The Division. Are we interested?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Things change between expo preview builds and release. If you want to believe that is because of some sinister conspiracy against PC gamers, you go for it!
 
If I was trying to make console versions look better than PC I would sure as hell not released a PS4 version that looked like a not even cutting edge PS3 release! That's my take on that whole drama, you're welcome to your own interpretation!

I'm not defending that PC version, it was absolute turd, unplayable slideshow mess on my crossfire rig.
 
I knew ubisoft had a bad rep atm but wow from what I see here people are a lot more annoyed then I thought. While some of it is deserved I don't think all of it is and as I said happy to give them another shot with this game. If they don't downgrade it to make it "equal to console" I will be disappointed. However with the issue happening with watch dogs and the terrible press they got for that I really don't see them doing it again.
 
mid_gen said:
Things change between expo preview builds and release. If you want to believe that is because of some sinister conspiracy against PC gamers, you go for it!
Click to expand...

Your continuing assertion that we're all crazed PC conspiracy theorists is misguided. I'm not convinced that its even particularly about PC gamers. Its a common marketing ploy across various industries to make things look better than they are in reality. A few analogies are photoshopped images of celebrities in cosmetics adds, food looking so much better in pictures when compared to what you're served (pretty much every McDonalds on the planet). Or even car manufacturers overestimating mpg. These are all well documented examples, not conspiracy. What makes it impossible for something similar within the gaming industry? That their marketing and finance guys are somehow a better class of human being than their counterparts?

Get a high-end PC and crank eveything up, show it as pre-release footage for hype and pre-orders, then downgrade it so as not to alienate your console customers. If anyone complains then claim its solely for the sake of stability and performance in the final build, then go on to attack them as conspiracy theorists. Much as you are doing. Its plausible. I don't claim that they all do this, and being a mere consumer with no vested interest I have no evidence that any of them do. But its hardly a great leap to believe that some of them might do. Your complete refusal to even acknowledge the possibility says more about you than anyone else.
 
The game ran at <10 fps on my 280x crossfire setup.

I find it very hard to believe that some people sat around watching a slideshow demo and said "you know what, this looks too good compared to the console version, cut some graphical features out". It's more likely and plausible that the conversation was more like "this is running like absolute crap, start cutting rendering options out until it runs at a respectable framerate on normal settings".

While it's certainly *possible* there is some plot to make the PC version look worse....the simpler and more likely option is that they shipped a rushed, cut back, poorly optimised PC version because they ran out of time.
 
mid_gen said:
The game ran at <10 fps on my 280x crossfire setup.

I find it very hard to believe that some people sat around watching a slideshow demo and said "you know what, this looks too good compared to the console version, cut some graphical features out". It's more likely and plausible that the conversation was more like "this is running like absolute crap, start cutting rendering options out until it runs at a respectable framerate on normal settings".

While it's certainly *possible* there is some plot to make the PC version look worse....the simpler and more likely option is that they shipped a rushed, cut back, poorly optimised PC version because they ran out of time.
Click to expand...

The latter part of your final statement is certainly true, it seems allot of games are rushed to release now. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was the case here as well.

The E3 demo version by all accounts ran smoothly, as is showed in the footage. I don't know what the spec of that PC was, we'll have to wait and see if the release version looks noticeably poorer at max settings.

You've run this title on your PC? Or is that first sentence just for the purpose of illustrating your point?
 
Looks like an interesting game however wait and see will be my approach too.

Plenty of other games to play, I'm not getting caught in any pre-game hype. Also, must have a 100% functional single player, no real interest or time for any multi-player.

Cheers,
 
mid_gen said:
While it's certainly *possible* there is some plot to make the PC version look worse....the simpler and more likely option is that they shipped a rushed, cut back, poorly optimised PC version because they ran out of time.
Click to expand...

And that's why we don't buy from Ubisoft any more.
Nobody is a conspiracy nut here.
Nobody is saying they're trying to make PC looks worse than console.

But they definitely downgraded the settings and "hid" them as a modder activated them and create the sweetfx preset for it with results matching the E3 demo. - I then used them for my game, which made a whole load of a difference.

Look at the multi-platform mess Unity was which they're churning out year after year, Rogue is now upon us after only a few months!
Look at Far Cry 4, it's just a repeat of Far Cry 3!
They were revoking keys for whatever reason they want to throw at us.

I don't like Ubisoft as a Video Games Publisher any more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom