For those PC gamers who are craving for Min vs Max comparison

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
The textures are clearly higher definition, which is noticeable. Youtube's compression or the video capture method used could be make things a bit less obvious?

I have a feeling once PC users start editing the INI things will be quite different. I must say though. Doesn't PC have a bunch of settings that PS4 isn't capable of like HBAO, tessilaization, ect. They don't see to be there in that comparison video. Just seems a bit odd. Maybe someone from CDPR can confirm?
 

Attachments

  • 8KhKlHq[1].jpg
    8KhKlHq[1].jpg
    443.1 KB · Views: 44
Last edited:
@phaino: When you have 3 platforms to work on in the cours of 3 years and you have limited budget this is what happens..from the PC only build we have seen at E3 2013 to a single build that works on all 3 platforms (the architecture of the consoles are very similar to a PC and it helped in this case).

I'm sorry that they wanted to cater to more than just the PC crowd and try to appeal to the mainstream..this was their decision..and I respect it. This will bring more sales to them and make Cyberpunk 2077 even better and future games (hopefully more Witcher ones after CP 2077). by having a bigger budget.

Regarding the machines..no..you can't play on a low end machine if the game requires high end machines to even run at the acceptable framerate (no PC only gamer would be "fine" with 30fps let's be honest here).

With all it';s said and done..we have to wait until release to see exactly how much we can tweak those ini files in terms of foliage, shadow textures and everything else. I also noticed that HBAO+ wasn't enabled in ANY of these videos..and that increases the image quality GREATLY.


Then don't show the "ingame footage" trailers. Just don't do it. Don't show something you can't or won't produce. It's like me going around telling cancer patients that I have the cure for cancer, but in reality it's just something to temporarily relieve it. (yes an extreme example) you guys are missing the issue. the game was published and advertised as more.

thats all people are saying. And in no way, do I believe it was any sort of downgrade. I feel it was a misrepresentation in 2013 and august 2014 of the real game they were going to deliver not 9 months later. And this is why I'm upset. But like i've said.. .I've canceled my pre-order. I do not agree with the all systems parity. Never will. I'll let you guys talk about the min max settings, I'll just keep going in circles.
 
Last edited:
While I can agree that the current screenshots and gameplay footage come nowhere close to 2013 stuff(vgx etc) and alot of stuff seems to have been cut(foward lit particles anyone?), I think the game still looks great. At this point I think ppl will have to manage their expectations a little. Some of the stuff that was released recently actually came very close to the 35min gameplay(which was still beautiful as hell imo) and I am personally very happy about that.

The thing is though that we all knew the game was gonna be released on consoles too. They started working on the game long before the new consoles were even out. I think here lies the initial problem with peoples expectations and ~maybe~ those of CDPR too. These folks at CDPR strike me as very cool guys. They seem very honest about their feelings for the game and for pc gaming in general. I believe them when they say that they want to create the best experience for everyone because they themselves are tired of current business practices. The fact they release 16 free dlc and some big expansions(havent seen expansions of that scale for any rpg happen since skyrim and - before skyrim - gothic 2) only reinforces my faith in them. But heres the real problem that probably occured during development. Like already stated, they started working on the game before the consoles came out and had to go simply off of their known specs. So they created this absolutely stunning vgx stuff, having a vision for the game and all that only to then find out that it is no longer possible. Why not? Because consoles. Now, one could argue they couldve made the PC version prettier anyways. And while I wish they did, it is simply reasonable. Those times are largely over. Not because CDPR are evil but because times have changed.

10 years ago the development of a game(especially AAA titles) was just a teeny tiny fraction of the cost it is today. People could actually afford to develop different versions for different platforms, as the revenue you would make from selling those games would largely outweigh their development costs. Today, when looking at AAA titles, games can be more expensive to make than movies and usually take longer to develop than 10 years ago. So what does this mean? To put it simply, every company only has x amount of money for any given title before they go bankrupt. Now, yes, this amount can be expanded by taking loans etc but not by any large enough amount and I think CDPR have exhausted their limits by postponing the games launch twice. Developing 2 or 3 fundamentally different versions of the game for all possible platforms wouldve simply been too expensive and so they had to decide on whether to "downgrade" the game and try to give us the best experience with what consoles would allow, plus some nvidia eyecandy effects or to scrap the console versions entirely in favour of a vgx-esque pc version. I think it is pretty clear why they opted for option nr1. And be assured, they didnt do it to offend every pc gamer on earth and because they hate us and they want to backstab us and evil console corperations have bought them off and other nonsense like this but simply to a: deliver their piece of hard work and their dream to as many people as possible and b:(because do not forget. as cool as those guys are, they remain a business and a business has to make money somehow) they just had to get their development costs back in.

But this is not to say that it will stay like this forever. Looking at the history of TW1 and TW2, both games ended up having an enhanced edition. In both cases this EE enhanced the already existing graphics quite a bit and once again pushed possible limits. And in the case of TW1 they even did a new voiceover for (some or all I do not know) languages. So I would say that yes, while I understand your anger and disappointment and yes, quite frankly I am a bit sad too that vgx will probably remain a dream - blaming CDPR for it is not fair. Those guys are giving it their all here. Try to make it up to them by trusting them a bit more. I am sure that with their history there are lots of great (and possibly free) goodies to come for us pc gamers and who knows, maybe we will get a nice surprise when the EE comes around the corner.

Until then, dont direct your hatred towards CDPR but rather at the way the industry is currently shaped(and no, consoles alone arent the big bad villain here either), making it impossible to develop many different versions for different platforms if you are working on an AAA title.

Oh, I forgot. One more thing for all those who are saying "errrrmahhgerrrd CDPR tricked us". Consider this. Yes, they said the game wasnt downgraded. But if they really wanted to hide it, would they really have lifted the embargo so early? Would they have allowed streamers and youtubers to go to warszaw and play the game and record their experience? Would they have showed us all those tiny questlines on the official youtube channel? Most probably not. I think what you are looking at here are a bunch of developers who are disappointed they didnt manage to fullfill their own goals 100% and who are a bit reluctant on admitting it. Who could blame them for it - this project has been their baby and their vision for several years. Turns out you get quite disappointed when you have high hopes for something and you are very invested in it and then it doesnt work. Probably happened to everyone here in the past at least once or twice.

Saying they tricked us or tried to scam us is nowhere close to legit. They gave us everything we needed to make our own judgements. Starting from livestreaming the game, showing us gameplay footage repeatedly over the months and years, to allowing other ppl to play, stream and record their games and giving us hundreds of screenshots. Everyone who hasnt been dead for the last year should know the state of the game by now. Everyone who feels disappointed or had their hopes and dreams crushed is still able to get a refund - if they preordered it at all and dont just complain for the hell of it. Trying to "trick someone" looks a little bit different to me, tbh.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I'm waiting for 2 things to happen:

1. PC folks with high end graphics being mad that the game runs well also on mid-tier PCs. I think we're quite near this point. And it's going to be a glorious sight.

2. People realising that how the game looks does not equal how the game looks+plays+feels.

Remember when the game looked like this http://giant.gfycat.com/UnrealisticComplexGrunion.gif?
 
2) Can the scenes in the VGX/SoD trailers be replicated in their graphical fidelity integrity on high end PCs when the game finally launches?

http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/32644-Obvious-Downgrade?p=1525774&viewfull=1#post1525774


.............yes..........................

That was Marcin Momot oficial response, and now come this guy and tell us this (You can't downgrade something that doesn't exist... the game wasn't finished back then) which emagine exact same sentence said art developer on you tube video about downgrade. At least we know there are not so good with lies.
 
That's just a factor you have to remove though, iGPUs aren't for playing games. So just move to the most common dGPUs, and the most common dGPUs are GTX760 and 660. That's what most PCs run. Guess what it's close in performance to

The Dreamcast?

Jokes aside I know it's the current gen consoles. I thought Intel said they wanted their integrated graphics to be an option for gaming. I could be wrong on that however.
 
That wasn't a game back then. It was Work In Progress. The actual game will be released on May 19th.

In nothing but respect, why was it released as in game footage? not even 'in game engine' ... and what about e3 demo? Now, you can argue that the game is still not relelased to PCs... but from what we have seen, you can't be ok with the fact that some of us are a bit discouraged and worried that we are just getting a 1:1 port?
 
ok I just want to say several things.

I would be ok with platform parity if the game looked good on all platforms. But it doesn't. I've seen some pretty terrible screens from the PS4 version and from the PC version Ultra.That it's gonna look the same as the PS4 version scares me. This game is terribly inconcistnet. See for yourself. It only look good half the time. Worst offender at time 9:30, 11:35

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv0gJ8DpUd0

Something is very wrong with the color palete and lightning making the game terribly inconsistent.

My advice is since the game is gonna get weeks of DLC, two expansions, and probably a GOTY retail eddition, CDPR should work on improving the lightning if possible on all platforms.
 
now all this is just my opinion on this nothing else:
"You can't downgrade something that doesn't exist..." true but what that was is false advertisement ... i wouldnt have a big problem with it if CDPR would be honestly explain that it wont look like that and explain it why (i know it will hurt the sales but the trust level will also drop if you dont do it in my opinion).. and when I saw the whole there whole "wont be a downgrade" i didnt see the the parts what you just said (why didnt they explain that instead of just saying no downgrade? i dont know) and because of that many people thought that it really will look like the gameplay trailer (35min) or even better .
also Remember watch dogs? people didnt defend ubisoft back then... neither colonial marines (but that was a much bigger thing)

and i have to say i hate the new shader but thats subjective
 
Last edited:
I, personally and whole heartily enjoyed the witcher 1, despite its graphics. i did not mind its combat system either. i enjoyed the game so much, i became a fan of the series and eargly yet patiently waited for the witcher 3.

Dragon age: Origins, Mass Effect etc didn't have GREAT graphics when they came out. they were great enough to still enjoy the game and their stories that made me fall in love and wanting more after i finished them. simple times.


That being said.. gameplay and story>>>>graphics.
 
now all this is just my opinion on this nothing else:
"You can't downgrade something that doesn't exist..." true but what that was is false advertisement ... i wouldnt have a big problem with it if CDPR would be honestly explain it that it wont look like that and explain it why (i know it will hurt the sales but the trust level will also drop if you dont do it in my opinion).. and when I saw the whole there whole "wont be a downgrade" i didnt see the the parts what you just said (why didnt they explain that instead of just saying no downgrade? i dont know) and because of that many people thought that it really will look like the gameplay trailer (35min) or even better .
also Remember watch dogs? people didnt defend ubisoft back then... neither colonial marines (but that was a much bigger thing)

To me, Watch Dogs, Colonial Marines - this is the same. And I hope companies do not think that this is acceptable.
 
I feel sorry for all the pc gamers, I really don't care because i game on console. But man if i was a pc gamer... I would be extremely disappointed that the only differences are in the hair physics and the finer details, Other than that it's basically the same looking.

:/ I probably am gonna get banned for saying that, But that only proves that you Block criticism instead of owning up to it. I wonder what the internet is gonna have to say on the 19th. Gopher is probably gonna be disappointed as well.

I can't wait to see what totalbiscuit says.
 
and what about e3 demo?
What's so hugely different from E3 2014 that's not an artistic change(colours/saturation/contrast)? Please don't say that tower, I think I'll be hugely disappointed if the last 12 pages have been over that.

Artistic changes are NOT "downgrades". Well they may be in someone's head at which point they will need to realize if they don't like it then they shouldn't buy it. It's an entertainment product under development, I don't see anybody complaining about any of the 'upgrades' now do I?

"Omg, why did CDPR add soft shadows?"
"Omg why did CDPR add soft shadows to plants, I don't like upgrades!"
"Omg why did CDPR change reduce the saturation many people complained about earlier? DOWNGRADE!!!"
"Omg why did CDPR change their shader system from the older to physically based?"
 
Last edited:
The Dreamcast?

Jokes aside I know it's the current gen consoles. I thought Intel said they wanted their integrated graphics to be an option for gaming. I could be wrong on that however.

Intel says alot of stuff. Like trying to make you believe that an i7 is totally awesome for gaming whereas in reality, an i5 will perform just as good until dx12 hits most games. Yet, they have been claiming the i7 stuff for years already and guess what. The i7 is 200-300 bucks more expensive than the i5. Coincidence? I would always take everything that a company like intel, amd, nvidia etc say with a grain of salt. Nvidia maxwell was supposed to be the holy grail and now look at us. Sure, they are some 10% better than the last generation of cards and they use a bit less power but they are by far not what has been "promised" to us over the years.

Intel can say whatever they want. Onboard chips can only perform so well. Look at the back of a current gen graphics card. Doesnt matter of nvidia or amd. Do you think all of that can fit on an onboard chip? Cause I sure as hell dont. So unless Intel have found some magic hardware shrinking device that nobody knows about, I would largely ignore those claims if I were you. ^^
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom