Anyone started The Witcher 3 recently with an old GPU?

+
Having looked at my order history on GOG, I saw that the first two games in the series were my first purchases on this site. I still haven't played these games though (the only GOG/PC game that I've played has been GWENT, since late last year).

Anyway, I was thinking if I started playing the first two games and then I got to the final game, I wouldn't be able to play it at 1440p with my 980 SLI setup.

I had a quick look online about this yesterday and it sounded like it might be possible to play The Witcher 3 with my setup at 1440p, pretty close to 60fps.

So, has the game been updated enough to make this possible? One thread mentioned disabling hair effects or something to make the game playable but I've not played any PC games, really and maybe the comment about close to 60fps included having hair effects on. I don't know.
 
With an AMD Ryzen 7 3700X a GTX 970 and 16 ram I run it Ultra 50 fps. If that is of any help to you.
 
With an AMD Ryzen 7 3700X a GTX 970 and 16 ram I run it Ultra 50 fps. If that is of any help to you.

Thanks for that. My CPU is as old as my GPU but that really shouldn't be a bottleneck, should it? It's a 6 core Intel. Hopefully not. Being a reasonably old game, I don't have to worry about things like RT slowing down the fps. If the CPU isn't an issue, it sounds like I could get 60fps at least, which is what PC gamers have as the gold standard, or at least used to. If I don't upgrade, I should still be able to play it at 1440p in ultra mode at 60fps then. Hopefully.

You play the games in order? I remember a review of the first game on a tv show not being positive but the hosts loved the sequels more and more.

Once I quit GWENT and have played XCOM 2, maybe I should start playing the Witcher games. They were my first ever purchases on GOG. Or anywhere for a PC title. That was 2015, I think!
 
Thanks for that. My CPU is as old as my GPU but that really shouldn't be a bottleneck, should it? It's a 6 core Intel. Hopefully not. Being a reasonably old game, I don't have to worry about things like RT slowing down the fps. If the CPU isn't an issue, it sounds like I could get 60fps at least, which is what PC gamers have as the gold standard, or at least used to. If I don't upgrade, I should still be able to play it at 1440p in ultra mode at 60fps then. Hopefully.

You play the games in order? I remember a review of the first game on a tv show not being positive but the hosts loved the sequels more and more.

Once I quit GWENT and have played XCOM 2, maybe I should start playing the Witcher games. They were my first ever purchases on GOG. Or anywhere for a PC title. That was 2015, I think!
I played them in order. Loved them but each one for different reasons. Forgot to mentions that I play it Ultra 50 fps with Hairworks on including Geralt (no mod for disabling it for him). As long as your GPU still have something in the guts you can get good results I think.
 
I use a 1060 gtx 6gb with 32 ram, and on high I get like 55-60 fps,

That doesn't give me as much hope as the other reply, since my 980 beats a 970 and I've got SLI. However, your reply might give hope to others.
Post automatically merged:

I played them in order. Loved them but each one for different reasons. Forgot to mentions that I play it Ultra 50 fps with Hairworks on including Geralt (no mod for disabling it for him). As long as your GPU still have something in the guts you can get good results I think.

Well, playing the game has come into calculations for me recently. When I quit GWENT, my plan is to play XCOM 2, vanilla, then, if I'm still keen, the DLC for that. I stopped playing Red Dead Redemption when my controller broke and my new controller sucked. Maybe that's fixed now, but I haven't played that game for, what is it, a couple of years now? Maybe that will end up being just another game that I didn't finish, like Half Life 2.

So, after XCOM 2, Witcher perhaps. I haven't checked to see what the consensus is for that game. I know that people say that Mass Effect wasn't that good and that it really hits it stride with ME2. I didn't mind Mass Effect, so hopefully it will be same for the Witcher. Hopefully I won't hate the combat. I saw a bit of a video for maybe Witcher 3, for a mod, where all the combat is replaced by a GWENT matchup. Not sure that I like the thought of that any better than bad combat mechanics!
 
Last edited:
I would not say W3 has bad combat. It has a simple one that is not bad nor great but good enought to go through the story. It's an open world RPG. Combat is not really the main focus. As long as it's interesting enough I am good with it. Glad I could be of help though. Enjoy Xcom 2 and hopefully The Witcher !
 
I would not say W3 has bad combat. It has a simple one that is not bad nor great but good enought to go through the story. It's an open world RPG. Combat is not really the main focus. As long as it's interesting enough I am good with it. Glad I could be of help though. Enjoy Xcom 2 and hopefully The Witcher !

I forgot to ask for you previous reply: do the sequels play like they follow from the last game that you play? Or does it play pretty much the same way, regardless of what you did in the previous game?

I've played the Mass Effect series and the spiel for that was that your choices matter. Maybe that got thrown out the window due to the dev's decision to make the sequel available to PlayStation owners but not the first one, initially. So maybe that sequel couldn't really do justice to the spiel, in order to not go over the heads of the PS gamers. Then again, I think that the criticism of the series, especially the original ending for the final game, was that it didn't really take into account your personal history with the character, as promised by the spiel.

I was thinking of buying Dragon's Age. The GOG reviews here says that that game is great but the sequels anything but. I've paid for all three Witcher games, hopefully it isn't like that! I did have a glance at the Wiki entry for the first game. It got a very solid score. Then again, I tend to be harsher scorer of games than gaming mags etc.

With XCOM 2, I'm not sure that that is the type of game that you enjoy. I was reading somewhere that the game forces you to move quickly. The first game was horribly punishing. By the sounds of it, they've just made be tougher! I wonder if I should play that in Easy mode first time around. God, I hope that it has an Easy mode!
 
From gameplay perspective: TW1 and TW2 play very differently when it comes to combat. You will find a lot more similarities between 2 and 3 in that regard but the exploration is very different from 2 and 1 that are pretty similar when it comes to quest structures or navigation in the game space to complete said quest. All games also feel very different when you move your character though with different camera in each games. The scale of areas is also different in each game. Overall the trilogy has very different game but never to a point you feel each game is outside the trilogy. This variety between titles to me is great strengh of the trilogy.

From story perspective: your choices are poorly reflected in sequels except a few details. This explained by the lots of story possibilities each game has though. Especially W2 that has 2 entire chapters that are vastly (when I say VASTLY I mean it) different depending on some decisions. Therefore the replayabilty is great. W2 has so many endings that they had to find ways to not take in to considerations yours choices. Or else they could not have done W3.

Don't worry, all Witcher games are great although a lot find the combat in W1 not good(I love it though very unique). It's not like DA or only Origins is good.

And The Witcher has all kind of difficulties. From very easy to a lot harder.
 
All games also feel very different when you move your character though with different camera in each games. The scale of areas is also different in each game.

That reminds me of the Splinter Cell games. One of the sequels had a bigger-on-screen Sam Fisher. Maybe he moved differently too.

From story perspective: your choices are poorly reflected in sequels except a few details. This explained by the lots of story possibilities each game has though. Especially W2 that has 2 entire chapters that are vastly (when I say VASTLY I mean it) different depending on some decisions. Therefore the replayabilty is great. W2 has so many endings that they had to find ways to not take in to considerations yours choices. Or else they could not have done W3.

Yeah, it no doubt takes a lot of work to have a really meaningful representation of your choices in the previous games play out in the sequel. You don't have women Geralt made love to in previous games react to him in a way which reflects that in the sequels? I'm assuming that there is some choice in the game as to who your romantic interests are. It wouldn't seem to be too big an ask to have some scenes play out which follow on from the previous game, in a romantic sense.

Maybe in the next few years studios might take that extra step and do that. I saw that the Mass Effect finale had a lot of gamers angry about not getting that "your choices matter" pay-off in the game. The devs eventually changed the last scene in the game to try and satisfy that. That's probably not what I had in mind on that front, but I suppose it might have satisfied some.

And The Witcher has all kind of difficulties. From very easy to a lot harder.

I normally play on Normal but I have completed games on subsequent playthroughs on the hardest difficulty setting. Got some platinums on the way, too. I really hated the gunplay in the first Uncharted game. It sucked. Not sure what difficulty I played that on but it might have benefited by being on Easy.

replayabilty is great

How many hours did you put in on your first playthrough for the Witcher games?

I'm not sure that I would be that hardcore. It's rare for me to revisit games. I replayed the first two Bioshock games. I probably played Metal Gear Solid GOP more than I otherwise would have in order to try and get The Big Boss rank on that, which I did. Some time after, it got trophies, maybe overlapping entirely with the old ranking system. I couldn't be bothered playing it again for those trophies. I liked the old system.

P.S. how do you handle DLC with The Witcher series? Do you finish the game and then play them? That doesn't mess with continuity?
 
Last edited:
You have both option. They are directly integrated within the continuity but you can also choose to launch them from the main menu.

First Witcher game :70 hours I think.

Witcher 2: 40

Witcher 3 80-100
 
I just finished Witcher 3 Wild Hunt campaign on my pretty old PC. I'm sitting on i5 2500K and Gforce 10603GB. I used default settings the game chosen for me for 1440p (50% high, 50% medium). Then I disabled "Nvidia Hairworks" ("Predefined Nvidia Hairworks" is still on High, no idea what it does) as you cant really see any detail in normal roam mode and the details when sitting at the barber are barely impressive. Then I did what I always do, turned down "Shadows" to medium. Game runs smooth and the only issue I had was higher CPU temp (jumping to 60celsius very quickly), but fixed it with putting new thermal paste, as the previous on was there since the beginning. Which was over 9 years now :)

PS. Now when I think about it, (after 190hours played) I should have overclock GPU and turn up the details, but the game is so engaging that it never even occured to me :p
 
You have both option. They are directly integrated within the continuity but you can also choose to launch them from the main menu.

First Witcher game :70 hours I think.

Witcher 2: 40

Witcher 3 80-100

Hmm. I downloaded the complete set of XCOM 2 then uninstalled everything apart from the vanilla game. If I'd known that you could choose to disable the expansions etc. I wouldn't have bothered.

I started playing XCOM 2 and that thing I hated from XCOM:EU happened again...they game beat me. And I was playing on easy. It's bad game design how that happens. If it happens again, I might just start playing The Witcher!

Any explanation for the differences in hours played for the Witcher series? The 2nd title seems to have gotten little love from you! Also guessing that maybe the long hours on the 3rd might be due to the expansions?
 
It's just time it took to complete each games first time. 2 is shorter because more of your choices matters and there are more ending. But I played each game 3 or 4 times so it's not really about quality. Just W2 is quicker to complete.
 
It's just time it took to complete each games first time. 2 is shorter because more of your choices matters and there are more ending. But I played each game 3 or 4 times so it's not really about quality. Just W2 is quicker to complete.

I might start playing The Witcher series sooner than anticipated, as I'm finding XCOM 2 ridiculous in how it doesn't help you stave off the ending that you get for not succeeding in the essential stuff. At least with the first game you could complete the game with the help of making multiple saves and the non-combat stuff wasn't as hard to come to get to grips with as the sequel. The game is bad on that front. Might write a review of it here. I'm expecting to get the short ending on my second play, not sure if I'll try a third time. Even though my games might be relatively short, it's taking up way too much and it sucks getting that ending. Probably won't be bothered keeping on playing.

I have noticed that XCOM 2 stutters for the loading scenes. Maybe that's because my GTX 980 has only 4 MB RAM. But I do have 2 in SLI. Was reading something online about how with the crazy GPU prices now, the GTX 970 is the best value GPU at the moment.

Anyway, if I give up on XCOM 2, I might go for Thronebreaker next, assuming that it is relatively short. Then The Witcher...or maybe Civilization III which I've just bought. Not played any of those before. Apparently they can be hard too. Hmm.
 
1619546518836.png

*hold my beer* this badly PC can magically run The Witcher 3, but the resolution and quality all need to be on low to make it fluid on 27-30fps. Not the best, but still looks beautiful.
 
Nothing is older than my good old Ryzen 5 2400g Vega 11. Legends tell it was already there when the magic cataclysm happened.
It was there for me when I sold my Radeon 5700 because AMD decided to not implement raytracing to the 5000 series so I had to step up to the 6000 series.

And still Witcher 3 is playable with it, with this good old Vega 11. This was not always the case but now thanks to AMD FSR2 Extreme Performance implementation it now is.
 
GTX 1050 4gb , 16gb ram, i5-8300h

Runs at 30-40fps on High settings with DX11( 2-3 fps less on DX12)

Running with FSR2 at Quality, Dynamic Res disable, Chromatic, Vignette, Blurs are disabled.
 
Top Bottom