"Lead Watch Dogs developer Jonathan Morin comments on various aspects of the game."
At the same resolution they both look very similar. Great to hear.
I want to know why the violence seems so very much toned down. It seriously looks like a lot of self-censorship has been going on. I'm not a gore-hound by any means, but surely when you shoot a guy in the face, you expect quite a bit of blood, don't you...!?
Thank you I thought I was deranged or something expecting to see some splatter from blasting 6 or more shots in someones stomach. I think its just the trailers though, you know so they can put them as ads on Videos etc.
Certainly, though perhaps they wanted to prevent Watch_Dogs from having the extreme image that Grand Theft Auto has earned over the years.
One of my single favorite things in Red Dead Redemption was the gore. Like you I am not someone that get's off to violence... But when a man drew on me, before I knew it my gun was going back in it's holster and he was dead on the ground. I walked over to him and saw what was left of his head and said aloud "Jesus Christ.." I love games that make me think things like "Don't make me kill you..." Said, not in a menacing way, but because I genuinely didn't want to have to kill them. There have been a few games that make me feel that way, and I love it. I *like the idea of Watch_Dogs. I'm not a maniac, and I'll only kill someone out of self preservation. There are bad guys doing bad things, and I'm going to try and stop them. But I'm not gonna kill a cop unless I'm backed into a corner. Having the heavy gore ala TLoU really made it more visceral for me. I would feel drained after a game session.
well it doesnt really splatter,if you got a 45 or 50 caliber it might,you can look at it that way....to me what matters is the holes(aftershot) how detailed are they and how many can be kept on a body
@RE_L-Mayer: The bullets to the face are just an example, but I'm sure there will be bigger caliber guns (shotguns) and such in the game, and there's a sort of ímpact' you would expect when you blast someone with that... ... not to mention running over people in your car. I feel they'll keep everything as 'muted' as possible, so minor blood-splatter, minor pools of blood, and quickly disappearing dead bodies. Like I said, I'm not really a gore hound, as in I wouldn't buy a game purely for the violence or gore, but I also feel it shouldn't be dumbed down or censored...
So, now resolutiongate is dead (was DOA) we now replace it with goregate. Why do I have the feeling that if this game contained an acceptable amount of blood that there would be some other aspect that would be a "controversy." Maybe we can DOA this one too: https://twitter.com/Design_... The ArabGamer article was proven false and all he did was backtrack when called out about it. He even claimed he would change the title of the article, but didn't. He lied, then changed the text in the "update" to try to make it seem like he wasn't. Lame.
Probably is toned down. As for why, to cover their asses and not be blamed for glorifying vigilantism. Things are getting rough, and if someone goes the vigilante route and has remotely touched a videogame console guess which game they're going to pick to show on tv and vilify? At least with the toned down violence it won't look so bad watching a guy get shot in the face as it's paraded around for all to see on Fox news and what not.
Fallout 3 did that head shot thing really well. That game was not for the squeamish.
So I tweeted this question to "Jonathan Morin [email protected] I said no unnecessary gore in takedowns. Blood spatter is in there but don't expect heads blowing up..." There is the reply.
@Thorstein: Thanks :) "I said no unnecessary gore in takedowns. Blood spatter is in there but don't expect heads blowing up..." That's disappointing. When I shoot someone in the face with a shotgun, I DO expect a head blowing up. That's not 'unneccessary gore'. It's realistic! I HATE self-censorship. This is extremely disappointing news. Again, I'm not saying they should take it way OTT, but when I play an action game that's pretending to be a mature story in a mature setting with violent realistic actions taking place, it should absolutely NOT be dumbed/muted down, simply because some devs/gamers/critics MIGHT not 'like' that kinda violence. The violence you can encounter in the game should reflect the kind of results you would get in a real situation. The Man from Nowhere is a good example of a movie that does violence 'right', as in it's a good mix of 'entertaining' AND realistic; Violence is BRUTAL. And the emotion that brings with it has an impact on the viewer, and it should be the same when it's in a game, and it impacts the player.
This is what people don't realize. They took that one trailer out of context and everybody ran with it without proper verification. The game looks phenomenal. The difference between the PC version and the PS4 version will be resolution. They said the streets may be more dense with civilians, maybe a few effects here and there, but for the most part they are going to look identical. As he said, at the same resolution, you will find it very hard to tell the difference between the PC version and the PS4. If you go on to read his tweets, which he has done many today answering everybody's questions he can. He tells you that nothing has really changed as far as what we seen from past videos. If anything, things have gotten better as they had that extra time to clean it up. When you see a missing reflection or shadow, you're just seeing a time of day or some sort of interference with a light source that causes that reaction at that point of time. Since the lighting is dynamic, as well as the time of day, anything can happen at any given time to make things look a little different. Which is exactly what we saw in that trailer that everybody blasted apart saying the graphics were downgraded. Everyone just needs to relax and understand that when they play the game, they are going to see how gorgeous it looks and how well it plays and all of their fears will be put to rest. Everybody who played the game a few weeks ago, all said the same thing. The game looks incredible, better than any open world game before it. Especially the world simulation and how everything works together to make the game world feel like our own. Less than two months and we will all be enjoying this title. I hope everybody else is as excited as I am, to play this game. It has been my most anticipated title since it's unveil in 2012.
Infamous:SS has raised the bar for open-world games in terms of looks, heck it raised the bar for the best looking console game available right now. As much as I would like it to, I seriously doubt Watch Dogs will come anywhere close to Infamous.
@ITPYTHON Exactly, open world games Infamous has raised the bar. Character facial models I would have to say Ryse has the best faces on characters so far. Anyhow being that Watch Dogs is an open world game similar to Infamous, if it doesn't look like the E3 showcase, then it will not look better than infamous second sons environment.
When you start those comparisons, the size of the worlds have to be added to the conversation.
Not just the size of the worlds, but the density of cars and pedestrians, the lighting model and how dynamic lights behave, character models of both main characters and average NPCs, incidental world detail, physics interactions, dynamic time of day and weather changes, etc. I think they will both have their strengths. I'm almost to beat Infamous Second Son soon and it IS a very nice looking game. I'm looking forward to playing Watch Dogs--it looks amazing too.
It means new consoles are already holding back pc version
Erm have you seen infamous SS the ps4 is a very capable system.
Erm..have you seen Ryse the X1 is a very capable system. @seanpitt Point is, the X1 may hold back the Ps4(depending on the dev) and the both of them are holding back the PC(Most devs), no one said they aren't capable. But they're still only as good as budget range gaming PC's, really, Ps4 is worth a 500 euro PC in terms of components if even, the GPU is a laptop model and the CPU is very weak, but well, they are top of the line hardware(as in, they are that powerful and sit in a tiny little box). ****, what else could you expect? It's very standard for consoles to hold back PC. It's just with every new console gen, the amount the PC is being held back gets smaller for a year or two. Really, look at the potential for PC games in 2008, then 2010, the Consoles were immediately holding back PC's, the difference became huge VERY quickly. This time around the PS4 and X1 are actually weaker compared to the PS3/360. So they are holding back PC even more. The thing with consoles is...30FPS Edit - @ ColonolRex XD, see, you still actually believe GG's ****? GG came out and stated that no, it's not native, Native is too taxing on the hardware so they tried something else. Deal with it, 1080i is 'technically' outputting 1080p too. That doesn't mean it's 1080p.
I just want to say...what budget pc can play games that look like infamous at the same resolution/framerate? None of them. It may have similar hardware to a budget pc you can put together, but it has none of the overhead, therefore it will end up being considerably better because its using far closer to 100% of the available resources. Consoles hold pcs back for multiplatform, but at this point pc exclusives arent being held back due to consoles. If devs want/can use the power, they will. Games like star citizen prove this.
Well if you want games exclusive to PC that will push the hardware. Then I hope you are interested in Star Citizen
This is teriible, how can it be great to hear? Oh ... I see for a ps4 gamer
Don't worry about it. Devs always say things like this and it never turns out to be true. Yes, it will look similar in a general way, but the PC version will still have tangible advantages that take it to another level. Nvidia is working with Ubisoft to push the PC version above and beyond the console versions. They did this with both Splinter Cell Blacklist and AC4 and both of those are indeed better on PC. Blacklist is MUCH better on the PC, while AC4 is quite a bit better but not as dramatically so. The PC version will probably have higher quality shadows, higher fidelity post process effects, much better anti-aliasing, less pop-in, greater density of traffic and pedestrians, higher resolutions and smoother/higher framerates. And according to the Nvidia E3 press event it seems they are advertising tessellation as a PC exclusive feature as well. http://www.dsogaming.com/ne... We'll find out more as the release date nears. I'm sure it will be an amazing looking game in any case.
If you max out it on pc at the same resolution i think you will see a difference don't fall for these debs trying to sell the game to console players look at battlefield 4
There will be a big difference one will be locked at 30fps and the other will be capable of running at 60fps.
I wish they'd start releasing an adult version and a children's version of the same game, I'm tired of getting a censored sissy version of a game just because they want to make more money... A game like this is trying to be realistic, when you see a vid of a guy getting shot with a shotgun at close range and see no blood at all it hints at all the censorship to come. Immersion breaking at its finest.
Good to hear that the PS4 version is close to the PC one.
Not if you intended to buy it on pc.Just means they were lazy with the pc version and didnt throw in the bells and whistles.
lazy? 4 maybe 5 different console versions and a pc version, and you have the nerve to say lazy? they delayed the game for further optimizations on 5 different versions and you say lazy. smmfh its like you think games are easy to make...cross gen at that. if it was a port with lag problems yeah say lazy. if its a online only fps game with minimal game modes shotty frames no destruction or bullethole while being ugly in comparison to other this gen fps..say lazy. but this open world, multi gen, multi plat, sp and mp game is far from lazy. if on pc dont worry mod up and dont cry.
I have to agree with cell. They could have easily had jacked up graphics on PC then just scaled them back for the ps4. It's a lot like when devs say the xbox one version looks like the ps4 version of a game and the whole interwebz goes nutz. Except that the power difference is multiplied compared to the power gap between the one and ps4. Not what anyone who games on PC wants to hear. Hopefully it'll be modded to fix these problems.
why though? it will sell most on ps4...no? it's business...follow the money. they always follow the money. 'sides it will look better on pc anyway..ps4 will be close but not as good...whats the prob? cry when they make a ps4 game thats looking better than the pc version...man o man...just mod up...look at skyrim...i mean damn!
lazy lol? how about common sense to work on the most on the system that will sell the most lol. only a re re will put forth more money for a version that will sell the least out of all the versions. also only a hand full of pc gamers will be able to run it at elite levels... would be such a waste a time and money for the few pc elitist with systems of that caliber. dont be mad bc u spent alot of money on a pc when no one else did.
"they were lazy with the pc version and didnt throw in the bells and whistles." They don't bother trying to push graphics that only a small percentage of PC gamers will see. That's what doesn't make sense about the "consoles hold PCs back" argument. It's just a self entitled delusion that says "I upgraded my PC, therefore devs must cater to me". If more PC gamers tried to stay current with their hardware, suddenly consoles wouldn't be holding back PC gaming anymore.
like all multi plat games, if PS4 version is hard to tell from PC version it means the developer is not taking advantage of more powerful PCs
@ Kingthrash360 The point is too many games today especially in the next gen crossover are cashcows. If the focus was on just next gen and pc only I think the game would be closer to its original target render. Developers should be making games to push what they can do and people expectations. So yes I say they are lazy and gamers shouldn't have to put up with so called next games which are just last gen with a bit of gloss.
It wont be unless you gimp the PC or play on 5 year old system, this is PR. Do you think anyone at Ubi will say: 'er yeah we first revealed watchdogs on a pimped out PC and now we have scaled back the games detail becuase the consoles are just not that powerful'
Will there be an option to remove or censor sexual content and nudity in Watch Dogs? What a stupid question.
so that means xbone's version will be significantly inferior?
Inferior, yes: http://vr-zone.com/articles...
"This news has already inflamed yet another “resolutiongate” quarrel, with both PlayStation and Xbox One fans defending their respective consoles in light of these figures. The lower native resolutions for Xbox One fall in line as the console uses a graphical upscaler to hit 1080p resolution, and most gamers won’t really notice it during gameplay (this of course varies on a game-to-game basis), leaving some to conclude that the arguments are trivial matters." - VR-Zone.com
should have called it xbox 960)))
@ clark: Whether or not people won't notice a "difference", the difference is there and real. Thus, nothing negates what I posted. He wanted facts and got them.
In reference to the sexual content and nudity; does anyone regularly game with the kids or younger siblings around? Also, is there anyone here who would rather be able to censor nudity during their own playthrough?
1. No. 2. It really, really depends. Usually, I wouldn't feel like censoring it unless it was particularly distasteful content (like rape or sexual abuse). Though I can definitely see how it could be a nice gesture to the sensibilities of certain gamers for a developer to have that as an option.
Would I like to be able to? Yes, absolutely I would love to have the option. I would (likely) never use it, but more options are always welcome to me.
people are always asking him about PS4 and PC version differences on twitter, are they from the PS4 camp that want to hear PS4 version looks as good, or from PC camp that want to hear PC version looks better?
Obviously console only kids that expect a £350 med/low spec system to perform like some sort of supercomputer. I love my PS4 but I know how limited it is compared to my i7/gtx/16GB PC which did not cost £350, tech wise we get what we pay for.
While PCs are obviously faster than consoles, consoles offer optimization that will NEVER be possible on PC. Take a look at The Last of Us. Sure, the game seriously needs some AA, but apart from that the game looks beautiful. No PC running a 7800 GTX (equivalent to PS3) would ever be able to run The Last of Us or anything even close to it. With these new consoles being x86, it's much faster to optimize for them, and developers are getting much more out of them much quicker. Just because a game is identical on PS4 and PC doesn't mean that the PC version was in any way held back, nor does it mean the PC version would look better if a console version didn't exist. It really just shows you how much easier this new generation is to develop for than previous consoles.
you pc guys really are something. seem to always be compensating for something. I mean why even have 16 gb? newsflash no developer is maxing out or even trying to waste time maxing out their games on pc. its been like this forever so dont expect it to change. and just to be clear I have a good pc also.
I call BS on your saying you have a good PC, NYC, since you apparently find 16 gigs of RAM to be overcompensating. 16 gigs of RAM isn't meant to be sunk into a game. Games don't take advantage of RAM like that. The RAM is for having multiple programs at once, or for editing/rendering things or, hell, just for a rainy day in which something might want need a lot of RAM. You don't seem to know much about computers...
As a longtime(decade+) pc enthusiast, I completely agree...16gb ram is stupid if all you do is game. I got 8gb in '12 and havent even come close to tappi g that...and to be clear I run a LOT of programs while gaming. On average I have 3 pieces of monitoring software(temp, clock speeds, voltage etc), web browser (sometimes 2 different) with lots of tabs open, vlc, itunes, on top of the standard antivirus amd windows features, with a game running maxed out. Im not even close to tapping out. But I always see these ridiculous gaming system specs, 16gb ram, i7...for those that do more than gaming, absolutely. For a pure gaming machine? Waste of money. Dont jusy buy more for the sake of numbers, do some research if you dont know. Similar rated i7 and 16gb ram is not better than i5 and 8 gb, but adds plenty on the cost.
If anyone has seen the brand new trailer in action that they released last night. If anyone is in any doubt about the 'promise' Ubisoft made about a guarantee of no downgrade. It was yet again complete BS it's looking the worst it has done sine the Alisha trailer. I'm shocked at ubi's comments the other week after seeing this. It's a massive public slap to the face.
Are you talking about that taxi scene that looks like vice city?
I don't agree with you. It doesn't look quite as good as the first E3 2012 demo, but it looks better than last year's PS4 demos. It looks really great. I honestly don't know what you are watching.
The new Chicago trailer released about 2 days ago on Facebook. It looks no where near last years PS4 'gameplay' footage it looks like GTA 4 never mind 5.
Nice that they throw sex in the mix to widen the eye and make the young (and old men start fapping) but what Id like to hear is simple: "There will be no difference between what you saw on the E3 trailer and the final product" Wheres that statement at Ubi? Say this and lets move on, and put this issue to bed.
The girl in the picture. Is she the one with the awesome zeldass tattoo ?
No I'm pretty sure that was a real person this pic is a game person.
Oops yes you're right. I was too busy looking at the tattoo on her chest ;0
Who wants to turn that off? The game is for adults so deal with it...
Looks like the PC version got downgraded thanks to the last-gen PS4 version.
No consoles, no AAA titles for PC. There just isn't a big enough target market. You should be grateful that you get included at all.
Not a big enough market? Obviously you have never been on steam where at any given moment there are over 4 million people logged in.
Moron. The PC has more games reviewed on Metacritic etc than the console have had since the Xbox 360 and PS3. The PC version of Skyrim sold over 5 million on release. JUST THE PC VERSION. Your precious Infamous with it's small map and short story, will barely sell that. So don't come at us with your lack of PC knowledge, saying all we care about is graphics, when you're busy bitching to the Xbox One owners how much better the PS4's graphics are. You console scum are hypocrites.
@Dumb&Nasty2021 Not every game is that big a hit and nobody knows how a game will sell before it gets commissioned. If you are going to spend $100,000,000 on a game, you want to reach as many potential customers as possible. If the extra numbers provided by console gamers weren't there (up to 160 million potential PS/360's and 10,000,000 PS4/XB1's), If those numbers weren't there, how many developers would think twice or reduce their budgets accordingly? I have a PS4 and 4 PC's at the moment (including my £12,000 Video Workstation), I don't have a problem with PC's, I just don't have a problem with economics (as you seem to).