The Witcher 3 - Visuals

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
This grass has become that bad and blurry based on those screenshots it may as well be green filled, grass shaped silhouettes.
 
This grass has become that bad and blurry based on those screenshots it may as well be green filled, grass shaped silhouettes.

that's almost what it looks like lol. It's extremely chunky looking. Hell, fallout new vegas and fallout 3 grass and shrubs looked better than this. Those games are old by todays standards.
 
Yup, the direct links work, but after asking around, I think they were originally on this page:
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/ar...witcher-3-wild-hunt-nvidia-geforce-gtx-bundle
and then removed.

To be honest, my guess is that someone in Nvidia's PR fucked up and included year-old images, only to get screamed at afterwards.

I'm not going to disagree with everyone who things those two shots are crap. But I'd prefer to judge based on content known to be current. I think that the comparison of those walls actually has "Old" and "New" the wrong way round.

(Incidentally, there's no real need for anyone to click on those image links. They are, as stated, the two images that everyone's been talking about)

Just chiming in about those nvidia screens. I think it was established on NeoGaf(can't remember which thread exactly) that those nvidia shots had all manner of graphical features, and post-processing disabled. To highlight specific nvidia technologies. They realized the shitstorm they then created, and promptly removed them.
 
the monster looks awesome. In generally speaking IMO always when it comes to games. Still pictures look way worse than when u actually see it in motion on your PC/console
 
that's almost what it looks like lol. It's extremely chunky looking. Hell, fallout new vegas and fallout 3 grass and shrubs looked better than this. Those games are old by todays standards.

There are games that were released in 2004 which have better foliage than this. The original Far Cry for example.
 
In my opinion its like that: the whole game looks still great (especially the NPCs and monsters nobody says one sentence about) but the gras is ugly
 
the monster looks awesome. In generally speaking IMO always when it comes to games. Still pictures look way worse than when u actually see it in motion on your PC/console

Not true, since its a direct frame from the game itself. In certain cases screenshots can actually look better since there is no anti-aliasing movement issues when taking a screenshot from a game.
 
Just chiming in about those nvidia screens. I think it was established on NeoGaf(can't remember which thread exactly) that those nvidia shots had all manner of graphical features, and post-processing disabled. To highlight specific nvidia technologies. They realized the shitstorm they then created, and promptly removed them.

Well I kind of liked that wall. They've manage to repair that crack so the wall looks much sturdier.
 
No offence to CDPR but at this point, GTA 5 (a two year old game) with very high grass (yes, very high not ultra) settings on PC beat the entire foliage of Witcher 3.


 
Just chiming in about those nvidia screens. I think it was established on NeoGaf(can't remember which thread exactly) that those nvidia shots had all manner of graphical features, and post-processing disabled. To highlight specific nvidia technologies. They realized the shitstorm they then created, and promptly removed them.

And they couldn't have simply said this here? I call BS on NeoGaf.
 
hell... on only "high" gta 5 foliage grass is way superior than this let alone anything else. There's 2 settings ABOVE high in gta 5 for grass.

What are they doing to this game.....?
 
The Witcher 1 foliage is on par if not better than what we are seeing here.


Maybe you should try comparing this with a field of tall grass in similar weather in W3 to try making a point? You are cherry picking some shots that look good, there are awesome looking location in W3 as well.

Sorry for the off topic, but seeing how someone screams 'donwgrade' and the others chime in, it kind of reminds me of this:

---------- Updated at 06:17 PM ----------

No offence to CDPR but at this point, GTA 5 (a two year old game) with very high grass (yes, very high not ultra) settings on PC beat the entire foliage of Witcher 3.

Maybe you should also compare the game budgets as well. ;)
 
Maybe you should also compare the game budgets as well. ;)

why compare budgets when they already clearly had better looking grass in the game ... ??

It went from something that looked amazing to something that looks so bad that you could compare it to amateur modders work.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you should try comparing this with a field of tall grass in similar weather in W3 to try making a point? You are cherry picking some shots that look good, there are awesome looking location in W3 as well.

Stop making excuses. It's plainly obvious to anyone not in denial that the foliage has taken a HUGE hit in quality all thanks to the consoles.

Maybe you should also compare the game budgets as well. ;)
They already had the high quality assets created, it would COST MORE to create new lower quality assets so your argument is invalid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom