Witcher 3 downgrade arguments in here and nowhere else
- Thread starter Jigolo
- Start date
- Status
Yea, the first few pages especially is rampant with that contradictory behaviour.
The name of the thread was changed after that.
On topic: Looks like there's a good case for it being a downgrade. Part of why I don't mind as much as other cases is because there was always more to the game than the eye candy. I don't like the defense the game gets either though.
GatticusFinch
Member
Yes, fucking prostitutes and all that. I get it. But, the gameplay though. Simon says change stance, Simopn says change swords. I couldn't take it.
It's quite clear its been downgraded significantly... The question should be what has been downgraded and by how much. The foliage is a standout to me. It just looks bad.
And to those who firmly believe there was no downgrade or the difference is minimal...
Replicate that. We'll compare.
That gif has never been overly impressive to me. Aside from perhaps the grass there's nothing in the composition of that shot that isn't present in the new footage. From the detail of the NPCs to the texture quality and post effects there's nothing special about that shot. Even the way the windmill looks is essentially identical to the way the windmills look in the newer footage.
That doesn't really change anything. That is why PC game's have multiple graphics setting, but there is always an optimal/max setting that corresponds to higher end performance regardless of what some dude somewhere may or may not have in his tower or laptop. This is clearly a case of a game being technically downgraded across the board in favor of consoles to me just like Watchdogs.
Having all versions in parity makes the console versions look a lot more appealing than what it would be if the PC version had absurdly better graphics like what was demonstrated in the older gameplay vids. This is just a common sense analysis to me. They are trying to appeal to the more popular medium just like they did with the Witcher 2 on the 360 last gen, except they chose to go the route of extra content rather than graphical downgrades for the PC version to make the 360 versions look more appealing given it that the PC versions launched way in advance.
This is a trend that will end no time soon.
Confidence Man
Member
Looking forward to the 1:1 comparisons but it's clearly been downgraded. I prefer the older, less cartoony palette as well.
This gen has a pretty shitty track record of living up to it's promises so far.
This gen has a pretty shitty track record of living up to it's promises so far.
Zomba13
Member
I know I'm probably weird here but I think it'd be nice if one day devs could show their game off before release and have it accurately represent the final product. I mean, the game has been done a while now right? At least in a stage that would be "final" if not fully optimised then with final assets and lighting and all that? Why don't devs cut a small trailer with in-game gameplay direct feed footage to show us the final form of the game?
Oh right, they want to sell copies so will hype up PC footage as console gameplay and only use prettied up assets specially made for big event demos.
Oh right, they want to sell copies so will hype up PC footage as console gameplay and only use prettied up assets specially made for big event demos.
It's quite clear its been downgraded significantly... The question should be what has been downgraded and by how much. The foliage is a standout to me. It just looks bad.
And to those who firmly believe there was no downgrade or the difference is minimal...
Replicate that. We'll compare.
A small texture pop-in caught my eye right away lol
This didn't start out as THE thread for downgrade talk. It just became it after a couple of pages so the people in the first couple pages weren't being contradictory at the time.
DOWN
Banned
But surely by now you realize that just because you see it as just fine and keep saying so, doesn't negate the large number of people who consider it one example of the game having looked better as a whole when revealed than it has since.
I'm not sure what will be accomplished when one of the many who consider the VGX images better looking gets told again by you that you don't see eye to eye on it. At this point you know that the images have a different effect for many individuals (easily noted in this thread and prior) than they have on you. It quite simply looks worse for many of us, and this is a thread dedicated largely to expressing that widespread impression.
How about the petals blowing in the wind up close and in the distance, the multiple layer of smoke, the clothing swaying the wind to the right, the dynamic shadows on the roof and foliage as well as the overall volume and complexity of the foliage with so many people moving at once. Then there is the draw distance and the vegetation it demonstrates as well as the overall quality of lighting. Also, the op clearly points out exact points of enormous downgrade in the first post, I thought. How can those changes be denied?
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
Is this a joke post?
viveks86
Member
i'll show you mines if you show me yours
Bro, u getting it day 1? We should benchmark!
I don't think they have. There's been some good examples of atmospheric stuff like that in the newer footage.
There's a lot of neat touches in that scene, including stuff like birds flying, waving grass and falling leaves. It looks awesome. Personally, that scene alone wows me more than any of the typical gifs that get bandied about by some. I agree with your overall post, btw.
Firelord Chargrilled
Banned
Damn super disappointing
Edit: fix spelling error
Edit: fix spelling error
bigboss370
Member
Don't really care that there is a downgrade...
...I do care that CDPR said(lied) "no downgrade" though when asked about it
...I do care that CDPR said(lied) "no downgrade" though when asked about it
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Does the ground foliage cast shadows? In the middle of a field it looks pretty downgraded.
It looks decent in forests because the canopy is casting shadows.
It looks decent in forests because the canopy is casting shadows.
Vire
Member
There's a painterly quality to the first one's landscape. The second one looks like a video game.
I'm hoping the second pic is so muddy looking because of video quality. If not, that is some ridiculous downgrading.
The second picture looks like a winter setting with fog and the top picture is a summer weather system. Foliage issues aside, the draw distance in those photos isn't a fair comparison because that's what reality is like.
Does the game have a weather and seasonal system?
If so, you need to have screen caps of the same area in the same conditions to make a full assessment.
According to the screen cap text it is "butchered draw distance" which is bullshit. It is draw distance with fog and mist in valleys where it should be.
DOWN
Banned
I just don't see how anyone can look at this.
And say that there has been no downgrade. It's clear as day.
That's big. I can't believe some people are trying to suggest that the game looks just as good and all those great effects in the reveals have just been hiding behind time of day and slightly different locations of capture ever since.
As said above, it went from cinema and painting looks to very flat video game looks.
It's in a lot of images. Nothing has looked as good as the early footage.
Now, I don't give a crap that the visuals have been downgraded.
But I do give a crap that CDPR says that the graphics have NOT been downgraded.
I like the more vibrant look of the lower one but yeah thats a big downgrade. smh cdpr
mgs2master2
Banned
that doesnt even look like the same time of day, area, or anything at all.
This is their first simultaneous mult-platform release and it's a massive open-world game full of content. There are plenty of reasons other than not wanting to upset console players. If they cared that much about the console version they would have done what Bethesda does and had it front and center instead of the PC version. The console versions have been hidden from public eye until this week.
Kurt Russell
Member
Well, I just don't see how anyone can call that a fair comparison.
I was just watching the Xbone videos that are floating around some other thread and the game still looks great.
In fog or mist, visibility can be as low as a kilometre or ten. The second pic is a perfect example of that.
The top pic is clear air in summer. Visibility can be 40km in those conditions. The cloud types and vegetation colouring prove it is a screen shot taken in different seasons.
Show me two shots at the same time of year, or a developer comment stating they don't have a weather system in game and ill happily concede the point.
Edit: on cloud types you have high base cumulus and cumulonimbus in the top shot. The bottom shot has stratus and fog/mist typical of a winter setting after a cold front passes. The top shot is more in common with a summertime heat trough. The weather, cloud and visibility are consistent in each screen with what reality is like.
That's why to claim a downgrade based on those screens alone is missing important context.
GatticusFinch
Member
Yeah, it couldn't be a downgrade. It must be a revolutionary fog system.
Sanctuary
Member
Honestly, you can't expect everyone to have 2x GTX 980 (or even one) to run the game above 30fps with the graphics from a year or two ago. The game will still look good.
The only thing I am worried about is the silly bloom/ultra color saturation. I think it's absolutely awful in TW2, sometimes comically and I don't know why they went that way, when the first game had a "grittier" look to it.
The only thing I am worried about is the silly bloom/ultra color saturation. I think it's absolutely awful in TW2, sometimes comically and I don't know why they went that way, when the first game had a "grittier" look to it.
This isn't superman 64. Those screens both show excellent examples of different times of year.
Zomba13
Member
And your post show excellent examples of trolling.
Or being blind and missing all the other aspects that show a downgrade.
GatticusFinch
Member
Come on man. Look at the foliage. It looks like a Bob Ross painting done in human feces viewed through a dirty window smeared with vaseline.
It was downgraded like mad.
Still doesn't change that there's nothing special in the composition of that shot that isn't present in other areas of the game.
Maybe just maybe the grass is of a higher quality, but it's hard to say because it's like a 2 second clip and we've already seen that the grass varies from place to place in the game. The grass in that gif certainly looks better than the typical short grass in many areas of the game, but we've already seen how the ground foliage varies in certain locations. It's not like we saw a demo of them riding over miles and miles of grass like that.
In any case, I'm not sure that your continually repeated downgrade claims are any more needed than my questioning of them.
Interficium
Banned
Actually, It's About Ethics In Pre-Release Screenshots
XxRampage07xX
Member
The second pic is compressed as fuck.
Still, I can see some downgraded parts existing in that image.
You're inventing a system that doesn't exist.
Isn't the first image compressed as well?
trolling? Not in the slightest. I'm picking up on one aspect of the comparisons which is lacking context.
You can't blame a game for having decreased draw distance if it is modelling (for lack of better term) mist and fog.
I haven't commented on other issues because those elements I'm not familiar with.
It's a screengrab from a damn youtube video, of course it's muddy when it's been compressed to hell and back. Any comparisons before we have some real screens from the full release is just silly really.
Does the game have a weather system? A seasonal cycle? If no, then I concede. But if it does, my comments stand.
- Status