Watch_Dogs got a massive graphics downgrade

  • 126 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by Metal_Mills (3033 posts) -

E3 2012 footage vs March 2014 footage of the same scene. Holy fucking shit. What the hell has happened to this game? It was confirmed as PS4 footage too.

Here's the link to download the gif if it's too slow to load, it's pretty big. http://i.minus.com/iboqqHgyy5tOsD.gif

#2 Edited by Chaser324 (6716 posts) -

I think you meant 'downgrade' and not 'download' - updated the title for you.

It is a pretty striking difference. Are we absolutely certain that these are both running on the same platform? Do you have links to each video that this GIF pulls from?

Moderator Online
#3 Posted by TooWalrus (13255 posts) -

I'd assumed the e3 stuff was all high-end PC footage.

#4 Edited by Abendlaender (2866 posts) -

I watched the video on Gamespot, and it seemed like a mix between the two. Not as good as 2012, not as "bad" as 2014. I don't really have an eye for that stuff though

#5 Posted by Metal_Mills (3033 posts) -

I think you meant 'downgrade' and not 'download' - updated the title for you.

It is a pretty striking difference. Are we absolutely certain that these are both running on the same platform? Do you have links to each video that this GIF pulls from?

Did I say download? I didn't even notice. My bad, thanks! :)

Here's the video of the downgrade: http://www.everyeye.it/ps4/articoli/watch-dogs_hands-on_21862

#6 Posted by Fushichou187 (115 posts) -

@toowalrus: I pretty much always assume that, especially if the title is intended as a multiplatform release.

Still, for Ubi to pull this as a launch title where there could have had a near 1:1 attach rate and take an additional 6 months-- presumably to make things look better-- yet trot out something that looks far inferior, is a huge disappointment. If this is the end result of all that polish, I can't wait for an insider at Ubi to leak footage of what the state of the game was last October.

Also, this doesn't bode well for The Division :(

#7 Edited by flasaltine (1694 posts) -

It happens with a lot of games. It is pretty dumb that people only complained about it with Aliens: Colonial Marines

#8 Posted by Hailinel (25201 posts) -

Wait, seriously? These are from the same platform? What an I looking at?

#9 Edited by HammondofTexas (836 posts) -

That comparison is definitely shocking. I'll be able to max this game out on PC, so hopefully that's close to what they originally showed.

#10 Posted by BisonHero (6789 posts) -

Except for that randomly terrible looking Aisha Tyler Watch_Dogs trailer, almost all of the trailer footage has looked pretty much on par with the E3 2012 footage, and it has shown multiple difference scenarios and areas.

So either alllllll of that was complete bullshit, or high-end PC is somehow literally the only platform that could handle that game and not even the new consoles can manage it. The latter seems more likely, unless they stripped out all of the lighting and effects and textures for the sake of performance, even in the PC version where you can adjust those settings.

#11 Posted by Aetheldod (3682 posts) -

Woa ... that cant be right , I mean even GTA V has done better than that on the last gen

#12 Posted by Fear_the_Booboo (578 posts) -

Never EVER trust previews. The game was most likely running on a high-end PC at events, and was running specific built just made for the event. As the game expanded, maybe they had to downscaled it to have the game run fine on consoles and PC.

It's still insanely disappointing, but not surprising.

#13 Edited by spraynardtatum (3494 posts) -

That looks 50% worse.

#14 Posted by Roboculus92 (538 posts) -

Seems like Playstation Danmark has confirmed on twitter that the recent trailer was PS4 footage so there goes the hope of next-gen versions looking much better. The crazy part is I feel like the footage they showed from last year's e3 looked better than this and they showed tons of gameplay then so I don't know what the hell happened.

#15 Posted by erhard (434 posts) -

That looks bad.

#16 Edited by kaos_cracker (653 posts) -

@chaser324 said:

I think you meant 'downgrade' and not 'download' - updated the title for you.

It is a pretty striking difference. Are we absolutely certain that these are both running on the same platform? Do you have links to each video that this GIF pulls from?

Did I say download? I didn't even notice. My bad, thanks! :)

Here's the video of the downgrade: http://www.everyeye.it/ps4/articoli/watch-dogs_hands-on_21862

I just watched that video. Pretty sure that bridge was glowing because the game was telling him to jump it. Game still looks pretty good.

#17 Edited by Pr1mus (3959 posts) -

GMG recommended requirements say GTX 460.

At first it sounds great because that's what i have and then you realise that this is a 4 years old card...

#18 Posted by believer258 (12084 posts) -

The game play demos we've seen thus far were probably set in isolated areas with a specific set of things going on and were likely played on a super high end PC, allowing them to apply graphics options that most PC gamers will not be able to use, much less console gamers.

I can't be sure if they knew it or not - remember, these are new consoles and no one knows them that well yet, so perhaps they were overshooting. Or they really did know, I'm not sure.

#19 Edited by Wampa1 (725 posts) -

@pr1mus: Didn't it use to require a 660? I could have sworn there were articles talking about "insane" minimal requirements.

#20 Posted by BaneFireLord (2967 posts) -

And the meteoric kludge of my interest in Watch_Dogs continues to plunge into the earth's core. With the exception of the antialiasing and the smooth framerate (if that GIF is even properly indicative of it), multiple last gen games (GTAV, for instance) look a damn sight nicer than that...the lighting and shadows in particular appear positively abysmal.

#21 Edited by billymagnum (837 posts) -

i think that games ship already sailed, leaving it at the dock where it will die cold, alone, and unable to ever live up to its original potential.

#22 Posted by Fredchuckdave (5986 posts) -

Probably just depends on the platform; it's hard to make boring modernity look good without ridiculously good graphics.

#23 Posted by cloudymusic (1219 posts) -

That car model looks like it came out of a PS2 game.

#24 Posted by Soap (3631 posts) -

Every time I say to myself I won't be fooled again by bullshots, and every time I am. Shame on me for being so naive still.

#25 Edited by BaneFireLord (2967 posts) -

@soap: Hey, you haven't bought it yet. No harm done.

#26 Edited by ChrisHarris (284 posts) -

I think this apparent problem is primarily caused by a change in the way they're doing the helicopter's searchlight. It's a tight beam in the old footage, which makes for more dramatic lighting/contrast. The new footage looks like the beam has become huge and covers most of the ground on the screen. We also never see the light in the original section of the GIF cross over the vehicle in a way which causes it to cast a visible shadow, whereas it is doing so pretty much the entire time in the new video. So, the shadows might have been the same the whole time and we just didn't get to see them.

#27 Posted by MattyFTM (14423 posts) -

The announcement videos would have been using a super high end PC. Really high end. One far more expensive than any normal consumer would ever own. Now they're showing footage from the PS4, a real world console that costs $400. It's hardly surprising there are differences.

Moderator
#28 Edited by Metal_Mills (3033 posts) -

@mattyftm said:

The announcement videos would have been using a super high end PC. Really high end. One far more expensive than any normal consumer would ever own. Now they're showing footage from the PS4, a real world console that costs $400. It's hardly surprising there are differences.

A new next-gen console. That looks like shit. Compare that footage to something like this from Sleeping Dogs.

#29 Posted by mikey87144 (1811 posts) -

@wampa1: Game probably wasn't optimized yet. The recommendations just seemed way too crazy for a game that is also going to be released on the PS3 and 360.

#30 Posted by MonkeyKing1969 (2954 posts) -

Meh, I'll believe this when I see it. In a few weeks people at Giant Bomb, Gamespot, IGN and other will have their hands on it. From what they video shows there are a few objects, like the line heads on the bridges removed, but everything else is lighting effects. If the engine running wasn't doing a final lighting pass it would look like that...if the final code can't handle the final lighting pass it would look like that too.

You can swear up and down that what you see is RUNNING on modern hardware...but running what? Beta code form a month ago? Final build from a day ago? Final build, ready to go gold w/dynamic lighting on/off? God only knows.

Just wait and see, and maybe expect the worse, but hope for the best. But, for f_cks sake, sit back and let it come closer to coming out before you stomp around whining.

#31 Edited by joshwent (2323 posts) -

Maybe we don't have to all freak out about a 10 second clip we don't know anything about from an unfinished game?

#32 Posted by YoungFrey (1321 posts) -

Still might be fun. That's the part I care about.

#33 Posted by spraynardtatum (3494 posts) -

I'm actually offended. I per-ordered this game thinking it was going to be something better. The trailers and gameplay videos they showed for Watch_Dogs are in no way an acceptable representation of what it looks like they're releasing. Bullshot or vertical slice or whatever you want to call it, that was some deceiving shit.

Pre-order canceled and may God have mercy on Ubisofts soul.

#34 Posted by xyzygy (10062 posts) -

That lighting. It just makes the entire bland, muddy bridge texture light up like something from 1998. This can't be real... can it?

#35 Edited by Darklight (212 posts) -

I'm not normally one to complain but seeing this.... I realized how high my expectations for this game were.... The new art style, the road texture, the car details and the lightning effect... all of those are pretty ugly.

I kinda wish someone would come up, say that the footage is from the alpha and this was all a mistake.

Not sure I'm interested in this game anymore, will definitely wait to see more of it before making a decision.

#36 Posted by Korwin (2979 posts) -

They have to be mislabeling the PS3/360 version, if you put that along side some like Infamous 3 it looks downright silly.

Online
#37 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3505 posts) -

Looks very PS3/360... we sure it's not those versions?

#38 Posted by AMyggen (3510 posts) -

That cross gen stink. It will probably end up looking good on a high end PC, but this looks like shit for a "graphical showpiece" on the current gen consoles. Maybe it was naive to think that what was shown at E3 was close to how the game would look on consoles, but Ubisoft sure as hell didn't exactly say otherwise.

#39 Posted by Atwa (627 posts) -

Looks very PS3/360... we sure it's not those versions?

It has been said to be the PS4 version. Why would Ubisoft show the inferior looking versions anyway?

#40 Edited by TheHBK (5547 posts) -

It looks ok to me. I am gonna be playing it on my Triple Titan Black rig.

#41 Posted by Korwin (2979 posts) -

@thehbk said:

It looks ok to me. I am gonna be playing it on my Triple Titan Black rig.

Online
#42 Posted by Kidavenger (3599 posts) -

The building on the left when you go over the bridge looks completely different between the two different versions which doesn't make sense, is there anyway to verify they are even the same game?

I'm betting the bridge is just a reused model that we are seeing compared in two different games.

#43 Edited by Jimbo (9931 posts) -

Srsly? My toaster has better graphics than that.

#44 Edited by GrantHeaslip (1662 posts) -

I don't care for Ubisoft Montreal games, so don't read this as a defense of Watch Dogs, but we're talking about a cherry-picked GIF from a compressed web video. This wouldn't be the first time that NeoGAF (I assume?) worked itself into a frenzy over a tiny sample of a game that turned out to be unrepresentative of the final product in aggregate. Remember the shitshow surrounding that performance analysis of a specific scene in Dead Rising 3?

If Watch Dogs turns out to be a disappointing game, I doubt it will have anything to do with this.

#45 Posted by Scroll (601 posts) -

#46 Edited by GERALTITUDE (3505 posts) -

@atwa said:

@geraltitude said:

Looks very PS3/360... we sure it's not those versions?

It has been said to be the PS4 version. Why would Ubisoft show the inferior looking versions anyway?

I guess I'm just unclear on where this footage is from in the first place? This wasn't in the latest trailer was it?

I'd say that it'd be very smart to show the inferior versions sooner rather than later or you end up in this Titanfall situation where everyone is whispering about how the 360 version must look like complete garbage since it isn't being shown.

#47 Edited by Slag (4723 posts) -

Wouldn't be the first time, graphics on a huge release didn't come close to matching the hype/previews.

If true definitely disappointing though.

#48 Edited by GunslingerPanda (4847 posts) -

I dunno about you guys but I'll probably wait to play it myself before judging it rather than panicking over a five second gif.

#49 Posted by Dalai (7056 posts) -

We'll find out in a few months, guys. Stop with the panicking, people.

#50 Posted by Marokai (3110 posts) -

The lighting in all of these preview videos and images is what looks the most disappointing to me. It's like they just turned 90% of the lighting effects off.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.