Graphic downgrade

[Sardukhar]

It wasn't a facetious or trolling question. The more I think of this subject, from a business perspective the only way really upper-upper end graphics make sense is as a PR investment. Most sites I see talking about W3 graphics, including the current crop of muddy video, think they are great, but then go onto the robust gameplay, huge world, adult writing, etc.

This doesn't exactly please me, as I've spent a lot of money on hardware capable of running things like Ubersampling, but from a business perspective, if one of my people came to me and suggested we spend serious money on something that we can net nearly as much without doing that, I'd look at them like they were crazy.

Mind you, I'm not in the software business, so perhaps it's different there.

Last night I told my mom I'll make her some great pasta. It turned out fine, but not quite it. Shit move on my behalf?

You did WHAT? You -bastard-. Obviously, I'm canceling my preorder. Your poor mother. Give her my condolences.

"turned out fine." Just...I don't even...

 

[JasonShepard]

Someone? Hell, I can provide links to statements of that sort:

http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/30456-Interviews-and-Articles-Part-2?p=1510663#post1510663
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/34000-The-Witcher-3-Wild-Hunt-PAX-East-2015-Official-Gameplay-Video?p=1562197#post1562197

They say in one way or the other that the actual game will look better than what is shown in the gameplay footage. And of course Damien's saying about the slap to the face.

What I was referring to was, again, promises about how the game will look considerably better than the trailers. Maybe there were such statements, but I can't recall.


Shit in what way? Let's say there is a downgrade. It is a shit move on their behalf to pull back on some of their vision, probably because they couldn't manage to make it work properly (unless you're those who believe there are some malevolent considerations at work), and showing their potential customers that they pulled back in this or that area?

In what way is this a shit move?

Last night I told my mom I'll make her some great pasta. It turned out fine, but not quite it. Shit move on my behalf?

It's a silly comparison, but the principle is the same - there's nothing to suggest foul play at work here. Calling it a shit move is blowing it our of proportion, and that's a shame because there are visual discrepancies people are noticing, and that's worth discussing. It's when discussing them is decorated with all these dramatic statements that this misses the mark.

We're talking about a downgrade the equal to the Watch_Dogs/Dark Souls 2 fiasco. Dark Souls 2 had huge texture changes, lighting was removed, etc. Watch_Dogs...well it just looked and played horrible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idA9BEA4Hxs

 

[Phinnway]

The concern over politics is whether or not we will be involved in changing the outcome of the war and whether or not the politics will be as well portrayed as in TW2. They've never addressed this properly.

I see. To be honest, I never liked how The Witcher 2 handled narrative choice. I liked that your choices had big impacts on the world. But I didn't like that one choice (Roach/Iorveth) determined 90% of the content that varied based on choice and that none of your political choices were resolved in the game itself; they relied on an epilogue scene to show the consequences of your actions.

For The Witcher 3 I hope that it will be more like The Witcher 1 where there are a lot of little choices that lead up to one big choice. But I hope that big choice will have political impacts like the choices at the end of The Witcher 2, and there will be at least one political choice for each region (Novigrad, No-Man's-Land, Skellige.)

Anyways, this is probably off-topic opo:

 

[wavebend]

I[...] a downgrade of that size would be a huge fuck you to any buyers.

You're right. And it fuc**ng hurts.

Please read the transcript from the Jan. interview with main director and tell me they didn't make it into a console port.

Low-res environment textures for upgraded Geralt textures. Locked at 30fps for all platforms (?). Same distance draw for all platforms. Almost no difference between visual quality between platforms. Ultra will simply add HairWorks + ubersampling, which is a crap alternative to better AA.

The eye candy screenshots from their earlier work was never meant to make it into the finished product.

I'm now downloading the uncompressed 5GB video from the 35 min. gameplay, let's see if we can draw more conclusions based on PAX vs that

 

[DinkyDino]

If you were a CDPR director and you saw those numbers, and a case was made that spending time and resources on an experience only 3% ( or whatever tiny, top end percentage of the 10 million copies sold market was affected by Watch Dogs downgrading) will experience, could you fiscally sign off on attaining that upper level of performance?

Yes because that would mean it would be my franchise that has come a long way and I would absolutely LOVE for it to be the most it can be in terms of visual quality for everyone to experience within this year and the years to come. Of course I just say this because as long as I am living comfortably and can pay the bills, I wouldn't see any reasons why to hold anything back. Besides they had a great trailer to start with. If they really didn't intend on it looking that great, the first trailer wouldn't have looked so delicious and it would have been more similar to the recent trailers. It's obvious something happened in between that led to this outcome and it is more apparent now the choice they went with. To be perfectly honest, I really feel like they decided to dedicate more time optimizing and designing the game to run specifically on the consoles and left the pc in the air because "they could run it anyways and they would just have to be content getting the same quality the consoles get." Those are just my thoughts on the matter.

Adding a bit more I can learn to live and deal with it accepting that is it their choice. But at least give us the straight truth and don't lead us on with false hopes such as wait for release date to see the full quality of the witcher 3 when they know it won't look like the initial trailers. Assuming the downgrade is real of course.

 

[Agent_Bleu]

Marcin has played many different versions of the game so I'm betting he has a pretty good idea about how the game looks and if things have changed drastically for the worse. If he's lying then it's going to be very bad for CDPR when the game is released; I'm willing to give him enough credit that he'd not make such an obvious mistake which would harm CDPR's reputation. I suppose we'll all find out soon enough.

As far as releasing ultra footage goes it's not our "right" as gamers to see such. Whatever materials are released by the devs to advertise their game is completely up to them and consumers have no right to make demands on what the developers show pre-release. Hell, I remember back in the 90's when I'd walk into a game shop and the only things I'd know about a game before purchasing it was the description written on the back of the box along with a few screenshots.

I'm not suggesting he is lying. In fact, he's the one and only Community Manager that routinely visits the international forums I have no hesitation in extending the benefit of the doubt to. I trust Marcin Momot. Period.

That however does not mean I agree with every single assessment of his. One example comes to mind: the first time the downgrade rumours started was after the release of a trio of screenshots, which Marcin has previously deemed «great». Nah, hardly.

You completely dodged the question but I'm not letting you off the hook. Again, in which circumstances would you say it'd be legitimate for CD Projekt to withhold footage on ultra up until after release? REDs are completely free to release whatever materials they deem fit, when they deem fit, how they deem fit. Their prerogative. I, on the other hand, am completely free to interpret both their omissions and their actions in the absence of a convincing explanation or, as in this case, of any explanation whatsoever. I say this because the whole «slap across the face» meme merits not the label of «explanation».

I am not declaring malicious intent, ill-will, bad faith. Not by any means. But at the very least this has got to be the clumsiest PR in fresh memory.

 

[EliHarel]

We're talking about a downgrade the equal to the Watch_Dogs/Dark Souls 2 fiasco. Dark Souls 2 had huge texture changes, lighting was removed, etc. Watch_Dogs...well it just looked and played horrible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idA9BEA4Hxs

Jason I think you're placing meaning in some posts that wasn't there. None that I see. I'm not talking here about the general thread, but the original posts from which this chain of quoting began. That is, Costin's, then mine, about a scandal. A major part of those scandals was because of the companies not being frank about the game's state, which isn't the case here, as well as marketing fully played, long-minute sections which turned out worst than the final product - which doesn't seem to be the case here.

 

[Sardukhar]

I am not declaring malicious intent, ill-will, bad faith. Not by any means. But at the very least this has got to be the clumsiest PR in fresh memory.

According to what standard? Because they won't release imagery of some ultra-high-resimagery a small percentage of people even care about? Find me the gaming sites, the previewers, the early- play-crew of managers and journalists that are complaining about the graphics?

Find me this more-than-a-tiny minority that are complaining about the graphics at all, in fact.

Clumsy PR? Then where is the powerful negative feedback?

Also, to whoever keeps referring to Watch Dogs, the game looks find and is fun to play in my opinion. A fairly common opinion, considering the 4 million copies sold the first week and the further 6 million since. Keeping in mind the forums were a-rage over downgrading, I'd say if Watch Dogs is your downgrading-is-the-end precedent, CDPR can look forward to barely any PR kickback and some very profitable numbers from Witcher 3, whether they downgrade it or not.

Forums are simply not the market. We aren't. We represent a vocal minority.

 

[OliverDK]

You do realise the first is a trailer shot? You cant even replicate that shot in game because i doubt you can fly over Novigrad.^^

People.... nothing against comparison pics! But please take comparaple locations AND more importantly quit comparing TRAILER shots to Ingame Video Screens.

Its totally inconclusive. A comparison between the 35 min Vid to the recent Video would be fair. because it is both true gameplay.

But Trailer vs Screencap.

Can i tell a difference? of course. But its not a fair and valid comparison.

Quit comparing apples to oranges.

That particular screen cap is from the VGX trailer and it says right at the beginning: "IN-GAME FOOTAGE", so the "it's just from a trailer" and not representative argument is as I see it invalid.

Of course one can ague about the camera angle, that it's not from Geralts perspective but a fly by and so on but tbh I think people arguing those arguments must see something I can't because to me and others there is quite a difference in graphic fidelity between the two. And let's not forget that there has been posted quite a lot of imagery in this thread and others that offers better compartment shots than the one in question here and those too have a questionable differences in graphic fidelity.

When that is said I will reserve my judgement when the game is finally released and yes I have no doubt I will be playing it - downgraded or not. Graphic isn't everything and the game has many other merits going for it. But as stated earlier in this thread if there is a downgrade it will be hard to look back at the VGX/SOD trailers and think about what maybe could have been.

 

[JasonShepard]

Jason I think you're placing meaning in some posts that wasn't there. None that I see. I'm not talking here about the general thread, but the original posts from which this chain of quoting began. That is, Costin's, then mine, about a scandal. A major part of those scandals was because of the companies not being frank about the game's state, which isn't the case here, as well as marketing fully played, long-minute sections which turned out worst than the final product - which doesn't seem to be the case here.

You know, I think I was trying to say something about your response to wavebend's post, but I'm tired and forgot what I was trying to say.
pls ignor

 

[freakie1one]

I'm not suggesting he is lying. In fact, he's the one and only Community Manager that routinely visits the international forums I have no hesitation in extending the benefit of the doubt to. I trust Marcin Momot. Period.

That however does not mean I agree with every single assessment of his. One example comes to mind: the first time the downgrade rumours started was after the release of a trio of screenshots, which Marcin has previously deemed «great». Nah, hardly.

You completely dodged the question but I'm not letting you off the hook. Again, in which circumstances would you say it'd be legitimate for CD Projekt to withhold footage on ultra up until after release? REDs are completely free to release whatever materials they deem fit, when they deem fit, how they deem fit. Their prerogative. I, on the other hand, am completely free to interpret both their omissions and their actions in the absence of a convincing explanation or, as in this case, of any explanation whatsoever. I say this because the whole «slap across the face» meme merits not the label of «explanation».

I am not declaring malicious intent, ill-will, bad faith. Not by any means. But at the very least this has got to be the clumsiest PR in fresh memory.

Agreed. Marcin is a community manager and not a programmer or graphics artist. I'm sure he does his best to give truthful statements but this doesn't guarantee that all of them are 100% accurate even if he believes them to be so.

In a way I did dodge your question because I don't know why, exactly, they aren't showing ultra footage so all I could do is add my speculation to the rest. If I were to guess I'd say CDPR is getting sick of all the people doubting their game, calling them liars and accusing them of intentionally false advertising, etc., so that is why they are saying things like the "a slap in the face" comment. If their fans are going to act like spoiled, self-entitled children then the "slap in the face" comment seems appropriate and it gives them very little incentive to meet any of their fan's demands (such as showing ultra quality content). This may not be the best PR move but I can definitely relate to such a situation if I were in their shoes.

 

[EliHarel]

@Agent Bleu I sometimes also feel like their PR has been clumsy, but that's mostly because I don't find anything better to do with my time than read every interview and post on a game's official forums, instead of, say, reading for my next Uni class. So the strange answers are more apparent to me. Zooming out, it's difficult to say if their PR was good or bad. I think the visuals are the area where PR dropped the ball and it's not hard finding posts in comments sections about a downgrade, but on the other hand this game received numerous "Most Anticipated" on different sites, whether from the staff or the users, and the excitement around it seems big. Whether it shrunk or grew doesn't matter, it's still pretty damn big.

As an avid fan I might feel their PR is a bit off. My impression is that most gamers are very excited about the game, downgrade or not, so in that case I guess their PR is a huge success? It's all hard to determine, there's no data and we're working on gut feelings, but overall I think that their marketing is doing a damn good job, even if it has its slips. So I'm mostly with Sard about that.

A friend of mine saw me browsing the boards all bothered and focused and he was asking me what I was reading about, and I told him about TW3's downgrade, and he gave me this confused look.

Now I know that these personal experiences aren't really indicative of anything. Another person might have a different experience. It just reinforced in me the belief that the vast majority of people who will play this game aren't those who follow these things as closely, or even care too much. So even if their PR failed to communicate the differences in visuals, I still think it accomplished its purpose very well.

 

[Phinnway]

It's also possible the multiple delays impacted the PR strategy; stretched out the marketing push & whatnot. Just think of how many trailers we've had over the past 12 months. It seems like they're starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

 

[JasonShepard]

According to what standard? Because they won't release imagery of some ultra-high-resimagery a small percentage of people even care about? Find me the gaming sites, the previewers, the early- play-crew of managers and journalists that are complaining about the graphics?

Find me this more-than-a-tiny minority that are complaining about the graphics at all, in fact.

Clumsy PR? Then where is the powerful negative feedback?

Also, to whoever keeps referring to Watch Dogs, the game looks find and is fun to play in my opinion. A fairly common opinion, considering the 4 million copies sold the first week and the further 6 million since. Keeping in mind the forums were a-rage over downgrading, I'd say if Watch Dogs is your downgrading-is-the-end precedent, CDPR can look forward to barely any PR kickback and some very profitable numbers from Witcher 3, whether they downgrade it or not.

Forums are simply not the market. We aren't. We represent a vocal minority.

Not showing footage of a game for reasons which weren't made clear after the community manager(?) says that showing it would be a good idea comes off as a bit clumsy. On the topic of people complaining about a downgrade, I've seen posts on Youtube, Reddit, the Steam Forums, /v/, etc. There were a few articles about a possible downgrade if I remember. But yeah, I've seen a decent amount of discussion on the topic.
Clumsy PR doesn't really mean there's going to be a huge backlash of Dark Souls 2 proportions. It's just clumsy.

 

[GuyNwah]

Moderator: "There will be no demands made of the developers" does not justify anyone in posting further demands, and "accusations of lying... will result in action against your account" does not justify anyone in posting claims that anybody has lied. These were orders made by the moderators, and posts contravening those orders will not be allowed. A large number of posts are going away.

 

[CostinRaz]

Find me this more-than-a-tiny minority that are complaining about the graphics at all, in fact.

I think you should look on reddit or NeoGaf to see it's more then just a tiny minority complaining about it.

As for your previous post on whether or not it would matter. Yes it would. Watch Dogs was hit quite hard in terms of overall sales due to the downgrade controversy while Dark Souls escaped somewhat unscathed mostly due to what kind of people the game caters to but Ubisoft and Namco are quite different are companies then CDPR and their reputations don't hinge on the same things as CDPR's.

In both the case of Watch Dogs and Dark Souls the companies behind them have strong brands, especially strong for the Souls series as such despite the large amount of negative comments and media attention they still were able to sell well. Their reputation also is not predicated on pleasing the consumer through constant patches and free DLCs, far from it.

Also in both those cases for the console versions they were able to defend themselves by pointing out that they had done all they could with the hardware of those machines. A rather correct and honest defense. That they pissed off their PC audience to no end with this BS excuse didn't matter to them because the vast majority of their customers are on consoles not PC so they don't care that much about it. In fact Ubisoft regularly takes the piss on PC gamers.

On the flip side CDPR's relies heavily on fostering good will among it's consumers. Free DLC, constant patches, no DRM etc. All of that is what allowed them to turn that disaster of a launch for TW2 into a success story. If they had not gone down this route their day 1 sales would have remained about the same but their long term sales would have suffered hugely. We probably would not see the glowing praise they receive on a regular basis and there might not even be a Cyberpunk in the works at this hour and TW3 would not be such a high profile game as it is. Their main market is also the PC market not the console one with majority of their sales being on PC.

Them maintaining that consumer good will is essential for their continued success as a company, them not pissing of their PC consumers as Ubisoft and Namco both did is critical to them.

What would happen if they decided to not resolve this downgrade issue by the time the game is launched. A massive firestorm that what's exactly would happen and while you are correct in saying it wouldn't really affect their day 1 sales much it would affect their overall sales plenty especially if they continue being dismissive of the issue as they've been so far.

If they resolved it post launch then they would calm people down but they would still lose plenty of that good will that they've spent so much time and effort garnering from consumers.

 

[Sardukhar]

Tell me exactly what i did wrong . One of the moderator make a question . We answer with out hate . speaking correctly and talk about witcher 3 cd projetk as responsable or not of The downgrade . I dont think we break any rules

Well, NOT THAT WE TALK ABOUT MODERATOR DECISIONS - we don't - but speaking as a user, a moderator obviously thinks you did. You might want to PM that moderator if you are unclear.

 

[Scryar]

Not showing footage of a game for reasons which weren't made clear after the community manager(?) says that showing it would be a good idea comes off as a bit clumsy. On the topic of people complaining about a downgrade, I've seen posts on Youtube, Reddit, the Steam Forums, /v/, etc. There were a few articles about a possible downgrade if I remember. But yeah, I've seen a decent amount of discussion on the topic.
Clumsy PR doesn't really mean there's going to be a huge backlash of Dark Souls 2 proportions. It's just clumsy.

I think some people are heavily overestimating the "downgrade" talk or the consequenes it could have. I have read every single english and german hands-on preview from januray I could find (more than 40), written by journalists who acutually played the game (something nobody of us did ) and there wasn't a single mention of the world "downgrade". Quite the opposite. Most of them were impressed by the graphics and praised it..This should give a foretaste on the reviews of the game. I can assure you the game will still get its 9/10 or 10/10 points in graphics and he big majority won't care if the grahpics look a bit worse, because it's still beautiful. A small hardcore fanbase, which watched every single trailer isn't representative for anything and certainly not for the millions of players CD Project Red is trying to reach with Witcher 3. And even in this "hardcore fanbase" most people won't care because they:
a) will play the games on consoles
b) are the 90% of the pc users, who won't be able to play the game on ultra anyway
c) don't care that much for graphics, because the Witcher franchise has and always had so many more important aspects (story, characters, writing, choices, atmosphere, combat, gameplay, living world etc)
I count myself to the third group and that's why I hope they focus on the removal of bugs rather than trying to get the graphics on the vgx level for the estimated 1% of players, because bugs will affect 100% of the players.

 

[Sardukhar]

I think you should look on reddit or NeoGaf to see it's more then just a tiny minority complaining about it.

As for your previous post on whether or not it would matter. Yes it would. Watch Dogs was hit quite hard in terms of overall sales due to the downgrade controversy

How do you know this? They sold 10 million copies. 10 million. It's a commercial success. It cost 68 million to make and grossed ~500 million US. So if the Witcher 3 follows that route - great!

I do read Reddit and (less now) NeoGAF. I would never descrive those places as other than forums, with a similar vocal minority that does not determine sales. This is not to say that such forums don't have a point, but it is to say that they do not represent the target market. Watch Dogs being a case in point.

Things like graphics downgrading and platform wars are the territory of the hardcore, the very people who post here, Reddit and GAF. The hardcore are the people you take suggestions from, but not the people you target overall. Unless you are making a niche game, of course. And even then, for games like Dark Souls and Witcher 2, you'll find the hardcore among the niche.

On the flip side CDPR's relies heavily on fostering good will among it's consumers. Free DLC, constant patches, no DRM etc. All of that is what allowed them to turn that disaster of a launch for TW2 into a success story. If they had not gone down this route their day 1 sales would have remained about the same but their long term sales would have suffered hugely. We probably would not see the glowing praise they receive on a regular basis and there might not even be a Cyberpunk in the works at this hour and TW3 would not be such a high profile game as it is. Their main market is also the PC market not the console one with majority of their sales being on PC.
.

Whoah. This is a lot of assumptions. I think CDPR actively fosters goodwill amongst it's consumers, as a smart business does. I do not think the colour of Geralt's hair or the slightly blurred cobblestone textures are going to trigger a goodwill backlash at all.

I don't think TW2 launch was a disaster. No idea why you think that. Usual buggy game launch - typical since about, what, 1990? Graphics issues, etc. I see that all the time - my Steam library is a list of games that sucked at launch.

Witcher 3 Will Be buggy at launch. Bet on it.

Witcher 2 is popular because it's a good game, not because CDPR fosters goodwill. Everyone patches, that's how it works now. People (most people) forget launch week and remember the good times they had playing.

And as to what CDPR's main market is now - only CDPR knows that. Not you and not I. Consoles may have become their main market. Given that whole XboxOne marketing shtick, who knows?

 

[wavebend]

I've made a complete comparison between PAX and 35 minute gameplay.

Will be posted shortly