphics being better on the PC is well known, and yet the sales of most titles show that it really doesn't matter.

 

[Illessa]

Not knowing the language it's in I could be wrong but that code doesn't look legit anyway, weird order of #else and #endif. It could work (if this was the last bit of a nested set of if else's) but it'd require more outside of that piece of code to be functional.

Yeah, it's obviously a snippet, and a lot of nested #ifs make sense for code that has been heavily optimised on a per-platform basis. The language is a C-derivative, probably HLSL - as Areloch pointed out it looks like a shader.

[EDIT]

Really getting tired of this...where is your (and everyone elses)evidence that there is any forcing going on by the big three (I notice you're at least smart enough to not put Nintendo there).

Also these graphics would draw people to the PC platform... are we in the 1990s? You really believe that the big three has undergo a campaign to hide the fact better graphics are possible on PC?
Graphics being better on the PC is well known, and yet the sales of most titles show that it really doesn't matter.

Veering away from coding geekery I actually agree with this, MS/Sony have a vested interest in appearing good for sure, but I doubt they needed to put much pressure on Ubi. Real, meaningful fancy settings on PC have always been the domain of people who actually care about the platform (CD Projekt for instance), and Ubi definitely aren't on that list. I'm sure as soon as they realised these settings were going to be difficult/impossible to optimise on consoles, they just ditched them rather than spend dev/QA time on a feature that would only be available on what they consider to be a tertiary platform.

The problem isn't PCs being held back by some conspiracy, it's features being implemented in order to make fancy demos/trailers (the over-the-top DOF and bloom, Aiden's constantly damp coat [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/06/16/watch_dogs-graphics-mod-video/], were all obviously crafted to look good in the demo, not to function well across the whole game). Basically it's a less extreme Colonial Marines' false advertising all over again.

 

[Strazdas]

people are not giving this guy enough credit:

Many people misunderstand what that screenshot meant, the E3 fRain command controls just the value of how much rain to apply from the default settings, but I've done more research to for example make the rain react to light properly. Because of this screenshot many people at neogaf think what i've done is just 1 and 0.

The mod improves performance for High and Ultra quality only, because of ubisoft's lazyness they just used plain commands for the lod dither, lod values and shadowmaps sizes which turns into a complete stuttering experience. I tuned down and changed the values of this. I can make stuttering even less but it'll make the shadow quality to be "worse"

Source [http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/28amgh/this_was_in_watch_dogs_game_files_e3_rain0/]

Also looks like Ubisoft wants the worst company in america title now that they got a chance since EA finally left that position.

This is almost as bad as the whole Dark souls had the fix to their game written in their code, but this seems much worse. They are hiding complete graphical options away. On top of that, I've heard stories people have been seeing improved performance WITH said graphics. How do you take shit away, and make it perform worse at the same time?

if you mean the Dark SOuls resolution fix, then it was written by a DirectX god who enjoys fixing stuff like this and many developers now acutally send him an early copy so he could point out flaws he notices because hes much better at it that most developers.

Reddit is planning to flood ubisoft with refunds, chargebacks, lawsuits, and a shit load of other shit.

Because they have legal grounds to do so...

1. They are nto doing it for money, but to send Ubisoft a message of their displeasure, because they think the best way to get companys attention is to threaten to take their money away.
2. In European Union they actually do have legal ground.

I mean seriously, it makes the game look and perform better? I'd love to know why Ubisoft decided it'd be a good idea to remove these features.

its a meta thing. the actually game of Watch Dogs is the one of hacking the game files!

Why would they pay for a downgrade on PC when their business is doing fine. Why not pay to not have it on PC instead? If you are going to push a conspiracy theory than at least push it right.

doing fine?
Xbox division that overall is a loss to Microsoft (only lately started being profitable and havent covered the loss yet) thats also struggling to sell machines.
Sony reporting massive losses and clsoing divisions while their entertainment remains theri only lifeboat (so they are going to do everything they can to keep it as profitable as they can)
Nintedo has everincreasing loss while thier console isnt selling well at all, a 3 times younger PS4 has outsold it already.

So no, they arent doing well, they are struggling to the point of getting desperate.

Not knowing the language it's in I could be wrong but that code doesn't look legit anyway, weird order of #else and #endif. It could work (if this was the last bit of a nested set of if else's) but it'd require more outside of that piece of code to be functional.

well, if you look at the line numbers to the left, its clearly missing a begining of over 40 lines, so its very likely its an end of some bigger nest.
then again, my programmign skills ends with VBA so i may be wrong.

I honestly have no idea but the last time an Ubisoft game didn't run like arse on my PC never happened in the first place. I'm still not going to buy Watch Dogs.

hey, hey, Assasins Creed 1 ran just fine!

 

[gittonsxv]

3 words ubisoft,
u dun goofed.

 

[putowtin]

I used to stick up for Ubisoft,
I'm a die hard fan of the Assassin's Creed series,
but this on top of the "women are hard to draw" crap from last week has tipped this calm gamer over the edge!

Pitch forks at the ready!

CAPTCHA: loaf of bread, no thanks, just had me lunch

 

[The White Hunter]

4

I honestly have no idea but the last time an Ubisoft game didn't run like arse on my PC never happened in the first place. I'm still not going to buy Watch Dogs.

hey, hey, Assasins Creed 1 ran just fine!

Nothing but slanderous lies.

Also AC1 sucks balls anyway.

 

[infinity_turtles]

I hope this causes more than a few crashes for Ubisoft's sake. Otherwise they are going to look so bad when this becomes well known.

EDIT:

Found some code in W_D:

snip

Welp. Nevermind then. Grab the torches and pitchforks.

From what I've heard, that line of code specifically effects consoles, so it makes sense not to care about it for the PC version.

*edit* I feel like it's very sad that I've been defending Ubisoft lately. I don't even like any of their fucking games.

 

[senkus]

The Escapist did not report that comment "This is PC only, who cares".
Awesome, job well done, Escapist.
So many websites brought it up, not explaining what it actually means in context (because they don't know).
But it's potentially inflammatory, so you HAVE TO report it. Dolla dolla bill, yall.
Spoiler alert: It's not a knock on PC, rather the opposite actually. [http://www.dsogaming.com/news/watch_dogs-unbelievable-hidden-comment-shows-ubisofts-arrogance-towards-pc-gamers-or-not/]

 

[CardinalPiggles]

On one hand I'm now actually interested in playing Watch Dogs, on the other hand I'm now not buying it because of principles and shit.

 

[black_knight1337]

1. They are nto doing it for money, but to send Ubisoft a message of their displeasure, because they think the best way to get companys attention is to threaten to take their money away.

Of course, the only way things will change will be when they start losing money. I doubt it'd actually get anywhere or have any long term impact though. Really depends on what their response is.

2. In European Union they actually do have legal ground.

I'm pretty sure that, if Ubisoft deliberately made the performance worse, they have the legal ground for a lawsuit and/or refunds.

Of course, law are different in other parts of the world so I might be missing something. But even IF they did intentionally sabotage the PC version, it would be almost impossible to prove. You could claim false advertising but the fact that it's a two year old demo couple with the fact that the pre-launch advertising was accurate hurts that claim significantly.

 

[J Tyran]

To the people asking WHY this happened: It's because Sony and/or Microsoft pressured Ubisoft to keep the PC version in line with the console one AND/OR because Ubisoft themselves want their games to be bought on consoles more than on the PC. Which is all mildly understandable - consoles offer more control over a product to the publisher instead of the consumer. It's more of a closed and controlled platform. A better looking/performing PC version would draw people to that platform, which doesn't help publishers and console manufacturers.

Really getting tired of this...where is your (and everyone elses)evidence that there is any forcing going on by the big three (I notice you're at least smart enough to not put Nintendo there).

You want proof, well getting our hands on Ubisofts financing would be damn hard but what about this?

Spoiler: PS4 will the Definitive version of Watch Dogs

http://www.examiner.com/article/rum...initive-version-of-watch-dogs?cid=db_articles

So yeah thats pretty much a smoking gun right there, you have Ubisofts PR guys running around claiming that the PS4 version will the "definitive version" while they are working with Sony in cross promotions with Sony, Ubisoft, the PS4 and Watch Dogs. Thats just one link, click here [https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ps4+watch+dogs+is+the+definitive+version&safe=off] if you want to see how much time Ubisoft went around trumpeting that the PS4 release of Watch Dogs will the the "definitive version".

Then it turns out the deliberately disabled features in the PC version that would make it look better, how much more "proof" do you need? Thats pretty much case closed unless someone is determined to follow a pre conceived bias that flies in the face of facts.

 

[Rozalia1]

Because its simple. Those consoles have an actual market and an actual excuse. Those consoles are 10 years old. The Wii U is new, has no following, and is weak by modern standards. Weaker compared to its competition in the very same generation. It falls into the very same trap that developers don't like.

Wii U is weak. No one owns it. And its brand new to top all of this off. The other next gen consoles shit all over it in both sales and power. Even the xbone. Developers are done making 7th gen games, and Nintendo just barely got to 7th gen power. That's why this year's E3 was all about next gen.

They were mainstream 30 years ago. Back in the age of the dinosaurs and Ronald Reagan. Their golden age ended 20 years ago in the age of Clinton. Its now been roughly 10 years since they mattered in the mainstream space. Halo, COD, God of War, etc have all dethroned Nintendo.

Nintendo relies on Nostalgia. The new generation has nostalgia for games too edgy for Nintendo. You should know that when Halo became retro along with Medal of Honor. Now that those kids grew up without childhood memories of Nintendo, it lost its main draw. It will only get worse from here on out.

No amount of your Nostalgia will change that. Nintendo isn't slipping, it already slipped. We all knew this was coming.

Ubisoft is scared of everything. Even Pre-owned games. If it was PC only, they would ruin their sales by pulling shit like this. Just like Microsoft ruined their sales when they tried to take away used games.

Consumers are not at fault for someone else's unfounded fears. They would go bankrupt in that market, and nothing would be wrong about it. Free market with actual competition from the little guy, unlike the console monopoly.

And what sabotage? Its Ubisoft pushing out another cheaply made cash grab. I saw it a mile away. All their games are gimped.

Watch Dogs is a zombie game they should have left in its grave. But they didn't because money.

There are more PS2s out there than there are PS3/360s so by your logic why aren't they pushing a PS2 version? Its down to them, no releases, downgrades, taken features, and so forth is all down to the dev.

Nintendo aren't some little unknown company actually, even those "dudebros" as they are apparently called have at the very least heard of Nindendo and its titles.

People were saying that Nintendo was finished 10 years ago, and they'll likely say it in 10 years time too.

doing fine?
Xbox division that overall is a loss to Microsoft (only lately started being profitable and havent covered the loss yet) thats also struggling to sell machines.
Sony reporting massive losses and clsoing divisions while their entertainment remains theri only lifeboat (so they are going to do everything they can to keep it as profitable as they can)
Nintedo has everincreasing loss while thier console isnt selling well at all, a 3 times younger PS4 has outsold it already.

So no, they arent doing well, they are struggling to the point of getting desperate.

Xbox has always been that way and they aren't really struggling to shift machines, they may not have PS4 level sales but they have plenty of time to avoid a disaster (look at the PS3).

Stretching to find any excuse with Sony aren't you now? Can't find anything in gaming so you'll just fish elsewhere...

Nintendo has been in the business a long time, they'll recoup as they always do, and besides what would Nintendo even have to do with this sort of thing? The PC platform likely don't even register to Nintendo, as in they really couldn't care less for it. They haven't promoted "top graphics" in a long long time.

So Ubisoft are being big meanieheads and have shown they don't care about you, and your platform...and you're blaming the big three still? Either you're a really big Ubisoft mark which is why you want to shift the blame elsewhere, or you're a PC mark who hates on the competition to nonsense levels because you have to justify being a mark.

 

[idarkphoenixi]

I can only come to two rational conclusions from this:

1. Ubisoft hates PC gamers so much they would willingly sabotage the platform as punishment (although forcing Uplay is punishment enough, honestly)

2. They deliberately made it worse so that it wouldn't look superior to the "next gen" consoles. This game was no doubt supposed to be a system seller and showing just how much better it would look on PC kind of takes away from the magic of "next gen"

I mean, it looks better AND performs better (insert mindblown.gif) there is NO logical reason not to deliberately take that away. This would seem like legal grounds to sue them, they deliberately and willingly sabotaged their own game while promising a much better experience.