Lazy developers? Really?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry vs Watch Dogs on Wii U
- Thread starter mocoworm
- Start date
Really, except if you are happy with the optimization of both Watch Dogs and AC:U.
Look, buddy, first and foremost, read the whole post. I do think that Ubisoft in general still are very capable of delivering great games. Don't just read the one word that would sound provocative.
Secondly, WD and AC:U are shit. Either all platforms that run them are shit, or they did a shitty job optimizing them. Pick one, i know i have.
C'mon man. You can troll better than that. There are tons of devs that have tons of experience on far more powerful hardware than any console. Conversely, just because a platform has a certain amount of gigaflops doesn't mean the ins and outs of the console are known. What is certain, however, is that developers certainly know how to max out that level of hardware because it has been around for years. You act as though console development is the only kind that exists.
Actually if you want to look strictly at certain numbers, they are both weaker. Things go beyond the numbers, sometimes, however. As an example, there are some things that the PPE in the 360/PS3 does better than the Wii U CPU and the PS4/XB1 CPU. There are also things that the more modern cores are better at, even if their floating point performance doesn't match. The floating point performance of the Wii U CPU is certainly worse than any of the other options, however. There is no money in Wii U development outside of first/second party to exploit what the console does do well, though. It's a simple market reality, and that's why you see many ports that don't exhibit the highest polish that is possible.
If you want to call out bias, do so with facts. Everyone knows what the Wii U is and what it isn't. It will do somethings better than previous gen and some things worse than previous gen. It's all on paper (well, various websites that had access to said papers). Posters that "ninjablade" just serve as a source of unnecessary distortion.
No, "lazy devs" is not a thing. At all.
This is entirely a budget vs time vs return on investment.
Things like Unity are definitely based on time.
The developers themselves are working very hard to put out the best product they can. Including for this game.
What, you want me to go on? lol
FreedomFighter
Member
I'll say this one more time, since I've said it several times already: No one is arguing that the Wii U is as powerful as the PS4 and XBone. NeoGaf knows the latter two are more powerful than the Wii U. No one argues otherwise - so why is it still a talking point. Seriously, let it go.
Sigh. I don't know man. You might actually be right. I might have overcomplicated things, where the answer is what you said, simply Ubisoft the company and publisher cracking the whip on Ubisoft the developer to push unfinished products just to meet deadlines.
I know how hard those guys work, i had worked as an animator for the better part of a decade, and as i said before, i can't really call Ubisoft lazy. They have actually released great games, even this gen, but on the other hand, i am baffled at how a publisher of that caliber is content releasing such broken products at times.
ninjablade
Banned
I see you missed my point completely. other then crysis who pushes the Pc graphically? not many developers, cause the most profit is on consoles, so Pc were being held back for ps3/360 sake, now games that are not cross gen show a huge leap, and developer's will learn how to max out XB1/ps4 specs. Just look at Ac, unity compared the other AC games, on a powerful pc, it's a generation leap, despite that hardware being available for some time.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Never properly optimized for any platform? Um what? It was very optimized on ps4. No stuttering, barely any frame drops etc. It actually runs better than GTAV on ps4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SmhW_IqYt4
PeakPointMatrix
Member
Why would they invest their time and money into that?
Played WD on PS4 and can't say i'm impressed tbh. The framerate isn't too consistent really, and just by having a 30 fps cap, any framerate drop is pretty noticeable.
I'll admit it's not as bad as AC:U, but i wasn't happy with it at all.
I had no idea that GTAV was like that. Never cared about the series tbh, and i was critical about all those performance issues when it launched on PS360, but i was sure they'd deal with them for the current gen version. Eh...
Yeah. Ubisoft can make great games (performance and gameplay wise) when they choose to make it exclusive (I know Rayman went multi later). Their multi platform output however is a mess. My guess is that they make their games too ambitious while they don't have the time or budget to make such a game. I'm very happy with Rayman Legends and ZombiU and would love more games like that from Ubisoft, although that won't happen.
protomouse
Member
Child of Light as well. The UbiArt framework runs pretty well. It's a shame that they never released Valiant Hearts on Wii U, because... reasons. Child of Light was brilliant, and I hope it did well for them on the platform.
I did my part, at least.
JordanN
Banned
I may not be Ubisoft's biggest fan but comments like these are disrespectful and disgusting.
Ubisoft make games like anyone else. Calling them crap for it is very arrogant.
Yup, there hss only been a few posts in the last few pages actually about Watch Dogs..
Jimmyfenix
Member
Since the game is already profitable there was this post in May about the sales.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
It rarely ever drops. Certainly not enough to say that it's unoptimized.
Don't be a pedant, it is incredibly obvious that d1rtn4p is saying that they don't like Ubisoft games by calling them crap.
I really don't know what people expected. Ubisoft cannot even deliver their flagship games in functional manner by their flagship studios. What chance did a c team port have?
Ubisoft went with a CPU heavy engine this Gen which was probably a really bad choice considering all 3 went with subpar CPUs.
Ubisoft went with a CPU heavy engine this Gen which was probably a really bad choice considering all 3 went with subpar CPUs.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Any change in the dev pipeline is going to alter how a project ends. WiiU's CPU is weak when faced with any competing game system. Preferring shorter chains and less FP heavy code.
It could never compete on a like by like basis with Cell in particular. No matter how efficiently designed the code is for it. It will always come up behind. Cell hangs in there with PS4/Ones CPU's for christ sake. A design finalized in 2005, is keeping up with (albeit) low rent CPU's of 2011.
WiiU had a few advantages. Very little is tasked implicitly for the CPU. Or more accurately very little should be tasked for it.
I'd say it's a multitude of factors on why the WiiU version ended up as it did. A CPU that can't keep pace with those in consoles that launched in 2005-06, a low userbase tally that does not buy 3rd party efforts at all, and limited investment because of those realities.
I think it could do better, but we will never know.
It could never compete on a like by like basis with Cell in particular. No matter how efficiently designed the code is for it. It will always come up behind. Cell hangs in there with PS4/Ones CPU's for christ sake. A design finalized in 2005, is keeping up with (albeit) low rent CPU's of 2011.
WiiU had a few advantages. Very little is tasked implicitly for the CPU. Or more accurately very little should be tasked for it.
I'd say it's a multitude of factors on why the WiiU version ended up as it did. A CPU that can't keep pace with those in consoles that launched in 2005-06, a low userbase tally that does not buy 3rd party efforts at all, and limited investment because of those realities.
I think it could do better, but we will never know.
MemoryHumanity
Member
648p, sub-20fps. Yup, sounds like a Ubisoft Wii U game.
So basically UbiSoft is proving again that they have no qualms eliminating even the basic levels of quality customers should expect out of game releases. Keep on keeping on UbiSoft. I'm sure that hole you're digging will eventually reach China and I hear there's gamer gold there.
Ok yeah no. You officially have no shame whatsoever. Both Watch Dogs and AC:U perform piss poor on PS4 well below the quality of pretty much any game from any other company. That tells a pretty damning story and you don't get to lie and spread FUD saying otherwise.
Ok yeah no. You officially have no shame whatsoever. Both Watch Dogs and AC:U perform piss poor on PS4 well below the quality of pretty much any game from any other company. That tells a pretty damning story and you don't get to lie and spread FUD saying otherwise.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
I love how people keep placing the sole blame on Ubi and not on the WiiU's hardware.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
No, this is the thread about how Ubisoft did their very best - and frankly worked miracles to only be 6 months late - working on the worst hardware thats ever existed.
The Ubisoft fucked up and its entirely their fault because the target hardware is beyond reproach thread is the one about AC:U for PS4.
lyrick
Member
The hardware didn't select the software to be targeted for it.
Ubisoft knew the hardware limitations before entering into the project, then they released a shit port.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
What else could they do besides canceling it altogether? The game is taxing, it's not surprising that it doesn't run smoothly.
Sorry, had to be done
But yes, I am with you. It certainly can't be Nintendo's fault that the Wii U version can't keep up with last gen consoles.
That's a ridiculous excuse and you damn well know it. Eden your unabashedly apologetic attitude and vigor excuse making when it comes to UbiSoft is just getting more and more desperate. The game should be scalable. If UbiSoft can't achieve the most basic level of quality that customers should expect from a purchased retail title they should scale it down. There is NO excuse for releasing a game with regular dips into the teens for framerate. That is absolutely fucking atrocious. UbiSoft fucked up AGAIN and you should have the sense to acknowledge it for once.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
You can't infinitely scale a game back unfortunately. This is a game that was made with ps4 and xb1 in mind.
So who gets blame for Unity being a poorly optimised piece of shit?
Fbh
Member
Well that sounds even worse than AC IV. At least that one looked a bit better than the last gen version (while still having inferior framerate).
Still.... I don't see many people buying this. Sounds like a port for WiiU only owners. Most people who were interested enough to pay full price for Watchdogs probably have it already
Still.... I don't see many people buying this. Sounds like a port for WiiU only owners. Most people who were interested enough to pay full price for Watchdogs probably have it already
They could damn well further reduce the resolution, decrease texture resolution, and reduce ambient NPC count further. They had options. They didn't take them. Why? Because they are perfectly content with releasing a shit tier product to the consumer and because $ that's why. UbiSoft is quickly becoming a poison eroding even the smallest modicum of consumer confidence in the industry.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
And how would people react if they reduced the resolution even further? Or if it had an even emptier world? That's insulting to the devs to think that they're proud or perfectly fine with this port, especially after all the hard work they put into making the ps4 version run well. You're oversimplifying how game development works.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
So potential WiiU owners should be thankful their game is late and a shitty port because the developers spent a lot of time on getting the PS4 version to run okay?
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
That's not what I was saying at all but ok.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Then what are you saying?
Because its a matter of record that the WiiU version was delayed so that the development team could work on the Ps4/Xbone versions of the game, and its clearly a shit port that was pushed out the door with no marketing to meet contractual obligations.
So why is it insulting to the devs to state that, and why "especially" after their work on the entirely irrelevant to this topic PS4 version?
It's insulting, because all your information is earsay and theories. If that's all it takes for you to judge and punish, well..
selectively:
This just got completely dodged by console bashers.
[/QUOTE=Triggerhappytel;140482579]
So you noticed as well.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Exactly.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
So... its NOT a shit port and DF are wrong?
It might be as good as it could be, what do you know that we don't?
You honestly believe this port got the budget and development time that is necessary to be as good as it could be?
Cmon son. You must think ac:u had enough time in the oven as well, right along with bf4.
Return on investment on this contractually obligated port is likely low enough that this didn't even get the same kinda effort that stealth released cod nintendo Ports do.