Ubisoft Working on a Patch to Tame Watch Dog Issues on PC

30

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Dasboogieman

Lol I think NVIDIA should also shoulder part of the blame.
They've been too conservative with the VRAM on all the GPU designs in the past till now and have the gall to charge $1500 for the one product that has a sufficient amount.

The 780Ti may be have solid rendering performance but its design is not forward thinking enough with the 3Gb. I don't understand why they didn't release 6Gb variants unless its greed in forcing Titan Black sales. AMD was a bit more on the ball so the 290 isn't as affected by the VRAM starvation but it simply doesn't have the rendering or texture filtering power of the 780Ti which is also important.

The writing on the wall was there when the PS4 rocked up with 8Gb of GDDR5. Next Gen games will need more VRAM, the worlds are bigger, the graphics are more complex and the GPU may even be called upon to offload more of the physics. All of this needs VRAM.

avatar

maleficarus™

I hate it when people do not know what there talking about! The PS4's 8GB is TOTAL system ram that is shared for everything. After all is said and done the PS4 doesn't even have close to 8GB for VRAM. Also explain to me why the PS4 is 30 FPS 900P only high quality in Watch Dogs?

avatar

LatiosXT

Eh.

If you do a benchmark comparison of the GTX 780 Ti and the GTX Titan Black, the two perform almost exactly the same. The GTX 780 Ti is a bit slower, but it's like within a 2% margin, even at 4K resolutions.

Also if you look Guerrilla Game's dev slides on the PS4 ( http://www.guerrilla-games.com/presentations/Valient_Killzone_Shadow_Fall_Demo_Postmortem.pdf ), the total amount of RAM that was actually used about 4.7GB (3 of which was used for video). Wait, what happened to the rest? The PS4 still needs RAM for its OS and sharing features.

Even the Radeon R9 290X loses the GTX 780 Ti, marginally, but all that VRAM sure didn't help it, even at 4K resolutions. Conclusion? There's nothing out there yet that truly saturates VRAM to the point where more is absolutely needed.

avatar

paul_deemer

The GTX780ti was stuttering with 3gb VRAM while the 290X with 4gb VRAM was running smoothly. So how can you say 3 gb VRAM is enough? Your totally ignoring the Facts. As it stands until the GTX880 with 8gb VRAM comes out the Radeon has smoother game play in Watch Dog's and a clear advantage. I do want the GTX880 in SLI when they come out but I'm ready to build a new rig now. Nvidia has dropped the ball for the moment. I'll buy a 295x2 for $1500 before I spend $3000 on a ridiculously priced TitanZ. For the cost of one TitanZ you could custom build an entire SLI Rig that is more than capable of running Watch Dog's on Ultra at 2k.Oh and btw nobody is going to be gaming on Ultra at 4k with a single Video Card. Ain't happening.

avatar

Dasboogieman

What the benchmarks don't show is the smoothness of the rendering, travelling fast, going through the different areas. A healthy buffer will prevent sudden drops (though arguably this can also be minimized by good coding). I've logged the VRAM differential on my 290 to be between 2.9gb and 3.6gb depending on the area and scene being rendered, and thats just using Med-High settings with Temporal SMAA.

If there were more Titan Blacks we'd have more data but there are precious few owners who are reporting results. I know the 780Ti guys are having a hard time at the moment with the VRAM despite being easily able to top 60+FPS. The 290X guys have issues with having insufficient rendering/texture power despite having adequate VRAM.

avatar

LatiosXT

I'll give you that most benchmarks don't show smoothness of rendering, but it's still silly to say that NVIDIA isn't "forward thinking enough". It's a chicken and the egg problem, coupled with other issues, like perhaps Watch Dogs is just a shoddily coded game, much like Crysis was back in the day (Crysis Warhead performs a lot better on the same machine than Crysis). But in my experience, even throwing in something like Metro LL on maximum didn't choke my 2GB card all that much. Then again I wasn't really paying attention to framerates all that much while I was playing...

avatar

devin3627

i have the 4gb geforce 760.

avatar

devin3627

i have the 4gb geforce 760.

avatar

paul_deemer

I remember seeing a recommendation of at least a GTX 880 before release for Ultra settings. Some folks were even saying 8 gb VRAM on the GTX 880 was ridiculous. Welcome to the Future where 3 gb Nvidia cards don't cut it anymore on Ultra. I'm still going to wait till they come out and get a pair of GTX 880s in SLI to drive the ASUS Rog Swift 27 inch g-sync monitor. But in the meantime while a release date has not even been mentioned yet it looks like Radeon has the advantage with it's 4 gb of VRAM. At the high end Titan-Z at $3,000 vs Radeon 295x2 at $1500 currently 295x2 offers more bang for the buck at half the cost. Nvidia is going to lose ground the longer it takes them to get the GTX 880 out the door. Some people want to play Watch Dog's on Ultra Now and not in Dec or 2015!

avatar

devin3627

the xbox one uses 5gb videogame memory!

avatar

LatiosXT

Also small mini-rant.

Just because someone targets a "weaker" platform doesn't automatically equate to the game sucking for "stronger" platforms. Overall, if you've designed your software correctly from the ground up to be as modular as possible, separating core elements from overall software code, then porting from one system to another is a lot less painless.

Unreal Engine targets iPhone, yet is scalable up to the PC and still looks amazing. The Fox Engine had a game originally released for the PS3 (Pro Evolution Soccer 2013), and yet it scales up nicely to the PS4/Xbox One. Hell, even Cry Engine 3 and Frostbite, both of which were built with consoles in mind, work wonderfully on the PC.

These are examples of software developed by people who (more or less) know what they're doing, who can target "weaker platforms" and still make games that run on "stronger platforms" look and run wonderfully.

Ubisoft's case? Their management just doesn't like the PC platform. And if management doesn't give two cents, the product suffers. This is why I'm abandoning Ubisoft. Their DRM is a joke and their business practices are laughable.

avatar

maleficarus™

The game ran average 55-60 FPS for me Ultra settings no AA 1080P. I had to turn my textures down to "medium" to solve stuttering issues though. ASUS GTX 760 2GB Oc'd 1200MHz boost/6400MHz memory on an i5 2500K @ 4GHz with 8GB DDR3-1600 system RAM. Overall good experience so not sure why all the crying?

avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

Some people enjoy mediocrity. Some don't.

It's not so hard to understand.

avatar

LatiosXT

Hey Ubisoft, didn't you develop this game for a console called Xbox One? Oh, and doesn't that console use a stripped down version of Windows NT6.1? It does?

So then tell me how the hell do you have problems on the PC. :B

avatar

Ghost XFX

Same issues with Ghost Recon Phantoms. So apparently, they're becoming consistent at it. =P

avatar

vrmlbasic

I was under the impression that the 360 was the target platform...?

avatar

LatiosXT

Target platform doesn't matter when they've developed it for another console that apparently has no problems running the game.

Also the game has no problems running on the PS4, which may as well be a Linux version of the game.

avatar

Ryan5609

Last time I ever buy a game on launch day. It is almost like they expect this kind of thing to happen and are completely cool with it. How about this, give us pre-order people a deep discount on the game, compensation for "beta testing". Once pre-orders work out the bugs. Sell the game full price. Or you could just skip all that and invest a few bucks in testing yourselves before you release the game.

avatar

FrancesTheMute

I'm kinda glad I skipped this one at launch. I've been playing Diablo 3 and Skyrim too much to justify spending $60 on Watchdogs when I knew I probably wouldn't play it much, if at all right away. I'll wait another couple months until they iron out all the bugs and maybe Steam will have it on sale.

avatar

topmech71

Well...that's Ubisoft for you, the same thing happened with Splinter Cell Blacklist and Assassins Creed Black Flag. With Black Flag I was getting huge updates all the time, and my PC would barely play the game. Probably will not buy this one for a while because of this reason...and I'm also careful about which games I buy on a launch day, it has a lot to do with the developer and graphics engine.

avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

So it's another lousy console port? Gee, what a shocker....

avatar

Tracer76

After they fix this issue they should fix the KB mouse issues with the game as well. As for the graphics issues seen that as well in Ubi's forums, but there seems that there are several bug issues with the game, from not even launching, video, mouse and KB, crashing, sound loops, ect..... All of this was in the forums. The only issue I have was the mouse and KB, other then that the game runs fine on ultra with my R9 270X card for video.

avatar

vrmlbasic

Wasn't this game targeted for the 360/PS3, systems that don't even have a single GB of RAM? Ubisoft fail.

avatar

iheartpcs

Once again, a company releases a game for PC's in a Beta state, calls it a fantastic job and pats themselves on the back.

I haven't bought a PC game at release in over 5 years. I am happy to wait for others to pay $60 to beta test it and once the game is finally working right, it's usually on sale because of all the negative press it's gotten.

avatar

Jaymondo

Couldn't agree more, I brought F1 2012 on release day, and that turned out to be a total console port turd. Now I wait for the sales on steam, and occasionally Origin and as you put it , buy games that by then "working right".

avatar

TheDorkSide

Exactly! You beat me to it. I typically run last year's hardware to run last year's games, with this year's prices.

avatar

Masterx1234

This is a fix that worked for me 100% now i have zero stuttering and the game is smooth as pie.

create a shortcut to the watch_dogs.exe and go into properties on the shortcut and where it says "Target location" it should say watch_dogs.exe, add a space after that and put that same command line in there "-disablepagefilecheck" (No quotes) then only use this shortcut to launch the game
when you are using this fix DO NOT put your textures above your maximum VRAM, as this effectively disables the game using your harddrive as extra vram (This is incorrect, but the best way to get the correct information is to post something incorrect). if you ignore this, you will run out of VRAM and the game will crash.

avatar

Richardbs

I kept thinking my PC was starting to get weak. But after hearing the 780ti's getting their butts kicked I felt better about my current performance. Haha

avatar

Alpha-Zulu

This is what happens when a game isn't specifically designed and coded from the ground up for PC. You get crap like this happening.

Gotta love it when they just port games to the PCs and stuff like this happens.

avatar

acidic

i acquired the game just to see what the fuss is about. i played for only about an hour. it is just another generic sandbox game with ALOT of mashing the X button (i play 3rd person games with a controller). it runs pretty much flawless on ultra (1920x1200) using sli 670s. once i enter a car, that is a completely different story. the fps drops to single digits and once i get out of the car, all is great once again. i'll buy it on steam once it is atleast 75% off as i didn't see anything worth $60. hopefully by then they will have this shit fixed