Watch Dogs delayed until spring 2014

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,648
6,528
126
wow that is actually a pretty big deal imo. but totally not surprised considering ubisoft is developing it. as much as delays suck, they are always for the better so that we can have a better final product.
 

Rage187

Lifer
Dec 30, 2000
14,276
4
81
I'm ok with it. I have enough current gen games I'm trying to chew through, plus all the launch day games I'm picking up.

The really big surprise, was the short notice. Literally, 30 days from console launch.

Still, what about those launch consoles with packins? This close to release and those things aren't all sitting in a warehouse, yet???
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
Eh, those bundles will probably just become normal consoles packages instead.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Now that I think about it, I bet they get a price adjustment to the $400 console and simply no game.
 

Durvelle27

Diamond Member
Jun 3, 2012
4,102
0
0
This is a huge disappointment. Anticipation from me for thus game was really high and anxious
 

futurefields

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2012
6,470
32
91
Devs are having a really hard time coming up with engines that deliver a truly next-gen experience on these consoles. It's not even the GPU's that are the problem either, it's the ridiculously low-clocked, low single thread performance that the CPU's offer. The fact is most game engines are 90% single thread, with little things like audio dsp being able to be easily offloaded onto a different core. I'm willing to bet this is the major reason for the delay and why the game looks like worse and worse when they show it running on actual hardware.
 

Rage187

Lifer
Dec 30, 2000
14,276
4
81
I just want to say: I'm glad they held it back to make it better. However, their project managers need to have their career asses handed to them. You know, the more I think of it, I'm in agreement that they've known about this for awhile but held off announcing not to affect their quarterly earnings.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,648
6,528
126
Devs are having a really hard time coming up with engines that deliver a truly next-gen experience on these consoles. It's not even the GPU's that are the problem either, it's the ridiculously low-clocked, low single thread performance that the CPU's offer. The fact is most game engines are 90% single thread, with little things like audio dsp being able to be easily offloaded onto a different core. I'm willing to bet this is the major reason for the delay and why the game looks like worse and worse when they show it running on actual hardware.

considering the consoles aren't even out yet, i think this is a stupid conclusion to come to at this time.
 

futurefields

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2012
6,470
32
91
considering the consoles aren't even out yet, i think this is a stupid conclusion to come to at this time.

i made a speculation on the cause of the delay. my speculation is likely, at the very least, in the ballpark. game performance is one of the last things that devs can polish up, naturally. Ubisoft said they need more time to polish this game, thats why they are delaying it. so then, is it not reasonable to deduce that they are struggling hitting their performance target on the hardware?

or maybe you just wanted to call somebody stupid :cool:
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
i made a speculation on the cause of the delay. my speculation is likely, at the very least, in the ballpark. game performance is one of the last things that devs can polish up, naturally. Ubisoft said they need more time to polish this game, thats why they are delaying it. so then, is it not reasonable to deduce that they are struggling hitting their performance target on the hardware?

or maybe you just wanted to call somebody stupid :cool:

No because the systems aren't even out yet and the first games on EVERY new console don't look infinitely better than the ones before it, it takes time.