Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,147
+1 The game is a Major let down in just about every department. It suffers even more because of the hype that was generated.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
So what does it take to max Watch Dogs @4K
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
+1 The game is a Major let down in just about every department. It suffers even more because of the hype that was generated.
Soldato
So with no AA at all, At 4K, All max settings and an overclock of 1300 on a 780 Ti I get a steady frame rate of around 20-30 but it's a stuttery mess -
+1
Caporegime
+1
Kaap insists on using maximum AA even though it makes no difference at 4K just so that he can find a use for his 6GB Titans.
Any ordinary user will get it running on a 3/4GB card and see no difference between 8x AA and 4x or none.
Last edited:
Caporegime
It does look good mind.
Caporegime
Soldato
Don't be childish.
On the subject of the game itself I quite enjoyed it. Played it on the PS4 mind.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,147
I also played on the PS4. It ran fine and looked decent. It was still a let down for me as i believed to much of the hype. My favourite part was playing hide and seek online (Hacking).
Last edited:
Caporegime
Running 8x AA at 4K is a bit silly, it runs fine at 4K on a 780TI / 290X without that much AA, and it makes little to no difference visually.
Last edited:
I wouldn't bank on it, unless something has changed drastically since launch I had 2 options to get this junk game to run on a pair of 3GB 780's...
Use FXAA/No AA + Ultra ~2700mb
Use 2/4x AA + High/Medium ~2700mb
At 1080p
That said the Vram readings were exactly the same at 1440p....perhaps X setting = Y Vram required regardless of res.
In the end I chose hidden option number 3....uninstall it and don't look back.
Soldato
It can look very good. Especially with TWM features enabled.
It may not be necessarily, but of course it still makes a difference. I can tell quite easily the difference between settings at 4K.
It may not be necessarily, but of course it still makes a difference. I can tell quite easily the difference between settings at 4K.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Option 3 is what i went for, no reflection on the game-play, its more me in this regard, its not really my thing, every 6 feet along the game presented options for hacking this and that.... while its not compulsory to hack everything i do have that compulsion to do everything, so to me the game-play felt micromanaged, i found it annoying.
Other than that i didn't find it very interesting, i was also unimpressed by the Graphics. and the performance was horrible, typically Ubisoft performance, FPS up and down in huge chunks, very stuttery, jerky game...
Just a horrible horrible horrible game, i didn't keep it long enough to 'learn to get into it'
Soldato
its a funny old game, this pc business. 100% gpu usage = great optimization. 100% ram usage = **** poor optimization. Oddly that seems to apply to CPUs and system ram, too.
completely wrong of course.
completely wrong of course.
i couldn't agree more. the flatness and low res textures are horrible. if i play crysis 2 from 2010 or tomb raider from last year and then watchdogs, it is very very flat and some of the textures are terrible. the water looks miles better than the other textures. the pop in when driving is annoying. my 7970 get 30-40fps on max settings at 1080p and it sutters all the time as well.
Oh I agree, once I'd got a near playable state I found my self bored inside an hour of doing the same thing 3 or 4 times.
Provided rock star don't monumentally muck it up, gta5 will remove all traces of this horrid game.
Soldato
Ok, let's not get silly about it. It's terribly optimised, but the graphics bad? lol. Head scratching stuff. It has better lighting than say BF4. Are those graphics bad?
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,147
Look in any window for a laugh. I had a road with cars parked behind me in an industrial area and when i seen the reflection it showed me in a garden with grass and stuff. That's terrible in this day and age for a top title. The Graphics ain't as bad as some are making out but they are not as good as i was expecting.
Last edited:
Soldato
I've got realtime reflections enabled. A lot of it's been turned off. It's really poorly optimised which is most likely why they removed a lot of the effects before it went gold. It's forgivable in an open world game. Have you seen real time reflections in GTA 5 yet? I think people might be being overly critical because of the bad press. But it's definitely not as good as it could be. Graphics aren't categorically bad though, not a chance.
Last edited: