Watch Dogs Review - No Hack Job

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
No one even needs a review for this, its basicly "Ubisoft: The Game", every major mechanic of every other Ubisoft game is in here without much adaptation so you better love climbing spots to have your map updated.
 

Darth Sea Bass

New member
Mar 3, 2009
1,139
0
0
All i know is it's really fricking ugly on the 360! I didn't expect it to be as shiny as next gen versions but i thought it would/should be on a par with GTA 5 or even Just Cause 2. Maybe the colour palette in Watch-Dogs doesn't help.
 

Kerethos

New member
Jun 19, 2013
250
0
0
KingsGambit said:
Kerethos said:
Rabid_meese said:
Snip
It's been "the standard" as it were since the prevalence of LCD monitors, about a decade or so give or take. CRT monitors generally had higher refresh rates, anywhere from 75-120Hz+ typically (some went much higher). LCD screens however took up less space, had flat screens, etc but lower refresh rates.

Most LCDs, even today, are around 60Hz. Some are 75Hz and there are current (TN only) screen models that refresh at 120Hz (this is mostly so that they can show 3D stuff at 60Hz per eye, though 2D @ 120Hz is also a bonus). The reason for wanting 60FPS in the game is so that it matches the screen's refresh rate. If matched perfectly, a game will look and play silk smoothly with no screen tearing or lag. Lower frame rates means some frames have to be duplicated. Some games go so far as to "step down" completely from 60 -> 30 if 60 can't be maintained as then each frame can be doubled and play can continue, albeit (arguably) less smoothly.

At an in between number of frames, the game will look disjointed and there will be frequent screen tearing. Triple buffering and VSync both help in that regard. In an ideal world, a game's FPS would precisely match the refresh rate of its screen. Since consoles generally can't maintain 60fps, they are stepped down to 30fps with each frame doubled for 60Hz screens (the most common kind). Just know that if one's screen had a 75Hz refresh rate, 60FPS games would also suffer screen tearing and artefacts during fast scenes, so one would want to play at 75FPS ideally. I can only dream of how great games would play at 120FPS on a suitable screen (albeit a TN display), but my most recent screen is a 60Hz IPS monitor.

Last point of note is that it's only really consoles which lock frame rates in games since PC frame rates are essentially "unlimited" and variable, dependant on the power of the PC/graphics card (and obviously the monitors ability to display it). Hence we get graphical settings to tweak for the right balance of visuals vs. performance with the top end cards generally powerful enough to max out everything and still have the grunt to maintain high FPS.
Thank you, Mr. Enraged Panda-Man. That was quite informative, and an easier read than what I got while doing a quick search on screen refresh rates, frame rates and buffering.

Also, your forum avatar is quite amusing.

OT: No matter what the reviews say I'm still going to give Watchdogs a long wait, so that AMD might get some decent drivers out and the DLC surge is done, before I give it a try. Because despite all the performance issues being reported right now, the game does look like one I'd enjoy - provided I can get it to run satisfyingly on my PC.
 

Adeptus Aspartem

New member
Jul 25, 2011
843
0
0
NLS said:
What? I have both AMD processor and GPU, no problems. I did have some trouble logging into uPlay the first few tries, but that's because everyone is trying to get in at the same time. It worked again after 10 minutes or so. Been playing it for an hour without any problems.

I suggest you just wait a few days for things to settle down, and it'll probably be solved by less pressure on uPlay and maybe even a patch or two. Pretty much "all" games nowadays have launch issues the first few hours, demanding a refund when the game probably works the next morning is a bit harsh.
So you can play, great. Now check the webs for 3min and start counting how many AMD user can not play the game.
I've hard core blue screens which i haven't had in.. probably 10 years as soon as i click the start button. And before anyone asks, of course everything is up to date, patched and even re-installed + repatched just for the sake of it.

Does not work. It's Ubishit all over again. There's a reason the last game i bought from them was RB6:Ravenshield back in 2003. Ah not true. The first AC in 2007, pretty repetitive but at least it worked. So maybe they'll see money in 2019 from me the next time.

And about the last part: This is acutally the most prominent problem we have in this industry. If i buy a god damn [Any item] and it does not work at all i gonna bring it back and demand a refund. That's customers rights. I'm not talking about the servers, even though i'm 100% sure that basically all companies only use minimal efforts for their servers because people already are accustomed to shitty service anyway.
It's not harsh, it's just no tolerance for bullshit and the AAA industry fabricates bullshit every other minute. Some people are fine with that and so be it, but i'm not.

EA hasn't seen a penny since i bought DA1 for 5 bucks somewhere in a discount box and before that only ME was an expection of the rule - because it was brilliant. Bought the 2nd, never bought the 3rd.
Nintendo? Uh.. Smashbros in 2007. 0 games since. Though these games are usualy complete and work.
MS hasn't seen a penny since Freelancer.
Leaves Bethesda, Rockstar and Valve who usually deliver great stuff, some of them bug-ridden but at least you know what you get.
And the trend continues. The AAA can die in a fire for all i care.
 

Zydrate

New member
Apr 1, 2009
1,914
0
0
Might get it on a sale. Not interested in playing yet another generic white guy. Bit tired of those.
 
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
Kerethos said:
Thank you, Mr. Enraged Panda-Man. That was quite informative, and an easier read than what I got while doing a quick search on screen refresh rates, frame rates and buffering.

Also, your forum avatar is quite amusing.

OT: No matter what the reviews say I'm still going to give Watchdogs a long wait, so that AMD might get some decent drivers out and the DLC surge is done, before I give it a try. Because despite all the performance issues being reported right now, the game does look like one I'd enjoy - provided I can get it to run satisfyingly on my PC.
A pleasure. And in an interesting case of coincidence, Experienced Points discussed just this subject in today's column [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/columns/experienced-points/11507-The-Great-Framerate-Debate]. There's some more info there that might be of interest also.

With framerate being the "holy grail" as it were, the ultimate goal of any game and gamer, getting it high is, as mentioned a case a compromise. Compromise on resolution, graphical fidelity or pre and post-processing. Personally, I don't compromise on resolution; it's 1920x1080 or bust, and I'll lower/disable other things if needed to maintain the resolution and framerates. A friend of mine would trade resolution without hesitation however, if it was the difference between Antialiasing on or off (his no compromise). Thankfully, I buy the top end cards so I don't have to compromise. I'm of the opinion that since LCD screens have a fixed number of pixels (ie. native resolution), displaying an image at a lower resolution results in a blurred image with clever pixel doubling and technical voodoo.

In honesty, I can play a game at 30fps without issue, though I prefer 60. 30fps won't detract from enjoyment as is perceptibly smooth enough to me, despite that 60fps is perceptibly better. I think it's a little sad that the console versions of WD had to compromise on everything though. They not only had graphical fidelity lowered, not only had resolution lowered, but all of that and it's still 30fps. On the PC, I'm getting steady 1080p, 60fps and all the eye candy (though it does have some issues).

The AMD (lack of) optimisation is pretty harsh and despite being in the nVidia camp, I think it's downright out of line if AMD are being kept from being able to update their drivers. This game really isn't next-gen, but it is a good sandbox, shy of greatness. You'll be well served by waiting as you suggest and picking up an "all in one" version later in the year.
 

Ariseishirou

New member
Aug 24, 2010
443
0
0
Zydrate said:
Might get it on a sale. Not interested in playing yet another generic white guy. Bit tired of those.
Yeah, the character design + uber generic revenge backstory pushed this from a pre-order to a "maybe if it goes on sale" for me. I'm sick of that shit and if I keep buying it that's all the industry is ever going to make.
 

coppah20HE

New member
Apr 8, 2011
73
0
0
I was really hyped for this game.
Spent $84 on a special editon, waited 9 hours for it to download.

Now I can't even get past the first loading screen without it crashing.
It's completely unplayable. :(
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,257
0
0
Watch Dogs looks more promising now. At this rate, however, I'm still just going to wait for the GOTY edition. I don't want to buy it and then actually get absorbed into it and realise that I've been held back on quite a bit of content.

Ubisoft does have a gift for huge games, don't they?
 

Th37thTrump3t

New member
Nov 12, 2009
882
0
0
It's great that this game turned out to be good. I've been eyeing it for a very long time now. I've been hearing some pretty bad things about the PC version though regarding constant crashing and performance issues so I'll wait until those are resolved before I buy it. I have Dark Souls 2 to give me my open world fix so I should be good until then anyways.
 

Zydrate

New member
Apr 1, 2009
1,914
0
0
coppah20HE said:
I was really hyped for this game.
Spent $84 on a special editon, waited 9 hours for it to download.

Now I can't even get past the first loading screen without it crashing.
It's completely unplayable. :(
Post on some forums, make some calls. Do what you can to salvage your investment.
 

danielcofour

New member
May 6, 2014
28
0
0
Rainbow_Dashtruction said:
AnthrSolidSnake said:
Per usual though, the PC port right now is terrible, at least for the majority of people it seems. Playing with my 780ti, I get horrible stutter, significant frame rate drops and screen tearing, making the game pretty much unplayable right now. Looks like I'll have to wait for a patch for a new game...again.
Thats a bug that can be fixed by using borderless windowed mode. Its got something to do with the Vsync. You should be able to run ultra at 60+
You actually can't do 1080p/60 on Ultra. A lot of people have been posting benchmarks all over the internets and so far none of them have been able to do it. TotalBiscuit did a video on this as well, and his 5k$ rig couldn't do it either. So nope.
 

Extra-Ordinary

Elite Member
Mar 17, 2010
2,065
0
41
Well, I'm loving it so far.
The gunplay's fun, the hacking's fun, it's just pretty fun in general; driving could use some tweaking but eh, whatever. And this game has done something no other game has ever done: Made me care about the little side things. I think it's because it takes less time than real side-quests, they're quick and easy, but I don't know. Normally I truck through a games main story then go back for all the little things but I'm really drawn into the side-things here.
Especially hacking into people's webcams, I'm a snoopy little guy.
 

putowtin

I'd like to purchase an alcohol!
Jul 7, 2010
3,452
0
0
Thanks Jim, also agreed Jordi is a great character, spin off with him as the lead please!
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Since they apparently didn't spend much time on PC port optimization (and given Ubisoft's history with PC, that's sadly unsurprising) it's already a no-sell for me. I've had it with obnoxious technical issues stemming from this stupid shell-game of console bias.

Given that continuing trend of "High Reviewer score, Low user score"", the content of the review is worth far more than the score.

"Been there, done that"

That's about right, since until something else penetrates the gaming Zeitgeist and becomes massively popular, there is no way that Ubisoft (or any major publisher) is going to risk the kind of scratch they have doing anything actually new: "Evolution, not Revolution".
 

Collin Stewart

New member
Mar 29, 2011
14
0
0
way to ignore the TERRIBLE PC support, the graphics looking far worse than they did in the trailer, only giving the games massive tedium a small mention (and apparently not impacting the score), the terrible controls that barely even include mouse support.

But I guess all that is not noticeable to the ADD afflicted tards on their consoles who actually think this game looks "good"

penthesilea180 said:
Zydrate said:
Might get it on a sale. Not interested in playing yet another generic white guy. Bit tired of those.
This. I'm tired of gravelly voiced dudes as the default.
That's racist.
You know it's racist because if you swapped out "white" with any other race then there would be a shitstorm going on.
 

wooty

Vi Britannia
Aug 1, 2009
4,252
0
0
While I always enjoy reading your content, Jim. I cant agree with you on this article.

This is one of the most boring games I've played in quite a while, I just could not get into any aspect of it, even though I avoided the humongous hype train and was just looking forward to it. The whole thing just felt sterile to me, no real fun, no real atmosphere and some endless car chases. Maybe Ubisoft just spoiled me with Black Flag and its grand sense of adventure.

I'll give you 4.5 stars for your writing though. :)