Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2014]

[Deleted member 11852]

Does Watch Dogs deliver on its stunning E3 2012 reveal?

Digital Foundry were very quick.

Does Watch Dogs truly deliver on the promise of its initial E3 2012 reveal? The short answer is yes.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Digital Foundry were very quick.

Wow, that was the crappiest and least-technical article I've ever seen coming out of DF.
The whole article feels like damage control through-and-through.



And this part?

Does Watch Dogs truly deliver on the promise of its initial E3 2012 reveal? The short answer is yes. Cutting away the obviously pre-rendered CG inserts at E3 2012 leaves a slice of gameplay that is indeed a close match for the final game.

WTF? "Oh we were already counting on some scenes being a scam so it's ok".

 

[Wynix]

DF have been pretty inconsistent since the new console reveals, very disappointing.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

DF have been pretty inconsistent since the new console reveals, very disappointing.

The number of updates on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One analysis is getting silly, they often react to discussion here or on GAF. Perhaps if they stop trying to rush them out and spend more time getting them right in the first place.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

There's no sign of CGI in the E2012 trailer, only something that could have been rendered out (or rather simply captured out) of the engine itself.

They did talk more about the game, and gave it an overall bigger introduction, than what I've recalled, though. Bit also did not look that much better either...

 

[DavidGraham]

The article is pathetic at best, it confirms the game only looks good when it is raining, while ignoring the other 2013 demos which featured impressive daylight presentations.

 

[Rangers]

The number of updates on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One analysis is getting silly, they often react to discussion here or on GAF. Perhaps if they stop trying to rush them out and spend more time getting them right in the first place.

No, I'd rather they rush them out

Really though we want the info quick. A update later as info gets refined hurts absolutely nothing.

 

[Scott_Arm]

No, I'd rather they rush them out

Really though we want the info quick. A update later as info gets refined hurts absolutely nothing.

I don't read many of their comparisons anymore. Not because of quality, but because I don't care. If quality really is dropping, they shouldn't rush them out. In anything in life, if you're going to commit to something you should do it well.

 

[Rangers]

Timeliness is very important though. Heck I'm mad I'm not looking at a Watch Dogs cross platform comparison yet.

If you clean your house, you can get every speck of dust with a toothbrush and take a month, or you can do the big stuff in an hour...the latter is the wise decision. It's always a tradeoff

 

[Deleted member 11852]

No, I'd rather they rush them out

Really though we want the info quick. A update later as info gets refined hurts absolutely nothing.

You would have have inaccurate information quickly than accurate information later? My brain is metaphorically exploding right now.

But I can do that for you. Hell, I'll do this before the game are even out

 

[London Geezer]

My brain is metaphorically exploding right now.

I actually, literally, love you.

If I had to see one more person writing that their brain is literally exploding, or that they're literally dying, one more time, I think i'd literally kill myself.

 

[Arwin]

I actually, literally, love you.

If I had to see one more person writing that their brain is literally exploding, or that they're literally dying, one more time, I think i'd literally kill myself.

No use crying over spilt words.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I actually, literally, love you.

I am literally filing for a restraining order.

 

[Nesh]

I actually, literally, love you.

If I had to see one more person writing that their brain is literally exploding, or that they're literally dying, one more time, I think i'd literally kill myself.

I am literally dying until I ll eventually be completely dead. *waits to see whats going to happen"

 

[Rangers]

You would have have inaccurate information quickly than accurate information later? My brain is metaphorically exploding right now.

But I can do that for you. Hell, I'll do this before the game are even out

False analogy. I'd rather have sometimes perhaps incomplete information of varying degree, faster.

Anyways, luckily we dont have to wait 6 weeks for the less inaccurate anaylsis, DF has a preliminary WD face off up now

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-watch-dogs-performance-analysis

Not too much to say but it's disappointing a couple effects are missing from the XOne version besides the pixels. OTOH as usual there's not too much actual noticeable difference comparing the consoles versions shots (or PC for that matter)

 

[Prophecy2k]

I'm literally confused?

 

[Globalisateur]

Watch dogs performance analysis

Stuttering issues on PC even with big GPUs and as expected the AMD cards are particularly unoptimized on PC:

it is much more of an issue [the suttering] with the AMD cards. Even going nuclear and throwing a top-end 290X at the problem didn't produce a satisfactory experience.

Reduced or removed Ambient Occlusing on XB1:

Ambient occlusion is also reduced, if not removed completely on Xbox One, which is a bit of a blow given that the effect is really needed in the harshly lit daytime scenes

Worse framerate/screen tearing on XB1:

Noticeable [screen tearing], but not especially annoying on PS4, the Xbox One version is somewhat more intrusive in this regard - with tearing even appearing in certain cut-scenes, which remain completely solid on the Sony console.

DF don't really mention the worse framerate but the video clearly shows it, notably while driving. Also they didn't stress-test the 3D engine like for the preliminary test done on the PS4 engine highlights video (stress test). All the parts are carefully chosen either in closed areas or outside but without several cars exploded and burning in one screen like on the PS4 stress test.

Finally shadows quality: PC >> PS4 > XB1 and of course PS4 has 29% more pixels than XB1.

Surprisingly at this point the PS4 version would be even preferable than the stuttering PC version.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

False analogy. I'd rather have sometimes perhaps incomplete information of varying degree, faster.

Only DF's updates have not been adding information, they have been correcting inaccuracies. Hence the criticism.

 

[Rangers]

Surprisingly at this point the PS4 version would be even preferable than the stuttering PC version.

1080P+ vs 900P 60 FPS vs 30? Ok. I'm sure the stuttering will be fixed soon though. In other face offs 1080P is almost always given the clear nod over 900p, so I dont see this game warranting getting a extremely unusual exception to the rule for some reason. If it does I would have to question DF.

 

[Globalisateur]

1080P+ vs 900P 60 FPS vs 30? Ok. I'm sure the stuttering will be fixed soon though. In other face offs 1080P is almost always given the clear nod over 900p, so I dont see this game warranting getting a extremely unusual exception to the rule for some reason. If it does I would have to question DF.

That's why I said "At this point". Until they patch the stuttering on the PC version.

Constant or even regular stuttering/judder is unforgiveable (on a costly PC GPU) no matter the resolution or framerate.

Many reviewers/people prefered the smoother launch/pre-patched COD@720p on XB1 than the less smooth PS4 1080p version.

And 1080p alone didn't always win in DF articles. Remember Thief face-off? 900p + noPOM + AF > 1080p + POM + noAF.