Is Wildlands a Last-Gen Game? Graphics are awful.

[Mak]

Even running the game on ultra, it just...doesn't look very impressive at all. Characters models are awful, low-polygon details throughout (landscape, roads, rocks, etc.), animations are janky and the game just has an overall cluncky and old feel to it. Animations are pretty bad as well.

What's worse is this fairly unimpressive-looking game needs massive horse-power to run (i5 4690k, 16gb, gtx970, SSD and I can't get more than 30fps on ultra).

I've seen many games that are older, look better, and run better. What has Ubisoft been doing with this game? It feels like it started as a last gen game for the ps3-era, was put on hold for a while, and then released today.

Granted I'm also playing Horizon right now, so maybe I'm getting a little spoiled with that game given how phenomenal it looks, but really, I was expecting more from this title. Especially considering that other Ubisoft games are generally pretty decent looking (Farcry, Assassins Creed, etc.)

[Captain Murphy The Villian]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mak:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ｓ Ａ Ｃ Ｈ Ｉ:

Oh sorry I just assume considering you are trying to run this game on Ultra Settings with a 970.

You need at least a 1070 or higher to try and achieve ultra settings.

Running at 1080p. I get about 30fps.

I'm running it on ultra just to see how it looks, and it just....doesn't look that impressive. That's the whole point of this thread. It's not the fps itself, it's just the graphics.

To me this game doesn't look as good as Witcher 3, or MGSV, and definitly not as good as Horizon. The fps comes in only in the sense that it's a game that looks worse than those, yet also runs worse as well, which is unfortunate. But the fps is really secondary, I'm just I little bummed that the graphics aren't that great. Again, maybe my expectations were too high coming off Witcher 3 and Horizon, but still.

Yeah it's called you are still using 1080p.

[Mak]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mr Ty:

lol game uses latest in mapping and effects and douche of a chester callls it ugly.. lol fail

What do you mean when you say "mapping" and "effects" that are "the latest"?

Are you implying that Witcher 3, MGSV, Horizon, etc. are using "mapping" and "effects" that are out of date?

Need some specificity here. I can't say that this game looks better than any of the three I mentioned above. Even with nVidia Turf enabled.

BF1 certainly looks better, but I don't really include that just because it's a different sort of game (not an open world), so it represents different demands on the technology.

I think to be fair to Ghost Recon we should compare it to other games that are also open-world.

[Mak]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ｓ Ａ Ｃ Ｈ Ｉ:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mak:

Running at 1080p. I get about 30fps.

I'm running it on ultra just to see how it looks, and it just....doesn't look that impressive. That's the whole point of this thread. It's not the fps itself, it's just the graphics.

To me this game doesn't look as good as Witcher 3, or MGSV, and definitly not as good as Horizon. The fps comes in only in the sense that it's a game that looks worse than those, yet also runs worse as well, which is unfortunate. But the fps is really secondary, I'm just I little bummed that the graphics aren't that great. Again, maybe my expectations were too high coming off Witcher 3 and Horizon, but still.

Yeah it's called you are still using 1080p.

Sorry I might be misunderstanding. Are you saying I need to run this game beyond 1080p in order for it to look better than other games (even when those games that look better are running in 1080p?).

[SexyBastardAlert!]

Ubi did the same thing with Rainbow Six Siege, last gen in almost every category, gunplay, graphics. This sounds like Tom threw another "bomb" our way again. What is the draw of this game? Drug dealers, co-op? Sounds half baked. Not buying it right now, maybe later if I'm really bored which doesn't happen too often. There are better older games to play.

[Mak]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von GotMyAssKicked!:

Ubi did the same thing with Rainbow Six Siege, last gen in almost every category, gunplay, graphics. This sounds like Tom threw another "bomb" our way again. What is the draw of this game? Drug dealers, co-op? Sounds half baked. Not buying it right now, maybe later if I'm really bored which doesn't happen too often. There are better older games to play.

Yeah this game sort of fits that description unfortunatly. I would say it's fundamentally last gen graphics, but the've added some layers of post-processing effects to try and mask it. The lighting effects are very nice, but the foliage and vegetation doesn't seem as rich as Witcher 3 or Horizon (much more "patchy" and generic looking). The geometric detail (polygons) is, for me personally, the worst thing about the graphics, especially in terms of character models.

Gameplay-wise it's alright. The controls are feel ported from the Division largerly (not necessarily a bad thing).

The reviews are on the lower end of the scale for a big-budget title like this (this isn't going to win any GOTY awards). I think it depends on your expectations. I just got off Witcher 3 and Horizon, so I just experience some of the best visuals in gaming. So for me, going from those games to this one was definitly a step down. But if you've never played those titles, than you might be happy with the visuals here. It's all relative I suppose.

The open world is fairly bland. Lot's of space, but most of it is empty in terms of content. This game is more about quantity than quality. One review said it well, lots of open world, but little reasont to actually explore it (I think it was Eurogamer but can't remember). Fairly generic and typical missions. Co-op really helps though, I think that might be the saving grace.

I'll do a steam refund. I might jump back in later at a lower price point and when Ubisoft has fixed all the issues (at least they admit there are issues).

Remember you can buy the game and try it. If your not happy you can do a refund (play time less than 2 hours). Play for an hour and a half or so and decide.

[Panic Fire]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ｓ Ａ Ｃ Ｈ Ｉ:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mr Ty:

R9 390 runs this on uultra at 1080 with 1.20 scaling np

1080p LUL.

1080 WITH 1.20 scaling. Which is quite a bit more than 1080p.

[Primus Palus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Panic Fire:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ｓ Ａ Ｃ Ｈ Ｉ:

1080p LUL.

1080 WITH 1.20 scaling. Which is quite a bit more than 1080p.

I'm running the same thing. It's amazing looking.

[Zefar]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Syncroniam:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Zefar:

So when the game can't load in the textures it'll replace them with the lowest type there is.

What the hell are you talking about? I don't agree with op, but that's definitely wrong. Anyone can go past their base amount of VRAM and still load in textures correctly.

If a graphic card only have X amount of VRAM it'll try to load as many textures as it can. If you go past this it just doesn't have enough space to load it up and will either stop loading some textures or keep switching around. Could depend on the game. But you'll generally see low textures a lot if you exceed the VRAM limit.

This might cause the game to look quite horrible. Seeing how he tries to go up to 4K which I believe would need like 5GB VRAM minimum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6Yn-pGVs6M

Here is someone demonstrating it in GTA5.

[Justin_760]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mak:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von 🍁D3LTA_SAS11🍁:

ur gpu needs a upgrade

It's already on Ultra settings. :(

Agreed. Funny, that pic that dude posted is showing the only two tree models that have passable textures. Because every foliage/tree I see looks like utter garbage. I too am running on Ultra settings, I have a 1070, which is like what, the second highest end GPU on the market right now? 16gb RAM and an Intel i7 4.0ghz, thats 4ghz WITHOUT overclocking, dont even need to bother overclocking since my rig is so far past recommended specs.

Im almost starting to think the people that claim the graphics are amazing are actually shills, because I simply cannot fathom how anyone can seriously believe that the engine this game runs on is passable in any way, I mean not even counting the retarded AI and broken physics, this game should not be considered complete or passable.

[Justin_760]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Primus Palus:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Mak:

I'm okay when performance suffers due to phenomenal visuals that really push the boundries (think Crysis when it was first released).

Bad performance with relativly menial visuals not so much.

You're the worst kind of trolls. The one that pretends to justify their BS with actual text responses. Just say your stupid nonsense and then make fun of someone then disappear from the thread like every other troll does.

Your level of stupidity is atrocious. Anyone who says this game doesn't look good isn't playing the game maxed out or is a troll.

Performance is a whole different beast.

For someone accussing others to be a troll you sure do use some offensive language. Completely unnecessary and in my opinion calling someone stupid or labelling them with connotative terms is textbook troll behavior, is it not? I find the graphics to be crap, I am playing it maxed out, and Im no troll. Now just because my opinion differs from yours doesnt mean I will now bash your intellect and make offensive accusations. I cant respect your opinion that the game has good graphics, but i CANT respect your disrespectful and rude behavior. I recommend in the future you think before you post, do you really want to make others feel upset or angry? Thats trolling in my humble opinion, and there are actual human beings on the other end of these interactions so try to be a decent human being and dont contribute to making the internet such a toxic place.

[Horny Shrimp]

Poor attempt at trolling Sir...

Game is one of the most gorgeous game ever released on any platform.

[Rai]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von ReeseKS13:

This game is extremely CPU intensive cuz Ubi are fecking idiots and didn't use the GPU as it is intended for..

Actually, any open world game that has numerous things happening in it at once is going to be heavily CPU intensive.

[CMDR WeeJet]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Pathfinder-01:

Sure it's poorly optimized upon release but don't go saying a game has terrible graphics with your potato pc.
* And by the way with just 1 970 I doubt you're even running in 2k especially on ultra.
I barely manage to get stable fps with dual gtx 1080's i7-6700k@4.00ghz 32gb DDR4 and I have the game on a m.2 pcie drive when playing ultra 4k. So don't BS with your specs lol. Games are evolving and hardware does alongside.

try running the game with 1 1080. i dont think the game works well with sli. i have the same specs as you exept 1 1080 and 16gb of ram but im running the game at 60fps with the odd drop down to 50 every now and then on ultra

[Rai]

This influx of new PC gamers hasn't bothered to learn the basics of PC gaming. You have to upgrade your rig to at least one step above recommended settings if you truly want to get a maxxed out performance. Recommended settings is simply for playing the game on 'High' or 'Very High'; Ultra is for cards that are above the recommended settings.

This is how it's always been; just because new PC gamers are joining the market and not bothering to learn the intricacies of PC gaming does not mean that the rules have changes. I have an i7 4790k, GTX 1080, 24gb RAM, and I have no issues running this game on ultra and getting gameplay that matches the official game footage. My friend is getting smooth performance on his 750 TI. If you're getting poor performance, you need to check out your computer. Update your drivers, update your processor, idk. But don't blame the developers for your lack of understanding.

[UncivilS3rvant]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von GotMyAssKicked!:

Ubi did the same thing with Rainbow Six Siege, last gen in almost every category, gunplay, graphics. This sounds like Tom threw another "bomb" our way again. What is the draw of this game? Drug dealers, co-op? Sounds half baked. Not buying it right now, maybe later if I'm really bored which doesn't happen too often. There are better older games to play.

Think someone needs some expectation management...