Oh righto, yes I have thatMy girlfriend uses the crop mode to remove letter boxing from DVD and Blu-ray discs. Bless her. Horses for courses, though!
You need to dump her immediately.
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2014]
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
-
- Tags
- digital foundry
- Status
You need to dump her immediately.
I concur. I could never get past my previous partners complete ignorance in audio/video matters. CUT.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I'd consider it a preference rather than ignorance. Don't go all cinema master race on me
Not master race but some people really don't deserve eyes and ears. The things they do!I'd consider it a preference rather than ignorance. Don't go all cinema master race on me
Like look at Turbo links...
It doesn't work that way. There are games on PSN/Live that cost several times more than their mobile or PC counterparts, but aren't several times better. Each ecosystem has its own localised market with its own customers, most of whom are oblivious to the other markets. The reason to charge $60 is because that's the going rate for AAA titles on Wii U. The fact you can get a better version of the game for cheaper on PC makes no difference, just as one is able to buy fuel for 5p cheaper on the litre in one county than another, or for £n hundred being able to be able to get a small 1 bedroom apartment in Surrey or a 3 bedroom house in the Midlands. Or one can buy the electronics in the UK for a massive market up compared to exactly the same electronics in Hong Kong without there being any improvement in the experience to justify the addedcost.
And from Ubisoft's POV, they put in just as much effort for the Wii U port (possibly more, because the total cost was the initial creation + the porting costs), so why should they sell it cheap just because Nintendo's choice of HW can't run it effectively at the level of investment that the game warranted?
Your argument is heavily influenced by your interpretation that Wii U could handle a much better version of the game but the devs cheaped out. Other possibilities exist, and there's no reason to think or expect Ubi to behave differently in the market than they (and everyone else) usually do.
A ways back I worked in a video store, just went DVDs were taking off. This is an actual conversation I had with a customer (based on my memory):
customer: "Why do all of these DVDs have black bars on the top and bottom? I'm missing part of the picture."
me: "You're seeing the full picture. For VHS, most movies are cropped to fit the shape of your tv screen. The people who make the movies, and film fans would rather see the entire image, even if it doesn't use up the full screen."
customer: "That's stupid."
me: "Cropping the image is like taking a rectangular painting and cutting off the sides to fit it in a square picture frame. No one would do that."
customer: "I would." *smug look on his face*
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I think it's worth remembering that not everybody has a big screen TV. I remember when I had a 32" 16:9 TV, the actual visible area of the 2.40:1 aspect movie with letterboxes was really quite small - equivalent to a 25" 4:3 TV in terms of vertical space and, arguably, too small to see any kind of detail in any wide-angle shot. Some folks prefer seeing the entire movie as originally envisaged and frames by the director for cinema, others just want to be able to see the prime area in more detail (larger).
It's a choice. A preference. There's no right or wrong.
As an educated consumer, its my right to not purchase a product of lesser quality. Ubisoft can do what they want, but I doubt anyone here really thinks a game that hugs close to 20fps most of the time is going to be an enjoyable experience. There is no getting around it, Ubisoft new that they were putting a sub par experience on the disk for $60 when other better versions sell for $20 less.
Perhaps they did make some effort, but when buying any product, effort doesnt matter if the product still remains poor. Its quality and price are all that matters. The fact is that Watch Dogs on Wii U has the worst quality and the price is the highest. Seems like a bad combination. Forget about the other superior versions for a second, if this was a Wii U exclusive, this would still be a sub par product not worth $60 for the majority of consumers.
Maybe Wii U's hardware does have hurdles, but if the developer cant jump those hurdles, then stop trying. When you put your game out to sell, your asking consumers to purchase your product. Im sure Ubisoft Bucharest cringed as the deadline approached. Its not like they didnt know that they were wrapping up development of a port that did not result in a good product. Perhaps some people arent as picky about a low framerate, and its still worth it to them, but for me, this is bargain bin material at best.
edit:
Ubisoft themselves didnt try to sell Rayman Legends on PS4 for $60, it was an old game that didnt really offer any upgrades. They sold it for $40, not $60 like when it launched on Wii U/PS3/360. At the very least, Watch Dogs value to price should have followed this trend.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
My 32" (a CRT) was bought back in 1996 and I kept that until I got a 40" Samsung LCD in 2007 - to enjoy the HD experience that PS3 was bringing.
It's not nearly as bad as that DF article makes out, and don't forget DF are primarily there to drive up hits even if they do provide interesting technical insights into games.
The WiiU version is priced high because on this platform it's a brand new game. Also if they expected to sell only a few copies, that's even more reason to keep the price high and try to recoup as much as possible from their costs.
Probably a very difficult question, but what would the cost of this port have been, I wonder? And how many copies would be the break-even point at this price? We'll probably never know but it would be interesting. Bucharest labour costs are very low, I'd expect and they really just needed developers to recode and fit the program on the WiiU hardware, since all artistic and game design was already done.
Also very important, don't forget that many, many people bought the game on other platforms even though it wasn't exactly the same game that was first revealed, and even after the public shaming Ubi got as a consequence. Nothing seems to have affected the release of a game I actually passed on because of the shamelessly dodgy Ubi business practices.
With that in mind, I have little doubt that Watchdogs will sell relatively well in WiiU, everything considered, and it will in fact make them some profit.
Just my opinion.
Probably a very difficult question, but what would the cost of this port have been, I wonder? And how many copies would be the break-even point at this price? We'll probably never know but it would be interesting. Bucharest labour costs are very low, I'd expect and they really just needed developers to recode and fit the program on the WiiU hardware, since all artistic and game design was already done.
Also very important, don't forget that many, many people bought the game on other platforms even though it wasn't exactly the same game that was first revealed, and even after the public shaming Ubi got as a consequence. Nothing seems to have affected the release of a game I actually passed on because of the shamelessly dodgy Ubi business practices.
With that in mind, I have little doubt that Watchdogs will sell relatively well in WiiU, everything considered, and it will in fact make them some profit.
Just my opinion.
shredenvain
Regular
My first 2 HD TVs were CRT both 32".My 32" (a CRT) was bought back in 1996 and I kept that until I got a 40" Samsung LCD in 2007 - to enjoy the HD experience that PS3 was bringing.
One was 4:3 the second one was 16:9.
Damn where they heavy. I bought then for progressive scan on the Ps2 and HD on some Xbox games. My first flat panel was a Magnavox 27" LCD I bought for the 360 in 05.
Back on topic, patch 3 has been released for the ps4 version of assassin's creed unity, some improvements in frame rate may be noticeable according to ubi. Anyone noticed any difference.
Apparently another patch later is going to address the majority of the performance issues though.
Apparently another patch later is going to address the majority of the performance issues though.
The words 'may be noticeable', 'apparently' and 'later', when talking about a Ubi product, are really not reassuring at all...
What? Do you have anything to back that up except a vague feeling they're mean to your platform preference?
- Status
Similar threads
