[QUOTE=Fish_poke;44924134]Sorry for seeming like a dick, but a lot of the stuff you post is holding games to an impossible standard. Really need to bring your standard down a bit.[/QUOTE]
Ok, just out of interest what is this stuff I post? Because it seems recently I've said how average Watch_Dogs looks, talked about CS and Hearthstone and expressed how I don't really enjoy realistic racing games.
Why is this funny?
[QUOTE=dai;44915297] Plus there did seem to be deformation of the car, just not wildly exaggerated smashes.[/QUOTE]
this was on page 2 but i have to disagree with it, and point out that gta iv's car deformation is nowhere near "wildly exaggerated". it's still pretty tame compared to real world crashes. light deformation such as in watch dogs looks absolutely ridiculous imo. it's fitting for a game like sr2, but not for this kind of stuff, and especially not for a "next gen" game
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;44924955]this was on page 2 but i have to disagree with it, and point out that gta iv's car deformation is nowhere near "wildly exaggerated". it's still pretty tame compared to real world crashes. light deformation such as in watch dogs looks absolutely ridiculous imo. it's fitting for a game like sr2, but not for this kind of stuff, and especially not for a "next gen" game[/QUOTE]
it seems to not even be dynamic deformation? it's just swapping out bits of the model
so really, no matter how hard you ram your car into a wall it will always have only 4 states.
normal
kinda fucked
fucked up
really fucked up
maybe i've just been spoiled, but i personally think such an archaic system should be phased out by now since it's already been proven to work well in games.
GTA IV is still one of the best-looking most immersion-inducing carefully crafted detailed gaming experiences I can think of. It really is sad. I mean, I knew that Watch_Dogs would be kinda average since all you've even heard about it is that it's supposed to look really pretty. If it was really something special they would be showing off way more gameplay before launch.
This doesn't go to say that Watch_Dogs is bad, but there's no way it could have lived up to the type of hype it was receiving.
What with Bethesda doing Oblivion the Fallout: Oblivion, Fallout: New Oblivion and Skyblivion. GTA V taking it a notch back in some respects, Far Cry 3 looking alrightish. Seems like graphics have stagnated since GTA IV/Crysis/Oblivion.
Just wait til GTA V comes out on PC. :wink:
[editline]27th May 2014[/editline]
Also I was pissed that RDR/GTA V took out the fistfighting from GTA IV.
[QUOTE=Rossy167;44923155]Did you fucking play GTA5, most people's GOTY was it? Because for me it was Disappointment of the Year (excluding my mock exam results...)[/QUOTE]
it's certainly a shit ton better than you're giving it credit for.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44925536]it's certainly a shit ton better than you're giving it credit for.[/QUOTE]
Or maybe the quality of a game is subjective?
[QUOTE=Rossy167;44926212]Or maybe the quality of a game is subjective?[/QUOTE]
yes, yes it is, and as clever as you may think you are for pointing this out, I never made an objective claim about anything here.
however, if you think that you can't objectively compare technologies, you're wrong. if anything, the only thing about games we can objectify is their technology.
GTA IV was ahead of its time. It maybe not optimized for PC very well but the game is absolutely packed with detail and it's done well. It'll always be one of my favourite games.
You know for all the pretty effects and attention to details in GTA IV, it's a shame that Rockstar's finesse there couldn't spread onto the actual game's content. Because despite the size of the game world, the actual real-life locations it was supposed to resemble, the game world felt pretty empty, and had almost nothing for players to do besides the story line, and taking friends out to certain activities. The physics at the time were probably the best things going for the game, but it seems like that sort of thing only goes so far.
I certainly had my fun with whatever content I could scrounge from the sides of the barrel, but it'll always be one of the weakest GTA titles for me.
so fucking shameful
[QUOTE=Raptors!;44924205]Yo hold your fucking horses everyone, I need to point this shit out
The Graboids weren't even that big, not bigger than an actual bandwagon.
Get your Tremors trivia straight before you talk shit.
Fucking unbelievable.[/QUOTE]
They're big enough to swallow you whole.
Also after 12 hours of gameplay I'd like to point out that this game has outstanding detail in it's own right. Civilians have way more personality than GTA.
[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;44930250]They're big enough to swallow you whole.
Also after 12 hours of gameplay I'd like to point out that this game has outstanding detail in it's own right. Civilians have way more personality than GTA.[/QUOTE]
Having parts of the game that are really good still doesn't outweigh all the terrible issues, of which GTA still wins there
[QUOTE=djjkxbox360;44930441]Having parts of the game that are really good still doesn't outweigh all the terrible issues, of which GTA still wins there[/QUOTE]
Games great and a lot of the terrible issues portrayed in this thread are non-existent or minuscule.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44926449]yes, yes it is, and as clever as you may think you are for pointing this out, I never made an objective claim about anything here.
however, if you think that you can't objectively compare technologies, you're wrong. if anything, the only thing about games we can objectify is their technology.[/QUOTE]
it's [B]certainly[/B] a shit ton better than you're giving it credit for.
I'm going to refrain from my actual opinions on GTA5 because I assume people who disagree with me will think I'm dumb.
Only thing that you could whine about GTA V could be the GTA Online heists that they promised long time ago.
Still I never played GTA V so I can't know what would be wrong with it if there is something wrong with it.
[QUOTE=Rossy167;44930471]it's [B]certainly[/B] a shit ton better than you're giving it credit for.
I'm going to refrain from my actual opinions on GTA5 because I assume people who disagree with me will think I'm dumb.[/QUOTE]
i've literally never said it wasn't a good or fun game
just that it didn't live up to it's E3 video and thus was sold on a lie.
don't take it so personally.
and you're free to your opinion of GTAV, I thoroughly enjoyed it and think it's a good game.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44930552]i've literally never said it wasn't a good or fun game
just that it didn't live up to it's E3 video and thus was sold on a lie.
don't take it so personally.
and you're free to your opinion of GTAV, I thoroughly enjoyed it and think it's a good game.[/QUOTE]
Wait what were we arguing over? I agree with you on the topic of Watch_Dogs and GTA5 was a good game but not as good as everyone said it was and definitely didn't live up to the hype that lead to half the guys in my year bunking to play it (for me).
[QUOTE=Skipcast;44914483][t]http://u.rtag.me/s/km9sWxIo.jpg[/t][/QUOTE]
Just noticed something
[IMG]http://puu.sh/94Luv/ccc41fd143.jpg[/IMG]
They couldn't even do transparency right. What the hell is this.
BUT THE WAY THE WIND BLOWS AFFECTS HIS JACKET
[QUOTE=rikimaru6811;44931679]Just noticed something
[IMG]http://puu.sh/94Luv/ccc41fd143.jpg[/IMG]
They couldn't even do transparency right. What the hell is this.[/QUOTE]
that's a part of the effect...
did you also see the main menu and complain about the data corruption ?
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;44915119]Dont blame it on the devs, one ex-dev who worked on watch_dogs just did some shit on /v/, hell the thread is still up but the guy is gone.
Its the suites that ruined the game.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/GomlLvH.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Can I get a foolz link? Seems like a good read.
[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;44930250]They're big enough to swallow you whole.
Also after 12 hours of gameplay I'd like to point out that this game has outstanding detail in it's own right. Civilians have way more personality than GTA.[/QUOTE]
You pretty much just listed the ONLY outstanding detail, id be a liar if I said the civilians were shit, also the little dynamic events that can happen are a really nice touch, like two cars getting into a carcrash, sometimes 1 dies and the NPC comments on it, sometimes its a fender bender and they get out and start giving attitude to each other.
Yet at the same time, it feels so barren and lifeless, the scenery is pretty ugly except in a few places where the game CAN actually look great(not run great) on ultra, such as the northwestern area Pawnee.
Aside from that, the game doesnt really do anything amazing, the game itself ends up being just "good" like a flat 70/100, I mean the writing and campaign are awful, the writing is so bad its not even opinion, its just schlock. You know somethings wrong when your fucking minigames and sidemissions are the highlight of your game and not the actual main story of it.
Even the hacking becomes pretty mundane after like 5 hours of play, its the same old shit, and the gunlplay is so easy and you literally fucking shit out ammo that hacking is almost never worthwhile, you get LESS XP WAY LESS, from fucking stealth+hacking than you would guns blazing with Headshots.
So the main feature they wanted you to use, and most likely wanted you too be a non killing stealth guy, you dont get any rewards for it, and far less than just being a killing machine.
The best way to describe watch_dogs is honestly, its a game thats very good at keeping you busy with a lot of unique things to do, yet at the same time, it doesnt do any of them exceptionally well to be blown away.
Also not even including all the lies and bullshit marketing surrounding this game and the atrocious PC port that will most likely never get polished because its ubisoft. At least GTAIV ran fine on my PC, it was just an ugly looking PC port(people were hoping for big changing graphic options) and not so much a shitty unoptimized mess, it wasnt perfect by any means, but Watch_Dogs is an embarrassment, nothing in the game should be nearly as taxing as it is, because it looks like shit 90% of the time.
[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;44930463]Games great and a lot of the terrible issues portrayed in this thread are non-existent or minuscule.[/QUOTE]
Do you exist on this forum solely to be contradictory and contrary?
These issues are glaring and obvious, even watching videos like TB's, where he spent most of the time driving around at high speeds, I noticed a lot of these problems and I hadn't even seen these threads. The only way you just plain won't notice them is if you are blind or dead.
[editline]28th May 2014[/editline]
Also this just popped on in the LMAO Pics thread earlier today, figured it helps here
[QUOTE=Zotobom;44933450][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/T3leCeT.jpg[/IMG]
Next-gen reflections.[/QUOTE]
those reflections are as bad as the reflections in Borderlands 2, god damn.
You guys realize that to get the most out of watch dogs in terms of pc graphics, you have to go into the settings file and tell it to render above 720p, and turn off 'console' mode for FX?
You can make the game look absolutely stunning that way, except one thing, the fucking AA.
I don't know what ubisoft did but every AA option looks like complete ass, the only AA option that remotely works is TXAA and that has the added side effect of blurring the shit out of everything.
Also the stuttering is a fucking nightmare.
Man I like, and I hope, that gamers are finally getting more and more demanding.
"Can't make that wall break? Fuck you then."
[QUOTE=ntzu;44934631]You guys realize that to get the most out of watch dogs in terms of pc graphics, you have to go into the settings file and tell it to render above 720p, and turn off 'console' mode for FX?
You can make the game look absolutely stunning that way, except one thing, the fucking AA.
I don't know what ubisoft did but every AA option looks like complete ass, the only AA option that remotely works is TXAA and that has the added side effect of blurring the shit out of everything.
Also the stuttering is a fucking nightmare.[/QUOTE]
I shouldn't have to dick with config files to make the game run how it should have to begin with.
[QUOTE=ntzu;44934631]You guys realize that to get the most out of watch dogs in terms of pc graphics, you have to go into the settings file and tell it to render above 720p, and turn off 'console' mode for FX?
You can make the game look absolutely stunning that way, except one thing, the fucking AA.
I don't know what ubisoft did but every AA option looks like complete ass, the only AA option that remotely works is TXAA and that has the added side effect of blurring the shit out of everything.
Also the stuttering is a fucking nightmare.[/QUOTE]
i don't think that's at all a good excuse for poor optimization.
[QUOTE=Vipes;44931867]Can I get a foolz link? Seems like a good read.[/QUOTE]
doesn't matter cause its probably just some shill posing as a developer to make people blame execs only for d bad game
dev hugboxing needs to stop right now they're lazy, incompetent and just as much to blame as to why watch_dogs=dog_shit
[QUOTE=DeVotchKa;44934698]I shouldn't have to dick with config files to make the game run how it should have to begin with.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure it doesn't fix most of the issues and there's still the whole horrible optimisation
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
