- Status
So we know the cinematics on the PS4 and Xbox1 don't use a similar setting or variance? Just asking in case I missed in on this long thread.
Well one thing you shouldn't mix up is this cutscene lighting and the E3 lighting, they're definitely not the same. The old footage had way more shaders and the lighting was better than what we see now, many of the comparison images floating around are comparing cutscene segments to old gameplay videos or trailers.
I think they were developing the PC version and had plans to port it downwards but that didn't work and they realized this in 2014, delayed the game, and downgraded our version for inexplicable reasons. Some things probably had to be dropped because they didn't have time to develop it fully but I dunno about things like textures or simple shaders like lens flare or water which were surely fully functional. I'm still bothered they haven't addressed it properly, the article were they talked about the 2013 thing was just avoiding the real issue.
It seems that consoles do use the cutsene lighting also (the same way as PC version does) as there are reports that consoles have a hard time rendering cutscenes.
P.S. You're from NC, cheers! I've lived 8 months in Outerbanks. NC is a beautiful state.
That's what scares me the most - if they haven't fully admitted the downgrade and why it might be an indication of their future intentions (or lack thereof) about bringing back graphical features.
Last edited:
We love Charlotte, NC and have been here for 11 years. We have been to the Outerbanks many times.
Yes buddy. The Witcher 3 has not become what we would have expected. This is disappointing indeed.
@vesemas228 its not 100% unplayable, you can play, but the view distance is very short compared to normal settings, once you get past the first " wow effect " it get irritating, also the skybox is broken , the blue is washed out, and i have no idea what can happen in other zone/settings or quest or whatever, i only tested this in novigrad, the day/cycle even broke at some point
and yeah the taverne music from world of warcraft is amazing, i used too to go there and just stand there listening to the musicohh the good old days before they butchered the game to oblivion
Would it actually help you if we did some testing with this and tell you the results?
Edit: We need to get this information out to the community somehow so modders can work on it.
Last edited:
i already explained what i did two time in previous pages, use the search fonction
---------- Updated at 08:07 AM ----------
If its your video and you find how to do that with the game file, maybe you can create to topic to explain how to, and let the community work on that. Instead of just releasing a teasing video. It would certainly give faster result for the benefit of everyone ^^
( and dont worry i'am sure everyone is not going to forget who found the "setting"
Imo, it would be far more interesting than just keeping that for yourself, and make everyone wait that, you, hypothetically, one day, share the info / succeed to correctly setup everything. ( or wait that someone else find the setting(s), and share it )
But, funny how it look like watch dogs and thoses guys just cutoff somes parameter when they was there from the begning for the PC version.....
no
Last edited:
Will play around with some of the settings maybe I can find something that helps.
Again, the "washed out" you talk about in the shots of before are reflections of the light from surrounding objects to the ambient. This happens in real life. If you cannot notice it that means little as there are many many things people don't notice in their real normal life. You could probably put a pink elephant in the sky and people in the morning would not notice it.
The "fog" in the video is another thing and it's not related. Two completely different concepts.
---------- Updated at 08:36 AM ----------
Good lightning, I like it. A shame it is buggy right now, but, imo, it is not so bad already. The ground shadows/reflections are astounding while inside Novigrad.
Shouldnt the same effect be achieveable by applying ambientlighting through reshade?
No, it is not the same, neither remotely. Reshade is an injector, it will never achieve the same quality as using the engine renderer or a specific renderer as ENB. The so called "ambient lightning" in Reshade simply works on bright levels, similar to how bloom works. Every pixel brighter than a certain point reflects "light" around ("light" being a semi-bloom applied around that object). Just use the "ambient lightning" in reshade in the places of the previous shots and you will see the difference in the two.
Exactly. You cannot do 'real' lighting calculations via shading, from pixel(color) shaders alone. It gets tiring listening to people claiming their doing "lighting" effects via these injectors. I don't mean to burst bubbles, or sound like an ass, but it's getting old.
Pseudo-jargon speak, if anyone's interested;
If you tried to load an actual lighting shader in one of those injectors, you'd simply get a (0, 0, 0, 0) coord framebuffer (a black screen). Because those injectors don't have access to any of the game's projection space transformation matrices. (Model, View, & Projection). Which are required for any sort of real lighting.
Saying that, you can "manipulate" the look / color / intensity of the game's existing lighting with pixel shaders.
Not to mention, natively done, locally by the engine's own renderer is always better than sliced in externally. When possible, obv.
Crap, that turned into a rant - but I'm posting it anyway, because it didn't bloody type all that for nothing lol.
Why blame the developers? They don't have much say in what happens with a game. Publishers are the ones in charge of a game these days. There have been plenty of games where publishers handed devs the equivalent of a rubber band, a paperclip and broken pencil then they're told "make a triple A title out of this" if it were up to devs they would try to make a master piece with every project they work on. They don't want their names to be associated with a bad game, but sometimes it's not up to them because they are given a their budget, a rough idea of the game and a deadline.
And honestly, I think they accomplished their goal. The only reason the bar was set so high was thanks to the mainstream, which didn't give Witcher the spotlight it has now. The graphics are fine. The bushes look like bushes, the trees look like trees and the landscapes look nice. Do we really need graphics to be so highly detailed we could see an ant taking a dump? The video game industry thrives off innovation. Better graphics are not innovative, graphics do not make a game. This reminds me of Star Wars... George Lucas said "Special effects are just a tool, a means of telling a story. People have a tendency to confuse them as an end to themselves. A Special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing." (Too bad he didn't follow his own advice with the prequels). That can easily be said for graphics as well.
Honestly if you had to pick between better gameplay, more content and overall a better experience OR really nice graphics but the rest is just filler what would you choose? Because just look at Final Fantasy 13. There's a game that focused nearly all their time on the visual performance and that game turned out to be a completely boring, bland, repetitive RPG. Sure the game looked amazing but in order to enjoy the visual aspect you have to want to play it. Yet Final Fantasy 7 all those years ago with the most hilarious blocky models and seriously deformed arms, is so much more beloved and highly regarded than even the most fanciest of FF games we have today.
Last edited:
Don't confuse the cinematic lighting with the cinematic profile -- the profile is clearly designed to maximise visuals and performance, hence the reduced draw distance. CDPR could very easily add this lighting back to the game, and do a far better job than us hacking around with the cinematic profile. If they in anyway love their game, they will add this back for PC users rather than let us try fit a square peg into a round hole using the cinematic profile in the main game.
It's not buggy, it's just designed for cutscenes, where it works perfectly. Square peg round hole. Again, CDPR could add this lighting to the main game with whatever performance hit this brings and let PC users decide for themselves how good they want their game to look and how well it runs.
And from this perspective, yes CDPR does deserve all the 'bad words' as you put it. They flat out said there was no downgrade, that the previously demonstrated footage was not tenable. This is patently false, revealed more so now thanks to your discovery. There is one, and only one, path CDPR can redeem themselves now: add this back in the game for PC users. If they don't do this, for me personally, I won't ever be purchasing their games again, not Cyperpunk or anything that comes after.
Whether console parity, or development timeframes and budget, CDPR fucked up. Vote with your wallets. It is, in the end, the only feedback companies listen to.
Originally Posted by web-head91
for those who want to increase draw distance and get rid of the annoying fog, this is for you (thanks to @MUPPETA):
(check the links)
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/attac...5&d=1433323724
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/attac...6&d=1433323768
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/attac...7&d=1433323835
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/attac...8&d=1433323866
and for those who want to mess around with particles ( thanks to @GHOSTMD ):
I'm with you. Either it doesn't work or we're doing it wrong.
A good piece every gamer should read
From Forbes:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...looks-great-but-you-still-shouldnt-pre-order/
A pertinent paragraph:
"For consumers, the perks can be nice. But the dynamic this sets up between consumer and industry is toxic. Hype, rather than quality, drive sales before a game is even released."
Sound familiar?
I know the die-hard fans may take issue with this -- and I am one of them (I bought two collectors edition of Witcher 2, I loved Witcher 1 so much) -- but the problems that even CDPR suffered here with Witcher 3 is a closed loop between developers and consumers, and will only stop when consumers stop throwing money at unreleased products. In doing so you hold developers accountable to release a good product without misleading marketing. If, instead, you keep throwing money at over-hyped marketing you will get more of the same.
I still have faith CDPR will come good... for now. When this level of graphics is restored to the PC version (more here), which isn't even 'E3' graphics but merely a greatly improved form that's already in the engine, some trust will be restored.
EDIT: Ok, so this was moved from General to the graphics thread. I made it a separate post because it was about the Forbes piece with its salient point about pre-ordering.
From Forbes:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...looks-great-but-you-still-shouldnt-pre-order/
A pertinent paragraph:
"For consumers, the perks can be nice. But the dynamic this sets up between consumer and industry is toxic. Hype, rather than quality, drive sales before a game is even released."
Sound familiar?
I know the die-hard fans may take issue with this -- and I am one of them (I bought two collectors edition of Witcher 2, I loved Witcher 1 so much) -- but the problems that even CDPR suffered here with Witcher 3 is a closed loop between developers and consumers, and will only stop when consumers stop throwing money at unreleased products. In doing so you hold developers accountable to release a good product without misleading marketing. If, instead, you keep throwing money at over-hyped marketing you will get more of the same.
I still have faith CDPR will come good... for now. When this level of graphics is restored to the PC version (more here), which isn't even 'E3' graphics but merely a greatly improved form that's already in the engine, some trust will be restored.
EDIT: Ok, so this was moved from General to the graphics thread. I made it a separate post because it was about the Forbes piece with its salient point about pre-ordering.
Last edited:
Thanks to both of you for taking the time to explain.
A fake is still better then no effect at all though, at least in my opinion.
- Status