Watch_Dogs PC Patch Coming!

[Guest]

Earlier today, a Ubisoft dev took to Twitter, addressing concerns of pretty much everyone who has tried W_D. He has promised a patch, and explained that the Disrupt Engine uses advanced texture streaming techniques that run well with NG consoles, especially PS4, since it has unified memory; VRAM and RAM are the same. But on PC, having seperate RAM and VRAM causes issues. Luckily, a patch is coming, and soon. Let's hope soon means by this weekend!

 

(Source)

https://twitter.com/SebViard

[mgsstar]

Sweet hope it will balance and improve the performance on AMD cards.

[dragosudeki]

Still quite disappointed with how it released. Seems like Ubisoft will make a habit of releasing poor ports onto the PC. I believe there was problems with Assassin's Creed when it came out. We already got EA to do that (except its not ports and just the game itself) and let's hope Ubisoft doesn't follow.

[Guest]

Still quite disappointed with how it released. Seems like Ubisoft will make a habit of releasing poor ports onto the PC. I believe there was problems with Assassin's Creed when it came out. We already got EA to do that (except its not ports and just the game itself) and let's hope Ubisoft doesn't follow.

W_D used PC as the primary development platform, so it's not a port. It's the fact that they are working on 6 different versions, all with different needs; the consoles got first priority, and PC got less. However, the use of Nvidia GameWorks for stuff like shadows, water, physics, and such is why the performance suffers on AMD; they got pretty much no time before release to optimize.

[Vitalius]

W_D used PC as the primary development platform, so it's not a port. It's the fact that they are working on 6 different versions, all with different needs; the consoles got first priority, and PC got less. However, the use of Nvidia GameWorks for stuff like shadows, water, physics, and such is why the performance suffers on AMD; they got pretty much no time before release to optimize.

The performance issue is likely actually more universal than that. If you watched the benchmarking video with Slick, it shows that AMD & Nvidia have very close performance. 

In October 2013, Ubisoft's stock price dropped 25%. This was during Watch Dog's development period. I believe part of the reason that Watch Dogs wasn't all it's cracked up to be is because of resource constraints. As long as it ran, it shipped. Optimization & performance taking a back seat to getting more money to cover what they lost. 

Just saying. It makes logical sense to me. That's why the amazing trailer for hype =/= what we actually got. Why some people think the game is incomplete, and why optimization is terri-bad.

[Guest Generallee]

 

[Noctus]

 

I love this  :lol:

[deathjester]

Earlier today, a Ubisoft dev took to Twitter, addressing concerns of pretty much everyone who has tried W_D. He has promised a patch, and explained that the Disrupt Engine uses advanced texture streaming techniques that run well with NG consoles, especially PS4, since it has unified memory; VRAM and RAM are the same. But on PC, having seperate RAM and VRAM causes issues. Luckily, a patch is coming, and soon. Let's hope soon means by this weekend!

 

(Source)

https://twitter.com/SebViard

 

Sounds like advertising for the PS4 to me. Our new DirectX can do the same thing as far as memory. So can OpenGL. The consoles use a GCN architecture 7000 series GPU, which is what any AMD R card is. The Xbox One used DDR3 for system and VRAM and the ESRAM is a joke.

 

Xbox One/PS4 have same frame rates so yeah...

 

We basically got a port optimized for the PS4/Xbox One, so that the dumb things can even run the game, that was not optimized for the PC whatsoever, with artificial VRAM needs due to our crappy current API, and Ubisoft not using the new DirectX because not enough people own Win 8, or because they wanted to limit 1440p and 4 k smooth gameplay from being seen by the public and talked about by people. 

 

MS's fault for being complete jerks and deliberately holding back PC Gaming for profits on their API, Ubisoft's fault for not optimizing the game for PC whatsoever and being complete whores as far as Nvidia Gameworks, since this game should run flawlessly on GCN architecture cards.

 

Temporary BS to prop up the consoles and artificial limits placed on PC so IGN can run articles saying the PC version has bad performance, with Sony employees selling a 900p, 30 fps version (we can lock our version at 30 fps if we wanted) as the "best version", even though it is still inferior to a garbage port. 

 

Only reason we are prob getting a patch is 50,000 people bought it on Steam and Ubisoft might be realizing they are alienating PC gamers and potentially losing a crap load of money. I don't expect the patch will do much at all. The game engine is optimized for pooled ram and unless they make a new API version? It is going to be like this no matter what. 

[ErickS89]

Earlier today, a Ubisoft dev took to Twitter, addressing concerns of pretty much everyone who has tried W_D. He has promised a patch, and explained that the Disrupt Engine uses advanced texture streaming techniques that run well with NG consoles, especially PS4, since it has unified memory; VRAM and RAM are the same. But on PC, having seperate RAM and VRAM causes issues. Luckily, a patch is coming, and soon. Let's hope soon means by this weekend!

 

(Source)

https://twitter.com/SebViard

Actually that makes a lot of sense since the PS4 uses unified memory but xbox and pc don't, and yes really hope it is by the weekend!  I love playing the game at 4K but my friends still mad as I still have his pc lol!   Hopefully this will solve the "1080p looks like crap" problem. 

 

This begs the question as to... why wasn't the PC version just delayed a week if a patch is coming this quickly?! 

[hiyayhi]

People are saying that watchdogs was primarily developed for PC but if that were the case then we wouldn't be dealing with crap menus that don't work with a mouse and shitloads of mouse acceleration.

[ErickS89]

People are saying that watchdogs was primarily developed for PC but if that were the case then we wouldn't be dealing with crap menus that don't work with a mouse and shitloads of mouse acceleration.

I believe the game was indeed developed on the PC but then they started the porting to consoles and code injection that went with it which caused issues we're facing as it was perfect in 2012.  The gfx are still there just that textures don't downscale well and I think this upcoming patch will "hopefully" solves the problem. 

[Guest]

Actually that makes a lot of sense since the PS4 uses unified memory but xbox and pc don't, and yes really hope it is by the weekend!  I love playing the game at 4K but my friends still mad as I still have his pc lol!   Hopefully this will solve the "1080p looks like crap" problem. 

 

This begs the question as to... why wasn't the PC version just delayed a week if a patch is coming this quickly?! 

Well, most likely, the entire dev team used a similar setup rig, so releasing it into the wild proved that it needed much more optimization; people on older CPUs/GPUs are running it fine. It just needs some tweaking.

[ACatWithThumbs]

Sounds like advertising for the PS4 to me. Our new DirectX can do the same thing as far as memory. So can OpenGL. The consoles use a GCN architecture 7000 series GPU, which is what any AMD R card is. The Xbox One used DDR3 for system and VRAM and the ESRAM is a joke.

 

Xbox One/PS4 have same frame rates so yeah...

 

We basically got a port optimized for the PS4/Xbox One, so that the dumb things can even run the game, that was not optimized for the PC whatsoever, with artificial VRAM needs due to our crappy current API, and Ubisoft not using the new DirectX because not enough people own Win 8, or because they wanted to limit 1440p and 4 k smooth gameplay from being seen by the public and talked about by people. 

 

MS's fault for being complete jerks and deliberately holding back PC Gaming for profits on their API, Ubisoft's fault for not optimizing the game for PC whatsoever and being complete whores as far as Nvidia Gameworks, since this game should run flawlessly on GCN architecture cards.

 

Temporary BS to prop up the consoles and artificial limits placed on PC so IGN can run articles saying the PC version has bad performance, with Sony employees selling a 900p, 30 fps version (we can lock our version at 30 fps if we wanted) as the "best version", even though it is still inferior to a garbage port. 

 

Only reason we are prob getting a patch is 50,000 people bought it on Steam and Ubisoft might be realizing they are alienating PC gamers and potentially losing a crap load of money. I don't expect the patch will do much at all. The game engine is optimized for pooled ram and unless they make a new API version? It is going to be like this no matter what. 

First it's not a port PC is the main platform and in 2013 they started also working on the next gen console version.(WiiU version is still in work)

Their explanation makes sense because the performance problems are 90% related to Vram/Ram issues which causes huge FPS drops,stutter ect.

The game itself runs fine I get 40-50FPS on Ultra with my GTX670.

The Ps4/XboxOne use hUMA so VRAM and system ram are one.

But on PC without hUMA this should cause horrible FPS drops in the moment it puts GPU data on to the system ram.

 

People are saying that watchdogs was primarily developed for PC but if that were the case then we wouldn't be dealing with crap menus that don't work with a mouse and shitloads of mouse acceleration.

It was the main platform for about 4  years they just used the last 8 months of the development for consoles.

And that's normally the time when optimization happens.

[hiyayhi]

First it's not a port PC is the main platform and in 2013 they started also working on the next gen console version.(WiiU version is still in work)

Their explanation makes sense because the performance problems are 90% related to Vram/Ram issues which causes huge FPS drops,stutter ect.

The game itself runs fine I get 40-50FPS on Ultra with my GTX670.

The Ps4/XboxOne use hUMA so VRAM and system ram are one.

But on PC without hUMA this should cause horrible FPS drops in the moment it puts GPU data on to the system ram.

 

It was the main platform for about 4  years they just used the last 8 months of the development for consoles.

And that's normally the time when optimization happens.

Yes, I suspect they deved most of it on PC but when they got their hands on so called "next gen" consoles they switched to deving on them, they got fund cuts, said bugger off to the devs that wanted to make it for PC, and then at the last minute did a terrible port across. Just speculation though.

[deathjester]

First it's not a port PC is the main platform and in 2013 they started also working on the next gen console version.(WiiU version is still in work)

Their explanation makes sense because the performance problems are 90% related to Vram/Ram issues which causes huge FPS drops,stutter ect.

The game itself runs fine I get 40-50FPS on Ultra with my GTX670.

The Ps4/XboxOne use hUMA so VRAM and system ram are one.

But on PC without hUMA this should cause horrible FPS drops in the moment it puts GPU data on to the system ram.

 

It was the main platform for about 4  years they just used the last 8 months of the development for consoles.

And that's normally the time when optimization happens.

 

Yeah right. If the game was a PC port to consoles and not the other way around? VRAM usage would not be close to this. Just because it WAS the main platform doesn't mean our final port was a good PC port or optimized whatsoever.

 

Every single game is made on PC and the game engine initially runs on PC. That doesn't mean we get a good port. The argument is strawman. They are about to show PC games at E3, with many titles being "console exclusives". That doesn't mean any of these games will be a good PC port. 

 

What will you see at E3 "blah blah blah running on the XXXX game engine that will be on the PS4/Xbox One". They never say the game is running on a PS4/Xbox One because they aren't. Unless they specifically say they are? They aren't. AC 4 was made on a PC also. Guess what? The optimization sucked. Bad ports are artificial, and either sabotage to prop up a garbage console and protect the market (Ubisoft is selling the PS4 HARD on this game) or complete laziness. 

 

 

 

"It's always a question of compromise about the effect, how it looks, and the performance it takes from the system. On PC, usually you don't really care about the performance, because the idea is that if it's not [running] fast enough, you buy a bigger GPU. Once you get on console, you can't have this approach."

 

Ubisoft on AC 4.

 

[ColourShift]

"Patch" I swear if they don't make it look like E3, I'm throwing out the game.

[CJPowell27]

Yeah right. If the game was a PC port to consoles and not the other way around? VRAM usage would not be close to this. Just because it WAS the main platform doesn't mean our final port was a good PC port or optimized whatsoever.

 

Every single game is made on PC and the game engine initially runs on PC. That doesn't mean we get a good port. The argument is strawman. They are about to show PC games at E3, with many titles being "console exclusives". That doesn't mean any of these games will be a good PC port. 

 

What will you see at E3 "blah blah blah running on the XXXX game engine that will be on the PS4/Xbox One". They never say the game is running on a PS4/Xbox One because they aren't. Unless they specifically say they are? They aren't. AC 4 was made on a PC also. Guess what? The optimization sucked. Bad ports are artificial, and either sabotage to prop up a garbage console and protect the market (Ubisoft is selling the PS4 HARD on this game) or complete laziness. 

 

 

"It's always a question of compromise about the effect, how it looks, and the performance it takes from the system. On PC, usually you don't really care about the performance, because the idea is that if it's not [running] fast enough, you buy a bigger GPU. Once you get on console, you can't have this approach."

 

Ubisoft on AC 4.

 

 

LOL not even trying to hide it

Watch Dogs, the game of magic mirrors

[DarkCrow]

LOL not even trying to hide it

Watch Dogs, the game of magic mirrors

He has eyes EVERYWHERE!!

[Noctus]

-snip-

The 1st pic i understand: no reflection. What am i looking @ in the 2nd picture?

[CJPowell27]

The 1st pic i understand: no reflection. What am i looking @ in the 2nd picture?

Those are at the same exact spot in the game.  The "reflection of the street" is just the image in the window.

The second picture is actually whats behind the player.

[BigMic]

The 1st pic i understand: no reflection. What am i looking @ in the 2nd picture?

Just to emphasize its not reflecting whats behind him.

[Noctus]

Those are at the same exact spot in the game.  The "reflection of the street" is just the image in the window.

The second picture is actually whats behind the player.

God that is awful 

[it24]

This patch should have been out on release day.

[PhantomChevron]

Well, I am hoping it will be a good patch, since this is Ubisoft and I have higher expectations of them compared to EA for example, I mean, when EA releases a patch, I just expect it to be broken like the rest of the rubbish.

Anyways, to be honest, Watch Dogs is not that great, certain aspects of it making me dislike it, plus that stupid auto running

[Guest]

LOL not even trying to hide it

Watch Dogs, the game of magic mirrors

Yeah, but pretty much every game does that. I wish cranking reflections up to Ultra would provide legit reflections on buildings, but it's probably really resource-hungry to do that on a hundred buildings at once.