# UbiSoft Ruined Watch Dogs



## WiiCube_2013 (Mar 9, 2014)

​
​​I'm really sad to see how much Watch Dogs downgraded from being such a graphically awesome game to something comparable to the graphics of GTA IV (I seem to recall they looked even better too).​​UbiSoft should've allowed the game to maintain its development time for longer but nope, they see people are moaning to get the game out and so that's what they're doing it.​​So.. getting this game on PS3 or PS4 makes no difference really.​


----------



## GameWinner (Mar 9, 2014)

Hmmm..
Nope. Still want on either PS3 or PS4.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 9, 2014)

...I'm gonna wait for the official release, but this looks like a massive downgrade.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Mar 9, 2014)

If you're talking about E3 2012, of course it isn't going to look as good as when the game was played on a high-end PC but if you're talking about 2013, then the graphical disparities just have to do with the time of day or the fact that every part of the game isn't going to look exactly as good. Rainy night gameplay obviously isn't going to look as good as gameplay in the middle of the day.

Look at THE demo played live not too long on Jimmy Fallon, looks just fine.







Or the supposedly "downgraded footage".



Spoiler



http://i.minus.com/iAHxbvGbhY0Mz.gif
http://a.pomf.se/faclvx.gif


----------



## GamerSince83 (Mar 9, 2014)

Is that whut they did with all the Extra time that was given to them   


I'm ready to shed some Tears for when they show the WiiU version


----------



## Gahars (Mar 9, 2014)

Is it too soon to throw in the "Watch_Dog devs are hacks!" joke yet?


----------



## tbgtbg (Mar 9, 2014)

Looks fine to me, but I haven't been following this game at all and have no vested interest in it being ruined or not. If not for the captions telling which was 2012 or 2014, I don't know that I'd have noticed much difference. I'm not saying you're wrong about it being downgraded, just maybe you're overblowing it with the whole ruined thing.


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 9, 2014)

I didn't know they were making a PS2 port    But seriously. Ouch.


----------



## Social_Outlaw (Mar 9, 2014)

WTH?...Infamous Second son looks way better (Which is good) than this sadly .

So your telling me after all of these delays it's not even up to par with NextGen?.

They should have at least made it a bit Darker for PS4, so you can see a little at least.

I heard people say The PS4 is like a low end Pc.

I say bullcrap Have you seen Infamous second son? It looks amazing. I really think Ubisoft didn't push the PS4 to it's limits, when making this game.

I'm Gonna still get this, but this feel like it's incomplete. Watch dogs look okay, but it just feels like it's not up to par with the competition.


----------



## Arras (Mar 9, 2014)

Uh. Apart from the very first thing where the car on the right looks like a plastic toy car I really can't see much of a difference.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 9, 2014)

Can we just complain about Watch_Dogs being a mediocre GTA clone and not because the Wii U ruined the graphics for everyone of muh grafix.


----------



## TimKatheteStadle (Mar 9, 2014)

Worse Graphics = Ruined?
Hmm thats like totally your opinion man..


----------



## Hells Malice (Mar 9, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Can we just complain about Watch_Dogs being a mediocre GTA clone and not because the Wii U ruined the graphics for everyone of muh grafix.


 
I can't think of any GTA 'clones' that actually managed to be worse than GTA.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 9, 2014)

TimKatheteStadle said:


> Worse Graphics = Ruined?
> Hmm thats like totally your opinion man..


When you've just bought a brand-new and expensive next generation system, you expect the games to be a substantial step-up from your last-gen one. Unfortunately, this is often not the case with multiplatform games which are held back by last generation hardware for the sake of compatibility.


----------



## BvanBart (Mar 9, 2014)

Lol... if it was on Wii U like that I would not really be surprised... but PS4 and Xbone?? Ubisoft is rather lazy then ambitious...



soulx said:


> *snip*


 
IF and really IF the graphics looked that nice I won't have a problem with this game... but what I see now is GTA 3 all over again


----------



## Gahars (Mar 9, 2014)

B4rtj4h said:


> but what I see now is GTA 3 all over again


 
A game that singlehandedly defines a genre and inspires a slew of imitators? I mean, I can understand wanting this game to be good, but you might want to lower expectations just a smidge.

:^)


----------



## BvanBart (Mar 9, 2014)

Gahars said:


> A game that singlehandedly defines a genre and inspires a slew of imitators? I mean, I can understand wanting this game to be good, but you might want to lower expectations just a smidge.
> 
> :^)


 

Haha  one can always dream!


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Mar 10, 2014)

TimKatheteStadle said:


> Worse Graphics = Ruined?
> Hmm thats like totally your opinion man..


 
Let's say you bought a high-end PC gaming rig worth around $2k would you be playing games on low settings or medium? Of course not, for that price you'd expect to get to play the games graphically at its full potential.

So even for $400/$500 you'd be wanting the same too. I certainly would, otherwise why'd I pay such absurd prices for nicer graphics?

P.S.: Even though I'm not ruling graphics are more important than gameplay, you get the drift from what I've said above. It's just a waste if that money is to play something that last-gen consoles can look equally the same.


----------



## FireGrey (Mar 10, 2014)

I'm not liking the new character design, or this plot.


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 10, 2014)

Arras said:


> Uh. Apart from the very first thing where the car on the right looks like a plastic toy car I really can't see much of a difference.


This. I've got to be honest: if that video switches what is shown left and right with every scene, I wouldn't be able to tell it.

Also: same complaint about titanfall: THE FREAKING GAME ISN'T RELEASED YET! You could argue that ubisoft ruined their trailer, but I wasn't buying on planning a trailer to begin with.


----------



## Hells Malice (Mar 10, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> Let's say you bought a high-end PC gaming rig worth around $2k would you be playing games on low settings or medium? Of course not, for that price you'd expect to get to play the games graphically at its full potential.
> 
> So even for $400/$500 you'd be wanting the same too. I certainly would, otherwise why'd I pay such absurd prices for nicer graphics?
> 
> P.S.: Even though I'm not ruling graphics are more important than gameplay, you get the drift from what I've said above. It's just a waste if that money is to play something that last-gen consoles can look equally the same.


 
I'd think console peasants are used to poor graphics.


----------



## xBleedingSoulx (Mar 10, 2014)

My PC is over 2 years old and already has better specs than a PS4... What'd you expect?


----------



## grossaffe (Mar 10, 2014)

lolgraphicswhores


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Mar 10, 2014)

I don't trust any of the demo footage's. We simply have to wait until the game is done and people are uploading videos of it.


----------



## Pedeadstrian (Mar 10, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> When you've just bought a brand-new and expensive next generation system, you expect the games to be a substantial step-up from your last-gen one. Unfortunately, this is often not the case with multiplatform games which are held back by last generation hardware for the sake of compatibility.


I'm pretty sure everyone and their grandmothers knew that the PS4 and Xbox One would not be "substantial step-ups." Would they be a step-up? Sure. Substantially so? I don't think so.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 10, 2014)

Pedeadstrian said:


> I'm pretty sure everyone and their grandmothers knew that the PS4 and Xbox One would not be "substantial step-ups." Would they be a step-up? Sure. Substantially so? I don't think so.


Both the PS4 and the XBox One are _substantial_ technological step-ups from their predecessors - they're about five times more proficient in terms of graphics, six times in terms of CPU prowess, sixteen times the memory and that's substantial. It's not _as substantial_ as previous generation jumps, but the pace at which _computers in general_ are progressing has slowed down due to gradually exhausting what silicone can do. Long story short, any sane person would expect a system that's 5-6 times more powerful than the last generation one to generate at least twice as good visuals, which isn't the case here, however it's not the case mostly due to the fact that the game had to be adapted for much weaker platforms, not because the systems are not massive improvements over last generation ones.


----------



## Langin (Mar 10, 2014)

Wow these discussions are everywhere... But okay I'll share my idea on this:

Here's a quote from another post I made on a different forum:



> Lol, I saw this coming from miles away. It's UBISOFT we are talking about, remember? They pumped the NDS, Wii and 3DS full with shovelware titles and fucked up whole launches with shitty, buggy and rushed titles. They also make good titles!(Rayman Origins, Legends for example) Don't get me wrong but Ubisoft is the crappiest publisher from all publishers I've played games from.(I never play EA nor Activision games(some acti games here and there but w/e) I want to give an example of Ubisoft at it's worst; the 3DS launch just to name some of their titles and their problems:
> 
> Rayman 3D, horrible port with horrible graphics and controls.(Also misses content from the latest versions)
> Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Shadow Wars, this is actually a pretty decent game! But it's broken by Anti Piracy bugs!(The game gives a weird error, Ubisoft said it was AP)
> ...



Aka I don't have faith in them at all. Their games(Assassins Creed, Far Cry, name it) are buggy as the hell. I mean of course you cannot make a game bug free! But please Ubisoft I just free roamed in AC games and the weirdest things happen around you... I'll pick Watch_Dogs up once it's budget-title .


----------



## Pedeadstrian (Mar 10, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Both the PS4 and the XBox One are _substantial_ technological step-ups from their predecessors - they're about five times more proficient in terms of graphics, six times in terms of CPU prowess, sixteen times the memory and that's substantial. It's not _as substantial_ as previous generation jumps, but the pace at which _computers in general_ are progressing has slowed down due to gradually exhausting what silicone can do. Long story short, any sane person would expect a system that's 5-6 times more powerful than the last generation one to generate at least twice as good visuals, which isn't the case here, however it's not the case mostly due to the fact that the game had to be adapted for much weaker platforms, not because the systems are not massive improvements over last generation ones.


I wasn't talking about the consoles' specs. I was simply talking about the visuals, which is what I assume you were talking about in the first post I quoted. Yes, PS4 graphics are better than PS3 ones. Twice as good visuals, though? I don't think that's accurate.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 10, 2014)

Pedeadstrian said:


> I wasn't talking about the consoles' specs. I was simply talking about the visuals, which is what I assume you were talking about in the first post I quoted. Yes, PS4 graphics are better than PS3 ones. Twice as good visuals, though? I don't think that's accurate.


That's because the system was literally just released and this is the first batch of games for it, and specs have everything to do with it. Currently programmers are held back by coding video games that are supposed to work on inferior machines and they're probably not yet comfortable with the new tools of the trade and their capabilities, but this will gradually change. Launch games and games within the launch window are rarely stunning, give it two-or-so years and we'll see development studios squeezing more juice out of the systems.


----------



## Kashalots (Mar 10, 2014)

xBleedingSoulx said:


> My PC is over 2 years old and already has better specs than a PS4... What'd you expect?


 

Its not like the new consoles have bad graphics chip inside. Looking at steam surveys there are probably 60 - 70% of pc users which graphics cards are the same tier or lower than the one inside the ps4. People with high end pc's are actually a minority.


----------



## Ryupower (Mar 10, 2014)

graphic do not make the game
if there is good game play it can still be a good game

look at 1st ps2/ps3 games
then look end of ps2/ps3 life games
as time goes on stuff will get better

also
the PC one might be ruining in the video might be  at max setting with  a very high end setup


----------



## jacksprat1990 (Mar 10, 2014)

Yay. More hipsters jumping on the "trendy" bandwagons. The game looks fine ffs.


----------



## Kashalots (Mar 10, 2014)

"Yay. More hipsters jumping on the "trendy" bandwagons. The game looks fine ffs." Its not about how it looks but its about the lies they showed us in the beginning - srsly devs should be fined for false advertising. Thats probably a cheap way for them to get lots of hype. Nobody would complain about the looks if they didnt show a much more promising version at the beginning.


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 10, 2014)

Its common for developers to downgrade graphics so the actual console can play it. Look at oblivion when they first showed gameplay, they had full on lighting for every room, and the models didn't look horrible.


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 10, 2014)

Ryupower said:


> also
> the PC one might be ruining in the video might be at max setting with a very high end setup


The first video was from before the PS4 and xbone were even ANNOUNCED. You didn't really think it was showing anything other than PC footage, didn't you? 


Kashalots said:


> srsly devs should be fined for false advertising. Thats probably a cheap way for them to get lots of hype. Nobody would complain about the looks if they didnt show a much more promising version at the beginning.


You're contradicting yourself. If nobody would complain about the looks if the first video was less promising, then the hype would be the same...and it wouldn't be "a cheap way to get lots of hype".

Also: good luck trying to fine EVERYONE WHO EVER ADVERTISED ANYTHING!
I'm not saying there is no such thing as false advertising (there is), but calling this video false advertising is like complaining about world hunger when you don't get a second desert if you dropped your first one.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Mar 10, 2014)

Aliens: Colonial Marines suffered from the same, the early footage looked like it was going to be an awesome game but then the final result was.. let's just say one of 2013's worst games. I'm not saying WD will be bad, but the graphics have been made inferior.

Seeing that Watch Dogs has been downgraded from its graphical full potential that was shown at the beginning won't feel like the intended finished product as they had promoted it.

I've never wanted a graphical game so good looking as Watch Dogs and then this happened.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 10, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> Aliens: Colonial Marines suffered from the same, the early footage looked like it was going to be an awesome game but then the final result was.. let's just say one of 2013's worst games. I'm not saying WD will be bad, but the graphics have been made inferior.
> 
> Seeing that Watch Dogs has been downgraded from its graphical full potential that was shown at the beginning won't feel like the intended finished product as they had promoted it.
> 
> I've never wanted a graphical game so good looking as Watch Dogs and then this happened.


 

I don't think that's a fair comparison. When they demoed Aliens it was a completely different game. Like it wasn't just a "downgrade", it was different. It was like showing footage of a Transformers movie and the final product is actually Transmorphers.

This is just a graphical downgrade which is quite common. Most of the early demos are much better than the final product. E3 live demos are done on much more powerful hardware than what's offered. Odds are the core game will be the same, but yes it'll look worse.


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 10, 2014)

Actually it looks more like they turned the brightness up revealing the bad graphics.


----------



## BvanBart (Mar 10, 2014)

The jackets belt... it's like a piece of plastic in the newest update... in the old version it was almost realistically flattering in the wind...


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 10, 2014)

I love seeing so many people nitpick and moan over graphical changes in an upcoming game on a console, expecting it to look as good as a PC game would.  I've both a next gen console and PC, so....


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Mar 10, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> I love seeing so many people nitpick and moan over graphical changes in an upcoming game on a console, expecting it to look as good as a PC game would.  I've both a next gen console and PC, so....


 
"Next gen consoles" are now the current-gen consoles (PS4, WU, XO) so there's no need to keep referring them as that until 6-7 years have passed when the newer ones will be released.

I was thinking of getting this game for the PS4 when I'd buy one but the graphical difference isn't really too different so I might get for the Wii U if they make the GamePad have interesting functions as a smart telephone.


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 10, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> "Next gen consoles" are now the current-gen consoles (PS4, WU, XO) so there's no need to keep referring them as that until 6-7 years have passed when the newer ones will be released.
> 
> I was thinking of getting this game for the PS4 when I'd buy one but the graphical difference isn't really too different so I might get for the Wii U if they make the GamePad have interesting functions as a smart telephone.


 

Be careful with that term, lumping the Wii U with the other current gen consoles might be dangerous around here due to hardware differentials  



Spoiler



But you're right, I hope they make good use of the game pad and sorry people, but hardware doesn't determine console generations, generation is defined as an interval of time trolololol


----------



## JoostinOnline (Mar 10, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> ​​I'm really sad to see how much Watch Dogs downgraded from being such a graphically awesome game to something comparable to the graphics of GTA IV (I seem to recall they looked even better too).


What's truly said is that you think that slightly less impressive graphics ruin a game.  That's seriously pathetic.

I'm currently enjoying the original Legend of Zelda.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Mar 10, 2014)

JoostinOnline said:


> What's truly said is that you think that slightly less impressive graphics ruin a game. That's seriously pathetic.
> 
> I'm currently enjoying the original Legend of Zelda.


 
You don't get it do you?

What they showed up before at E3 was spectacular and then the 2013 update was a huge disappointment so you see that expectations were high and they failed to deliver them.


----------



## JoostinOnline (Mar 10, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> You don't get it do you?
> 
> What they showed up before at E3 was spectacular and then the 2013 update *was a huge disappointment* so you see that expectations were high and they failed to deliver them.


So if graphics don't meet your new expectations (PS3/360 graphics apparently aren't satisfying anymore) then the game is ruined?  I think the game looks great, but even if it was a N64 graphics (and I only go that far because 3D is a huge part of the game) I wouldn't call it ruined.


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 10, 2014)

JoostinOnline said:


> So if graphics don't meet your new expectations (PS3/360 graphics apparently aren't satisfying anymore) then the game is ruined? I think the game looks great, but even if it was a N64 graphics (and I only go that far because 3D is a huge part of the game) I wouldn't call it ruined.


 

People have unreasonable and unrealistic expectations as far as eye candy for the eighth gen it seems.  If people honestly expect the same gap we had from Xbox to Xbox 360, they're going to be disappointed. I couldn't care less how much of a "downgrade" the game or any port is getting. I bought Splinter Cell for the Wii U, despite not looking as "robust" as the PC version, but do I care? No, I don't.


----------



## JoostinOnline (Mar 10, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> People have unreasonable and unrealistic expectations as far as eye candy for the eighth gen it seems. If people honestly expect the same gap we had from Xbox to Xbox 360, they're going to be disappointed. I couldn't care less how much of a "downgrade" the game or any port is getting. I bought Splinter Cell for the Wii U, despite not looking as "robust" as the PC version, but do I care? No, I don't.


What I think is really silly is how graphics can be amazing one year, then the next year the same graphics are an embarrassment.


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 10, 2014)

JoostinOnline said:


> What I think is really silly is how graphics can be amazing one year, then the next year the same graphics are an embarrassment.


 

No kidding. People have unreasonable and implacable expectations. How a game looks is never good enough, there's always something wrong with visuals.


----------



## Kashalots (Mar 10, 2014)

Let me ask this to people - If you ordered a car that you liked in a car show and when it came out and you got it it would not be the same as it was displayed there. Would you also think "Hey, it is not as pretty as it was but hey some of the features are still there!" would that be still okay?


----------



## JoostinOnline (Mar 10, 2014)

Kashalots said:


> Let me ask this to people - If you ordered a car that you liked in a car show and when it came out and you got it it would not be the same as it was displayed there. Would you also think "Hey, it is not as pretty as it was but hey some of the features are still there!" would that be still okay?


1) You have the option to cancel your order.
2) If you're buying a car because it's "pretty", then you are seriously bad with money.
3) This has all of the features, not just some.  The gameplay is the same, and it almost certainly runs better.
4) Does slightly-less "pretty" car mean it will run better (which it does in video games)? Only a fool wouldn't take that deal.
5) Being a little disappointed that it's not as good looking as you originally expected is completely different from the car being ruined.


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 10, 2014)

6) it's still the same car. at best, it looks a bit different because the show room had different lights on the thing.


----------



## trumpet-205 (Mar 10, 2014)

Let the game come out first before you deliver your judgment.


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 10, 2014)

trumpet-205 said:


> Let the game come out first before you deliver your judgment.


 
Isn't that asking this a bit much for many on here? After all, many pass judgment on something before they even try it, whether it be a console or a game


----------



## JoostinOnline (Mar 10, 2014)

trumpet-205 said:


> Let the game come out first before you deliver your judgment.


Take your reasonable-ness elsewhere, it has no place on GBAtemp.


----------



## Arras (Mar 10, 2014)

JoostinOnline said:


> Take your reasonable-ness elsewhere, it has no place on the internet.


ftfy


----------



## oodhfshdfbs (Mar 11, 2014)

hmmm.... still interested!


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 11, 2014)

Oh no! The graphics are totally horrendous and make this game completely unplayable. Woe is me!


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 11, 2014)

I think the following picture nicely shows how things have changed... 

(spoilered since it's a large file)



Spoiler


----------



## the_randomizer (Mar 11, 2014)

The Self-entitlement butthurt-over-graphical-change levels are well over 9000 at this point.


----------



## CompassNorth (Mar 11, 2014)

the_randomizer said:


> The Self-entitlement butthurt-over-graphical-change levels are well over 9000 at this point.


It's not self-entitlement.
Ubisoft showed us a great looking game and made people speculate it was going to be a next-gen only game because of how nice looking it .


Just because graphics doesn't affect gameplay doesn't mean it's okay to call the people who were looking forward to the early build of the game "entitled graphics whore". They were shown a game and the final product won't look like the game they were shown. It's completely normal to be let down.

False advertisement is becoming more frequent in the video game industry.


----------



## Sakitoshi (Mar 11, 2014)

if you complain about the console version, then get the PC version and move on.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 11, 2014)

Sakitoshi said:


> if you complain about the console version, then get the PC version and move on.


 

That's pretty poor advice, considering most people don't have PCs good enough to run the game at the desired settings, let alone at all, so that's not really a good alternative. A lot of people get consoles in the place of a heavy-specced PCs.

In general, I don't think "Just get it on PC" is a good excuse for poor console versions.


----------



## Sakitoshi (Mar 11, 2014)

Gahars said:


> That's pretty poor advice, considering most people don't have PCs good enough to run the game at the desired settings, let alone at all, so that's not really a good alternative. A lot of people get consoles in the place of a heavy-specced PCs.
> 
> In general, I don't think "Just get it on PC" is a good excuse for poor console versions.


 
yeah I know.
I was saying it teasing "try the PC version on your machine and see if runs like E3"
and day scenes on night focused engines always look ugly. just try a game that use DooM 3 engine and has day scenes.


----------



## CompassNorth (Mar 11, 2014)

Sakitoshi said:


> yeah I know.
> I was saying it teasing "try the PC version on your machine and see if runs like E3"
> and day scenes on night focused engines always look ugly. just try a game that use DooM 3 engine and has day scenes.


What makes you think is a night focused engine?
They're using a brand new engine so I don't really know how you came to this conclusion.


----------



## Coto (Mar 11, 2014)

Gahars said:


> That's pretty poor advice, considering most people don't have PCs good enough to run the game at the desired settings, let alone at all, so that's not really a good alternative. A lot of people get consoles in the place of a heavy-specced PCs.
> 
> In general, I don't think "Just get it on PC" is a good excuse for poor console versions.


 

No it's not. Game consoles are partially cheaper than PC conterparts because of budget (or spec'ed to up to three-four years) hardware.

To me the game seems fine, yes, the shaders are "GTA4 like" on mid-high pixel light hardware, but a balance of time and development, for the developer allows the sequel to be improved with little effort.


----------



## Sakitoshi (Mar 11, 2014)

CompassNorth said:


> What makes you think is a night focused engine?
> 
> Their using a brand new engine so I don't really know how you came to this conclusion.



ok I pulled that of my ass. but if you see a night scene and look fantastic and then a day scene and look not so great makes you wonder why.


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 11, 2014)

CompassNorth said:


> It's not self-entitlement.
> Ubisoft showed us a great looking game and made people speculate it was going to be a next-gen only game because of how nice looking it .


You're pulling this out of your ass. Keep in mind that in the 2012 E3, the PS4 and xbone weren't even announced yet. So not only are you saying that some people speculated this for machines nobody knew about (unless you count the wiiu, of which pretty much nothing was known), but you are also blaming ubisoft for the fact that people speculated on things. 

Wow...and to think I got excited for watch_dogs because it was one of the few game trailers that showed ANY FOOTAGE OF THE GAME rather than a string of cutscènes.


----------



## CompassNorth (Mar 11, 2014)

Taleweaver said:


> You're pulling this out of your ass. Keep in mind that in the 2012 E3, the PS4 and xbone weren't even announced yet. So not only are you saying that some people speculated this for machines nobody knew about (unless you count the wiiu, of which pretty much nothing was known)


No, no I'm not.
It's obvious that you weren't keeping up with the game when it was announced.
And even though they weren't announced every knew they were in the works, and if you add how visually impressive Watch_Dogs was you anyone can come up with that conclusion.




Taleweaver said:


> but you are also blaming ubisoft for the fact that people speculated on things.


What? No. Re-read my entire post and not the first paragraph.


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 11, 2014)

CompassNorth said:


> No, no I'm not.
> It's obvious that you weren't keeping up with the game when it was announced.
> And even though they weren't announced every knew they were in the works, and if you add how visually impressive Watch_Dogs was you anyone can come up with that conclusion.


...and how is that ubisoft's fault?



> What? No. Re-read my entire post and not the first paragraph.


Okay...I did that. Here is is:



Spoiler






CompassNorth said:


> It's not self-entitlement.
> Ubisoft showed us a great looking game and made people speculate it was going to be a next-gen only game because of how nice looking it .
> 
> 
> ...





I'll ask again (but a bit more slow), since it's NOT explained in your entire post: how...did...ubisoft...made...people...speculate...on...all...this...shit?

It's a commercial. So is the newer trailer. And all trailers (especially those years prior to the actual release date) give an ESTIMATE of how the end product will look like. It will never 100% be the same, and if you expect that, then there is something wrong with YOU and not the company.


Kind of the ironic thing on this whole discussion is that yahtzee was right: pretty much the whole E3 of 2012 was cutscenes, cutscenes and more cutscenes. Except for one newly announced game that showed nothing but in-game footage (linky...it's near the end of the video). I remember thinking "why do not more developers do this?". The wow-factor of cinematics were overused last generation so more and more gamers realise it's the actual GAME they want to see. But threads like this kinda show why the industry tends to clear away from that path...because random cutscenes can be previewed years in advance without any change whatsoever to the end result. And it sure wouldn't result in a bunch of sourpusses looking doubly cross on every freakin' pixel and somehow declaring that a day scene can TOTALLY BE COMPARED to a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT scene at night.


----------



## CompassNorth (Mar 12, 2014)

Taleweaver said:


> ...and how is that ubisoft's fault?


It's not the point I was making. You can't understand a simple post.




Taleweaver said:


> .I'll ask again (but a bit more slow), since it's NOT explained in your entire post: how...did...ubisoft...made...people...speculate...on...all...this...shit?


Is it really that hard for you to understand? You've complete missed the point I made.
- Ubisoft announces a visually impressive game
- It looks really great and (some) people think it's a next-gen game because that's how great it looks
- The final product does not look how it was initially shown
- *Ubisoft is at fault for falsely advertising a product and making people believe this will be the final product*, not that they made people speculate it was next-gen only game.

My post was a response to a "lol entitled graphics whores" post. It was to show that it's perfectly normal to be disappointed in a situation like this.

That's as simple as I can put it. If words aren't your thing I can try using cavemen drawings, but I'm not so sure it'll help.



Taleweaver said:


> It's perfectly okay to the company to falsely advertise a product. IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME YOU'RE DUMB!!!!


I'd agree with you if it was a barely noticeable difference, but it isn't. It's a huge downgrade.


----------

