Buried in a bigger feature about hacky happy escapade Watch Dogs, publisher Ubisoft has confirmed that the game will run at 30 frames-per-second in 900p – a far cry from the 60FPS in 1080p specifications that Sony originally posted on its website. While this represents a significant downgrade from that statement – and even comments made by the French firm earlier in the year – it’s still better than the Xbox One, which will power the game at 30FPS in 792p.
“Resolution is a number, just like framerate is a number,” creative director Jonathan Morin explained. “All of those numbers are valid aspects of making games. But you make choices about the experience that you want to deliver. In our case, dynamism is everything. Exploration and expression are everything. You want to have a steady framerate, but you want to have dynamism at the core of the experience. The same goes with resolution.”
He continued: “People tend to look at corridor shooters, for example, where there’s a corridor and all of the effects are on and it’s unbelievable, and they forget that if you apply those same global effects to an open city with people around and potential car crashes and guys in multiplayer showing up without warning, the same effect is applied to a lot of dynamic elements that are happening in every frame. So it becomes magnified in cost.”
It’s a fair response, but given the game’s recent delay, many may be pondering why the team didn’t employ the additional time to optimise the title’s performance. “The effort was split on continuing dynamism and making sure players can express themselves through hacking without ever being disappointed in how the game responds to them, whether it’s visually or through gameplay,” Morin emphasised. “Resolution has nothing to do with that.”
The developer concluded that it never wanted to compromise the “soul” of its impending sandbox escapade, and that’s why it’s opted for the specifications outlined above. Alas, that doesn’t mean that it’s any less of a next-gen game. “From a gameplay standpoint and an experience standpoint, the player is living something brand new,” the candid developer concluded. “That’s how we proceeded with Watch Dogs.” The question is: will you be proceeding with your purchase? Find a signal in the comments section below.
[source blog.ubi.com]
Comments 61
Absolutely. I do not care much for high resolution or shadows, etc... I care about the environment detail, the activity, the number of models and such that can be displayed on screen at any one time. This is whats important to me.
@thedevilsjester
Amen brother!
Compromises and lies! Not sure that the 60 FPS matters that much to me, but not even 1080p? Going to have to wait for the reviews to come in before buying this one.
@McSterls Are you f****g for real dude?! you all of a sudden don't want a game because it's in 900p and 30 fps.. oh man what is the world coming to. get a grip on reality. I don't even know what to say to this nonsense.
I find it so weird that Sony posted that the other day, I wonder what made them do that if they didn't know the game was going to be 1080/60 fps. very strange
That's good enough for me just as long as it has good gameplay and a good story that's all that matters to me
@McSterls Are you serious man? i agree with @mitcHELLspawn get a grip stop being so ridiculous and nick-picky
@thedevilsjester Right on man!
@DaftPlayStation really though ! We enjoyed games that were natively like sub 600p on the ps3 and 360 last gen.. not just enjoyed but loved. I agree that this gen should be better, but it is so far. 900p natively for any normal person is just as good as full HD. people are forgetting what truly makes these games memorable and fun. I'll never look back on games years from now and say... man that game was so great, but it only ran on 900p so I never bothered finishing it. like, how ridiculous right?
<sarcasm>OMG teh interweb will explodez ova dis!!
inb4 $ony told lies, etc, etc</sarcasm>
Actually, I'm slightly above the recomended specs for the PC version, so I might just wait for some benchmarks.
People will overreact, but this is still horrible, really. I mean 30fps at 1080p seems reasonable, but at 900p is very disappointing.
AC4 was 900 before a patch and I didn't notice the 17% difference. I'm gonna preorder it today with the hardcover guide. As long as everything's "better" than GTA5 on PS3, I'll be happy, but hopefully they can hammer it out to run either number higher
I've had it on pre order for a while now and this news doesn't sway me one bit. Watch the 9 minute video on here and tell me it doesn't look like one of the most immersive experiences ever!!! Roll on release day. I will take a minor res drop to maintain the playability every time
What the hell does " continuing dynamism " mean?
Good joke XD .. but well cant wait anyway
Can't wait for 720p and 30fps I hope (please don't be PAL SD like Sonic Transformed) Wii U version!
@charlesnarles I thought Assassin's Creed looked way better post-patch. I'm not going to cancel my pre-order over this, but I am a bit disappointed — 1080p really does make a massive difference IMO.
@mitcHELLspawn Right i agree like i said in the comment above all that matters to me is the gameplay and story graphics do matter to a certain extant but graphics are not the most inportant thing about games
@DaftPlayStation @mitcHELLspawn. Game isn't out, there isn't any evidence what the quality of game play is going to be, but so far ubi has done nothing to inspire confidence, they have downgraded the games graphics since last years reveal, banned people from their forum for commenting on the said downgrade. And while maybe it wasn't ubi themselves reports have been 1080p @ 60fps, then 1080p @30fps with a slider you can adjust the fps, to 900p @ 30fps as the final. Yeah I don't think any of this sounds great, and I won't buy unless it receives a damn good review score. Not saying its a pass, but reall it's not about 1080p or 60fps, what does it say about a game that can only do 30fps at something that isn't a real tv resolution. I don't think that sounds like great news at all.
It's not as sharp as I'd have wanted...I bought a bloody big True HD TV at the same time as my PS4 so all the 1080p loveliness could be basked in....but I'd certainly never spit my dummy over the resolution and framerate, it's the experience and the gameplay that really matters to me and if that's sound I'm still interested in the game.
I wouldn't be suprised if Ubisoft have spent most of their time getting the 360/Ps3 versions up to scratch and basically just scaled down the Ps4/XboxOne versions from the PC build. Would explain why we are only just hearing about all this now. 1600x900 isn't too bad, its the res I tend to drop to (sometimes 1680x1050) when I need a bit more performance from my lowly PC. 30 fps aint too bad either as we're not talking about a twitch shooter, are we? Still, that Titanfall-eque 792p resolution is a kick in the teeth for Xbox fans adamant that 900p was coming.
In truth, it doesnt affect me much as Im not getting Watchdogs anyway. Wolfenstein is my end of May game
This game will not be payed with my wallet that's for sure. This gen was supposed to handle 1080p with ease... @get2sammyb Still havent bought any next gen system.. Life is too awesome to buy and invest in mediocre game like this. Nintendo is maybe the way i need to go. The Wii U may be tanking but the games are awesome.. Im sick of the. 1080p and fps bull***
@McSterls Your right it's not great news but it's not the worst news ether at least to me anyway I think it says nothing as long the graphics and frame rate aren't so noticeably bad to where ruins the game for me or takes me out the experience then i could care lass about resolutions
@Sanquine Too each there own i suppose i think people like you are being picky shallow and petty i wouldn't consider 900p 30fps mediocre or a deal breaker
@Sanquine Oops forgot to ask if you where joking or not if you where than Haha funny if not than i stand by my comment
@get2sammyb it's a tiny tiny bit not exactly 1:1 but that's not a death sentence for the graphics. My TV's pixels are C-shaped so I get about the same image from 1-3 meters (for you Metrics) away. Most people's TVs need cropping set to on due to differing aspect ratios (16:9 or 16:10 etc) though, which probably eats whatever increased amount of black box you'd see in native, so I really wouldn't be so bummed about it. The frames however will be missed by everyone
[and I guess I meant that going from AC3 on PS3 to 900 on PS4 was a much bigger jump than to 1080]
my mind is seriously blown at all the people that I see taking a stand against games if they're not natively 1080p or at a lower framerate. seriously blows my mind. If I ever start to rate games depending on their resolution or framerate someone shoot me in the face... please. Nuff said.
Not a dealbreaker, but with that said I'm definitely NOT happy about this. I'm getting the Wii U version anyways but I already know what to expect across the board now. No, 30fps doesn't ruin the experience and neither does sub-1080p, however, it's still a blow considering that we were TOLD would be full 1080p and 60fps. And, everything looks better at 60fps. DKC is my favorite franchise (notice the avatar). I play the butter smooth 60fps Tropical Freeze on Wii U, and it's like Christmas morning every time. I switch to the 30fps DKC Returns on 3DS and I can definitely notice the choppier movement. I didn't notice it so much until after playing Tropical Freeze- that's when I realized the true advantage to 60fps.
So yes, this IS an issue. Dealbreaking issue? No, I don't think so. But to say it doesn't matter at all is being naive.
Well not a dealbreaker but after awesome that is infamous i really want 60fps all the time...
@ShogunRok That's next-gen for ya. I don't care too much about it but they straight up lied, that does irk me.
Embarrassing, 2014 and we have two studios with games delayed well beyond their initial release dates that can't get games running in 1080p, 60 fps on perfectly capable hardware. Maybe in the case of Ubisoft, since PS4 is a more powerful machine and MS didn't want its console to look too bad in comparison, it was paid them off, I don't know, but Evolution has no excuse. This crap better not start becoming the norm. Graphics aren't the most important thing but they do matter and to have these companies not reaching what should be standard performance is beyond pathetic. I'll keep my pre-order but I'm considering shifting it to something else on release date now rather than picking the game up if it turns out to be average in the gameplay department.
I prefere solid 30 FPS and 1080p over some silly "amazing" next gen effects. Why developers even consider making games less than 1080P and 30FPS? It's a shame. Hope they'll add some patch in the future updates.
@DaftPlayStation
Even for me this isn't a complete deal breaker but in 2014 with $400 hardware that is more than capable of 1080p, a game that was delayed 6 months should at least be running in that resolution. If reviews start pouring in ahead of time and the game is getting 8s and 9s across the board, I'll buy it despite its mediocre looks. Since it's clear however that the delay did nothing for the graphics, it better have done wonders for the gameplay. I still think the game was pushed back partly to avoid taking sales from AC IV but from the videos I'd seen after E3, it didn't look like the game was shaping up to be very fun either so the right call to not release it was made. I just hope the extra time was used wisely to make the main missions and side activities as good as anything we've seen from this genre. inFamous Second Son is a very good game with a great main story but the side missions were the same weak stuff we've seen for a while now. Watch Dogs has a lot of cool ideas and the potential to be my new favorite Ubisoft IP but that's all dependent on if these guys hit all the right notes. Going just based on what I've seen, there's reason to have doubts but Ubisoft is more hit than miss on the PlayStation and Xbox brands at least, so there is a chance it'll be a GOTY contender.
I think a lot of people are going to be missing out. At least for me, this really doesn't bother me at all. If it's true that it's 900p/30fps that isn't anything bad for me at least, I've played much worse and have enjoyed games at a worse resolution.
@JaxonH
It wouldn't be a big deal if the hardware wasn't capable, that's why I have a problem with this. The PS4 has proven to be more than capable so developers shouldn't just be given a free pass for not at least hitting 1080p. Or if you're going to go sub 1080p at least get it going at a constant 60 fps. But, as is always the case people will let stuff slide on their favorite brand of consoles that they won't on others.
1080p would make a noticeable difference, I'll buy this on pc now.
I have a theory maybe they "dumbed" down the resolution because the X1 couldn't handle it and couldn't afford to using more resources on the PS4. Plus all the delays hasn't made them any money thous releasing it how it is. Just my two cents.
@DaftPlayStation The Wii U part is the joke part, but i'm mad because of feeling cheated. First they proclaim 1080p and 60 fps and now this. I expected more of this generation.... Guess im nitpicky but i can't change that feeling.
So let me get this straight. The gaming industry promised us 1080p 60fps with the last generation of machines. They failed to deliver. Seven years later they release this generation of machines with the same seven year old promises. They still fail to deliver. Seven months in and we still don't have a decent next gen game that runs at 1080p 60fps. So no, it is not about the gameplay anymore it's about empty promises and the gaming industry needs to learn the lesson, that you can't go back on your promises all the time. If we do that on our jobs or in our relationships we get the boot. Why the hell should I reward them with my money, on a product that promises the star and the moon and fails to deliver even the hills? Nice going Ubi, Sony and Microsoft. Nice going.
Disappointing, but not the end of the world. I'm sure Sony put up the 1080 info having obtained it from Ubi, who then changed things.
I don't go into the resolution thing as much as some, but it's irritating as I did spend a significant amount of money on a new TV prior to the launch of PS4, specifically for the promised 1080p games. I won't refuse to buy these games though, as BF4 still looks gorgeous at 900p despite the other issues it's had.
What I do get sick of is developers coming out with this line about resolution/framerate being "just a number". That may be true, but some of them are quick enough to shout about it when they achieve it, including Ubi when they patched AC - so it obviously means something to them as well; they can't have it both ways.
That said, I won't be buying Watch Dogs until I've seen some reviews. This game seemed great, but various things since the reveal have made me stop and think, not least of which was one decidedly ropey looking trailer from Ubi themselves.
I guess its not the end of the world like many of you before me already posted, but honestly, FULL HD was promised to us LAST GEN already and then we were happy if we landed somewhere 540p or 720p max. I honestly expected this gen to be 1080p (at least on PS4) straight. Then just turn down some shadows or particles or whatever, but 1080p should be standard nowadays. And NO don't come with the PC argument, value-for-money wise a PC is a disaster and there isn't really much I want to play on it. So, PS4 all the way, but come on, 1080p should be possible...
@Sutorcen I mighst still get it as the features and story got me intrigued but Im with on everything else you said.
@Sutorcen - Amen.
This news is pathetic - just the latest in a long line.
All we hear about is this god-like power of PS4 and Xbox One, yet they can't even do what PCs have been doing for years. Jesus, even Mario Kart 8 is 1080p/60 fps.
Don't get me wrong, I personally don't care about resolutions and such (Christ, I still play Wii and Dreamcast games), but it just annoys me how companies spew continuous BS about how awesome their consoles are; and how game companies provide bullshots and phony alpha-build gameplay vids.
@DaftPlayStation they were trying to sell it off of "next gen graphics" just like they did with ps4. Both are failing to deliver. Im all about gameplay over graphics (hence why i like nintendo) but companies arent giving what they promised on these "next gen machines" that are sooooo much more powerful than the wii u. Did you know mk8 is running 60fps 1080p? Or that smash bros on 3ds is running 60fps with the 3d ON.
People no one promised that 1080p 60fps would be a standard for this gen, if you want that so bad = PC.
Not very new-gen at all. Granted, these things arent the deciding factors for me.....but all that "more power" talk is turning into a bad Tim "the Toolman" Taylor skit.
@ErnisDy OK I will go back, thanks. Hope you get a good grade on your Algebra final. Today is Tater tots and Pizza day!!!
@Punished_Boss you're right, but we were promised 1080p @60 for this game.
To anyone saying this doesn't matter I would agree if it wasn't supposed to be a visually stunning game but it was showcased as exactly that and throughout the life of the game development news has just got worse and worse for this game it's like all that extra development time and the finish product looks worse then when it was half way through. This gen really should have 1080p or 60fps on each game there shouldn't be any excuses for not hitting either of those benchmarks
@McSterls No you weren't. That was an error.
Does it actually make much difference to the game?
@Punished_Boss just one of many examples:
Watch Dogs runs at 1080p/60fps on PS4, says Sony
UPDATE: Sony deletes claims, Ubisoft yet to comment.
http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/watch_dogs/news/watch_dogs_runs_at_1080p_60fps_on_ps4_says_sony.html
If 900P and 30FPS is the Maxed out specs on PS4 . . . . . . . whats the XBONE going to be? 720?
@McSterls That doesn't detract from what i said. You weren't officially told resolution/frame rate.
@Punished_Boss An announcement from Sony that it's 1080p @ 60 isn't official enough?
Whats Mario Kart 8, a kart racer who's graphical flair comes from artistic design rather than technical whizz, running at 1080p60 on a WiiU got to do with Watchdogs? Wait..is MK8..codename for...the WiiU version...of Watchdogs!?? Watchdogs is running at 1080p60 on WiiU!!? No..Its not...everyones actually talking about Mario Kart in a Watchdogs thread as if to say the Ps4 is a pauper machine & the WiiU has unlimitedz POWAH! PushSquare sure has changed of late
@MadchesterManc
Nobody is saying that the Wii U is more powerful. The thing is, why can the Wii U (which is supposedly so much weaker than PS4/XB1) run an amazingly detailed game at 60 fps and 1080p when a game on the much more powerful and so-easy-to-program-for PS4 cannot match that. Its more about the apparent laziness of Ubisoft than the PS4 being weak.
@McSterls It wasn't an announcement, it was an error, which was removed hardly an announcement. Besides Ubisoft do the announcing for their games, not Sony.
@MadchesterManc Some people clearly just prioritise resolution and frames over pretty rain and light effects. Its a balance, and where you personally stand on that argument is up to you. Now im most certainly a resolution/frames kinda guy because gameplay is far more important to me.
My understanding of the mario kart argument is that people are using that as an example of an incredibly nice looking game that is 1080p 60fps (and running on inferior hardware!). Why can't PlayStation developers target 1080p 60fps and then scale graphics to match that? Surely it will still look fantastic.
If you prefer maximum flashy effects then obviously this is not the objective you want devs to work to.
My guess is the next wave of ps4 games (2015) will be 1080p 60fps - no last gen worries, better dev skills, optimised engines etc
@Of_Folsense Mario Kart 8 isn't amazingly detailed in a rendering sense and it's tracks are smaller than you'd think with everything within the level being baked & pre-determined. That's why it can hit 1080p60 on the WiiU. Plus the compression of a frambuffer stored in the WiiU's edram allows then to use higher resolutions than you'd expect. Watchdogs has a dynamic open world that would suitably require more processing & rendering than a game like MK8 I'm not saying Mk8 looks bad or anything, but most of its flair comes from artistic design rather than graphical grunt. As I said in my first post, cross gen development has no doubt hindered development somewhat. A focus on PC/Ps4/XB1 & WiiU would've no doubt allowed them to use the consoles gpgpu capabilities and leveraged better performance
I really want someone from Sony to come out and explain to us why it was such a brilliant businesses plan to sent seven years of cell processor programming down the toilet and how the developers agreed to that. "Oh well we invested so much time, money and know-how to learn to program on the PS3 but what the hell, let's throw all that time, money and effort away, huzaah." I want someone to tell me how it wasn't the logical step to put a cell processor running at higher frequency along with 8GB of DDR5 ram in the PS4 plus the latest gpu. I want someone to tell me that this PS4 outperforms such a cell machine, lol. I want someone to tell me how it is better to stream games than to keep backwards compatibility. Oh and one last thing, how exactly do you design a next gen OS and gui loosing most of last gens media capabilities and functionality?
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...