Watch_Dogs downgradeaton confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.
That was in night time footage. Have you got any daytime footage to prove your case? From what they said it is a specific issue with the fact that there are thousands of light sources being cast at night. I don't think there is a game with that many dynamic lightsources, so they had to cut it. During the day, shadows should be cast normally. Certainly in the footage released at E3 that seemed to be the case...
Do you have a source for that? Because yeah, seems like all of the recent footage is just night time, so maybe you're right
 
Wait... you're saying the confirmed PS4 footage in that first link has also been downgraded since then? I don't think that's what most people are saying in this thread - most are still comparing the initial reveal (supposedly running on PC, that is also shown in your first link) with the footage from the Italian website, which shows mostly daytime environments.

And now we're saying animation is step back too? Whaaa?

No, I'm saying first ps4 footage showed seems better to the last story trailer. Yeah animations ingame, appears less smooth to me. But mostly, lights system seems incredibly worst in the story trailer.
 
And how does that clear ubisoft of deceiving people?
Some of the ps3 games shown also exceeded the trailers but that doesn't change the bullshit that was the killzone 2 and motorstorm trailers

people fell for those too
Killzone 2 and Motorstorm were actual CG trailers. It was plain as day. They actually DID attempt to lie about those, though, as you say.

With Watch Dogs, I'm pretty positive that was not the case. What they showed in 2012 is what they were working on at the time. That was their ambition. They didn't create that to fool people. It wasn't just a CG trailer. It wasn't malicious intent either.

Something went wrong during development and now we have this situation. It sucks and is disappointing but it doesn't imply that they were actually engaging in wrongdoing back in 2012.
 
You don't have to show targets to the public - you can keep those for internal use. If you're showing something to the public, without any disclaimers, then that becomes the gospel. What else could they possibly be implying with an E3 stage demo?

Seriously, this is indisputable. I don't see how anyone could not agree with this.

You can debate about the goodness of the graphics, but the downgrade is obvious, just as Ubisoft's deception.
 
The car from OP is not as bad as it looks:

faclvx.gif
 
No, I'm saying first ps4 footage showed seems better to the last story trailer. Yeah animations ingame, appears less smooth to me. But mostly, lights system seems incredibly worst in the story trailer.
But almost the entire video is in the rain, whereas there is no rain in the story trailer. Rain makes a massive difference to how the lights look, reflections are everywhere. I'm not sure how you're able to say that the lights look worse.
 
Yeah agreed, I like to ponder the psychology of it. The puppy metaphor was spot on given that. If it was Cousin-IT, the tomatoes would be launched in abundance, if their not already (unfortunately)

Given the PS4 real name vs Alias options, hopefully that online offensiveness will decline, although seemingly it may not be fully implemented.

I fully opted in to put my real face and picture from FB on my ps4. But considering they're doing the 'name request' thing, I assume it's only for personal use. If Sony took the risk and forced everybody to post their real name, we'd have a couple of jokers with fake names and images sure. But I do feel the grand majority of issues with online communities would go down. Obviously there's no evidence as I can't think of a major gaming multiplayer community that used real names.
 
It's not like a full game that looks like the E3 demo exists. They most certainly decided how much they would need to downgrade before all art assets were finished.

Also there are 2 main factors that affect how the graphics end up being:
  • First the hardware performance. This one everyone knows. A game is usually built around a hardware specification.
  • Second is money. One of the other reasons that Watchdogs does not look like that e3 demo could be the monetary cost of maintaining that graphical fidelity consistently through an open world.


  • I consider cross-gen to be a possible factor also, perhaps even next-gen parity on the lowest performing console, the only contradiction is, the lowest performing should be capable of more than what is being shown in this thread.

    I am still in denial that we are seeing the PS4 version, if Sucker-punch - a first party studio can create an open world on a budget then surely a huge company like Ubisoft with their fingers in both console pies could financially and technically match it atleast negligibly.
 
It's not like a full game that looks like the E3 demo exists. They most certainly decided how much they would need to downgrade before all art assets were finished.

Also there are 2 main factors that affect how the graphics end up being:
  • First the hardware performance. This one everyone knows. A game is usually built around a hardware specification.
  • Second is money. One of the other reasons that Watchdogs does not look like that e3 demo could be the monetary cost of maintaining that graphical fidelity consistently through an open world.
I guess they could release that demo for PC looking exactly like they promised. But whats the point?

Yes, but the point here that everyone has is they shouldn't show off games before they've reached the point of determining what level of visual fidelity is going to be doable with their budget and time that they have and if they do determine there will be a lower fidelity, then be honest about it rather than treating others like idiots going "there was no downgrade"

I was personally fine with the fidelity they showed off last E3. If the game ends up like that, then I'm fine. Though a downgrade from the first reveal, it looked like the feel was still maintained.

I just hope right now, the reason it looks so different is because of the totally different time of day, and that the stuff they showed off last year is still in. There is something off with the look of the game in those lighting conditions, looks outright cartoony in some moments, which is not the vibe that the game gave off at e3 2012 and 2013.

Well hopefully they'll be smart enough to start the demo at night, in the rain. >_<

Or at sunset, where the shadows are longer and more abundant with fog or wind, and blowing leaves in the wind.
 
But almost the entire video is in the rain, whereas there is no rain in the story trailer. Rain makes a massive difference to how the lights look, reflections are everywhere. I'm not sure how you're able to say that the lights look worse.

I'm looking the surface of the environment. Lights seems not to reflect properly, or they have a limited range compared the old video. I don't think rain it has to do so much with this thing. Good for you if you think it's not the case, but I was really surprise to notice this difference from the last trailer.
 
Or at sunset, where the shadows are longer and more abundant with fog or wind, and blowing leaves in the wind.
Indeed.

I'm looking the surface of the environment. Lights seems not to reflect properly, or they have a limited range compared the old video. I don't think rain it has to do so much with this thing. Good for you if you think it's not the case, but I was really surprise to notice this difference from the last trailer.
I'm confused... if the surface is not wet... why would you expect lights to reflect off it?

I think he meant to say "How long have you been working at Ubisoft?"
lulz. I would love to work at Ubisoft >_<
I think
 
I feel a mod should update the OP.

The graphics were downgraded but not as much as pic in OP leads to believe.

Or at least add the videos so people can compare it.
 
I fully opted in to put my real face and picture from FB on my ps4. But considering they're doing the 'name request' thing, I assume it's only for personal use. If Sony took the risk and forced everybody to post their real name, we'd have a couple of jokers with fake names and images sure. But I do feel the grand majority of issues with online communities would go down. Obviously there's no evidence as I can't think of a major gaming multiplayer community that used real names.

I am exactly the same. Iv fully opted in, not just for people I know but anything.

I'm all for using Aliases to a degree, not quite the same bad-ass killing spree when 'little Johnny' takes your head off with an RPG. Alias in-game, on the score board Real-name with "ALIAS". Can see its merit :)

I suspect alot of forums, would be chaos without moderation. Lucky enough there are various levels of moderation/maturity here.
 
I have a feeling the maxed out PC version will look much better than the PS4 version, just look a the recommended system requirements:
- 3.5ghz i7 3770
- 64bit only OS
- 8GB of RAM
- 2GB of VRAM
- GTX 460 minimum
 
The E3 demo was running on a computer spec'ed "close to the PS4," so any downgrade is not from the hardware side. I really don't understand why they did any of this.

Dragon Age Inquisition is cross gen - it looks properly this gen in the gameplay videos (even at the pre-alpha stage).

Infamous Second Son, though it may have had a tiny downgrade, looks properly this gen and is not possible on older consoles.

If other developers are pulling this off, what's Ubi's excuse?.


What tiny downgrade did infamous have, most have commented it looks better?
 
I have a feeling the maxed out PC version will look much better than the PS4 version, just look a the recommended system requirements:
- 3.5ghz i7
- 64bit only OS
- 8GB of RAM
- 2GB of VRAM
- GTX 460 minimum


Maybe, I smell an unoptimised mess that needs grunt.
 
Twitch is off to a real friendly start:

Moondizzle: I bet the NeoGAF bafooons will come in here and troll the game, i hope that Ubisoft bans them all because this will be the best game ever released
 
What tiny downgrade did infamous have, most have commented it looks better?

For the most part the game still appears to look amazing, and it has gone gold. There are some people mentioning certain shadows didn't appear when they saw one of the gameplay videos, but for the most part it looks amazing.
 
That bridge is a hackable object which makes it glow and is not some product of awkwardly poor lighting underneath the car. Things hence has gotten progressively worse here.
 
I can't watch that at work and don't really remember what it looked like.

Is it the same as the reveal? If so, then yes, Ubi done F'd up big time and Sony SHOULD NOT have allowed them to show this if they knew it wouldn't look the same on release.
It's not the same as the reveal. Totally different footage. It didn't look quite as nice as the original footage, but it was in the same ballpark.
 
The chat is hilarious:
"Moondizzle: I was ban from NeoGAF but they have no power here, i hope people EXPOSE mods like Nirolka for being paid off to trash Sony platforms. This game was NOT downgrade and that will be PROOVED by this stream. Lets do this Ubisoft!"​
 

the more and more I see new GIF's the more I feel like there are now only two times of day.....day and night and the awesome light period that was in the 2012 version will never be shown.


I wonder if they removed the 24 hour cycle from the game......and thats why lighting seems baked.
 
Moondizzle: I was ban from NeoGAF but they have no power here, i hope people EXPOSE mods like Nirolka for being paid off to trash Sony platforms. This game was NOT downgrade and that will be PROOVED by this stream. Lets do this Ubisoft!

Oh boy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom