Pretty sure like he said before it was running on just a 680.
Last edited:
- Status
Agreed. That title is reserved for Gabe Newell alone.
Considering Steam is a competitor to GOG, I think I might have just committed apostasy.
At the Hands on Event it was PC on 1080p and on "High" you can read that in multiple Hands on Preview Articles around the Web.
Thats a point thats giving me hope too. Every single Hands on Reporter said it looks gorgeus. and that was just a month ago. so basically the finished version. Maybe the new Video shows the most ugliest region of the Map. who knows. This map is huge not every small corner is going to be heaven.
Things are constantly changing in a game during development. Saying that the graphic fidelity is going to remain on the same level as was shown in previous trailers doesn't mean every aspect is going to remain identical. I have never expected as much from any game I've purchased since I've played/tested way too many games while they were in an alpha/beta/prototype state. Some games are almost unrecognizable from what they started out as compared to what they end up like.
Marcin and Damien saying two different things in regard to whether or not they show ultra footage does not mean that CDPR is trying to lie or deceive their fans. Things change. Plans change. Again, this is completely normal and I don't consider it to be a big deal one way or another if they decide to show ultra footage pre-release. They are in no way obligated to do so.
The VGX version? I highly,highly would doubt that.
I think this point is a bit moot at this point considering they would have to delay the game a 3rd time in order to make that happen. What do you think the likely hood of that happening is? Even if we and scream and tear our hair out in protest? It'd pretty much take a huge consumer backlash (much larger than just one thread on the forums) to make that happen IMO.
And, of course, it's also possible these changes were made out of artistic direction. If that's the case than we're asking them to change a subjective element of their game. That would be nonsensical because, unlike them, we aren't able to see the whole game a make a decision about what subjective style is most appropriate.
Last edited:
To people who say that CDPR has LIED to them in order to sell them the game:
Your argument is self defeating for two reasons.
1. You have not purchased the game. There is no game at the moment, and there will be no game until May 19th. You have pre-ordered or in other words pre-purchased a game that is in development, and that means it can and it WILL change until the day that it is released. There is a reason it is called pre-order, and there is a reason you can cancel your pre-order.
2. You would not be here arguing that you were lied to and cheated If CDPR was in fact lying to you, because you would not have a clue that the game was "downgraded". Based on your own words, you can see from the new media that the game is "downgraded"! What this means is that CDPR is in fact showing you the real "downgraded" version of the game, and CDPR is encouraging you to cancel your pre-order if you do not like the new "downgraded" version of the game. If CDPR kept showing you media with the quality of the not "downgraded" version before release and released a downgraded game, then you could say that they lied to you and cheated you.
Conclusion:
1+2= cancel your pre-order and wait for the game to get released. At that point you can read reviews and watch walkthroughs before purchase, and CDPR cannot downgrade the game at that point (For an ungodly reason They may downgrade the game via patches, so to stay on the safe side do not download them!).
If you do not cancel your pre-order based on your own argument, then your logic has been "downgraded".
Your argument is self defeating for two reasons.
1. You have not purchased the game. There is no game at the moment, and there will be no game until May 19th. You have pre-ordered or in other words pre-purchased a game that is in development, and that means it can and it WILL change until the day that it is released. There is a reason it is called pre-order, and there is a reason you can cancel your pre-order.
2. You would not be here arguing that you were lied to and cheated If CDPR was in fact lying to you, because you would not have a clue that the game was "downgraded". Based on your own words, you can see from the new media that the game is "downgraded"! What this means is that CDPR is in fact showing you the real "downgraded" version of the game, and CDPR is encouraging you to cancel your pre-order if you do not like the new "downgraded" version of the game. If CDPR kept showing you media with the quality of the not "downgraded" version before release and released a downgraded game, then you could say that they lied to you and cheated you.
Conclusion:
1+2= cancel your pre-order and wait for the game to get released. At that point you can read reviews and watch walkthroughs before purchase, and CDPR cannot downgrade the game at that point (For an ungodly reason They may downgrade the game via patches, so to stay on the safe side do not download them!).
If you do not cancel your pre-order based on your own argument, then your logic has been "downgraded".
Maybe, maybe not seeing as the game was clearly able to run at a higher fidelity then it is right now. Their reasons for downgrading the graphics are anyone's guess.
You do however bring up a fair argument, the development of the game has been clearly troubled given that they've had to delay it twice by about 8 months in total.
I truly believe CDPR should not have given exact release dates for the delays but vague ones instead. Uncharted 4 was delayed today, and Naughty Dog just stated that the game was delayed to Spring of 2016. They have left a flexible window for themselves, but CDPR have cornered themselves with exact dates two times now. CDPR could have said we delay the game to summer of 2015, and that way they would not have to rush and interestingly they would have generated less backlash in my opinion.
Can someone explain this?
VS
The difference is so enormous it doesn't even look like it was rendered on the same engine. Draw distance on 2nd picture is laughable. WTF are these textures??? PC on High?? More like the game being played on a toaster
The downgrade is UNDENIABLE.
VS
The difference is so enormous it doesn't even look like it was rendered on the same engine. Draw distance on 2nd picture is laughable. WTF are these textures??? PC on High?? More like the game being played on a toaster
The downgrade is UNDENIABLE.
Last edited:
People need stop defending the game with the old build would only run in a Triple Sli Titan x Machine
. Crysis 3 was unplayable at ultra for most of the people on the day of realese . But guess what . There where many many user who buy new graphics card only to reach that level of detail . Hell there was multiple users who run the game at 30fp just to see the amazing crytek engine . And that game works .
why ? becouse was designed for pc gamers in mind . You dont have to be rich to get high settings on new games . 270x amd crossfire or 960 / 970 would make your machine a powerfull one . if in these day the game is impossible to run at ultra ; is okey . Pc gamers will test their machine for years to come with witcher 3 .
Dont defend this new engine stating the old one was more powerfull and demanding that any machine in the world . Please we need to keep this thread with good arguments and not simple attack or defend something with out any proof
. Crysis 3 was unplayable at ultra for most of the people on the day of realese . But guess what . There where many many user who buy new graphics card only to reach that level of detail . Hell there was multiple users who run the game at 30fp just to see the amazing crytek engine . And that game works .
why ? becouse was designed for pc gamers in mind . You dont have to be rich to get high settings on new games . 270x amd crossfire or 960 / 970 would make your machine a powerfull one . if in these day the game is impossible to run at ultra ; is okey . Pc gamers will test their machine for years to come with witcher 3 .
Dont defend this new engine stating the old one was more powerfull and demanding that any machine in the world . Please we need to keep this thread with good arguments and not simple attack or defend something with out any proof
Last edited:
It's anyone's guess what rigs the gameplay footage in the early previews were running on. They have been through 56 iterations of the graphics build (if that makes sense.) It's possible some of those builds weren't optimal for actually playing the game on; meaning that they got the game running on them, but once they plugged in all the systems running in the background it fell apart.
Yes, you're comparing an uncompressed screenshot to a highly compressed video. Not a very good comparison.Can someone explain this?
VS
The difference is so enormous it doesn't even look like it was rendered on the same engine. Draw distance on 2nd picture is laughable. WTF are these textures??? PC on High??
Where are the volumetric clouds? The HDR? The superb lighting contrast in the sky?
No offense, but there are more differences than youtube compression could ever accomplish. Heck, I'll repost the same picture uncompressed just to prove you wrong
You can search a 9k screenshot for the last gameplay on Pax and the difference with the city Screen will be more huge .
Haha, you haven't seen anything yet. I the past i played many of my games at less than 20fps, and for entire weeks at that (some RPGs). Why? Because i cannot immerse myself in a fake looking world - at least the lighting has to look realistic.
I mean it: if TW3 would allow maxing out the graphics so that it looks like the VGX/SOD trailers, i would play at 20fps the entire 100-150 hours of game time. I'll take it slow. :victory:
So, now you can see how important graphics are to me.
Then they shouldn't have shown gameplay footage that was beyond the capability of any chance of running if that's the actual case, if what you're saying is true then I seriously have to call into question the overall competence of CDPRs PR and Marketing departments.
Graphics are the hot button discussion right now because we have something to talk about due to the footage shown but there's still other issues that have been raise and which CDPR have done a terrible job at answering: It took them over two years to give us an answer about imports that yes we will have them for certain even on consoles.
Then there's still the concerns over the overall story and the politics. These concerns aren't discussed because we have little to go on but they still exist given how often CDPR is asked this in QA sessions. The only thing CDPR has done in all these cases, including graphics, is to promise people that they won't fuck any of these things up but that's not a proper way of dealing with these issues given that a lot of people are not convinced I'd even argue they've done a horrid job on this front.
Graphics are the hot button discussion right now because we have something to talk about due to the footage shown but there's still other issues that have been raise and which CDPR have done a terrible job at answering: It took them over two years to give us an answer about imports that yes we will have them for certain even on consoles.
Then there's still the concerns over the overall story and the politics. These concerns aren't discussed because we have little to go on but they still exist given how often CDPR is asked this in QA sessions. The only thing CDPR has done in all these cases, including graphics, is to promise people that they won't fuck any of these things up but that's not a proper way of dealing with these issues given that a lot of people are not convinced I'd even argue they've done a horrid job on this front.
Last edited:
- Status