Support NeoGAF

[Yasae]

And the amount of cost and manpower it took combined with subpar sales probably one of the reason that caused crytek to do this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crytek_USA#Shutdown

EDIT: Also crysis is a miniscule game compared to the size and scope of witcher 3. Can you imagine creating separate textures for 2 different platforms? are you crazy? The amount of manpower and work hours it would take while you have a deadline is insane.

Founded January 28, 2013
Defunct July 30, 2014

 

[Gunslinger]

this is true, not even a 980 can run this game at 60 frames with all the settings on the highest at 1080p, crazy

And now imagine a game size of witcher 3. It wont run it on medium settings i think.

 

[UnrealEck]

this is true, not even a 980 can run this game at 60 frames with all the settings on the highest at 1080p, crazy

True if you're talking about MSAA or TXAA.

And now imagine a game size of witcher 3. It wont run it on medium settings i think.

They're two different games on two different engines. You can't look at a game and compare it with another and say how the other will run.

 

[Emperor_Uriel]

Wait, how can they say they overestimated it, when Dark Souls 2 was a last gen game, which got ported later this year to ps4/xone?

“We always had in mind the next generation, such as DirectX11 and next generation hardware when creating our technology, and also challenged ourselves as programmers to simultaneously create for the new generation,” From Software programmer Takasuke Ando told IGN in February.

They ended up axing it all when not only could PS3/360 not handle the pre-downgrade game, but next gen specs fell far short of their expectations.

 

[H4r4kiri]

This is probably good news:

the guy who made the Screenshots in



says that the review version of the Game is looking a lot better then everything that is out there now in videos and Screenshots of the game, especially vegetation, water and LOD. But also demands more GPU-Power.

He also says that the Gamestar video was made with an older preview version of the Game and hes about to make a comparison of his own.

And yes he has access to the PC game already, because hes working at PCGH.

Links: (all german)

http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628734&postcount=1975
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628743&postcount=1978
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628752&postcount=1979

And its already up i see:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/indexb2.cfm?id=125693

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/The-Witcher-3-Screenshots-1159185/

Review Verions looks a lot better

Edit: beaten

If you are on this forum ( I cant get registered there, because they think it is a Spammail), can please ask if the foliage in the Tutorial is indeed better looking (finer etc) and if those are different assets ?

 

[Dictator93]

And the amount of cost and manpower it took combined with subpar sales probably one of the reason that caused crytek to do this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crytek_USA#Shutdown

EDIT: Also crysis is a miniscule game compared to the size and scope of witcher 3. Can you imagine creating separate textures for 2 different platforms? are you crazy? The amount of manpower and work hours it would take while you have a deadline is insane.

I want to point out how wrong you are, but it really would take a lot of time and effort. You can like... scale content you know. There are entire tool chains dedicated to that. Also, Crysis 3 having heavy ultra settings has nothing to do with the mismanagement that led to Crytek USA being shutdown and Nottinham being sold away.

 

[gatti-man]

And now imagine a game size of witcher 3. It wont run it on medium settings i think.

Size has nothing to do with whether a card can run a game. It's not rendering the entire game at once. Draw distance and various effects mixed with design are the factors.

 

[Emperor_Uriel]

They were running it back then. We now have even better hardware. On top of that, we don't even know what it ran on back then. Was it a 780? A Ti? Single or more?
Plus PC is constantly advancing in hardware.

Here's a good article speculating on that point:

http://www.gamezone.com/originals/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-betrayed-by-ambition-jtq9

"The Witcher 3 was in development prior to the next-gen console release, on PC’s that were more than likely using middleware, in hope that their ambitions would fall in line with the technology that would soon come to be."

 

[dgrdsv]

Damn. Looks fantastic.



Best day one patch ever?

That preview build was indeed fucked.

Fantastic? All I'm seeing in that comparison is a better shadow LOD bias and some grass which is missing in the preview build. Looks completely the same otherwise.

 

[GeekMarty]

PCGH Low - Medium - High - Ultra Comparison
With Day-One Patch

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/clickSwitch.cfm?id=125691

 

[DOWN]

I want to know what patch is giving people this much hope for Monday's patch lmao

 

[Dictator93]

I want to know what patch is giving people this much hope for Monday's patch lmao

THE PATCH OF THE FOREVER

 

[diamount]

Which means they likely did what I mentioned above, and kept two separate sets of assets. Crytek is in terrible shape right now.

It's a little bit funny you reply to that post citing a game from a company that's supposedly on the verge of bankruptcy.

Again, Crytek's financial woes has nothing to do with Crysis 3's poor sales, a game mostly funded by EA. The amount of defending CDPR are getting when it is absolutely not deserved right now. They are spending their goodwill at a rapid rate it seems.

 

[Genio88]

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/indexb2.cfm?id=125693
The improvement here are mostly in LOD distance, the closer grass looks the same in both screens, maybe just slightly better shadows in the review version, i'd like to see other screens or videos of this review version though, but why are they testing this on a r9 290X instead that on a GTX 980? i'd like to know how this definive version will performe on it

 

[icecold1983]

Damn. Looks fantastic.



Best day one patch ever?

That preview build was indeed fucked.

other than the extra bunch of grass its virtually identical. oh wait, vignetting. yay!

 

[Blade30]

“We always had in mind the next generation, such as DirectX11 and next generation hardware when creating our technology, and also challenged ourselves as programmers to simultaneously create for the new generation,” From Software programmer Takasuke Ando told IGN in February.

They ended up axing it all when not only could PS3/360 not handle the pre-downgrade game, but next gen specs fell far short of their expectations.

:sigh: great :/

hmm vegetation and shadow resolution are for sure better now.

Yeah, the LOD looks higher as well, but not much has changed though.

 

[Genio88]

this is true, not even a 980 can run this game at 60 frames with all the settings on the highest at 1080p, crazy

And you can tell why, i run it often to test my CPU and GPU overclock and it's still awesome to see, maybe only Ryse on PC looks better

 

[Derp]

I want to know what patch is giving people this much hope for Monday's patch lmao

People are hoping for / expecting for some kind of miracle patch. I seriously don't understand why. Either optimism or desperation... Or both. I was always under the impression that day one patches were for bug fixes and optimisation.

Honest question: Has there ever been a case where a day one patch noticeably improved the visuals in a game?

 

[skonvolt]

This is probably good news:

the guy who made the Screenshots in



says that the review version of the Game is looking a lot better then everything that is out there now in videos and Screenshots of the game, especially vegetation, water and LOD. But also demands more GPU-Power.

He also says that the Gamestar video was made with an older preview version of the Game and hes about to make a comparison of his own.

And yes he has access to the PC game already, because hes working at PCGH.

Links: (all german)

http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628734&postcount=1975
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628743&postcount=1978
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628752&postcount=1979

And its already up i see:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/indexb2.cfm?id=125693

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/The-Witcher-3-Screenshots-1159185/

Review Verions looks a lot better

Edit: beaten

if those screen are recent on the last build the problem is over.

i'll be back for the Batman Arkham Knight has benn downgraded thread................

sometimes i question myself if i'm stupid or not but still i'm looking for an answer

 

[Genio88]

other than the extra bunch of grass its virtually identical. oh wait, vignetting. yay!

Indeed, not that different but more grass in the distance thanks to better LOD, but the writer in the article says there are lots of improvements, maybe other screens could show this improvements better

 

[Razyl]

People are hoping for / expecting for some kind of miracle patch. I seriously don't understand why. Either optimism or desperation... Or both. I was always under the impression that day one patches were for bug fixes and optimisation.

Honest question: Has there ever been a case where a day one patch noticeably improved the visuals in a game?

Maybe Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag on PlayStation 4? Without day one patch it was 900p, with patch 1080p. But aside from that...

 

[CadetMahoney]

Not even a 980 can run this game at 60 frames with all the settings on the highest at 1080p, crazy.

What was all that PR talk about it running at 60ps ultra?

Or am I imagining things.

 

[UnrealEck]

Here's a good article speculating on that point:

http://www.gamezone.com/originals/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-betrayed-by-ambition-jtq9

"The Witcher 3 was in development prior to the next-gen console release, on PC’s that were more than likely using middleware, in hope that their ambitions would fall in line with the technology that would soon come to be."

Here's another I posted a few pages back:

The PCs themselves had more than enough power to achieve this vision, almost certainly.

Regardless, this is all really just speculation without a concrete answer from CD Projekt (who could just lie again anyway) and I have no reason to believe the footage before wasn't running on a high end PC.

 

[diamount]

What was all that PR talk about it running at 60ps ultra?

Or am I imagining things.

He means Crysis 3.

 

[GeekMarty]

What was all that PR talk about it running at 60ps ultra?

Or am I imagining things.

He was talking about Crysis 3 I believe.

 

[Skyzard]

What was all that PR talk about it running at 60ps ultra?

Or am I imagining things.

"Ultra"

Not Max.

--but yeah, he's probably talking about crysis.

 

[Lulubop]

DAY 1 PATCH OF GOD KINGS CONFIRMED?

 

[jacksepticeye]

Has there been a final version comparison with this gif yet? If the stuff is all in the same place that is

It always seemed like this gif was a bit too good to be true, it was one of the best looking gifs for the game I had seen

 

[BigTnaples]

PCGH has a comparison between the preview and review version(including day one patch) up: Click

review copy includes:

better vegetation
better ao
water tesselation
better textures
better shadows

But it costs a few fps according to the article. It's still not a huge difference though.

Fantastic? All I'm seeing in that comparison is a better shadow LOD bias and some grass which is missing in the preview build. Looks completely the same otherwise.

other than the extra bunch of grass its virtually identical. oh wait, vignetting. yay!

So you read all that and got some "extra grass and vignetting"? Also, don't make me paint huge red arrows and boxes to point out the obvious. This is a downgrade thread, I am assuming we all have eyes and can be somewhat analitical.

The specific screens I posted were just to show the difference in SSAO/HBAO+.

 

[Derp]

This is probably good news:

the guy who made the Screenshots in



says that the review version of the Game is looking a lot better then everything that is out there now in videos and Screenshots of the game, especially vegetation, water and LOD. But also demands more GPU-Power.

He also says that the Gamestar video was made with an older preview version of the Game and hes about to make a comparison of his own.

And yes he has access to the PC game already, because hes working at PCGH.

Links: (all german)

http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628734&postcount=1975
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628743&postcount=1978
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628752&postcount=1979

And its already up i see:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/indexb2.cfm?id=125693

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/The-Witcher-3-Screenshots-1159185/

Review Verions looks a lot better

Edit: beaten

Am I reading that wrong or does it say they were playing at ultra 1440p 50fps on a 290x?

 

[Easy_D]

Praise be! I'll crank that shit up and lock it at 30 if need be. If not I'll just drop down to High for a 60.

 

[dex3108]

Well CDPR is updating game even on Sunday

https://steamdb.info/app/292030/history/

 

[Latvian Hitman]

This is probably good news:

the guy who made the Screenshots in



says that the review version of the Game is looking a lot better then everything that is out there now in videos and Screenshots of the game, especially vegetation, water and LOD. But also demands more GPU-Power.

He also says that the Gamestar video was made with an older preview version of the Game and hes about to make a comparison of his own.

And yes he has access to the PC game already, because hes working at PCGH.

Links: (all german)

http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628734&postcount=1975
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628743&postcount=1978
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10628752&postcount=1979

And its already up i see:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/indexb2.cfm?id=125693

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/The-Witcher-3-Screenshots-1159185/

Review Verions looks a lot better

Edit: beaten

Shadow res and LOD are obviously better. Can't tell if AO is better, or if the stronger shadowing on the vegetation is due to slightly different sun position. A definite improvement, though. Would like to see more shots in a variety of locations with the splitscreen slider like this one.

 

[BatNIC]

Am I reading that wrong or does it say they were playing at ultra 1440p 50fps on a 290x?

yeah, but that was the preview build

 

[icecold1983]

So you read all that and got some "extra grass and vignetting"? Also, don't make me paint huge red arrows and boxes to point out the obvious. This is a downgrade thread, I am assuming we all have eyes and can be somewhat analitical.

The specific screens I posted were just to show the difference in SSAO/HBAO+.

im referring the the comparison screen they provided, feel free to draw red boxes around all the massive improvements im missing

 

[Derp]

Praise be! I'll crank that shit up and lock it at 30 if need be.

I was just thinking the exact same thing. If that article isn't bullshitting about their settings and hardware, then I'm locking the game at 30 and throwing everything up. Will probably turn HairWorks off since the default hair on Geralt looks better than with HairWorks on IMO...

yeah, but that was the preview build

Ah, I see now. So the "patch" or whatever it was introduced better visuals and so the performance is now less than what it was originally. Does it say how big of an fps drop it was?

 

[PFD]

I remember when games ended up looking better than when they were first shown. That was a nice time.

This is what the Witcher 3 first looked like

 

[kershner]

Honestly that is pretty fucking disgusting.

i guess the picture of what exactly that vetted insider was speaking about last year is pretty clear now. CDPR and their marketing department completely lied about the visuals of this game. Literally up until the point you actually boot up the game the first time.

Lol disgusting.

Edit - It's just hilarious how important you guys think you are in this thread. "PR damage control" "so much outrage." Lol.

 

[Gattsu25]

It's ironic how he looks kinda like Jamie Kennedy and has the same unfunny shtick.

Unfortunately when the argument gets reduced to that, it becomes a carte blanche acceptance of developer lying. I doubt anything will change with other big titles, but must we bend over entirely?

How about we at least wait until the PC version is in people's hands before we start freaking out?

Don't buy the game until you are sure about it.

 

[artsi]

Well CDPR is updating game even on Sunday

https://steamdb.info/app/292030/history/

I'm sure the devs are in mad crunch trying to damage control all this bullshit, doing what they can before release.

PR fucks up, everyone else suffers.

 

[Genio88]

Has there been a final version comparison with this gif yet? If the stuff is all in the same place that is

It always seemed like this gif was a bit too good to be true, it was one of the best looking gifs for the game I had seen

We should just remove that gif from the internet, or we'll never move on, the game is never gonna look like that, even after 10 mods

 

[Momentary]

If they would have just been upfront with this, I don't think there would have been such an outrage.

 

[Easy_D]

This is what the Witcher 3 first looked like

I haven't seen a single goat in the footage since! Fucking downgrades >:|!!

We should just remove that gif from the internet, or we'll never move on, the game is never gonna look like that, even after 10 mods

Yeah that was probably nothing more than pre-rendered, in-engine sure, but pre-rendered for sure

 

[zufuel]

the minds CD Projekt and power Cryengine ....

best game ever / never downgrade

end..

 

[jacksepticeye]

We should just remove that gif from the internet, or we'll never move on, the game is never gonna look like that, even after 10 mods

haha yeah, it'll forever sting to look back at what could have been.
Still though I'd like a comparison just to see how much has changed. The IQ in that gif is pretty crazy

 

[tuxfool]

They had that shitty pine leaf bush all the way at the beginning of development. Crazy that nobody in that time took a stab at improving it.

 

[Tractopoulpe]

Damn finally some good news for the PC version, then. The downgrade is still there though, according to the lighting / some assets. Oh well.

 

[Odah]

We should just remove that gif from the internet, or we'll never move on, the game is never gonna look like that, even after 10 mods

Never lose faith in mods

Spoiler

pics are from Skyrim obv.

edit: THAT 180 JUMP SHOT BY THE KID THO

 

[-Alligator-]

PCGH has a comparison between the preview and review version(including day one patch) up: Click

review copy includes:

better vegetation
better ao
water tesselation
better textures
better shadows

But it costs a few fps according to the article. It's still not a huge difference though.

I'd like to know if the indoor lighting might be better too.

 

[GeekMarty]

the minds CD Projekt and power Cryengine ....

best game ever / never downgrade

end..

Wut?