We have been lied to!

Only a fool would say that, it's clearly a misunderstanding, nobody would do that knowing social medias and how fast news spread to damage their

reputation like that.

Thats a shame for Sony. Lying to the players like that. So anti-consumer

That's probably what happened. Or earlier on in development Sony was told that the target was 1080p/60fps, and they foolishly decided to run with it.

I'd imagine stuff like this:

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/2394596/watch_dogs_is_1080p_60fps_on_ps4_says_ubisoft.html

Led them to believe that the game was 1080p/60fps.  

Still jumped the gun and could've done without this.  But it just feels like everything Ubisoft do regarding PR for this game has just gotten worse and worse since the initial reveal.

No kidding, my German isn't that good but good enough

Ubisoft spricht vollmundig von 1080p bei 60 fps für die Playstation 4 und in der Tat zeigte das Spiel subjektiv kaum Bildrateneinbrüche.

Nachtrag vom 13. Mai 2014, 22:15 Uhr

Überraschend hat Ubisoft per Blogeintrag angekündigt, dass Watch Dogs auf der Playstation 4 in 900p und auf der Xbox One in 792p bei jeweils 30 fps laufen werde.

The German source updated their report.

So you're telling me Sony would really post a rumor instead of actually having a conversation with Ubisoft before posting a false resolution and framerate? Even if it was 1080p the 60fps was the most questionable. No way Ubisoft would be able to optimize an open world at 60fps for a mid-range PC type console.

Should it really be considered a rumor when at an Ubisoft event, Ubisoft "openly talked about the fact that it would be 1080p/60fps on PS4"? Yes, it's since then been corrected, but if Ubisoft originally told me something about an Ubisoft game at an Ubisoft event, I'd take their word for it

Sony isn't some giant sentient being, it's made of people. Is it so hard to believe that some chap in the PR department was told to make a typical PR style statement about the game, and did so based on what Ubi had thus far been reporting? If i was the PR dude i'd go off what Ubi had been saying rather than my own gut feeling (assuming said PR guy even knows anything about hardware).

If they were lying why would they bother changing it before Ubi had even confirmed the actual resolution/frame rate? That would somewhat defeat the entire point in the initial lie ^^;

Had they waited for the truth to come out before changing it i'd agree it was suspicious. That, however, is not the case.