Witcher 3 Graphics

[luc0s]

flat, 2D and fake??? show me a game with fully modeled individual grass leaves then il shut up....

Yes, flat, 2D and fake.

This, this is proper grass:

Even DAI had better grass than TW3. Hell, even TW2 had better grass than TW3.

It's not even about whether it's fully modeled or not, it's about how it's presented. Most of the grass in TW3 doesn't cast- or receive shadows and the shading is done in a weird way. The density of the grass is also rather low. All this makes it very apparent that they're flat, 2D planes.

 

[Black_Iris]

flat, 2D and fake??? show me a game with fully modeled individual grass leaves then il shut up....

You don't need to create "fully modeled individual grass" (whatever the hell that means, but let's interpret it with "tessellated grass") to have better looking grass than W3. Even Witcher 2 had better looking grass in many circumstances (the green grass in W3 is passable, but the yellow one, it's awful).

Anyway, do you want a couple of quick names that have much better grass than W3 (on a technical and artistic level)? Crysis, GTA V, even Far Cry 4 and for coming titles MGS that has 3 times better grass.

Not all grass in W3 sucks, but there are some assets that are really really bad, and in past footage there was none of those instances.

 

[Zat0ichi]

its 100% the fault of the uneducated consumer, if he/she is dissapointed with the games visuals.. if they only watched 1 trailer with 10 seconds of TRAILER footage that is marked (work in progress) and ignored the hundreds of hours of ACTUAL GAMEPLAY FOOTAGE, that was available before launch... its their own fault....

I disagree

Early on we were told the PC version was to be uber - a cut above console. CDPR have a history of delivering on their PC promises

35minute gameplay footage from PC is released. I pre-order right after watching it. Wow they have made a fking magnificent game and I trust them with storyline and gameplay I tell myself.
Official confirmation is released that is was gameplay on PC NOT A TRAILER.

Then hundreds of hours of CONSOLE footage is available before release and I;m thinking, fair enough there's some obvious power issues there but console owners will be more than happy with that.

I had NO PC footage to go on other than that 35 min video. I didn't want to believe they had had to make it fit on console at the expense of the PC versions fidelity. Even the footage that was labelled as PC i did not want to believe it was PC. I just thought it was trolling

But eventually it turned out to be true and I did cancel my pre-order after much agonising. (still haven't played it)

They have their reasons and greed is not one of them. Market forces and commerce yes, but not greed.

There is however a part of me that feels deliberately mislead (hiding their own embarrassment maybe) and it took a lot of my time and research to establish a most probable truth.
This could have been a graphical masterpiece, instead its just a good game.
Fallout look to have matched the bar set by witcher3. The hype was about the visuals in all pre release materials coupled with good writing. Without the promise of those visuals this games hype train would have gotten nowhere near as far.

 

[Maganus]

@luc0s - have been replaying crysis recently, and at least for me, even the grass in TW3 looks better, more realisitic. Wait till it load fully and take a look:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/k5bw1i.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/538/RrhLDu.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/TITCtD.jpg

Folliage in Withcer acutally CAN look pretty amazing and realistic. It looks better or worse, depending on shading, a particular place, time of the day etc.
And while I really like the graphics of Crysis 3, it seems much more artificial. Also note how fast it dissapears on the distance, even on highest settings.

 

[Zat0ichi]

Also people going on about the grass, seriously. I'm annoyed by the graphics and the grass is like a scratch compared to the knife in the heart that is the missing volumetrics or the needle under the finger nail that is missing terrain and model tessellation.

There was so much more important graphical stuff replaced that constant harping on about grass devalues the over all legitimate complaints about this game missing its full potential.

 

[Black_Iris]

@luc0s - have been replaying crysis recently, and at least for me, even the grass in TW3 looks better, more realisitic. Wait till it load fully and take a look:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/k5bw1i.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/538/RrhLDu.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/TITCtD.jpg

Folliage in Withcer acutally CAN look pretty amazing and realistic. It looks better or worse, depending on shading, a particular place, time of the day etc.
And while I really like the graphics of Crysis 3, it seems much more artificial. Also note how fast it dissapears on the distance, even on highest settings.

Sorry but where in those shots the "grass looks better than Crysis 3"? Have you ever seen Crysis 3 grass? It seems to me you really didn't because there's no possible way you can say something like that otherwise.

P.S: The sharpening in that preset is so high that it suppresses a little the cardboard effect of the grass, but it also has the side effect of making distant grass even worse (look for example at the grass near the windmill that it seems like a collage).

---------- Updated at 06:13 PM ----------

Also people going on about the grass, seriously. I'm annoyed by the graphics and the grass is like a scratch compared to the knife in the heart that is the missing volumetrics or the needle under the finger nail that is missing terrain and model tessellation.

There was so much more important graphical stuff replaced that constant harping on about grass devalues the over all legitimate complaints about this game missing its full potential.

Actually grass is one of the most downgraded aspect of W3 in comparison to previous shots and grass is VERY important (as practically all the scenarios have some of it). If CDPR only just increased the quality of the grass the image quality would improve already threefold in comparison to what we have now.

Lightning is the other important aspect that would change the quality dramatically with not much effort involved (as for example adding complicated effects or tessellation).

 

[erxv]

Yes, flat, 2D and fake.

This, this is proper grass:

Even DAI had better grass than TW3. Hell, even TW2 had better grass than TW3.

It's not even about whether it's fully modeled or not, it's about how it's presented. Most of the grass in TW3 doesn't cast- or receive shadows and the shading is done in a weird way. The density of the grass is also rather low. All this makes it very apparent that they're flat, 2D planes.

Crysis 3 is a linear game... not an open world game... that kind of grass is mostly in just 1 part of 1 level in the entire game.... and that part ran like ass

Anyway, do you want a couple of quick names that have much better grass than W3 (on a technical and artistic level)? Crysis, GTA V, even Far Cry 4 and for coming titles MGS that has 3 times better grass.

GTA 5 .... no, just no.. watch some videos dude... it doesnt look better... it looks good, but not better

Not all grass in W3 sucks, but there are some assets that are really really bad, and in past footage there was none of those instances.

yeah and that grass had a predetermined animation just like the grass in GTA 5... not dynamic.. looks terrible..

But eventually it turned out to be true and I did cancel my pre-order after much agonising. (still haven't played it)

so you are complaining about a game that you havent even played yourself nor seen without any form of quality loss on your own monitor..... cool....

Even the footage that was labelled as PC i did not want to believe it was PC. I just thought it was trolling

see..... uninformed consumer.... see something labelled as PC and dont want to believe it.... your own fault...

Even DAI had better grass than TW3.

thanks for confirming that you know absolutely nothing and arguing with you is basicly pointless

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/k5bw1i.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/538/RrhLDu.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/TITCtD.jpg

it looks great... i dont know why anyone would complain about that kind of quality

 

[Black_Iris]

Crysis 3 is a linear game... not an open world game... that kind of grass is mostly in just 1 part of 1 level in the entire game.... and that part ran like ass

Please, don't talk of things you clearly DON'T understand. Please, I beg you.

The things we are talking about have practically NO impact on the world being "open" or not. Moreover Cryengine is clearly built also to provide a full open sandbox world if the game is built for it.

GTA 5 .... no, just no.. watch some videos dude... it doesnt look better... it looks good, but not better

Listen, given your capability of understand what technically defines "grass looking good" in this instance, it doesn't surprise me that you cannot see how GTA V grass is much better. However that doesn't meant that it is not better, because it is, it just means that you don't know where to look at.

it looks great... i dont know why anyone would complain about that kind of quality

Proving the point.

You are clearly not able to judge what constitutes "good" grass in a game. Those shots have NOT good grass, both from an artistic and technical quality (ffs, distant grass looks cardboard given the mipmaps).

I understand you like the game and you feel the need to defend it at all costs, but please, at last have the humility of talking of subjects you have some knowledge about. It is not just a matter here of what you personally "like", there are technical and objective parameters to judge the thing.

The grass in W3 seems like a painting of an impressionist like Renoir, not real (as in real life) grass. Shadows are practically absent (they are present only if coming from a secondary source. it's not present in-between individual instances of the grass, and those shots, especially the second, demonstrate it clearly), the lightning is clearly fake (it is always lighten the grass from the same direction, no matter the side of the grass that should be really illuminated), the foliage is too blurred and lacks definition (to compensate in those shots there's a lot of sharpening, but that creates a lot of aliasing and accentuates the problematics of the light).

 

[Charcharo]

Crysis 3 is a linear game with some EXTREMELY serious flaws.
That grass is the best it has.

What Witcher 3 needed IMHO was something like STALKER's A-Life... but that aint as easy to market as graphics

 

[erxv]

a lovely condescending speech there..... too bad its completely bogus

Please, don't talk of things you clearly DON'T understand. Please, I beg you.

i understand game engines perfectly well, so YOU, please, dont talk about stuff you dont know...

The things we are talking about have practically NO impact on the world being "open" or not. Moreover Cryengine is clearly built also to provide a full open sandbox world if the game is built for it.

clearly you dont know anything about the topic.... could Ryse and Order 1886 have the same visual fidelity if they werent corridor games? the answer is no... not without years and years of extra manpower and money (rendering it impractical)

Listen, given your capability of understand what technically defines "grass looking good" in this instance, it doesn't surprise me that you cannot see this. However that doesn't meant that it is not better, because it is, it just means that you don't know what you are looking at.

(first pictures i found on google)
http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2015/features/gta-v-grass.jpg
http://cdn3.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Witcher-3-115.jpg
http://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Witcher-3-124.jpg
witcher 3 looks better

You are clearly not able to judge what constitutes "good" grass in a game. Those shots have NOT good grass, both from an artistic and technical quality (ffs, distant grass looks cardboard given the mipmaps).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE6QpR0HDzM&t=0m03s

at last have the humility of talking of subjects you have some knowledge about.

i have considerable knowledge in the subjects i talked about.... i wish you did...

I understand you like the game and you feel the need to defend it at all costs

yeah, i love the game, that being said, i was the one of the first to complain about the awful pc controls, the sometimes stiff movement, the weird clipping at times and so on.... im not blind, i see problems with the game, but graphics are not one of them.... for a 2015 game, the graphics look superb, complaining that one game doesnt have the best graphics in every single department is just idiotic.... this IS as a whole, the best looking open world game out right now....

 

[luc0s]

@luc0s - have been replaying crysis recently, and at least for me, even the grass in TW3 looks better, more realisitic. Wait till it load fully and take a look:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/k5bw1i.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/538/RrhLDu.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/TITCtD.jpg

Folliage in Withcer acutally CAN look pretty amazing and realistic. It looks better or worse, depending on shading, a particular place, time of the day etc.
And while I really like the graphics of Crysis 3, it seems much more artificial. Also note how fast it dissapears on the distance, even on highest settings.

Euhm, let's agree to disagree then... I think the grass in TW3 looks decent at best (even in your screenshots) and in some cases quite flat and horrible. The grass would have looked better if it was simply placed better and had a higher density.

Another thing that I find jarring regarding the grass in TW3 is the fact that many times the grass appears to be floating in the air (not properly placed on the ground) and somtimes clips horribly through other geometry such as rocks and walls. Again, this could be solved with better placement, but as it is now these little things make the grass in TW3 look quite ugly, fake and quite frankly unpolished.

The grass in Crysis 3 just looks miles and miles better. There really is no contest there. How anyone could think TW3's grass looks better than Crysis's 3 grass is beyond me.

---------- Updated at 07:44 PM ----------

I think another reason why the grass in TW3 looks so fake is because every piece of grass is basically a crop. A field of grass in TW3 is basically just a ton of grass crops placed next to each other. That's now how grass grows in real life and it really looks quite fake with the exception of the areas with higher grass density.

TW3 also doesn't really try to hide the fact that the grass crops are flat 2D planes. This could be easily solved by making sure that every single 2D crop always has at least one other 2D crop sticking through it at an angel.

 

[Smurfin]

A says game W looks better.
B says game X looks better.
C says game Y looks better.
D says game Z looks better.
A says B knows nothing about graphics.
B says A knows nothing about graphics.
C says D knows nothing about graphics
D says C knows nothing about graphics.

Mirror mirror on the wall who/which 's the fairest of them all........... :hmmm:

:detective:


I don't know how most games draw grass but I think this is pretty much how it's done, so basically comparing the grass is like comparing how the engine does it.
https://youtu.be/CAyc_mBkjXA?t=10m50s

 

[Roccogrb]

I bet most people here complaining about the graphics haven't even played the game.

 

[Charcharo]

Some of them maybe.

Important thing is... some people cant distinguish aesthetics from graphical fidelity.

Others simply center on ONE thing and dont see the bigger picture.

Meh. Standard "Teh Graphics" debate.

 

[krakuus]

Guys, seriously.

Check this honest video

I stopped at ~2:00, this turd is comparing full open world (Witcher 3) with one that consists of small instances (Witcher 2) and yet he says that Witcher 2 has better draw distance ;D Some people are fukn idiots...

 

[cleanupdisc]

Well when a console is released in 2013 and the year is 2015 common sense says that people who spend 1600 on a recent pc would have better graphics AND THEY SHOULD!!!! Just a couple points here folks. Are consoles holding pc gaming back? HELL NO. Are consoles holding gaming back in general? In a way yes because the technology does get worn out and new tech comes over time.... But then in a way no but thats another topic.

Consoles help pc gaming because without them do you think the Witcher 3 would have been possible? The answer is no. Why is the answer no? Because of money..... The developers wouldn't have made this game to the 3% of computer owners and 20% of the 3% that are interested in running this game at ultra max settings. THERE IS NO MONEY SO THE GAME HAS TO BE MADE WITH CONSOLES IN MIND. There isn't many people in this world that can run a game above what the Ps4 and Xbox one can do.

Should a powerful pc run it better than technology from 2013 YES THE ANSWER IS YES. But does that mean consoles are to be shunned and yelled at? NO!!!!!!!!!!!
I just bought this game for Xbox one and it is amazing. I here people talking about texture popup...... put oblivion in and then you can talk about textures popping up. Graphics aren't up to par? RESEARCH A NICE HDTV for yourself. I'm running on a plasma with deep black levels.

The game is amazing even on Xbox one. I'm serious just pop in a game like oblivion from 10 years ago and look at all the progress we made in this genre. It is awesome and to have a thread with 300 pages yelling about the differences in platforms that offer this wonderful game is stupid. Are we as gamers hindered by the machines from 2013 in a way yes but in a way no. SO BOTTOM LINE JUST ENJOY THE GAME!, on whatever platform you chose!!! Take a step back and be glad Sony and Microsoft are out there competing against each-other in the end it will only help excel gaming down the road............. Now let me get back on my horse I got a quest to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Septerra_Core]

for a 2015 game, the graphics look superb

That was the funniest part. These graphics are console ready, not pc ready. PC ready are the 2013 graphics, with all the NVIDIA gameworks enabled, that CDPR introduced for the Witcher 3. So for the shake of everything you have holy, please stop.

I don't know how most games draw grass but I think this is pretty much how it's done, so basically comparing the grass is like comparing how the engine does it.
https://youtu.be/CAyc_mBkjXA?t=10m50s

Before changing the foliage assets to be console tolerant, the foliage was even better than of Kingdom Come!!

 

[krakuus]

Well when a console is released in 2013 and the year is 2015 common sense says that people who spend 1600 on a recent pc would have better graphics AND THEY SHOULD!!!! Just a couple points here folks. Are consoles holding pc gaming back? HELL NO. Are consoles holding gaming back in general? In a way yes because the technology does get worn out and new tech comes over time.... But then in a way no but thats another topic.

Consoles help pc gaming because without them do you think the Witcher 3 would have been possible? The answer is no. Why is the answer no? Because of money..... The developers wouldn't have made this game to the 3% of computer owners and 20% of the 3% that are interested in running this game at ultra max settings. THERE IS NO MONEY SO THE GAME HAS TO BE MADE WITH CONSOLES IN MIND. There isn't many people in this world that can run a game above what the Ps4 and Xbox one can do.

Should a powerful pc run it better than technology from 2013 YES THE ANSWER IS YES. But does that mean consoles are to be shunned and yelled at? NO!!!!!!!!!!!
I just bought this game for Xbox one and it is amazing. I here people talking about texture popup...... put oblivion in and then you can talk about textures popping up. Graphics aren't up to par? RESEARCH A NICE HDTV for yourself. I'm running on a plasma with deep black levels.

The game is amazing even on Xbox one. I'm serious just pop in a game like oblivion from 10 years ago and look at all the progress we made in this genre. It is awesome and to have a thread with 300 pages yelling about the differences in platforms that offer this wonderful game is stupid. Are we as gamers hindered by the machines from 2013 in a way yes but in a way no. SO BOTTOM LINE JUST ENJOY THE GAME!, on whatever platform you chose!!! Take a step back and be glad Sony and Microsoft are out there competing against each-other in the end it will only help excel gaming down the road............. Now let me get back on my horse I got a quest to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If console consumers were not such "tech-retards" and they realise that in current generation the 400$ PC outpreforms consoles then Devs would't have to care about making games for 3 different systems and pay M$ and $ony licence fees.

In result we could have one common gaming platform but peasants will never understand that.

 

[CostinRaz]

If console consumers were not such "tech-retards" and they realise that in current generation the 400$ PC outpreforms consoles then Devs would't have to care about making games for 3 different systems and pay M$ and $ony licence fees.

We could have one common gaming platform but peasants will never understand that.

Don't blame consumers for what the developers did.

 

[cleanupdisc]

If console consumers were not such "tech-retards" and they realise that in current generation the 400$ PC outpreforms consoles then Devs would't have to care about making games for 3 different systems and pay M$ and $ony licence fees.

In the end we can have one common gaming platform but peasants will never understand that.

Tech Retards? Let me tell you something buddy boy. Why don't you open up a studio and create a game to the small percent of pc gaming that would like this game to take full advantage of there $500 latest graphics card. Then come back to me after you studio goes bankrupt because you are worried about licensing fees to microsoft and sony HAVE A GOOD DAY.