Ben-DutkaRemember that amazing Watch Dogs E3 2012 presentation?
Well, in the long run, that may have actually hurt Ubisoft's case for the new IP. The increasing hype has been partly derailed by the recent flood of "graphical down-scaling" rumors. These rumors have yet to be confirmed (the publisher insists the game will definitely look "next-gen") but either way, these headlines aren't helping.
In the wake of this, the game's creative director Jonathan Morin told Edge (as cited by Polygon ) that in fact, they were "forced" to make that presentation:
"They forced us to go at E3 2012. Yves was the one who wanted us to go at that E3, even though we felt it was a bit early."
Morin is referring to Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot. However, Morin said he eventually agreed with Guillemot's decision, saying- "I think he was right." Yes, but do you? Given everything that has happened, including a lengthy delay and some questionable press, maybe it really was too early.
Related Game(s): Watch Dogs
Two years is nothing compared to other games (XV) but you better deliver what you show or expect people to be pissed off.
Indeed. That's pretty much the cause of the backlash the game has been getting since the story trailer was released. The game made a huge entrance at E3 2012 and that was mainly because of the incredible graphics. But after seeing the recent story trailer, it's quite evident that the final game doesn't look as good as the reveal trailer.
Have you seen Eurogamer's recent interview with the game's creative director? The lighting there was so flat, even GTA V on previous generation consoles looked better. It's quite unfortunate, really, because this game was really promising. I really hope that the gameplay delivers in spades so it will at least have a fighting chance.
Well he has to say his boss was right, but that key word "forced" is important.
I don't think it's the end of the world or anything but after the delay and with the fact that the E3 reveal wasn't the ugly game we will get it turns out to be the wrong decision in hindsight.
The reveal wasn't the problem considering the release date they had. This is an excuse to try and get the delay off topic. If you have a date set like the one that they did, showing it off a year earlier isn't too early. They missed their release date so that's the issue. The problem lies within there forecasting.
So long as the final product isn't altered so much that the E3 presentation was somehow exaggerated then all will be fine.
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 3/13/2014 3:22:22 PM
This game's graphics seem like they went down.
They weren't, the reveal in 2012 was on PC, as PS4 and Xbox One didn't even exist and Ubisoft wasn't even aware of what their eventual specs might be.
Ubisoft just recently released the minimum specs on PC for the game, and they're easily the steepest I've ever seen. The PC version will probably look close to the E3 reveal, the console versions will look considerably worse.
Well, I don't PC. So I was obviously talking about the Ps4 version. I don't really care how it looks though. As long as that frame rate is smooth, I'm A-O.K.
It's some really poor coding if the end product looks like what we've seen and still has those outrageous PC specs.
The presentation was running on a high-end PC with what they thought would be next-gen specifications; besides which it was most likely a target render. I'm sorry, but if anyone went in thinking that Watch Dogs was going to look like that, then perhaps they need to consider their gullibility. Also, as per ever, if the game's good enough, then surely the graphics don't matter so much unless they're pig ugly, which they aren't in WD. I know most of my favourite games don't have exemplary graphics…
honestly i don't care too much and yes there is a bit of a difference but i'm pritty sure i sud be fine i'm still quite looking forward to it.
happy gaming =)
I'll reserve judgment until i have the game and see the graphics first hand
maybe a little too early now with the delay, but judging it did hit its original nov date, and it kept the demos we had seen as the retail version, than not too early at all!
the problem is the games been delayed, gone quiet for over SEVEN months, and now they finally break their silence, and the game looks WORSE than it did 2 freaking years ago!
how can a game undergo 2 years of development and have its graphics look worse!?
i mean yes ubisoft was showing off the PC version and this is the first time they have shown off the ps4 version, but what really worries people is they are not actually denying the downgrade.
it will look next gen, how does that deny the game has been downgraded?
not to mention they refuse to show off the PC version now, wonder why that is……….
ubisoft is notorious for showing off pre rendered CG crap and passing it off as what the game will be, but what i cant believe is their STILL getting away with it!
they did the same crap with far cry 3, that did not look anywhere near as good as its reveal trailer would have lead you to believe!
thats what really pisses me off, they constantly announce a game, than it finally releases and it looks half as good as it does.
and only now people are up in arms about it?
seriously?
your a little late to the party guys!
now im starting to wonder how the division, and the crew, will REALLY look!
another thing i hate about this industry, how one sided everyone is!
oh no watch dogs does not look half as good as its reveal trailer, its the end of the world!!!!!!!!!!
but today a few copies sold on ebay and leaked gameplay footage of infamous second son has leaked, and people are reporting it does not look anywhere near as good as its reveal event either.
aaaaaaaaand, crickets.
typical!