Witcher 3 Graphics

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
Can we not discuss the 'reason' this happened anymore , it is what is it , what has happened has happened. The mods have given their two cents , we don't need any more theories about this .

Agreed. Now our effort should be concentrated on encouraging the devs and modders to continue improving the PC graphic. Let's make our demand heard, but let's not attack them.
 
look all im trying to pass out is that the game shouldnt be deemed bad nad hated because its doesnt look as good as it did when it was unveiled !
 
All that proves is, that the PC version wasn't important to them, which is very likely considering the sales on PC compared to XBone and PS4.

The "article" is actually a video and in German: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04gfC78tcaY

What people often mix up is the difference between being able to to something on PC and actually having the time and money to pull it of. The more details you put into the game, the more it costs you in an exponential curve. So just pushing the details of the game slightly for the PC versions produces costs that you don't make up, it is a waste of money, pure and simple.
Well, yeah. I failed to get that point across I guess, the PC version doesn't matter so much. They're just looking for parity for whatever reason. But we were talking, I think, about the downgrade that happened. If you read the past several pages you'll see I was saying that things were removed from the game even though they were already developed. Small things like textures for instance got downgraded for bizarre reasons. I don't speak German but thanks for the link. I saw that video the other day, I wish I could understand it :(.

What would anyone make of statements like this where CDPR confirmed SoD trailer-level graphic fidelity? I don't deny that the game looks pretty decent, but it is also indisputable that it looks nowhere even near the level of SoD. Was it a genuine misconception of our graphic expectations, or was it a deliberate lie, or a bit of both?

For me, I am willing to believe that it really was a miscommunication or misunderstanding and nothing more, if the game is eventually patched to upgrade its graphics till it looks close to SoD. Otherwise I'm afraid I will have to come to a very different and difficult conclusion.
I think it was to get us off their backs. I remember how much I calmed down when I read that.



Wanna know the REAL reason why this happens?

Budget.

It's that simple. Making 1 build for all platforms obviously is less costly and less time-consuming than making a unique optimized build for each platform.

I'm actually a game developer myself. I haven't worked on any triple-A titles yet but I've done some stuff within the Dutch game industry. I also study game art & development at a Dutch university as we speak. I don't like to throw this fact around because it makes it seem like I'm trying to speak from a position of authority, which I don't want, but it's true and I can tell from experience that making a proper build of your game isn't easy, even when you're only developing for 1 platform.

Making a separate build optimized for each platform is taxing and time-consuming. With the older generation of consoles the devs had no choice though. The architecture of the PS3 and Xbox360 were so different from the PC that developers had no choice but to make seperate builds for each platform. The easiest way to develop a game during the previous generation was to develop for consoles first and then port it over to the PC. The huge benefit of the current generation consoles is that they're pretty similar to PCs with mid-ranged hardware, allowing devs to basically make 1 build and throw them on all platforms, saving them a lot of time and money. Obviously that approach will indeed hamper the potential of the PC version.

Yet CDPR already went out of their way to add some unique features to the PC version to make it look better than the console versions. Could they have done more? Perhaps. But judging by the fact that a lot of PC rigs already have trouble running this game, I'm not sure if it would be worth it for CDPR. People like you and me with monster gaming PCs with GTX 970s (in SLI) or GTX 980s are in the vast minority. I'm sure we don't even make up 5% of the entire consumer basis.

All of this makes sense but removing existing assets(textures, models, shaders) that are already developed is a waste of money rather than a way to save it. They spent money creating them and didn't put them to good use, it maybe cost them even more money on account of angry nerds who didn't buy the game because such things were removed. Does that make sense?
 
look all im trying to pass out is that the game shouldnt be deemed bad nad hated because its doesnt look as good as it did when it was unveiled !

I'll be back on this forum , got to go sleep , meantime I will repeat what I said ages ago since you clearly haven't read any pages of this thread .

WE LOVE THE GAME. WE THINK THE GAME LOOKS FINE , THE GAME COULD DEFINITELY BENEFIT IF IT LOOKED BETTER.

---------- Updated at 06:57 PM ----------

Well, yeah. I failed to get that point across I guess, the PC version doesn't matter so much. They're just looking for parity for whatever reason. But we were talking, I think, about the downgrade that happened. If you read the past several pages you'll see I was saying that things were removed from the game even though they were already developed. Small things like textures for instance got downgraded for bizarre reasons. I don't speak German but thanks for the link. I saw that video the other day, I wish I could understand it :(.


I think it was to get us off their backs. I remember how much I calmed down when I read that.





All of this makes sense but removing existing assets(textures, models, shaders) that are already developed is a waste of money rather than a way to save it. They spent money creating them and didn't put them to good use, it maybe cost them even more money on account of angry nerds who didn't buy the game because such things were removed. Does that make sense?

Witcherman I please do not carry on this discussion , the mods have made it pretty clear . We all have a vague idea of whats going on and the best we can possibly do is come up with theories that cannot be completely substantiated by fact rather deductions.
 
I don't like people posting examples of occasional bad textures. I remember them all and when I play I'll know its there and it will jump out like a game spoiling gremlin. Same goes for the grass and that bloody novigrad wall.
My immersed state could have washed over them.
Those atmospherics I keep going on about. They change the whole feel accross the game and instead of playing a character in a vast land it feels like pushing a superhero through a job list with dialogue you don't skip.
One is enthrawling entertainment in a lovingly detailed world and the other is a masterpiece.
 
I don't like people posting examples of occasional bad textures. I remember them all and when I play I'll know its there and it will jump out like a game spoiling gremlin. Same goes for the grass and that bloody novigrad wall.
My immersed state could have washed over them.
Those atmospherics I keep going on about. They change the whole feel accross the game and instead of playing a character in a vast land it feels like pushing a superhero through a job list with dialogue you don't skip.
One is enthrawling entertainment in a lovingly detailed world and the other is a masterpiece.

One major thing that bothers me is how the camera looked in the 35 minute demo. It shook when you hit stuff and the angle it was at was really immersive, the combat looked really heavy compared to what we have now. When the redkit comes out that's one thing I hope we can enhance.
 
Nvidia admitted they screwed up Kepler GPU Drivers , people who used old drivers on their Kepler GPUs are doing better in terms of performance.

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-working-driver-updates-address-kepler-issues-witcher-3/

Do you seriously think a 960 outperforming the 780Ti makes sense when the 780Ti can compete with the 980 on most games. Please do some research before commenting on the topic.

It is Optional , http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/download-the-crysis-2-directx-11-ultra-upgrade

ABOVE is the Optional Upgrade for Crysis 2 , a game that was released to have Console parity on Dx9 , OPTIONAL update above and Improves the game if you have the hardware .

Yeah I already knew this. The point was about the little guys - and your belief I'm ignorant doesn't invalidate the argument. Though I have to admit I thought you were ignorant so didn't bother to elaborate.:p The kepler gpus 'error' or whatever you want to call it, only enforces my point that people like to ignore those with lower powered systems. The attitude that if you're not on the cutting edge you're falling.

If the 780 TI was the current gen - the error would never have happened.

But no your Crysis point was a good one. An optional upgrade for Witcher 3 would be the better way of doing it - but again it raises the question of why CDPR should do this?
 
All of this makes sense but removing existing assets(textures, models, shaders) that are already developed is a waste of money rather than a way to save it. They spent money creating them and didn't put them to good use, it maybe cost them even more money on account of angry nerds who didn't buy the game because such things were removed. Does that make sense?

True, but then there is also the fact that even the best rigs out there can barely run this game at 60 FPS on maxed-out settings as it is. Do you really think your rig would have been capable of handling those extra goodies that the E3 2013 trailers and demos showed without some significant FPS drops?

You have to keep in mind that a demo is just that, a demo. It might have looked good and ran smooth for that limited demo, but maybe not for the entire game? The demo didn't show the biggest and most detailed areas of the game. Maybe along the line of the development CDPR realized they couldn't keep up the graphics fidelity they had for all areas without running into some serious performance issues? Perhaps that's why they downgraded?

I wouldn't give up hope though. CDPR is the kind of team that listens to their fans and want to deliver the best experience possible. It's quite likely they'll keep updating this game's graphics and performance over the upcoming months/years and maybe at some point they'll try to bring back some of the extra graphical goodies that E3 2013 showed us, either through an update, an Enhanced Edition or a mod.
 
@Witcherman.

I appreciate you rewording that, thanks.

Might be the most popular thread but for the most part it's the same people commenting. Plenty of strangers chiming in, but it's a small group making the vast majority of comments.

From what I've seen there is a lot of game engine related effects that are missing that would indeed have a large effect on performance.

It would be illogical for them to be removed. You are absolutely right. So they did it because they hate us? Because it was a laugh? Or perhaps they had a valid reason that nobody some aren't willing to accept...
 
The game looks brilliant in the wilds where there is a ton of foliage and trees.

But when I walk into Novigrad.. ehh.

Thats when the flatness of the wall textures and just about everything else really starts to hurt.
 
All that proves is, that the PC version wasn't important to them, which is very likely considering the sales on PC compared to XBone and PS4.

The "article" is actually a video and in German: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04gfC78tcaY

What people often mix up is the difference between being able to to something on PC and actually having the time and money to pull it of. The more details you put into the game, the more it costs you in an exponential curve. So just pushing the details of the game slightly for the PC versions produces costs that you don't make up, it is a waste of money, pure and simple.

One of the first False Informations from CDPR was, that they will make the PC Version (as best as possible) and downgrade/port it to Consoles. Just another Fairytale tho.
 
Really think it's time a Witcher contracted this monster thread and laid it to rest!
Round robin rinse and Repeat!
Call it quits. Move on
 
I dunno, i'm really content with the games graphics. Never fully understood all the fuss about the whole downgrade thingy, cause i've never bothered to check any detailed comparisons or to come back to some old tailers. But, i've heard some rumours and was a bit afraid of what i could see. Eventually, I'm pleased to how the game runs and looks on my sort of economic rig ( 1-st gen i7 & 290-no x). Never below 60 with everything except shadows & some vignette distance maxed & bold ofc ;]. Sure the game looks so much better with only VSR turned on but then it deeps to around 40 so i'm sticking now to perfectly fluid 60 with SFX on top and leaving better for next playthroughs. Damn, in a year so much can happen, we can get like, tressfx in options, i can throw another card or upgrade everything, some texture mods/patches and i'll get completely new experience playing through that third or x time. For now, i am content ;].
 
The amount of facts you have wrong in your video , sigh . Do some research before discussing the topic.
i understand you opinion and i do admite i rushed this video quite a bit since i had personal matters to attend . But i am curious of what facts i got wrong , i mean i know for sure a 2 way sli of gtx 980 cant max the game and ive seen countless reports of the skyrim map being 20% of this games map , i am pretty sure that ubisoft has a larger budget than cd prject red , the only thing i said i can see being wrong is saying that cd project red spent million on this game , but i did say that as expression . Plz let me know what i got wrong because i always apreciate feedback

---------- Updated at 09:19 PM ----------

I'll be back on this forum , got to go sleep , meantime I will repeat what I said ages ago since you clearly haven't read any pages of this thread .

WE LOVE THE GAME. WE THINK THE GAME LOOKS FINE , THE GAME COULD DEFINITELY BENEFIT IF IT LOOKED BETTER.

---------- Updated at 06:57 PM ----------



Witcherman I please do not carry on this discussion , the mods have made it pretty clear . We all have a vague idea of whats going on and the best we can possibly do is come up with theories that cannot be completely substantiated by fact rather deductions.
sry this was a response to comment about my video on the forum so maybe it was a bit out of context , and yeah i know everyone here loves the game it is true that the game could look better , but obviously cd project red is working on that with patches so i beleive that in the near future it will look much better , plus its an rpg and rpgs dont really need the best grafics , as far as im concerned bugs are much more important to fix than the downgrade i can live with a graphical downgrade in a game i love but i cant live with bugs
 
True, but then there is also the fact that even the best rigs out there can barely run this game at 60 FPS on maxed-out settings as it is. Do you really think your rig would have been capable of handling those extra goodies that the E3 2013 trailers and demos showed without some significant FPS drops?

You have to keep in mind that a demo is just that, a demo. It might have looked good and ran smooth for that limited demo, but maybe not for the entire game? The demo didn't show the biggest and most detailed areas of the game. Maybe along the line of the development CDPR realized they couldn't keep up the graphics fidelity they had for all areas without running into some serious performance issues? Perhaps that's why they downgraded?

I wouldn't give up hope though. CDPR is the kind of team that listens to their fans and want to deliver the best experience possible. It's quite likely they'll keep updating this game's graphics and performance over the upcoming months/years and maybe at some point they'll try to bring back some of the extra graphical goodies that E3 2013 showed us, either through an update, an Enhanced Edition or a mod.
Brings me back to another point I made in a previous post -- most of the stuff that was downgraded has a negligible performance hit and are things that improve the visuals of every scene. Blood or lens effects for instance. The rest was playable in the most demanding areas of the game(the swamp and Novigrad) which are also arguably the biggest and most detailed areas of the game! It wasn't space age graphics that they removed, the spoofed up game was playable with a PC from a year ago.

@Witcherman.

I appreciate you rewording that, thanks.

Might be the most popular thread but for the most part it's the same people commenting. Plenty of strangers chiming in, but it's a small group making the vast majority of comments.

From what I've seen there is a lot of game engine related effects that are missing that would indeed have a large effect on performance.

It would be illogical for them to be removed. You are absolutely right. So they did it because they hate us? Because it was a laugh? Or perhaps they had a valid reason that nobody some aren't willing to accept...

I wouldn't know for sure but I don't believe that for a second, I mean forums all over the net have talked about it in detail. I don't think it's correct to say only a vocal minority cared about it but even if it was that doesn't mean their voice is worthless. Gotta remember that for every vocal person there are hundreds or thousands of people who may not post at all. The views on the thread speak just as loudly as the posts.

And why do you guys keep stating the effects have a large slash on performance? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PNuFKOcu7w here is xbox footage of the game before it was downgraded, the frame rate is pretty much identical to how it is now despite looking significantly better. Even if it was(it probably was) PC footage the frame rate is not bad at all compared to what we have now.

As I said earlier it was for parity.
 
Brings me back to another point I made in a previous post -- most of the stuff that was downgraded has a negligible performance hit and are things that improve the visuals of every scene. Blood or lens effects for instance. The rest was playable in the most demanding areas of the game(the swamp and Novigrad) which are also arguably the biggest and most detailed areas of the game! It wasn't space age graphics that they removed, the spoofed up game was playable with a PC from a year ago.

You say that as if you're certain about it, but how can you be so certain that a PC from a year ago could run it smoothly if PCs from now with GTX 970s and GTX 980s can barely run the game on maxed-out graphics as it currently is?

The demo didn't show the entire swamp, it also didn't show the entire city. We only saw small portions of both, and from what I understand the system they used to run those demos had the latest GTX Titans in dual-SLI! Almost nobody has such a rig! Your single GTX 980 or my GTX 970 couldn't possibly run those E3 demos.
 
Last edited:
Sorry bud but allot of people have sli systems that blow away the old titans. Graphics should not be held back because of consoles and or the thought that people dont have good systems. Dont punish us who have awesome systems with the catering to those with weak systems. That is why their is low and medium settings. This whole new philosophy of every body should be equal is retarded.
 
Sorry bud but allot of people have sli systems that blow away the old titans. Graphics should not be held back because of consoles and or the thought that people dont have good systems. Dont punish us who have awesome systems with the catering to those with weak systems. That is why their is low and medium settings. This whole new philosophy of every body should be equal is retarded.

I wasn't talking about the old titans, I was taking about the GTX Titan X, the best GPU on the market right now. The demos were ran on TWO of those Titan X badboys. Saying that a lot of people have SLI systems that blow away two Titan X cards in SLI is absolute nonsense.

In fact, saying a lot of people have SLI systems is nonsense, period. I think from all people who play videogames only 10% have the latest GPUs and an even lesser amount have two of those GPUs running in SLI.

The graphics aren't held back by consoles, not in this case. They are held back by the fact that 99% of all gamers don't have $2000,- SLI setups. Creating a game with graphics that 99% of all gamers wont be able to run for the next few years is complete nonsense. Which is probably the reason why CDPR downgraded the graphics of TW3.
 
Last edited:
That was xbox footage and 30fps average is playable. They didn't have to show all of the swamp or Novigrad, they showed a good chunk of both and those are the hardest to run areas of the game. And as people have pointed out to you already, graphics settings exist and it doesn't hurt to turn them down. I hope you understand now.
 
That was xbox footage and 30fps average is playable. They didn't have to show all of the swamp or Novigrad, they showed a good chunk of both and those are the hardest to run areas of the game. And as people have pointed out to you already, graphics settings exist and it doesn't hurt to turn them down. I hope you understand now.

The E3 demos weren't Xbox footage. Don't let PR talk fool you. Those demos were running on PCs with two GTX Titan X cards in SLI.

And I have pointed out to you already that it's nonsense to put time, effort and money into graphics that only 1% of your audience will be able to run.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom