Watch dogs got downgraded but the water effects were the best in my opininion. A close second is ac iv black flag
- Status
There is though, try to look at falls, trees and mountain while you get closer
it's also to say that the game is not as rich graphically. I agree with you that a dissolve in would be better. Maybe they'll look after it.Yup, I agree in the Watch Dogs case. AC Unity is somewhat close too. But Two Worlds' waters look too blue to be realistic
Also on a side note, the same water tesellation is used in Witcher 3 as well (It is nVidia's nonetheless). But I believe the intensity is much lower, as it would be PC melting in an open-world game.
Never played Watch Dogs, but yeah, you are right - that's some nice looking water effects
I'm happy the way the water looks now in W3 (want to see how it looks in a storm
), it's just the effect when he is swimming and the water behind him.. it just looks wrong somehow.. but more importantly, I would like to know if the volumetric clouds are still in the gameActually CDPR is not using nVidias water simulation, they made their own tool for that.
I could be wrong, but I think you can see some semi-volumetric clouds in the new footage. Around 1 minute mark, you can see bunch of darker clouds, and to me they seem to stand out, like they are not part of skybox, but actual real clouds.
Last edited:
Durante gets it right:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=149322962#post149322962
Probably just as well. nVidia's is a big-time performance hog (a small demo kept an entire GTX 680 busy).
Of course he's right. And he kept repeating to wait for benches before speaking.. which is the right thing to do. better yet the only right thing to do.
He typically does, yeah.
Well, except when he says that Neverwinter Nights II has a better interface than Baldur's Gate 2 or that ubersampling and extreme AA are more important for a game that higher framerate.
On a related note, I would pay good money to see a 60fps video for The Witcher 3.
Wasn't sure when I'd finally stumble upon it, but finally found it:
"Platform unification exists – we have one build that gets distributed on each of them. The game is exactly the same, grass drawing distance is identical everywhere. "
That kind of talk is alarming, since it suggests parity and locked graphical limitations.
He goes on to say that the differences between PC on ultra and console, will be small.
I hope this is just talk.
Last edited:
The interview is on the forum also. As I said elsewhere grass drawing distance shouldn't be locked on PC, it's against the basic scaling principles so I'm pretty confident he said it wrong.
As for little differences it's confirmed and was expected, the game it's the same like in every multiplatform game. Still this doesn't mean that PC version won't have an edge as it's reported that high preset looks a little better than consoles.
Ultra will probably be even more. But as always graphical fancy effects on PC are not game changer and come at a high performance demand. Nothing new for the reasonable gamer.
Other than that, even if many users here want it bad, it's not like he could scream to press "alright f******, console version suck, PC owns, end of the story". Especially since console lead the market. But they promised a good PC version and there are no reasons yet not to trust them
As for little differences it's confirmed and was expected, the game it's the same like in every multiplatform game. Still this doesn't mean that PC version won't have an edge as it's reported that high preset looks a little better than consoles.
Ultra will probably be even more. But as always graphical fancy effects on PC are not game changer and come at a high performance demand. Nothing new for the reasonable gamer.
Other than that, even if many users here want it bad, it's not like he could scream to press "alright f******, console version suck, PC owns, end of the story". Especially since console lead the market. But they promised a good PC version and there are no reasons yet not to trust them
The question was of the difference between ultra PC version versus console--he said 'slight'.
Maybe we just have a different definition of what slight differences are; the differences between the current and past trailers look drastic to me. I still wonder if we were looking at pre-rendered footage in certain shots, or if it's in-engine but at ridiculous settings without frame-skip, then sped up.
The truth is that its largely subjective.
Do you believe that higher resolutions, 60FPS, HBAO+, hairworks, superior AA, wider view distance and LOD, ect.. add up to a "small difference"? I certainly don't. 60FPS alone is an absolutely massive difference in image and performance quality IMO. Just look at the E3 footage and compare the Griffin's hair on Xbox vs PC... the difference is night and day to my eyes.
Nah it's in engine for sure, but hey trailers are made to impress. But not let them impress you more than the game, I say that to you as a fan like me, not because I want to defend CDPR or whatever. Keeping our expectations balanced is the key to be satisfied with the final product which evidently is full of qualities, even graphical-wise.
And yes there are different views of slight. Differences between trailers and the gameplay (for example) could be slight, but not for the enthusiast. Maybe he's just a normal guy unlike us and sees slight differences where we see a transformation. Maybe he tried to be politically correct towards console users. We'll see in due time but for now things seem to suggest to be confident about the quality of the final product.
Last edited:
Now that's just a work of fiction. You don't create a whole new engine that utilizes the same assets, just so that it might target other platforms. You adapt the existing one.
I think downgrading the game is obviously bad. But one thing i wanted to ask you all.
Who the hell will be able to max this game? Really... almost no one here, so it doesn't matter for your gaming experience.
Btw i don't think it will be downgraded. CDPR never lied to us. This could be there first time they did but i don't think so.
Who the hell will be able to max this game? Really... almost no one here, so it doesn't matter for your gaming experience.
Btw i don't think it will be downgraded. CDPR never lied to us. This could be there first time they did but i don't think so.
Last edited:
Yep. And from the sound of things the game has been designed to run on all three platforms since the beginning. There is no "PC build" and "console build." There is just "the build" and the PC version let's you adjust the graphics options and also supports "Ultra" settings and a couple bonus graphics settings like ubersampling and hairworks.
Besides, Adam Badowski said when the game releases he expects virtually no-one will be able to run the game on max settings with all the extra options turned on. So why does it matter? Most of us won't touch the Ultra settings for years.
That last is actually what I want to hear. What I was afraid of was that you won't even be able to turn them on.
I wonder how v-ram hungry some of the settings will be, and whether Titans will edge out an advantage over current maxwell cards on some settings.
Last edited:
Sure? what about with Aliens Colonial Marines?
first gameplay was in pc with a awasome engine.. then they redo the engine for ps3/x360... pc port.. and all we know the history
I can say with certainty a disaster of that scale is definitely not going to happen with CDPR at the helm.
- Status