- Status
I meant your processed images in a lossless format. (Not jpeg)
OK. Downloaded the whole 1.1GB PAX uncompressed video and took a screenshot with upscaling filters on MPC Home Cinema.
VS
Now you see it?
Compressed or not, even a child can tell you that there is downgrade. Too bad some people will still come up with poor excuses. Even I admit that there is downgrade and I was defending this game 2-3 months ago. New Pax footage is even more heart breaking. It doesn't even look good anymore when compared to other next gen games. In some places it just looks bad. Look at those mountains in the distance, they look like the ones from alpha version of Arma 3 when LOD wasn't final and engine had trouble rendering distant objects correctly. VGX trailer looked like CGI from few years ago and SOD trailer also looked epic.
I'm not sure why the thread took this sharpening diversion, unless it's to insinuate that the decline in visual quality we've seen is all down to the removal of a sharpening filter, which it isn't, even if the earlier footage was sharpened, and if it were why on earth wouldn't they re-enable it since it requires so little processing power?
All the sharpening examples look horrendous except at postage stamp resolutions. Once you up the detail it brings out the detail of the sharpening in all its heavy-handed glory. Heck, I can achieve this effect by ramping up sharpening on my television settings with the remote. It looks every bit as cheap and nasty as it is.
Not really, it could be just ticking a marketing box to say 'hey, we support 4k'. Any decently coded pc game will support arbitrary resolutions anyway, 4k and beyond.
As I said before, it depends on what you're talking about when you speak of a 'downgrade'. Maybe the maximum obtainable fidelity that will make it into the final product is the same that it has always been. Perhaps in that sense there is no downgrade. But the decline in visual quality from earlier to later footage is there for all to see, and leads one to speculate.
That's not stopped some people from denying any such decline, or stating the opposite, though. Only reference to demonstrably objective differences in side-by-side comparisons that are equivalent (cinematic vs. cinematic, gameplay vs. gameplay, uncompressed vs uncompressed) calling attention with arrows and boxes to every disabled effect and referring to it by name and why the footage shows that said effect is turned off and why it looks worse off for it would resolve such dispute. And maybe not even then.
Noone has gone to such effort and I'm not sure if they even should. People who are able to see an upgrade are lucky SOB's as far as I am concerned, good for them.
All the sharpening examples look horrendous except at postage stamp resolutions. Once you up the detail it brings out the detail of the sharpening in all its heavy-handed glory. Heck, I can achieve this effect by ramping up sharpening on my television settings with the remote. It looks every bit as cheap and nasty as it is.
Not really, it could be just ticking a marketing box to say 'hey, we support 4k'. Any decently coded pc game will support arbitrary resolutions anyway, 4k and beyond.
As I said before, it depends on what you're talking about when you speak of a 'downgrade'. Maybe the maximum obtainable fidelity that will make it into the final product is the same that it has always been. Perhaps in that sense there is no downgrade. But the decline in visual quality from earlier to later footage is there for all to see, and leads one to speculate.
That's not stopped some people from denying any such decline, or stating the opposite, though. Only reference to demonstrably objective differences in side-by-side comparisons that are equivalent (cinematic vs. cinematic, gameplay vs. gameplay, uncompressed vs uncompressed) calling attention with arrows and boxes to every disabled effect and referring to it by name and why the footage shows that said effect is turned off and why it looks worse off for it would resolve such dispute. And maybe not even then.
Noone has gone to such effort and I'm not sure if they even should. People who are able to see an upgrade are lucky SOB's as far as I am concerned, good for them.
Last edited:
So, we know that Witcher 3 at High looks like console version, and at Ultra there will be some small differences. (aka HBAO+ and fur)
Still, to be able to play the game set at console quality at 30 fps, you need a 770, a graphic card more powerful than console's GPU.
It seems to me that PC version is dumbed down because of consoles. Again.
Is it so difficult to set console version quality respectively to low/medium settings on PC version, and then scale up the latter?
Still, to be able to play the game set at console quality at 30 fps, you need a 770, a graphic card more powerful than console's GPU.
It seems to me that PC version is dumbed down because of consoles. Again.
Is it so difficult to set console version quality respectively to low/medium settings on PC version, and then scale up the latter?
The important question here is not "was there a downgrade?", the important question is "was there a downgrade on PC?"
Yep, HBAO+ and Hairworks. Those are the differences (HBAO+ is useless).
It is very little stuff. I expected more.
Uhh, No. AO is extremely useful, and HBAO+ is one of the best AO methods out there, and actually has a very reasonable performance cost.
Also this is Nvidia's site, they are only going to list what the game has in terms of Nvidia support. They won't actually say whether there's also bumps on Ultra to Draw Distance, LOD, Tessellation, other post processing effects etc.
That's not factual.
First of all, Marcin Momot did answer 3 relevant questions regarding this master. Let's acknowledge his contribution. Additionally, and more recently, TheEvilChris, the North American Community manager, was also kind enough to share his deep thoughts on the downgrade talk. Let's also acknowledge - and lament - that fact. So they have by no means kept absolutely quiet. Maybe their answers and comment weren't to your liking. They exist nonetheless.
I wouldn't get your hopes too high. Damien said footage on ultra: only after release. And I'm sure you're already read this:
Preparing the ground for not showing it before release?
How are you doing Bass? Great, I hope.
Let's review the facts: Regarding footage on ultra ahead of release , Marcin said:
Damien said what he said. EvilChris said what he said. It seems to me REDS' stance has evolved or, more accurately, clarified and at the very least that encourages some latitude when looking at Marcin's previous answer. Because, I'm so very sorry, but nobody, nobody, has ever come up with a reasonable explanation, a legitimate reason as to why REDs would be justified in not showing footage on ultra ahead of release. If somebody has a decent explanation - other than the completely non credible attempts made so far - let him come forward.
And should I take Marcin's words as Gospel? Is that the only possible reaction you would equate with «caring»?I love the man, but he declared a trio of passable screenshots «great». And here's the thing: this goes both ways. You can't keep mentioning there's still a couple of months to improve things without honestly also acknowledging that things can also deteriorate further and render Marcin's answers to the aforementioned questions outdated, much in the same way his reply to the footage on ultra suggestion appears to now to have been rendered outdated. Caution, my friend, some caution when evaluating this sort of statements is advised.
You want to know what I think about the complaining?
There have been some hot-tempered heads here and there advocating for the downgrade. But torrential complaining, now that has come from people complaining about the so-called complainers. Surely, it's a 3 or 4 fold disparity. That's where I've sensed hostility and negativity at their peak.
I don't quite agree.
In the past, praise for the TW3 has actually been more enthusiastic over there than here. Check their community thread on TW3.
Me neither.
Downgrades usually lead to poorer LoD, shorter Draw distance, lower res textures, simpler geometry, cancelled FX, etc. In my opinion, neither sharpening not gritty art direction pertain to the topic at hand.
Last edited:
Only things this has over console version is HBAO+, 4k, and DSR. Sli too but that only increases fps not the actual look of the game.
HairWorks and GPU Acclerated PhysX too. Nvidia site will obviously only list what THEY are providing, not what CDPR are doing for the game on PC.
From Nvidia GeForce website - Yes
From this "Nvidia" Presentation - No (most of this - not rly nvidia features, its just The Witcher 3 Red Engine 2013 build advantages, which most likely not will be in the final game (considering that the developers themselves indirectly admitted graphic Downgrade: Meanwhile, the quality of the lightning and adding light in the trailer remains debatable. We’ve made a mistake which was the fact that some shots were rendered in dark and greyish colors. To put it simply, that was the option picked by the engine. I think that there will be places that will look jaw-dropping, and no one will claim that they differ from what was seen in the trailer. Unfortunately, there will also be fragments, where the game looks worse. It’s the same with GTA – when the wind picks up and it gets grey, especially in the forest, the graphics seem certainly worse than in the neon-filled and lively city
link).
They're targeting* PC high settings for consoles. After the preview event multiple people confirmed that they've spotted the difference between the PC(that was on high) and the console version of the game. Draw distance,foliage quality,reflection on the armor wasn't the same.
PC setup with 750ti can match up and can offer similar results as PS4 when it comes to performance and fidelity.
As for the downgrade I won't critique before I see the final build but I think that the game will achieve and it will be close to the SoD trailer fidelity(I hope) and IMO it was the best representation of the game even though I really like that sharpening filter from the older build but even if it isn't available in vanilla a simple SweetFx can fix that.
thanks. would i be considered naiv if i expect the game to look like it does Here on Pc Ultra?
after all, thats on the front page of the game..
If you expect to see Sword of Destiny graphics as PC Ultra Preset - well, i cant answer for this surely (i rly expect to see it too).
But, if you expect to see 2013 graphic (Debut 2013 gameplay\VGX trailer) - I am hundred percent sure - this will not happen.
That part of the trailer where Geralt walking trhough the village...well that's the most Amazing trailer of TW3 so far...a step over VGX...finger crossed to replicate it with ultra or uber..
- Status