Geralt's Face

[Scholdarr]

No, it relates to that as well. Fewer cutscenes and characters means the artists get to have the lighting in each scene just right, they get to work on each separate face more since there's only need for 5-6 very detailed faces in the entire game etc. But this is really going off-topic at this point.

Why is this off-topic? The thread is called "Geralt's face" and we are talking about his face, or not?...

The character/facial artist has little to with lightning in areas imo. Two different things. And yes, it would mean some work to make the faces more detailed. But let's put it that way: the game is already feature complete. So the character artists have 8 months to polish their character and their faces. Why not demanding/wishing more detailed faces, especially for the most important characters. Wasn't it CDPRs own aspiration to make a true next-gen/PC game bending the technologoy? Well, then they should try to deliver on that on every level. And don't forget that MGS V is an open world game with many characters as well. There is imo no (technological) justification why faces in MGS V (game that doesn't even release on PC...) should look better and more detailed and lifelike than in Witcher 3...


@Kinley
I'm talking about faces, not about whole sceneries like in your picture. The faces in your picture are definitely not state-of-the-art.

 

[Sam44]

Well, that's your opinion and I respect it.


I looks quite a lot like characters in other video games. The latest iteration of Geralt and Solid Snake in MGS V are for example very similar (apart from hair and the eyepatch of course and the fact that Snake looks a lot more lifelike with a much more detailed face)...

Maybe it's also a technical issue. As much as I like the Red Engine there are still many improvements possible. Faces are for example one issue not really "state-of-the-PC-art" yet. Other games/englines (Fox, Cryengine,...) can deliver much more detailed and lifelike faces than the Red Engine. I hope CDPR will be able to really improve on that. I mean Crysis 3 has way better faces and you only see them in a few cutscene. In an RPG you see faces in every dialogue. Facial expressions are of crucial importance in an RPG like that. I personally even think faces and facial animations and the core part of the engine CDPR should focus on in the next months because on this topic thay can't live up to the (very high) expectations so far...

Facial quality of MGS V (Fox Engine):

Facial quality of Crysis 3 (Cryengine)

Both are imo qualitywise one step ahead of the Red Engine (not in terms of proportions or design, just from a technical point of view).


Edit: Of course in both engines faces are based on performance mo-cap of real persons. I don't know if that's true for Witcher 3 as well but I think I read somewhere that they create their faces by hand (at leat the main characters). While this is cool from a solely artistical point of view it may explain the quality-gap in terms of facial details, lifelikeness and also facial animations...

From posts like these I understand why CDPR wants to murder us sometimes :troll: .

 

[Scholdarr]

From posts like these I understand why CDPR wants to murder us sometimes :troll: .

Post like these let me hate the community or at least single members. If you don't want to participate just ignore...


Again, this is not about "CDPR has done a shitty work", not at all. This is a fair critique about what could still be made better than it already is. When I look at the (already great) graphics it's the faces that could use the most polishing and increased effort. That's my honest feedback. Professionals like CDPR understand that and they appreciate honest feedback (at least I hope so). There is also nothing wrong with comparing a game to other games. CDPR do that internally all the time I guess. You also compete on a graphical level with other companies, either directly or indirectly. There is nothing wrong with fans wanting their favorite game to look absolutely the best it could. There is nothing wrong with pointing out which elements could still be improved. After all, this is a feedback and discussion board, or isn't it?

 

[Sam44]

Post like these let me hate the community or at least single members. If you don't want to participate just ignore...


Again, this is not about "CDPR has done a shitty work", not at all. This is a fair critique about what could still be made better than it already is. When I look at the (already great) graphics it's the faces that could use the most polishing and increased effort. That's my honest feedback. Professionals like CDPR understand that and they appreciate honest feedback (at least I hope so). There is also nothing wrong with comparing a game to other games. CDPR do that internally all the time I guess. You also compete on a graphical level with other companies, either directly or indirectly. There is nothing wrong with fans wanting their favorite game to look absolutely the best it could. There is nothing wrong with pointing out which elements could still be improved. After all, this is a feedback and discussion board, or isn't it?

Well, I already am more than satisfied with how it turned out. You are obviously not looking at the circumstances. They are creating a massive open world RPG where there are hundreds and hundreds of NPCs, sometimes in cities even hundred of characters on screen ONCE, so your comparisons from the games you posted are just off, sorry.

 

[wichat]

Hey, guys, nobody better than the creator knows when his artwork is OK. Later retouches usually mean ruin it.

First, after TW2 we complain about combat system (OK), last year we complain about Geralt's waist/armour (OK). Now we compalin about his face or his eyes (ehem), what next? the absence of a grain of sand on his eyelashes amidst a blast of wind? (OMG!)

Well, at least, if we lose our complains in such trivials details it's maybe because the whole promises of TW3 are too good to find big complains. Congrats, CDPR!

 

[ReptilePZ]

Why is this off-topic? The thread is called "Geralt's face" and we are talking about his face, or not?...

The character/facial artist has little to with lightning in areas imo. Two different things. And yes, it would mean some work to make the faces more detailed. But let's put it that way: the game is already feature complete. So the character artists have 8 months to polish their character and their faces. Why not demanding/wishing more detailed faces, especially for the most important characters. Wasn't it CDPRs own aspiration to make a true next-gen/PC game bending the technologoy? Well, then they should try to deliver on that on every level. And don't forget that MGS V is an open world game with many characters as well. There is imo no (technological) justification why faces in MGS V (game that doesn't even release on PC...) should look better and more detailed and lifelike than in Witcher 3...


@Kinley
I'm talking about faces, not about whole sceneries like in your picture. The faces in your picture are definitely not state-of-the-art.

It's off-topic because the discussion is about which version of Geralt's face we like the most, not why action games will always have better looking faces than story-heavy RPGs.

 

[Wolfsblvt]

I don't know If I am just to stupid to see, but for me Witcher 3 facial expressions and especially quality and detail looks better than Crysis 3
The moment I've seen the two screenshots from @LordCrash I was surprised. For me it is clear. I can't even understand how one can say TW3 faces are not state-of-the-art?

 

[Scholdarr]

Well, I already am more than satisfied with how it turned out. You are obviously not looking at the circumstances. They are creating a massive open world RPG where there are hundreds and hundreds of NPCs, sometimes in cities even hundred of characters on screen ONCE, so your comparisons from the games you posted are just off, sorry.

You are obviously not reading my posts very carefully...I know qzite well what they are creating. That doesn't mean that there is no room for improvements. In the end you can always say "Sorry, we lacked the time or skill or whatever". But it's perfectly valid to point out that one could do even better.

I also think that there is a different between random NPC who you only see in the usual game perspective and "dialogue NPCs" who you see in dialogue close-ups. I don't know how many NPCs of the latter category the game will feature but it's probably still a manageable amount. At least the "core characters" like Geralt, the sorceresses, Dandelion, Ciri, Emhyr and co. could benefit from more facial details since we probably see some of them quite often in dialogues and close ups.



@Wolfsblvt
It's all in the details. It's not meant as "Crysis 3 faces look 200% better than Witcher 3 faces" but "Crysis 3 faces have a little bit more fidelity and details that make a face more lifelike".
This is for example a high-res version of the Crysis 3 shot: http://kzn-clan.nl/imgup2/images/2013/02/23/Crysis3_2013-02-23_21-09-45-030.png
Just have a look at the details, the small wrinkles on the forehead, the small age marks on the face, the slightly wet glow on eyes and lips and stuff. Of course Crysis 3 is an action game with very little important NPCs (I fully agree with Reptile on that) but calling the facial quality worse than Witcher 3's is just not correct.


Off-topic ends.

 

[Sam44]

You are obviously not reading my posts very carefully...I know qzite well what they are creating. That doesn't mean that there is no room for improvements. In the end you can always say "Sorry, we lacked the time or skill or whatever". But it's perfectly valid to point out that one could do even better.

I also think that there is a different between random NPC who you only see in the usual game perspective and "dialogue NPCs" who you see in dialogue close-ups. I don't know how many NPCs of the latter category the game will feature but it's probably still a manageable amount. At least the "core characters" like Geralt, the sorceresses, Dandelion, Ciri, Emhyr and co. could benefit from more facial details since we probably see some of them quite often in dialogues and close ups.

Off-topic ends.

I will just say that I was very impressed by the facial details they put in the trailer and the gameplay dialogues and if every dialogue in the game is going to be on that level, big props to them.

 

[Kinley]

I don't know If I am just to stupid to see, but for me Witcher 3 facial expressions and especially quality and detail looks better than Crysis 3
The moment I've seen the two screenshots from @LordCrash I was surprised. For me it is clear. I can't even understand how one can say TW3 faces are not state-of-the-art?

Wholeheartedly agree.

 

[wichat]

Oh, my! I love watching debates!

 

[ReptilePZ]

So, anyway, to get back to the topic, I feel like Geralt's face looks just fine in its current state. A few minor tweaks, probably needs to be paler, but nothing comepletely out of place (like in his early TW2 face.)

 

[Scholdarr]

I feel like Geralt's face looks just fine in its current state.

I think Geralt's face doesn't look fine in its current state. It's obviously too fat.

 

[ReptilePZ]

"Obviously" is probably too strong a word to use there. Personally, I don't see that, it probably has something to do with his beard, hairstyle, and a combination of his shoulder pads and thick armour that go up to his chin giving the illusion of the face being fatter than usual.

 

[AK-616]

I think Geralt's face doesn't look fine in its current state. It's obviously too fat.

View attachment 4357

 

[JackieEstacado]

If you look carefully at his cheeks, probably you will notice that they are unnaturally swollen.
It is even more evident when he speaks with Johnny in the swamp.
This aspect, added to the broad angles of his jaw, make Geralt's face different from the one of the two past Witcher games. It is just less him, it's more generic. Than, as I stated before, it should be paler l, with a sharper chin and thinner cheeks.
The hard and weary features of TW2 where just fine; but in fact as you can see, a few people critics the cgi face, that is quite similar to the past games one, and on the other hand, a lot of fellows aren't happy with the in-game face, that is different.

 

[wichat]

Maybe the syncro voices technic force them to do it this way, oh well, I don't know.

The only thing I see is that Geralt's face has more details, perhaps that give us the wrong sensation of fatter. We are not used.

 

[ReptilePZ]

I honestly don't know what you ,Jackie and Crash, are talking about . It's the same facial structure as the one in TW2. The only thing that's different is the lighting, the colour palette and the beard.

I was having issues with the way his face appeared in the VGX trailer though, even though it was still the same model, so I can relate.

 

[wichat]

How different is TW3's Gerals from TW2's one? No more than the TW2's one from TW1's.... As ReptileZ say, improved technology , more details in lightning, textures and so on, but Geralt keep remaining the same, one step closer of the original character. I bet CDPR would made this last Geralt's face in 2007 if they had the engines they have today.

 

[Scholdarr]

I honestly don't know what you ,Jackie and Crash, are talking about . It's the same facial structure as the one in TW2. The only thing that's different is the lighting, the colour palette and the beard.

I was having issues with the way his face appeared in the VGX trailer though, even though it was still the same model, so I can relate.

We're talking about the ingame Geralt. Just have a look at this screenshot:

View attachment 4361

Obvious fatty face is obvious.

Let's compare the Geralt of TW3 to the Geralt of TW2.

View attachment 4360

While I agree that the overall facial structure seems to be pretty much the same, they (for whatever reason) changed his cheeks and made them more "swollen", like @JackieEstacado said.

And let's be honest: facial animations for the mouth while talking were pretty weak in TW2 (they are kind of weak in the whole industry with some exceptions like LA Noire...). And I think - while seem to be much improved - that they are still lacking in TW3. It's pretty pointles if Geralt looks fine on screenshots but very less fine while talking and that's what he does in most close up situations in the game. If CDPR still have problems with performance mo-cap and facial animations for the mouth and face while talking comparing ingame pictures in which Geralt just looks to the camera make little sense imo. Geralt should look good in every situation and not only in some in which he looks angry at the screen... But I fear that's again a (slightly) different topic...


By the way, big props to the one who made this fanart of (a slightly older) Geralt. Nice work..

High res: http://www.bjornhurri.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Geralt_04.jpg