Watch Dogs: Legion is based in post-Brexit London (whyyy, I want escapism in my games!) and if you were on social media tonight you probably saw a lot of love for Helen. You can recruit 'any' NPC and I've never seen so many "GOLDEN GIRLS SQUAD!" tweets in my life. Really though, Helen is amazing. Coming to PC, PS4, Stadia, XB1 on March the 6th 2020. E3 trailer (has swearing beeped out): E3 Gameplay (full of the swears): site | twitter
There's so much swearing in the Gameplay footage, it sounds like Birmingham on a rainy Friday night out.
ooooh.. I like the look of this! I enjoyed the previous versions as well so this is right up my alley!
Watch Dogs was the first / only game where I inadvertently recreated that epic movie scene where the guy chased by police hops over a barrier and into a train station and gets in, the doors closing just in time. Watch Dogs 2 had the most immersive experience and realistic NPC interaction I've ever seen. (But it was weird being in sunny California.) I don't watch trailers, previews etc. but of the 2.3 seconds I saw I'm hoping it has those best parts of the previous 2 games, with extra cyberpunk and neon. Even if it is only London. I mean I only go there for the zoo, museums, Japan Centre and Persian restaurants really.
I was living in London for 2 years, and it's umbelivable the amount of details in Piccadilly Square… it's this going to be the first enjoyable Watch Dogs? We'll see!
I discovered Cyberdog in Camden Market after playing WD2, which has the same style in clothing etc. Didn't think it'd be in WDL! The real one has people, but as it's not actually licensed they used dogs for obvious reasons! And yes you can buy clothes from there! Though not as neon as the real store. It's weird playing a game set somewhere I actually know.
So...a customer of mine benchmarked for this game and it told him his i7-4790k is negatively impacting his framerates. What do you guys think, pure marketing BS or is an i7-4790k seriously slow enough to bottleneck this? I'm having a hard time believing it and am wondering if Intel just slipped the devs some money.
I took it to mean something is always going to be the weak point. It said the same for my CPU which is a Ryzen 3600. It also mentions the fact v-sync is on. It's true but not the whole truth. The benchmark is also heftier than normal gameplay - mine said average fps is 38 and min 25, but in-game it seems 90% of the time 45-60. This is on Ultra (except shadows which are Very High) with a 980 TI too, specs that requirements said were for 'High'. It also says about 7GB of VRAM is used, on my 6GB card, but I wouldn't know looking at it (maybe my 16GB of RAM helps). But I don't fuss over FPS and just play, turning down a beefy-but-unnoticable option if it ever feels too slow and continuing.
Thank you for The perspective, I knew something seemed off but couldn't reason it out in my head. I quoted your reply to him and added this: "So basically unless you're actually struggling with low FPS, I wouldn't worry about it. And given how new and demanding this game is, you'd need to spend a lot to get really good fps; the devs of big games are in bed with AMD, Nvidia and Intel, and deliberately aim their ultra settings at the most expensive hardware currently available. Another problem is you don't know how far your graphics card is from being a bottleneck. You might upgrade your cpu and find your graphics card is holding it back after that, so you only get a tiny improvement." I have a few gaming customers who get really hung up on bottlenecks, and think that if anything shows up as a bottleneck on any benchmark or calculator, they've got to spend £££ replacing it at once. Of course, I've been there and I know that there's no Gaming Nirvana at the end of the rainbow where everything runs perfectly and you never have to upgrade again, but it's hard to explain that to them because you end up just sounding defeatist and cynical.
People are always asking "should I upgrade?" and worry about futureproofing, they end up futureproofing the futureproofing then upgrading in a few years again. I say "if you have to ask, the answer is no". There was even a guy who got a 3600 + 2060 system FREE and was asking if he should return some parts to get better ones to futureproof! If your customer upgraded, they'd still get that message. I just looked up benchmarks with 10900K and 9900Ks and they get the same. Like this end screen (go to 16:22): Better upgrade that 10-core CPU!
