Watchdogs PC version trailer looks

  • 133 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by lglz1337 (3115 posts) -

Goddamn nice

Hbboo whatever + i want this on console right now!

or what setup do i need for this ?

#2 Posted by clyde46 (44004 posts) -

Thats it, I'm changing my pre-order now. Flappy coat >>> 1 hour of extra content.

#3 Edited by lostrib (33272 posts) -

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

#4 Posted by scatteh316 (4804 posts) -

PC = Best version

#5 Posted by clyde46 (44004 posts) -

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

#6 Posted by MBirdy88 (7406 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

Hmmm glad I got it on PS4 tbh.... the online is probably more active aswell.

Will probably rent Watchdogs... just seems like another Ubisoft collection simulator. (E.G ass creed, Far Cry 3) none of these games have a "living world" vibe.... just points to collect. the only sandbox that feels like a real city is GTA... suprisingly.

#7 Posted by with_teeth26 (6020 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

I wonder if the recent Nvidia drivers that granted huge performance gains will help with these kinds of slowdowns

#8 Posted by kalipekona (2296 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

What? I ran AC4 on an HD 7950 and maxed it out at vsynced 30fps. It might not be the most well optimized game ever (especially on processor side), but it looks better than the PS4 version and runs at a solid 30fps on a two year old card. Don't blow it out of proportion. It runs even better on my GTX 770. Hardly can be described as running "like ass".

Yes, I would love to max it out and run it at a solid 60fps, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some people make it sound. I hope Watch Dogs will have better utilization of multiple cores. It does seem to have more advanced simulations though so it might still be a little difficult to achieve a solid 60fps or higher with single graphics card setups.

#9 Edited by 04dcarraher (19171 posts) -

@kalipekona said:

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

What? I ran AC4 on an HD 7950 and maxed it out at vsynced 30fps. It might not be the most well optimized game ever (especially on processor side), but it looks better than the PS4 version and runs at a solid 30fps on a two year old card. Don't blow it out of proportion. It runs even better on my GTX 770. Hardly can be described as running "like ass".

Yes, I would love to max it out and run it at a solid 60fps, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some people make it sound. I hope Watch Dogs will have better utilization of multiple cores. It does seem to have more advanced simulations though so it might still be a little difficult to achieve a solid 60fps or higher with single graphics card setups.

Here is the problem with AC4 its only uses two threads which limits the cpu's ability to feed the gpu the data it needs and process all other items for the game. Which is why the higher the settings and stronger the gpu the performance loss is more significant. Also AC4's performance is dependent on the cpu being used. The newer and or higher clock the cpu is the better your experience will be, which is why having an i5 or i7 does so much better then any of AMD's 6 or 8 cored cpu's since their much slower clock per clock and only get to use two cores.

#10 Posted by chikenfriedrice (9692 posts) -

Well yeah...it is the PC after all.

#11 Edited by granddogg (409 posts) -

will grab this on pc so happy i picked up that gtx760

#12 Posted by 04dcarraher (19171 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

I wonder if the recent Nvidia drivers that granted huge performance gains will help with these kinds of slowdowns

Nvidia's new drivers does increase performance with AC4 and bunch of other games, but they cant fix the core problem with AC4 with only using two cores/threads limiting cpu processing which affects how well the cpu feeds the gpu while having to do all other jobs for the game and windows. Ive seen allocating the game's cpu usage to the last two cores helps abit also.

#13 Posted by ReadingRainbow4 (13113 posts) -

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

#14 Posted by Vatusus (4353 posts) -

Looks nice but it still doesnt look as good as the E3 2012 trailer.

#15 Posted by clyde46 (44004 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

What? I ran AC4 on an HD 7950 and maxed it out at vsynced 30fps. It might not be the most well optimized game ever (especially on processor side), but it looks better than the PS4 version and runs at a solid 30fps on a two year old card. Don't blow it out of proportion. It runs even better on my GTX 770. Hardly can be described as running "like ass".

Yes, I would love to max it out and run it at a solid 60fps, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some people make it sound. I hope Watch Dogs will have better utilization of multiple cores. It does seem to have more advanced simulations though so it might still be a little difficult to achieve a solid 60fps or higher with single graphics card setups.

I have the most powerful single GPU on the planet and it still can't run that game. The opening scene was horrific with the FPS bouncing all of the place.

#16 Posted by donalbane (16178 posts) -

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

PhysX added a lot to Borderlands 2.

#17 Posted by EducatingU_PCMR (534 posts) -

Looks as good as the E3 2013 PS4 demo.

It's still downgraded from the 2012 demo though.

#18 Posted by napo_sp (206 posts) -

@lglz1337 said:

Goddamn nice

Hbboo whatever + i want this on console right now!

or what setup do i need for this ?

still not as good as E3 2012 reveal!

ubisoft lies, see it for yourself

E3 2012 had better lighting, rain and bokeh dof.

#19 Edited by Ribstaylor1 (436 posts) -

That video was horrible quality but the world still feels less alive and active as the previous versions shown had. Also why no PhysX? I've seen many games use that to great effect but watch dogs doesn't? Kind of seems odd, when even FTP games like harken incorporate the tech.

#20 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (13113 posts) -

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

PhysX added a lot to Borderlands 2.

I haven't played that game in a while but didn't it just add particle effects like blood and the like?

That's what I remember anyway.

#21 Posted by Heil68 (43244 posts) -

Getting for PS4 first, then I'll pick up PC version when it's on sale for under $10

#22 Posted by lawlessx (46439 posts) -

kinda hard to forget the reveal trailer. was so blown away by it

#23 Posted by kalipekona (2296 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@kalipekona said:

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

What? I ran AC4 on an HD 7950 and maxed it out at vsynced 30fps. It might not be the most well optimized game ever (especially on processor side), but it looks better than the PS4 version and runs at a solid 30fps on a two year old card. Don't blow it out of proportion. It runs even better on my GTX 770. Hardly can be described as running "like ass".

Yes, I would love to max it out and run it at a solid 60fps, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some people make it sound. I hope Watch Dogs will have better utilization of multiple cores. It does seem to have more advanced simulations though so it might still be a little difficult to achieve a solid 60fps or higher with single graphics card setups.

I have the most powerful single GPU on the planet and it still can't run that game. The opening scene was horrific with the FPS bouncing all of the place.

Like I said, I've been able to get a solid 30fps with an HD 7950.

If people are talking like "oh I'll just get the PS4 version" then what's wrong with playing a superior-looking version on PC at a solid 30fps? I mean, obviously 60fps is much better than 30fps, but a solid 30fps on PC with better graphics and cleaner image quality is still better than a somewhat inferior looking version on console with worse image quality and more framerate drops.

I think the problem is that a lot of PC gamers don't know how to get a steady vsynced 30fps. You can't simply use a typical framerate limiter because the frame delivery will be out of sync with the refresh rate of of the display and you will still get some judder (although a lot less than if you let it fluctuate up and down). In order to get a steady 30fps without judder you need to use "double vsync" if you are on an AMD card or "half refresh rate vsync" if you are on Nvidia. These features can be found in RadeonPro and Nvidia Inspector respectively.

I don't know if that applies to you, but if not I can see why you would be frustrated not being able to achieve a solid 60fps with a high end card, I just don't think it is the end of the world. It still looks amazing running at a solid 30fps and offers better overall visuals than the console versions.

#24 Edited by clyde46 (44004 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@kalipekona said:

@clyde46 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

AC4 was riddled with that. I tried to run the game using the recommended setting for 780Ti and it still ran like ass.

What? I ran AC4 on an HD 7950 and maxed it out at vsynced 30fps. It might not be the most well optimized game ever (especially on processor side), but it looks better than the PS4 version and runs at a solid 30fps on a two year old card. Don't blow it out of proportion. It runs even better on my GTX 770. Hardly can be described as running "like ass".

Yes, I would love to max it out and run it at a solid 60fps, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some people make it sound. I hope Watch Dogs will have better utilization of multiple cores. It does seem to have more advanced simulations though so it might still be a little difficult to achieve a solid 60fps or higher with single graphics card setups.

I have the most powerful single GPU on the planet and it still can't run that game. The opening scene was horrific with the FPS bouncing all of the place.

Like I said, I've been able to get a solid 30fps with an HD 7950.

If people are talking like "oh I'll just get the PS4 version" then what's wrong with playing a superior-looking version on PC at a solid 30fps? I mean, obviously 60fps is much better than 30fps, but a solid 30fps on PC with better graphics and cleaner image quality is still better than a somewhat inferior looking version on console with worse image quality and more framerate drops.

I think the problem is that a lot of PC gamers don't know how to get a steady vsynced 30fps. You can't simply use a typical framerate limiter because the frame delivery will be out of sync with the refresh rate of of the display and you will still get some judder (although a lot less than if you let it fluctuate up and down). In order to get a steady 30fps without judder you need to use "double vsync" if you are on an AMD card or "half refresh rate vsync" if you are on Nvidia. These features can be found in RadeonPro and Nvidia Inspector respectively.

I don't know if that applies to you, but if not I can see why you would be frustrated not being able to achieve a solid 60fps with a high end card, I just don't think it is the end of the world. It still looks amazing running at a solid 30fps and offers better overall visuals than the console versions.

Nearly all my games are run at 60FPS, AC4 which was touted as a "Nvidia" title failed to play at all with the fastest (at the time) video game on their roster. I don't want to play at 30FPS, I game on PC because I can play at 60FPS or more. The fact is, the PS4 version at the time of launch was the best performing version.

However, thanks for the tip on that Vsync. Now I might be able to finish Mirrors Edge on PC without the horrible screen tearing.

#25 Edited by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

Game is potentially wasted.

#26 Posted by clyde46 (44004 posts) -

@donalbane said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

PhysX added a lot to Borderlands 2.

I haven't played that game in a while but didn't it just add particle effects like blood and the like?

That's what I remember anyway.

The liquid and particle effects were actually pretty cool.

#27 Posted by cfisher2833 (1547 posts) -

@lglz1337 said:

Goddamn nice

Hbboo whatever + i want this on console right now!

or what setup do i need for this ?

HBAO+ as well as TXAA are Nvidia exclusive features, meaning you won't get them on console or a gaming PC with an AMD GPU. They've released system specs already: pretty much an i5/ or 8 core AMD and a 560ti for recommended.

#28 Edited by pelvist (4577 posts) -

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

I hope they do, I love the physX effects.

#29 Posted by wis3boi (31009 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@donalbane said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

PhysX added a lot to Borderlands 2.

I haven't played that game in a while but didn't it just add particle effects like blood and the like?

That's what I remember anyway.

The liquid and particle effects were actually pretty cool.

best part about physx in that. In fact I'd say its the only game to date worth turning it on while playing.

#30 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (13113 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

@clyde46 said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@donalbane said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

PhysX added a lot to Borderlands 2.

I haven't played that game in a while but didn't it just add particle effects like blood and the like?

That's what I remember anyway.

The liquid and particle effects were actually pretty cool.

best part about physx in that. In fact I'd say its the only game to date worth turning it on while playing.

Yeah that's true, I'm just referring to the majority of titles that employed it.

Borderlands did feel really flat without it.

#31 Posted by WallofTruth (1384 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

Thats it, I'm changing my pre-order now. Flappy coat >>> 1 hour of extra content.

The PC version also has the 1 hour extra content, at least the Steam version does.

#32 Posted by Nanomage (2367 posts) -

While it doesn´t look quite as good as the E3 version it´s close and it looks considerably better than the console versions so it´s a no brainer wich version to get,for me at least.

#33 Posted by blackace (20007 posts) -

Looks as good as the E3 2013 PS4 demo.

It's still downgraded from the 2012 demo though.

Looks better than the PS4 demo. The cars looked terrible. Love the weather effects in this game. Nice reflexions of the water. Is this even going to run at 60fps on the PC with all these affects turned on? That's the big question.

#34 Posted by Cloud_imperium (2255 posts) -

Yep , it looks as good as initial demo .

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

PC is lead platform for Watch Dogs but I understand how you feel after AC3 .

#35 Edited by cainetao11 (16587 posts) -

May have to change my pre order now

#36 Edited by lglz1337 (3115 posts) -

@cfisher2833 said:

@lglz1337 said:

Goddamn nice

Hbboo whatever + i want this on console right now!

or what setup do i need for this ?

HBAO+ as well as TXAA are Nvidia exclusive features, meaning you won't get them on console or a gaming PC with an AMD GPU. They've released system specs already: pretty much an i5/ or 8 core AMD and a 560ti for recommended.

so wait what ? this means if i have a AMD Gfx card i will not get these features ?

did i read that correct or is it a typo ?

#37 Edited by lostrib (33272 posts) -

@lglz1337 said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@lglz1337 said:

Goddamn nice

Hbboo whatever + i want this on console right now!

or what setup do i need for this ?

HBAO+ as well as TXAA are Nvidia exclusive features, meaning you won't get them on console or a gaming PC with an AMD GPU. They've released system specs already: pretty much an i5/ or 8 core AMD and a 560ti for recommended.

so wait what ? this means if i have a AMD Gfx card i will not get these features ?

Well the video says NVIDIA PC technologies...

#38 Posted by clyde46 (44004 posts) -

@lglz1337 said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@lglz1337 said:

Goddamn nice

Hbboo whatever + i want this on console right now!

or what setup do i need for this ?

HBAO+ as well as TXAA are Nvidia exclusive features, meaning you won't get them on console or a gaming PC with an AMD GPU. They've released system specs already: pretty much an i5/ or 8 core AMD and a 560ti for recommended.

so wait what ? this means if i have a AMD Gfx card i will not get these features ?

Nope. Its an Nvidia title so no nice toys for you!

#39 Posted by donalbane (16178 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

@clyde46 said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@donalbane said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

PhysX added a lot to Borderlands 2.

I haven't played that game in a while but didn't it just add particle effects like blood and the like?

That's what I remember anyway.

The liquid and particle effects were actually pretty cool.

best part about physx in that. In fact I'd say its the only game to date worth turning it on while playing.

Yeah that's true, I'm just referring to the majority of titles that employed it.

Borderlands did feel really flat without it.

It was also used to decent effect in the Batman games. Papers, and in the Catwoman missions, currency, blowing around realistically and in great quantities, added a sense of atmosphere lacking on the console versions.

#40 Posted by cfisher2833 (1547 posts) -

@lglz1337 said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@lglz1337 said:

Goddamn nice

Hbboo whatever + i want this on console right now!

or what setup do i need for this ?

HBAO+ as well as TXAA are Nvidia exclusive features, meaning you won't get them on console or a gaming PC with an AMD GPU. They've released system specs already: pretty much an i5/ or 8 core AMD and a 560ti for recommended.

so wait what ? this means if i have a AMD Gfx card i will not get these features ?

did i read that correct or is it a typo ?

Yeah, but AMD GPUs will use HDAO (high definition ambient occlusion) for their more advanced ambient occlusion. TXAA is pretty nice, but also quite demanding; I imagine most people won't even be able to use it and maintain 60fps.

#41 Edited by cfisher2833 (1547 posts) -

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@wis3boi said:

@clyde46 said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@donalbane said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

Oh it will be if they're pushing the stupid physx crap.

PhysX added a lot to Borderlands 2.

I haven't played that game in a while but didn't it just add particle effects like blood and the like?

That's what I remember anyway.

The liquid and particle effects were actually pretty cool.

best part about physx in that. In fact I'd say its the only game to date worth turning it on while playing.

Yeah that's true, I'm just referring to the majority of titles that employed it.

Borderlands did feel really flat without it.

It was also used to decent effect in the Batman games. Papers, and in the Catwoman missions, currency, blowing around realistically and in great quantities, added a sense of atmosphere lacking on the console versions.

My personal favorite was the PhysX deformable snow in Arkham Origins. Not only did it look amazing (what with the tessellation and shading), but it also didn't create any noticeable performance drops, even when I deformed the shit out of the snow.

Borderlands had some good PhysX features, but some--like the rock and debris particles that were created during combat--got really ridiculous. It was just annoying to try to find all the dropped loot when there were piles and piles of scrap metal and rocks everywhere on the floor.

#42 Edited by lunar1122 (658 posts) -

these specific features wont be available to AMD cards , but i wouldn't be worried about that. TXAA isnt as good as MSAA and im pretty sure Watchdogs will have MSAA... TXAA is on the lines of FXAA.. Which is too say its crap .. Even on Nvidia cards you should still be using MSAA

The HBAO+ on the other hand looks decent and will be the only thing us AMD users will miss.. But normal HBAO wouldnt be that to far behind .. I doubt any of us would really notice the difference...

#43 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16252 posts) -

Certainly the best looking open world game out there.

But I'm sure my game will look nothing like that, as I have an AMD card. Game will clearly be optimized for Nvidia only.

Yep , it looks as good as initial demo .

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

PC is lead platform for Watch Dogs but I understand how you feel after AC3 .

Assassin's Creed 3s optimization is so bad.

Unfortunately it doesn't have a lot of options you can turn off.

#44 Posted by Cloud_imperium (2255 posts) -

@R4gn4r0k: AMD or nVIDIA , it doesn't matter . The game is going to look amazing on PC . Some games are more friendly to AMD hardware , others are to nVIDIA .

#45 Posted by m3dude1 (1040 posts) -

txaa is the best version of anti aliasing there is from a quality/perf stand point. hbao+ works on all gpus, only txaa is nvidia exclusive.

#46 Posted by tdkmillsy (1261 posts) -

This could be the last push for me to build a PC. Has to be a good game first.

#47 Edited by kalipekona (2296 posts) -

@Cloud_imperium said:

Yep , it looks as good as initial demo .

@lostrib said:

hopefully it's not just a bunch of horribly optimized crap that i'll just turn off

PC is lead platform for Watch Dogs but I understand how you feel after AC3 .

Yeah, I'm not seeing where the initial 2012 E3 demo looked better. I think this actually shows off more impressive tech. Some of those shots of many trees throughout the city blowing in the wind is something I have never quite seen in a game. Or that whole field of grass where every blade seemed to be swaying. We've seen animated foliage before, of course, but nothing on that scale. Also, the specularity and reflection maps on the cars look great and have good LOD--even when a car is far away from the camera it doesn't seem to lose those qualities.

#48 Posted by kipsta77 (915 posts) -

Now THAT'S the Watch Dogs I knew and loved! Pre-purchased on Steam!

#49 Posted by blangenakker (2171 posts) -

Actually looking pretty good there

#50 Edited by NFJSupreme (5127 posts) -

The difference between PC and Console is already this big. It's been less than a year. This is what happens when consoles are launched with ancient hardware by tech standards. Imagine how different PC vs Console will look in two years?