Watch Dogs PS4, Xbox One graphics match PC high settings

lol this guy, he really should learn when to shut the fuck up...All he is doing is pissing gamers off. So what this tells me is they've either gimped the pc version or he is just talking out of his ass, considering he also claims you'll need a minimum of 6GB ram to even run the game on PC...Ubisoft really should staple his mouth shut.
 
Well if that is Gameplay then it looks awesome, But why do i feel that this is optimized for Nvidia more than ATI :(
 
The Joker said:
lol this guy, he really should learn when to shut the fuck up...All he is doing is pissing gamers off. So what this tells me is they've either gimped the pc version or he is just talking out of his ass, considering he also claims you'll need a minimum of 6GB ram to even run the game on PC...Ubisoft really should staple his mouth shut.
Click to expand...

I am willing to try the PC version on a Pentium G/i3 GTX750ti and 4GB's of RAM.

The minimum specs need a Q8400

According to CPU Boss: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core2-Quad-Q8400-vs-Intel-Core-i3-4130 an i3 haswell has the same performance as it.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-4130+@+3.40GHz&id=2015
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Quad+Q8400+@+2.66GHz&id=1041

Then they go on to state: Graphics: DirectX 11 graphics card with 1 GB Video RAM – Nvidia Geforce GTX 460 or AMD Radeon HD 5770

Only 1GB of VRAM? Okay... GTX 460/HD5770 they say: http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-5770-vs-GeForce-GTX-460 While the two cards are similar they have varying strenths and weaknesses.

I can see a GTX 750Ti/non-Ti handle the game well enough at 720/900p maybe 1080p at a stretch, still some funky QA and marketing going on here.
 
Last edited:
@Glordit

I'll be testing it with a AMD FX8350 @4.5Ghz and a i7 4770K + i5 4670K with both a R9 290X and a 780Ti.
The thing that is really grinding me is this idiot that keeps on spewing shit, I don't think he even realizes how he is pissing off gamers.
This game has gone from "you'll need a top of the range rig with a minimum i7 and 780 to max it" to "As long as your cpu scores 9000 passmark (i5) and you have a GTX670 you'll be able to run it at ultra"

Then in the same breath he says the game won't even launch unless you have a minimum of 6GB ram..

This game is either made up of piss poor coding or he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Seriously wtf are they doing at Ubisoft? Do they not know when to stop talking...
 
Last edited:
Joker then tell me quick should i worry or not I5 Quad 8gb ram and R9 270X O.C edition will i be able to enjoy this game or not my upgrade is only in Sept or oct
 
AlienTaker said:
Joker then tell me quick should i worry or not I5 Quad 8gb ram and R9 270X O.C edition will i be able to enjoy this game or not my upgrade is only in Sept or oct
Click to expand...

Your system will play it just fine.

Joker and I are complaining about Watch Dogs "creative director" Jonathan Morin, that they have spewing out crap with regards to PC specs.
 
AlienTaker said:
Joker then tell me quick should i worry or not I5 Quad 8gb ram and R9 270X O.C edition will i be able to enjoy this game or not my upgrade is only in Sept or oct
Click to expand...

You'll be fine, we're just talking about this ubisoft tard that doesn't stop talking and he keeps on spewing rubbish.
They should put a gag order on him for the rest of his life.
 
The Joker said:
lol this guy, he really should learn when to shut the fuck up...All he is doing is pissing gamers off. So what this tells me is they've either gimped the pc version or he is just talking out of his ass, considering he also claims you'll need a minimum of 6GB ram to even run the game on PC...Ubisoft really should staple his mouth shut.
Click to expand...

Sigh, it's like your intentionally being difficult about this. PC games 99% of the time go up to ultra, high != ultra. There is also no mention of FPS. So the consoles can do it at 30FPS, but PCs can get above 100FPS. The difference is huge. If it's such a big deal to you please cancel your pre-order.
 
What came out of that Twitter Q&A is that Morin is not really fussed about how the game performs on PC. All they're really worried about at this point is how much they can mitigate the issues with the game on the Xbox One.

Unless they've optimised the game to require four cores by default and to not run well on a dual-core, even a Pentium G3220 should run it just fine on Low settings. If this was a completely next-gen game like The Division then I'd be less skeptical.
 
Wyzak said:
Sigh, it's like your intentionally being difficult about this. PC games 99% of the time go up to ultra, high != ultra. There is also no mention of FPS. So the consoles can do it at 30FPS, but PCs can get above 100FPS. The difference is huge. If it's such a big deal to you please cancel your pre-order.
Click to expand...

Nvm not gonna bother with a response to this.
 
Last edited:
The Joker said:
No because your being a fanboy, your blind to their mistakes.
The game hasn't even released yet and your defending them...I don't get it. Are you paid by Ubisoft or something?

Also there are thousands of people complaining about the same thing, just because you live in your Ubisoft fanboy box doesn't mean we all have too.
Click to expand...

No, firstly graphics isn't everything to me. I've played MUDs for years and they are some of my best gaming memories. Secondly, you sound like a broken tape recorded and don't take anything that the guy says for face value. He says high is comparable to the console, not the best setting is comparable to the best setting. You take no mention of my post about the frame rate. You take no mention of the fact that they've said several times that you can't compare a day screenshot in one area to a nigh screenshot in another area where it's raining. You also can't compare the consoles to PCs directly and let's face facts: for most of the screen shots we have no idea which platform it's running on.

I'm not a fan boy, but I'm really looking forward to this game which for all intents and purposes looks to be an awesome game. Sure it's graphics might end up being slightly worse than they originally marketed, but it might also not be. I am however 100% sure that that won't be the deciding factor for me whether or not it will be an awesome game.

I have respect for Ubisoft for deciding to delay the game because they weren't happy with the state it was in, this delay cost them a crap load of money and they took it on the chin.
I have respect for Ubisoft for realizing that always-online is a failed concept and actually removing it from their games.

Watch Dogs will be an awesome game irrespective of whether the graphics is holy-sh1t amazing, or just great.
 
Let's move on from the negativity for now, Ubisoft made a mistake and should possibly hire better people to do their public speaking. Only a few days until the game releases and we're all still looking forward to it in some way, let's focus on that. Keep calm and watch the Launch Trailer:

 
@Wyzak if only you knew why the game was really delayed lol
More to do with Nvidia then Ubisoft but anyway there is no reasoning with you, already claiming the game will be amazing yet you haven't played it at all :wtf: lol

Good luck and God speed.
 
You're more than welcome to be a cynic, I generally am. But it's within your power to act on it. If you don't like it cancel your pre-order. Or are you just going to whine and whine and whine and whine, without any action?

IMG_23052014_112315.png
 
Last edited:
Wyzak said:
No, firstly graphics isn't everything to me. I've played MUDs for years and they are some of my best gaming memories. Secondly, you sound like a broken tape recorded and don't take anything that the guy says for face value. He says high is comparable to the console, not the best setting is comparable to the best setting. You take no mention of my post about the frame rate. You take no mention of the fact that they've said several times that you can't compare a day screenshot in one area to a nigh screenshot in another area where it's raining. You also can't compare the consoles to PCs directly and let's face facts: for most of the screen shots we have no idea which platform it's running on.

I'm not a fan boy, but I'm really looking forward to this game which for all intents and purposes looks to be an awesome game. Sure it's graphics might end up being slightly worse than they originally marketed, but it might also not be. I am however 100% sure that that won't be the deciding factor for me whether or not it will be an awesome game.

I have respect for Ubisoft for deciding to delay the game because they weren't happy with the state it was in, this delay cost them a crap load of money and they took it on the chin.
I have respect for Ubisoft for realizing that always-online is a failed concept and actually removing it from their games.

Watch Dogs will be an awesome game irrespective of whether the graphics is holy-sh1t amazing, or just great.
Click to expand...

I think the issue that Joker is having is not purely the graphical fidelity of the game; but rather the fact that Ubisoft is sending extremely mixed messages about the graphics. I do agree that if the game is truly amazing then the graphics need not blow me away; however it doesn't inspire confidence in the product that every few weeks they are changing their story. Also a delay in production schedule does not equal to a great game. The game is out on Tuesday so let's reserve judgement ,positive or negative, until the game comes out and we will see which of the legends concerning it ring true.
 
Snare said:
I think the issue that Joker is having is not purely the graphical fidelity of the game; but rather the fact that Ubisoft is sending extremely mixed messages about the graphics. I do agree that if the game is truly amazing then the graphics need not blow me away; however it doesn't inspire confidence in the product that every few weeks they are changing their story. Also a delay in production schedule does not equal to a great game. The game is out on Tuesday so let's reserve judgement ,positive or negative, until the game comes out and we will see which of the legends concerning it ring true.
Click to expand...

I can appreciate that, but then he is fully within his rights to cancel his pre-order. Constantly over-analysing every single press release and sounding like a broken tape recorder isn't helping anybody.
 
This whole Watch dogs negativity is getting out of control.I have it on pre order for pc so come Tuesday and the game is getting panned in reviews I will cancel that pre order,like I do with all my games on pre order.I personally dont understand this internet outrage it is not like Ubisoft is making you buy there game if you don't like the way it looks or plays don't buy it but give it a chance it could actually be a good game regardless of it's graphical performance.
 
i hope the gameplay is solid, i must say the graphics does seem downscaled quite alot, it also seems like they've simplified the geometry in certain areas and alot of the ambiance is missing if you compare it to the e3 2012 build

E3 2012

WD_E3-2012_scene2.jpg



Now

findjoseph.jpg
 
As posted by Eugene in another thread:


The guy's specs are apparently:
4770K@4500MHz
16Gb RAM
GTX 780 OC
SSD
Click to expand...

However in comments:
Jordan Khoviteri-Zadeh

So... How much of your system RAM is this thing using? Does it actually require the 4GB+ the developers were talking about?

I have 16GB too, but I'm curious.

Helby (video poster)

Actually it uses 2.7Gb of RAM
Click to expand...

So everybody breathe deeply, take your suppositories and relax. As Joker said... Morin's just spewing his usual crap. Don't take him seriously at all.

My biggest concern would be whether this game (since it's got NVIDIA branding all over it) will use PhysX and how heavily that wonderful proprietary bullshit will affect AMD gamers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top