Ubisoft Comments on 'E3 2012' Files Present in PC Version of Watch Dogs - Polidicks

The game does not run better because the old graphics were enabled It runs better because the mod maker changed the way the game loads assets/increased cache or something, he explained it in an older version of the guru3d thread which has been edited many times since then It pisses me off when people say "b-but how come the old graphics look AND run better", no, it's not the fucking graphics, it's another feature of the mod making it run better.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;45161878]Honestly, as much as I hate to defend them when they're blatantly lying, some of the effects do kind of degrade the gameplay, even if they do look better in screenshots.[/QUOTE] The modder is trying to balance that, make it look amazing and be playable in all ways.

This is so fucking stupid. Why can't they just add these things to the settings so people can enable them if they want to? Because holy fuck, clearly there IS a demand for these things to be in the game! Just make menu options and stop making up excuses!

[QUOTE=Thunderbolt;45164994]The game does not run better because the old graphics were enabled It runs better because the mod maker changed the way the game loads assets/increased cache or something, he explained it in an older version of the guru3d thread which has been edited many times since then It pisses me off when people say "b-but how come the old graphics look AND run better", no, it's not the fucking graphics, it's another feature of the mod making it run better.[/QUOTE] Even with all of the other features turned off and just the hidden features left on the game has no performance impact in the slightest from pretty much everyone who has tried and commented on it

[QUOTE=QuickSnapz;45165231]Even with all of the other features turned off and just the hidden features left on the game has no performance impact in the slightest from pretty much everyone who has tried and commented on it[/QUOTE] you must have missed the thread where a shit ton of people were confirming that the mod fixed a lot of stuttering issues then

Didn't they have a "Looks best on PS4" campaign? I bet Sony paid Ubisoft to gimp the PC version, so they threw together some new shaders at the last second which would explain why people got better performance with the original, optimized, E3 ones.

[QUOTE=Rika-chan;45166066]Didn't they have a "Looks best on PS4" campaign? I bet Sony paid Ubisoft to gimp the PC version, so they threw together some new shaders at the last second which would explain why people got better performance with the original, optimized, E3 ones.[/QUOTE] as mentioned previously, the most probable reason they cut it is because there were some minor issues with it and rather than spending extra development time to fix it they just cut the whole thing because it's easier and quicker

[QUOTE=Rika-chan;45166066]Didn't they have a "Looks best on PS4" campaign? I bet Sony paid Ubisoft to gimp the PC version, so they threw together some new shaders at the last second which would explain why people got better performance with the original, optimized, E3 ones.[/QUOTE] Usually when these campaigns happen they totally ignore the PC because it's not really in proper competition with the consoles. So that's probably not the reason.

Okay guys calm the fuck down. Yeah it fucking sucks that they are lying about Watch Dogs and it sucks that it's pretty shit compared to what they first showed us, and you're free to throw shit at them or even boycott them for it. But don't make it out to be about things they've fixed, or sins they never commited. Like: [QUOTE=seano12;45161348]People need to show some self control. Someone ought to link that picture of the CoD: MW2 Boycott steampage showing everyone playing CoD: MW2. Ubisoft should be boycotted for many other reasons too including: Ruining Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, Brothers in Arms, Silent Hunter, and Splinter Cell series of games. Let us not forget uPlay and their past DRM bs.[/QUOTE] First of all, I really enjoyed both Blacklist and Vegas 2, so I have no idea what you're talking about when you say that they ruined those series. Furthermore, the previous installments are still there, they haven't forced a terrible DRM onto them nor have they changed anything else. They're just as good as ever, only now I can play other games as well. Sure sounds terrible. Second of all, are you actually calling for us to boycott a company for their "past bs"? What would be the point of boycotting a company when they've already fixed the issues we're now boycotting them for? [QUOTE=ironman17;45161669]Thing is most folks don't have the goddamn moxie to keep up a boycott. Soon as the company puts out a game that gets them hyped, they start to get the shakes and cave in to throw their 6 Alex Hamiltons at the product. (he's the guy on the ten dollar bill) And then of course there is the usual large herds of uninformed ignorant "commoners" who don't care about the general politics of the gaming world and just want the latest military shooty bang bang for that Xbax. I hesitate to call them gamers, since real gamers are smart folks like us, keeping their finger on the pulse and scrutinizing the activities of companies like Ubisoft and Slacktivision and Volvo, taking our "hobby" more seriously than some schoolboy who plays CoD to distract himself from his single mom's drinking problem. ...[/QUOTE] "Real gamers"? "Smart folks like us"? "The peasantry"? Do you have a superiority complex or what? So the schoolboy playing games as a form of escapism because his life has been utter shit so far and seems to keep heading that way should just deal with his drunk mother beating him in some other way. We shouldn't suffer. Except we don't suffer. And he needs those games way more than we do, or at the very least as much. We have an entire world filled with video games today, and the amount isn't decreasing. Many of these games are fucking incredible, and other people find other games fucking incredible. When did more options suddenly turn into a bad thing? [QUOTE=seano12;45161843]Well said. I agree with everything you stated. It is very frustrating to know that they will get away with this and that people are still buying rehashed AC games.[/QUOTE] And finally this, why are you guys even playing games? Are you not doing so to be entertained and engaged? Pulled in by a story or given stories to share with friends? Whenever the rehashed games grow stale, when leaping from building to building feels boring and assassinating two guards at once doesn't feel satisfying, I will quit playing Assassin's Creed. At that point I'll stop buying them. Until then I will enjoy them. Gaming can actually be that fucking simple. I get that you guys are mad about the lies, and I am too, but I'm not going to make this about things that don't matter, such as a lack of innovation or a DRM that was removed years ago.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;45164928]I wouldn't say completely dead. I'd suggest you looked for those franchises that only get a release every bunch of years. Metal Gear Solid, for example, only has releases every 3, 4 or even 5 years. They have a rather long development cycle, and what do you get you may ask? One HELL of a game. That might not be to your liking, so... How about GTA? 4-5 year gap between releases, and what do we get? 10/10 worth games. TES? 7 year development cycle. A guy just has to look for the right titles. Far Cry 4 seems like it MIGHT fall in the category of rehashed game with just a few differences, but it apparently has enough changes to actually warrant a buy. But I wouldn't say the same about Assassins Creed...[/QUOTE] Hence for the most part :v:

Would have done better not responding to it at all

[QUOTE=seano12;45161281]They disabled the features due to stability and performance? But people such as TotalBiscuit said that the framerates barely changed if at all. This is bullshit and they know it. I am calling all PC gamers to join me in boycotting Ubisoft permanently (at least Ubisoft Montreal). Ubisoft needs to answer for their bullshit. And everyone giving me boxes: You're really going to keep buying their games after they lied to you like this? You're really going to let them get away with it?[/QUOTE] Too be fair, while this is still utter bullshit, Totalbiscuit does run two Titans with SSD, so he's not as likely to see much change in framerates.

[QUOTE=DeEz;45166188]as mentioned previously, the most probable reason they cut it is because there were some minor issues with it and rather than spending extra development time to fix it they just cut the whole thing because it's easier and quicker[/QUOTE] But what minor issues? Why aren't they writing them down? Clearly more than 50% of people who used the mod said it improved performance. Why would you believe anything Ubisoft says anymore? Just use your brain for a second and think if they're telling the truth or not.

[QUOTE=catbarf;45161499]But if the changed settings improve performance for all users then why wouldn't they just use those settings for the consoles? I really don't think this 'conspiracy theory' makes any sense. There are some gameplay issues with the changed settings, like the excessive DOF or how dark it is without lights at night, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are memory issues with some of the effects and they decided to cater for the greatest common denominator. Maybe it's just incompetence on their part, but I would much sooner attribute it to incompetence than some plot to make next-gen consoles seem better.[/QUOTE] The patch isn't just graphix=1. There's some config optimizations done by the modders, I imagine maybe enabled some extra pre-loads to get rid of the stuttering, cut down range of something irrelevant, something like that.

[QUOTE=Gunzers6;45168830]Too be fair, while this is still utter bullshit, Totalbiscuit does run two Titans with SSD, so he's not as likely to see much change in framerates.[/QUOTE] FPS Capped or uncapped?

The mod makes the thing perfomance even better, Ubisoft go die in a hole. also "E3_Fake" just shows most of shit in E3 doesn't bat the eye in the actual game.

I ROFLd so hard when I read those lines. Dayum, I guess Ubisoft thinks it speaks to a bunch of nooblets that play games for the first time. And people are right: the "unlocked" edits make the game run smoother and less hoggy. Ubisoft, you dun' goofed now! 2nd worst company in the universe, following EA.

[QUOTE=-Sleepy-*;45168956]But what minor issues? Why aren't they writing them down? Clearly more than 50% of people who used the mod said it improved performance. Why would you believe anything Ubisoft says anymore? Just use your brain for a second and think if they're telling the truth or not.[/QUOTE] maybe you should realize that there are more lazy dev cases than hilarious corporate conspiracies like "ubisoft is downgrading the pc version so it doesnt look better than consoles!!"

[QUOTE=proch;45164803]I agree completely, this is basically why I think that the AAA scene is dead to me for the most part. It's a soulless, commercialized scene that does not care for enthusiasts, but just makes products to appeal to the "commoners" as you describe them.[/QUOTE] True that. Whilst there are some sizeable companies that do good by the gaming community as a whole, like for example CD Projekt RED, they aren't exactly a dime a dozen. Contrast against indie devs and you tend to see a fair bunch of passion projects and labours of love, games that spirited people wanted to make, as opposed to something they needed to make to pay the bills, or something had to make because they were assigned to it by some sort of "employer". Games like Dust: An Elysian Tail, Bastion, Super Meat Boy, Braid, these kinds of games weren't made because some suit said "we need to develop a Metroidvania-style game about an amnesiac furry swordsman who dresses in cyan robes and wears a conical hat, the charts say it's gonna be the next motherlode" or "our company could make a ton of cash if we design a puzzle-based platformer that revolves around time manipulation and a guy who is a combination of Mario and Kenneth Bainbridge". They were made because that is what an artist poured their heart and soul into, wanting to make the game they wanted to make without having to compromise it by appealing to the cold uncaring "ideals" of creatures that only care about making money. That kind of free spirit and individual enthusiasm is one of the main reasons I respect most indie devs. They don't need to make a game to tie into the current trends, if the game's good enough it'll probably be able to find its audience through word of mouth and the promotion of folks like Jesse Cox, John Bain, Simon and Lewis of the Yogscast, all sorts of new media gaming personalities who cover all sorts of things on a daily basis. Hell even that Swedish guy who sounds like a half-baked My Little Pony OC, the guy who has the most viewed channel on YouTube from played-up overreactions and the occasional rape joke, he's a way for indie devs to get their game promoted without needing even a fraction of the ridiculous marketing budgets most triple-A games have. Marketing and advertising can be ludicrously expensive, and if you can get it insanely cheap, perhaps even as cheap as giving Markiplier a free copy of your game, that is an excellent deal and yet another advantage of being an indie dev, even if you can't normally make a massive complex high-fidelity title on your lonesome in 2 years.