• A Guru3D Modder just found out how to make Watch Dogs look like the E3 2012 Buid
    187 replies, posted
[QUOTE=rakker;45123320]Holy shit, you're right. [img]http://abload.de/img/1402943413586ngopq.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] [url=http://abload.de/img/watch_dog-3rzzw9.gif]This rain?[/url] :v: [QUOTE=27X;45123505]-quote-[/QUOTE] [img]http://i.imgur.com/yGCQWdT.jpg[/img]
There's a lot of people calling Ubisoft lazy over this, and I don't think that's actually fair. Ubisoft MADE these effects, made them work with the game and showed them off all the way back at E3. This guys just found and re-enabled them. So, really, Ubisoft did a pretty awesome job with these graphics, they were anything BUT lazy. But then they disabled them. Probably because of the console release. Which just about negates any credit I could give them :v: And at the same time the graphics don't really make up for some of the other shortcomings of this game like retarded AI and little attention to detail.
Latest version has been released: [url]https://mega.co.nz/#!WJYgVYrS!uu5lSdcggF1z7bCaFmGOTCFkp1F7HWdJeoXFBtwl6PA[/url] [QUOTE]Changes 0.7: Depth of field now has been changing to be playable for gameplay Bloom has been changed so its not ovewhelming (still you need to tell me if this version is better) Slighly changes to the lighting system including several settings from e3 2012 and e3 2013 Changes made to the rain system so now it should rain more between days, not all the time obviously. Now the day will not be always clear The tod system now is fully dynamic meaning there is no more delay on the shadow updates etc Headlight shadows has been fixed There will be 3 presets inside the rar to choose a closer, a normal or a further camera And many more things inside including different settings for the civilian pedestrian density.[/QUOTE] [url]http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4843237&postcount=1306[/url]
I have to say, IMO looking at this stuff, Sony and Microsoft paid off Ubisoft to even the playing field between the versions.
I think there is much more going on in the gaming development that we don't know about. The fact that modders make the game look better is not cause the developer sucks. It's more likely that they keep it like this so that the next game can have a bigger graphical jump. Seeing as this is a big selling point for many games. This is part of the first series of games for PS4. Look at the first series of games for PS3 and then compare them to Last of Us, GTA V, etc... Looks like two different consoles. Expect to see the same with PS4. I'm sure they could make the games much better already now, but they choose to delay for different reasons.
Please don't tell me we're going to let Ubisoft get away with this.
[QUOTE=Super Muffin;45121768]Fun fact: In the container file listing there's a few options in a section called "e3_theater". They're all set off by default.[/QUOTE] make_game_look_nice = "false"
[QUOTE=Delta616;45122983]By definition, that's a modification.[/QUOTE] It's changing a fucking boolean value. It's less of a mod than getting Unreal Tournament to run at 1920x1080.
[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;45119553]why would they downgrade it in such a way to start with? it doesn't make any sense..[/QUOTE] they did it because they didn't want it looking better than the console version
I like how no credit was given to Rick the guy who actually wrote the unpacker/repacker nor any mention of xentax. Scum and he is even asking for donations wow total scum
Oh wow, are these the guys that are developing Far Cry 4 too? I really hope not, what complete assholes.
I want to restate the issue going on here. Not only does this make the game look better, it fixes performance issues while improving overall performance DRASTICALLY. A buddy tested this out. He had been having issues. Can now run it on high with no issues. It sort of boggles the mind why this all played out the way it did.
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;45124154]It's changing a fucking boolean value. It's less of a mod than getting Unreal Tournament to run at 1920x1080.[/QUOTE] It's a weak mod that's a packed series of hooks and tweaks, but it still is one. I don't really think it's a coverup or damage control on the part of gaming news outlets as you imply though. It's just the fact of the matter: It's a series of out-of game tweaks designed to make the game better only for people that trust themselves to edit INI files. The [url=http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=390114]original post[/url] of the tweaks also called it a mod. Ubi themselves are likely hiding something, though I doubt it's as conspiratorial as some theories. I'd chalk it up to fears of performance issues or infighting as compared to bribery. It'll be interesting to see how it develops. Just glad to hear the E3 quality does exist naturally in Disrupt. I'd like if more companies did something similar to Witcher 2 and included an "experimental" set of graphic options that can make the game look amazing at the cost of unpredictability/performance drops.
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;45124154]It's changing a fucking boolean value. It's less of a mod than getting Unreal Tournament to run at 1920x1080.[/QUOTE] That doesn't change the definition of mod. Whether you agree with it or not, it's a mod.
How about we just accept that there are hundreds of reasons, scummy and non-scummy, that Ubisoft may have had for this. We're not game developers nor are we associated with Ubisoft whatsoever, so why do we have to pretend like they're the worst of the worst and they were compensating for current-gen consoles when we know none of the story behind this?
[QUOTE=IceyMalone;45124450]How about we just accept that there are hundreds of reasons, scummy and non-scummy, that Ubisoft may have had for this. We're not game developers nor are we associated with Ubisoft whatsoever, so why do we have to pretend like they're the worst of the worst and they were compensating for current-gen consoles when we know none of the story behind this?[/QUOTE] What reason could they possibly have for holding back changes that apparantly improve graphics and increase performance? Also, i'm not sure why people are fighting over whether it's a mod or not, who gives a fuck, whatever it is, it does some good shit, at any rate this was just posted by the maker: [QUOTE] Originally Posted by TheWorse View Post Many people are talking in neogaf saying this is not a mod and I should not consider it one. I never intended to call this a Mod whatsoever so please stop. You guys told me it was so I heard you. And a mod stands for modification, and this is one, many modifications to the default files. About comparissons do one day light and raining too. Don't compare clear night because You'll not see so much difference. I'm still into change the values of night colors etc to be more realistic. Being hard on me saying this is enable or disable =1 o =0 it's not cool, I guess I only know how much time I've dedicated to getting this to THIS point. Thanks again for the support and if you suffer stuttering with this version tell me about your specs to further investigate about it. I'll update the new version and the fix for the normal camera to mediafire. There is no anamorphic lensflares yet. That will be included for 0.8 if I get it to working properly.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=TheNewDude;45124546]What reason could they possibly have for holding back changes that apparantly improve graphics and increase performance?[/QUOTE] The very fact you're asking this just proves my point. We don't know if it improves performance universally, it may drastically reduce the capacity of some graphics cards, or may even be wholly incompatible with certain drivers, it may even cause huge stability issues even with the performance boost None of us except Garry and a few people here and there are game developers so we can't accurately comment on this, we should just stop trying
[QUOTE=IceyMalone;45124762]The very fact you're asking this just proves my point. We don't know if it improves performance universally, it may drastically reduce the capacity of some graphics cards, or may even be wholly incompatible with certain drivers, it may even cause huge stability issues even with the performance boost None of us except Garry and a few people here and there are game developers so we can't accurately comment on this, we should just stop trying[/QUOTE] In this case, if there's a chance of it causing problems with certain hardware configurations, then why not have them as an option in the games graphics settings? It's exactly the same as having to choose between ultra or high shadows, HDAO or HBAO, directx9 renderer or directx11 renderer, options that may or may not work properly depending on hardware.
[QUOTE=TheNewDude;45124889]In this case, if there's a chance of it causing problems with certain hardware configurations, then why not have them as an option in the games graphics settings? It's exactly the same as having to choose between ultra or high shadows, HDAO or HBAO, directx9 renderer or directx11 renderer, options that may or may not work properly depending on hardware.[/QUOTE] Playing devil's advocate, but if some features are massively experimental, like say, supersampling, and someone tries to turn it on with no knowledge of the settings required and the game starts to tank, they'll be pissed and confused. I can see why some companies may say "the hardcore will figure it out/make it for themselves" and focus on making sure all their in-game options are the most stable for everyone that's tech illiterate as possible.
The main issue is that no matter what Ubisoft do now, they'll be crucified all over the internet. If they say nothing, people will assume something based on no evidence. If they give a valid defense, people will think they're just trying to cover their asses.
[QUOTE=Nick Lomax;45123998]I think there is much more going on in the gaming development that we don't know about. The fact that modders make the game look better is not cause the developer sucks. It's more likely that they keep it like this so that the next game can have a bigger graphical jump. Seeing as this is a big selling point for many games. [/QUOTE] This doesn't change the fact that this is absolutely shameful.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/yGCQWdT.jpg[/img] Dafuq. Anyone have context to this?
[QUOTE=Chihuahua;45124964]Playing devil's advocate, but if some features are massively experimental, like say, supersampling, and someone tries to turn it on with no knowledge of the settings required and the game starts to tank, they'll be pissed and confused. I can see why some companies may say "the hardcore will figure it out/make it for themselves" and focus on making sure all their in-game options are the most stable for everyone that's tech illiterate as possible.[/QUOTE] not really acceptable reason to lock it off though.
[QUOTE=Grimhound;45125499][img]http://i.imgur.com/yGCQWdT.jpg[/img] Dafuq. Anyone have context to this?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=116861543&postcount=1170[/url]
If the e3 modification fixed your stuttering while driving, rate this post agree. If not rate disagree
So I'm confused. Does it look less terrible than the non-patch on PS4? Because my computer could literally never run Watch Dogs worth a fuck and console may be my only option without spending $48358235. (An exaggeration, but my PC's old as hell and I've never made a custom one.)
And the doors for modification begin to open...Lets hope that not only will graphics be restored, but that NPC AI, missions, etc will be improved/fixed. I still want to love this game's spirit
And the Damage Control begins. [url="http://i.imgur.com/ofaaFrm.png"][img]http://i.imgur.com/ofaaFrm.png[/img][/url]
[QUOTE=lapsus_;45119639] *If you are near-sighted[/QUOTE] yeah if the DOF distance was, like, one foot
[QUOTE=Chihuahua;45124964]Playing devil's advocate, but if some features are massively experimental, like say, supersampling, and someone tries to turn it on with no knowledge of the settings required and the game starts to tank, they'll be pissed and confused. I can see why some companies may say "the hardcore will figure it out/make it for themselves" and focus on making sure all their in-game options are the most stable for everyone that's tech illiterate as possible.[/QUOTE] I don't see how this is an issue. Common sense says if you don't know what something does, you don't fuck with it. [editline]16th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Vitisus;45126511]So I'm confused. Does it look less terrible than the non-patch on PS4? Because my computer could literally never run Watch Dogs worth a fuck and console may be my only option without spending $48358235. (An exaggeration, but my PC's old as hell and I've never made a custom one.)[/QUOTE] Uhm, most peripherals can be moved over, you can make an excellent PC for ~$1000, if that. There's thousands of guides out there you can follow to assemble it, it isn't hard at all. I built my first PC when I was like, 8 years old. (with some parental supervision, my dad was an IT tech, but most of the work was my own)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.