piratethingy
Self professed bad raider
Played the first three hours last night, ugly as sin xfd.
Great game though, can already tell my sleep schedule is fucked.
Great game though, can already tell my sleep schedule is fucked.
Witcher 3 downgrade arguments in here and nowhere else
- Thread starter Jigolo
- Start date
- Status
Agreed i think the water is prob the weakest looking part of the game it just looks off. GTA V water was much better
cool that the first pub you enter in the Witcher doesnt look as good as a random apartment in Unity, a game where pretty much every apartment in the city looked exactly the same
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
is this real? Damn, they should of at least kept the theme.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
You'll find many downgrade/tech threads are populated by very vocal posters who know absolutely fucking nothing about rendering tech.
Wow that really looks a lot better :-O
How do I do this and how much performance does it cost ? :-O
Lol no
GTAV has nicer looking foliage and that's pretty much it
Unity looks incredible, however it is clear the engine is trying to do more than it is capable of and it is a mess to run as well as having incredibly poor architecture LoD and NPC pop-in. Also has pretty garish looking daytime lighting.
Infamous has nice particle effects, but it's really not even on the same scale as TW3.
Ricky Ricardo
Member
Comparing Infamous to the Witcher 3 .... I've seen it all now
bryanee
Member
To be fair Infamous Second Son is fucking beautiful.
All I can say is that after playing for 4 hours last night, this is by far one of the best looking games I have ever played.
Sure the early trailers were very carefully tweaked and very carefully lit, using unrealistically hopeful settings that have been scaled back during optimisation. This is normal (while understandably dissapointing).
Had the game been visually dissapointing then I would say there was more fire to this smoke. But god damn is this game drop dead gorgeous. It's one of those games that static screenshots (especially with even a tiny amount of compression) simply do not come close to doing the game justice.
As a 980 owner I am used to running things at max settings and this game constantly takes my breath away. Far more so than Far Cry 4 or AC:U for instance. And they were exceptionally beautiful games too.
Sure the early trailers were very carefully tweaked and very carefully lit, using unrealistically hopeful settings that have been scaled back during optimisation. This is normal (while understandably dissapointing).
Had the game been visually dissapointing then I would say there was more fire to this smoke. But god damn is this game drop dead gorgeous. It's one of those games that static screenshots (especially with even a tiny amount of compression) simply do not come close to doing the game justice.
As a 980 owner I am used to running things at max settings and this game constantly takes my breath away. Far more so than Far Cry 4 or AC:U for instance. And they were exceptionally beautiful games too.
m_shortpants
Member
Agreed ^
I was playing last night and in the game I was in the middle of a forest at night...the atmosphere was great, it became legitimately spooky there.
I was playing last night and in the game I was in the middle of a forest at night...the atmosphere was great, it became legitimately spooky there.
amstradcpc
Member
The best PS4 engine i have seen so far.
BlackNinja
Banned
So let me get this straight:
W3 and any other game that post dates it should implement every single graphical feature better than all other games already released this gen. That includes water, interiors, real time GI, higher res textures, displacement mapping, etc?
W3's 2013 footage should have been implemented in the final release despite lackluster hardware (on both PC and consoles) to get it there -- AND -- run decently with no stuttering or framerate hits?
Rigghtt..
W3 and any other game that post dates it should implement every single graphical feature better than all other games already released this gen. That includes water, interiors, real time GI, higher res textures, displacement mapping, etc?
W3's 2013 footage should have been implemented in the final release despite lackluster hardware (on both PC and consoles) to get it there -- AND -- run decently with no stuttering or framerate hits?
Rigghtt..
Infamous? The game scope is nowhere near...
Man I hope this was an autocorrect fail
Look, nobody can deny the game looks good. It does. But when you advertise using BS, it should be called out, even for usually transparent devs like CDPR. This shouldn't be any different for other similar cases, including ubisoft, naughty dog, ea sports, etc.
Also, PCs are availabe to scale unlike consoles. Just because the consoles are using aged low/medium-end hardware doesn't mean you design your PC version to the same spec when you advertise something higher end for 2 years in a row. The beauty of PC gaming is that the people with lower end hardware will scale the game to their own liking. The people with high end hardware will do the same. This whole thing could've been avoided if they had just said "hay guys, sorry but we didn't have the time to do so and so, so we are concentrating on a consistent experience". Not "wait for ultra" (and lo and behold, ultra isn't the same as the old trailers)
Man I hope this was an autocorrect fail
So let me get this straight:
W3 and any other game that post dates it should implement every single graphical feature better than all other games already released this gen. That includes water, interiors, real time GI, higher res textures, displacement mapping, etc?
W3's 2013 footage should have been implemented in the final release despite lackluster hardware (on both PC and consoles) to get it there -- AND -- run decently with no stuttering or framerate hits?
Rigghtt..
Look, nobody can deny the game looks good. It does. But when you advertise using BS, it should be called out, even for usually transparent devs like CDPR. This shouldn't be any different for other similar cases, including ubisoft, naughty dog, ea sports, etc.
Also, PCs are availabe to scale unlike consoles. Just because the consoles are using aged low/medium-end hardware doesn't mean you design your PC version to the same spec when you advertise something higher end for 2 years in a row. The beauty of PC gaming is that the people with lower end hardware will scale the game to their own liking. The people with high end hardware will do the same. This whole thing could've been avoided if they had just said "hay guys, sorry but we didn't have the time to do so and so, so we are concentrating on a consistent experience". Not "wait for ultra" (and lo and behold, ultra isn't the same as the old trailers)
I think the most hilarious one I have seen and can remember was one known vocal poster that claimed that Dark Souls 2 downgrade removed normal mapping and started tweeting developers about it. I called him out, but he still kept posting about the missing normal mapping.
Did he mean to say maggots? I don't understand the post or the picture on any level.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/xanvast/sets/72157650756108433
Sharpening filter is definitely in, though not as intense as in the 2013 screenshots and trailers.
Sharpening filter is definitely in, though not as intense as in the 2013 screenshots and trailers.
Confidence Man
Member
The bundle of sticks.
I think he meant this kind of faggot: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faggot_(food)
That think on the ground looks a bit like one. Maybe he is a brit.
He certainly got the ban stick regardless lol
Darkstorne
Member
Faggots are bundles of sticks. He was definitely just trying to get a rise out of that statement though.
Pretty much this. I am on PS4 and am blown away by what they have done. Especially when you factor in how meticulously crafted each area is, the weather effects and the variety of lighting that makes the world look continually different depending on where you are and what time of day it is. It's honestly a masterpiece in world building and design.
The change in lightning and particle effects is clear as day, and it is a good thing to call out the devs on downgrades such as this:
Some people may see this thread as a bunch of crybabies nitpicking on an excelent game, but excelent games should not be inmune to criticism and complaining about things like this happen is the only way to change the industry for the better.
I'm looking forward to having a great time with this game and CD Projekt RED is rightfully praised for delivering such a fantastic effort, but they haven't handled the graphical changes well and there would barely be any backlash if they had properly labeled their trailers as target renders instead of gameplay.
Some people may see this thread as a bunch of crybabies nitpicking on an excelent game, but excelent games should not be inmune to criticism and complaining about things like this happen is the only way to change the industry for the better.
I'm looking forward to having a great time with this game and CD Projekt RED is rightfully praised for delivering such a fantastic effort, but they haven't handled the graphical changes well and there would barely be any backlash if they had properly labeled their trailers as target renders instead of gameplay.
The first tutorial area did NOT impress me at all. It ran like garbage, first of all, and it looked like something out of skyrim... well, slightly modded skyrim.
Then Geralt woke up, and we wer eina forest clearing on top of a small hill, and the variety and liveliness of the trees and leaves and foliage, and the lighting as the sun started to rise, and the close up of Geralt's face, and the incredible detail of his armor... WOW!
This game is a looker.
This first game area also ran like butter on my setup, while the tutorial area struggled to get above 40 FPS.
Then Geralt woke up, and we wer eina forest clearing on top of a small hill, and the variety and liveliness of the trees and leaves and foliage, and the lighting as the sun started to rise, and the close up of Geralt's face, and the incredible detail of his armor... WOW!
This game is a looker.
This first game area also ran like butter on my setup, while the tutorial area struggled to get above 40 FPS.
Wow, and that's from almost 2015 too.
Understandable. There are more subtle presets, but like someone told me in the performance thread, SweetFX is worth it for SMAA alone.Looks like someone used a darbee darblet to "enhance" their movies.
Not a fan, but if you like it I'm not stopping you
Exactly.
There's normally little to no performance impact, but I haven't tried it yet.
I didn't bother with injecting SMAA because andy said he couldn't get it working in the guide afaik. Not sure if he was using something else though (can you inject smaa from nvidia control panel?)
Also I never bother with colour changes because what looks better in one scene looks worse in another, seems to be a waste of time tweaking.
Also I never bother with colour changes because what looks better in one scene looks worse in another, seems to be a waste of time tweaking.
We got a vertical slice to give us an idea of what they were working towards. The game was in the middle of development and tweaks happened as it got built and some areas even got improved. The end result is pretty damn magnificent to be where it is when you weigh the entire package and that is why you don't see the media harping on this shit.
They were not trying to screw anyone over and the end product is the kind of game that comes around maybe once in a generation, if we are lucky. That is a fact, Jack. But hey, even then nothing is perfect. Yet it is going to be awhile before we get a game that comes as close as this one does. I find it hard to be upset about that.
viveks86
Member
Yeah 2.0 beta didn't work for me. Crashes right at game boot up no matter what I tried. And 1.5 threw DLL errors on boot. So I gave up :/
DarkLordMalik
Member
Please explain to me why they were trying to prove till the last minute that there has been no "downgrade"? Doesn't this scream shady tactics to you.
They sold the game on the premise of the 2013 trailer (3+ million views on official channel) and VGX trailer. Even the 35 minute of so called gameplay demo showed visuals that were never matched in the final version.
It is a good thing that the end game is good, and there is no denying that it is a gorgeous looking open world game. But this talk is not for this thread, rather for the OT or reviews thread. This thread is solely to talk about the downgrade from the original reveal and the 1 million views proved that it was a popular topic.
I never said they cut anything out. It was a target that they were working towards as the game was being built. Of course it is not identical, but they surely came close enough that it sits atop the pack of open world games. Good enough for me, but obviously not for others. That's cool.
Because some areas got improved as well. But no, it is not identical to their target and I never expected it to be. It is certainly close enough for me, though. Sorry if I don't feel deceived.
Not identical...
The lighting and grass went from on to basically off. Things you see constantly. And the performance is JUST ABOUT there.
They ought to be brutalized by the community for claiming it was in-game footage and then denying negative changes. The in-game vgx trailer is next gen from now.
The lighting and grass went from on to basically off. Things you see constantly. And the performance is JUST ABOUT there.
They ought to be brutalized by the community for claiming it was in-game footage and then denying negative changes. The in-game vgx trailer is next gen from now.
lol 10 bounce. Even though there is a downgrade there is no way that there is an engine or a hardware that can do 10 bounces in real time without killing itself, much less expect it from an engine and hardware from 2013.
LOL, okay. I must be imagining the dense forests and plains and all of the gorgeous and varied lighting that makes the world look continually different and alive. On that note, back to the OT for me.
True dat. I'd put the Order: 1886 just a notch above it though.
Diablohead
Member
Whatever happened with the witcher 3 visuals is rather upsetting, I was told by the internet through images that this game was going to look like A but ended up being released as B, and I find stuff like that really annoying.
DarkLordMalik
Member
Good for you, I guess.
But there are many people out there that feel deceived because they built their PC on the premise of running Witcher 3 maxed out, only to find out that it doesn't get much better than the console version. I know quite a few of these myself.
HeWhoWalks
Gold Member
To be honest, there are parts about that gif that made it into the game, while others needed a bit of a face lift. The ambiance of the gif may never be achieved, though.
Uh. 60fps is a pretty big deal over the console version. That plus maxed looks way better.
icecold1983
Member
watched gamersyde videos. looks as expected. anytime grass is being hit by sunlight it looks like it doesnt belong in the environment as there is no occlusion applied to it. reminds me of the grass in bf4 if you dont use hbao. whatever they are doing for AA pretty much looks like fxaa
Just a notch? On the PS4? Are you kidding me? The game has flat textures everywhere. The foliage, while dense is generally underwhelming. Geralt himself looks phenomenal and at times like he doesn't belong in that world. Geralt's movement is usually clumsy, while The order is usually smooth. The game has crashed on me twice. The Order runs a fair deal smoother as well as I complained about The Order's smoothness in a post in the past. It has great draw distance and lighting. But it is not even close to The Order if we are talking strictly the PS4 version.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
I think one of the biggest things that takes me out of the world is Geralts movement animations. Way too floaty feeling, guy feels like a damn specter you're controlling. Doesn't help that I've been playing gta v pc for the last few weeks, which arguably has the best third person movement animations I've seen. I dunno I feel like I need to have more of a grounded feel with third person characters, really feel their weight in the world as they traverse it. This goes for horseback riding too, horse traversal seems so janky in this. Getting caught on something constantly, can't even jump over a damn calf high stone wall. Just takes you out of the game.
I don't get the comparisons to red dead redemption aside from world building, cause a big part of what put you in that world was the amazing animation work R* put into Marsten, the horses, and characters in general. I know they're an outlier, but there's been other third person games that have done movement animations much better recently such as Unity, The Order, and going back a bit TLOU. I'm hoping for a first person mod with a walk input pronto as when I just wanna take the world in it gets muddied by the janky ass controls unless I'm standing still.
Uno Venova
Banned
Probably should have never gotten peoples hopes up then.So let me get this straight:
W3 and any other game that post dates it should implement every single graphical feature better than all other games already released this gen. That includes water, interiors, real time GI, higher res textures, displacement mapping, etc?
W3's 2013 footage should have been implemented in the final release despite lackluster hardware (on both PC and consoles) to get it there -- AND -- run decently with no stuttering or framerate hits?
Rigghtt..
- Status