This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Ubisoft Explains Why It Created A New Engine For Watch Dogs Instead Of Licensing

#11CilymPosted 10/14/2013 3:53:24 PM
thatauthor posted...
From: wizardmon | Posted: 10/14/2013 6:17:24 PM | #008
But that's not actually wrong...

while it might not technically be wrong, people on GameFAQs generally don't capitalize every word in a topic title. hell they might not capitalize any word, regardless of where it is in the topic.


ITP: idiots can only be idiots one way.
---
i called myself uberhipster before, try harder. - Ningishzida
You a straight up buster TC (Super_Thug44).- KidInTheHall
#12Treason686Posted 10/14/2013 4:45:16 PM
thatauthor posted...
From: wizardmon | Posted: 10/14/2013 6:17:24 PM | #008
But that's not actually wrong...

while it might not technically be wrong, people on GameFAQs generally don't capitalize every word in a topic title. hell they might not capitalize any word, regardless of where it is in the topic.


1. "Technically" is irrelevant. It's not wrong. Criticizing something that isn't wrong makes you look uneducated. Typically, "non-important" words like it, a, for, and of wouldn't be capitalized, however..

2. Unless CAPS lock and both shift keys are broken, you should be capitalizing the first letter of every sentence. I haven't seen this as a wide spread issue, so whatever makes you feel better about being lazy.

Honestly, I don't particularly care unless it gets in the way of reading, but you better capitalize the start of a sentence at the very least.

And hey, since we're all complaining:
What's the deal with tech sites these days? Smaller sites with "journalists" are littered with grammatical errors. Everyone with a computer and a keyboard thinks themselves a journalist, and they re-report news they found from somewhere else.
---
PC: Core i7 920 || 6GB DDR3 || GTX 660 Ti || HP w2408h
#13Kosba_2142Posted 10/14/2013 4:49:19 PM
/gamefaqs
---
CATS. That's about it honestly...
#14LazyyAmericanPosted 10/14/2013 5:40:09 PM
Earth
Internet
Serious Business
---
Quite the dilemma....to coexist in a world that ostracizes you into obscurity
#15JonWood007Posted 10/14/2013 5:46:46 PM(edited)
Acquire posted...
Shineboxer posted...
they created an unoptimized mess if their posted specs are any indication of their new engine.


Unoptimized mess? You mean these requirements? http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/10/08/watch-dogs-system-requirements-announced-specify-64-bit-os-and-minimum-6-gb-of-ram/

Those seem perfectly fine to me given that it's a brand new game engine and it has been shown to be able to do some very impressive visuals.


Not really. Considering how that's doubling the requirements from the norm we've seen the last year or two.

I'd say this would be reasonable for a new engine:

E8400 or Phenom I X4 9150
4 GB RAM
HD 5750 or GTS 450

(that's minimum for a DX11 engine).

Seriously, we've had 2.4 GHz core 2 duos with 8800s standard for a while, to jump from that to a phenom II 940 or equivalent core 2 quad with a 460/5850 is a bit ridiculous.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 8 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HDD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HDD | W7 | 1366x768
#16Bazooka_PenguinPosted 10/14/2013 6:02:54 PM
As long as it lives up to the hype I'm okay with the requirements.
---
Deth Pen
http://i.imgur.com/eMXgU.gif
#17JKatarnPosted 10/14/2013 6:19:25 PM
Treason686 posted...
thatauthor posted...
From: wizardmon | Posted: 10/14/2013 6:17:24 PM | #008
But that's not actually wrong...

while it might not technically be wrong, people on GameFAQs generally don't capitalize every word in a topic title. hell they might not capitalize any word, regardless of where it is in the topic.


1. "Technically" is irrelevant. It's not wrong. Criticizing something that isn't wrong makes you look uneducated. Typically, "non-important" words like it, a, for, and of wouldn't be capitalized, however..

2. Unless CAPS lock and both shift keys are broken, you should be capitalizing the first letter of every sentence. I haven't seen this as a wide spread issue, so whatever makes you feel better about being lazy.

Honestly, I don't particularly care unless it gets in the way of reading, but you better capitalize the start of a sentence at the very least.

And hey, since we're all complaining:
What's the deal with tech sites these days? Smaller sites with "journalists" are littered with grammatical errors. Everyone with a computer and a keyboard thinks themselves a journalist, and they re-report news they found from somewhere else.


Probably has something to do with that fact that it's pretty simple/inexpensive to host a website and reserve a domain name. Probably the same reason there are 10,000,000 Tech/Game review and/or LP channels on Youtube, people just trying to cash in on trends.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#18ShebeskiiPosted 10/14/2013 8:58:55 PM(edited)
JonWood007 posted...
Acquire posted...
Shineboxer posted...
they created an unoptimized mess if their posted specs are any indication of their new engine.


Unoptimized mess? You mean these requirements? http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/10/08/watch-dogs-system-requirements-announced-specify-64-bit-os-and-minimum-6-gb-of-ram/

Those seem perfectly fine to me given that it's a brand new game engine and it has been shown to be able to do some very impressive visuals.


Not really. Considering how that's doubling the requirements from the norm we've seen the last year or two.

I'd say this would be reasonable for a new engine:

E8400 or Phenom I X4 9150
4 GB RAM
HD 5750 or GTS 450

(that's minimum for a DX11 engine).

Seriously, we've had 2.4 GHz core 2 duos with 8800s standard for a while, to jump from that to a phenom II 940 or equivalent core 2 quad with a 460/5850 is a bit ridiculous.


Jon, dual cores are off the table. Stop expecting a dual core to work at this point. Quad cores have been budget for a long, long time. Hell, tri cores have been budget for years.

You're just being an ignoramus at this point.

The Phenom I series is also trash. It's architecturally flawed FFS. It doesn't even break 2.0GHz with an IPC more like an Athlon 64.

Minimums around a Phenom II X4 810 sounds much more realistic and with the times.

Why do you keep having these unrealistic expectations?

Current games were based around the current consoles.

The next gen consoles are 6-10 times more powerful and requirements only a little over doubled.

What's the problem again?
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
#19SnipeStarPosted 10/14/2013 9:07:20 PM
JonWood007 posted...
I'd say this would be reasonable for a new engine:

E8400 or Phenom I X4 9150
4 GB RAM
HD 5750 or GTS 450



lmao, 7/10
---
i7 3820 / Corsair H80i | Asus Sabertooth X79 | 2x GTX 680 4GB | 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP | 2x 600GB Raptor / 2x 1TB WD RE3 | Corsair HX1000w | Silverstone RV01
#20ZeraphLordSPosted 10/14/2013 9:13:05 PM
lol dual core minimums

even quad cores are potentially going to be sub-optimal soon

the architecture of the new consoles should see us making more use of the extra power we've had for years

no holding back now
---
The best course of action is to just get the information you need, then get out while you're still alive. - destroy everything on GameFAQs