Hi guys, i just wanted to ask since i cant get a straight answer ANYWHERE. Is the new 15 minutes of gameplay released today the PC footage or not? Or is it a mix of console and PC? And is it the high settings or ultra?
- Status
The game look good, no downgrade overall, but i, first of all have to say that i trust dasega and read the .pl article, two of them.
I think PC version is the same as console but with the nvidia works and some filter and common pc options, but nothing further.
If it is the case that the game is like this, then it's a shame, because it could be so much better if it where designed specially for PC as The Witcher 2 was. Nvidia works is a couple of effects that doesn't serves for nothing, except giving some eye candy to games that wont have any improvements or optimizations by the developer, just another filter, as HBAO+, tessellation,hairworks, object based sun shafts and PCSS.
Is weird from one side because everything is amazing about the game and CDPR and doing this stuff and opaquing the game a little is something weird, but from other side they said cross platform the first day and we all know what that means, the problem is that DAI for example is cross platform but doesn't have this problem keeping amazing graphics for PC standards and it is a game cross- generations more than just cross platform, it's on a 360.
Hope this is not true......
---------- Updated at 07:48 AM ----------
recommended is a 770 on a i7 or a r9 290..... amazing cards both, and both so much better than consoles....it's something just normal, or even it's on the limit of acceptable, less than that performance would be a disaster.
---------- Updated at 07:50 AM ----------
I think PC version is the same as console but with the nvidia works and some filter and common pc options, but nothing further.
If it is the case that the game is like this, then it's a shame, because it could be so much better if it where designed specially for PC as The Witcher 2 was. Nvidia works is a couple of effects that doesn't serves for nothing, except giving some eye candy to games that wont have any improvements or optimizations by the developer, just another filter, as HBAO+, tessellation,hairworks, object based sun shafts and PCSS.
Is weird from one side because everything is amazing about the game and CDPR and doing this stuff and opaquing the game a little is something weird, but from other side they said cross platform the first day and we all know what that means, the problem is that DAI for example is cross platform but doesn't have this problem keeping amazing graphics for PC standards and it is a game cross- generations more than just cross platform, it's on a 360.
Hope this is not true......
---------- Updated at 07:48 AM ----------
Why would you not expect that?
recommended is a 770 on a i7 or a r9 290..... amazing cards both, and both so much better than consoles....it's something just normal, or even it's on the limit of acceptable, less than that performance would be a disaster.
---------- Updated at 07:50 AM ----------
The last 6 months we had more questions than FACTS, we don't know that you asking for. Sorry, we'd like to know.
aw damn, so no one knows for sure at this time what footage that is? It looks really good but i'm hoping thats not the PC max. Some areas could use some work. Still i'm alright if it looks like that and runs 1080p 60fps well!
a while back i saw some familtsu screenshots with nvidia hairwork and everything, and that screenshot of zoltan and geralt itself, the facetextures and body textures and overall lighting was just really great compared to the newly released gameplay, im thinking the game was running on medium or high settings just so they could look the same as the console.im sure pc will get much better gfx than the consoles, just look at ac unity ... it looks amazingly better on pc than the consoles.
I don't buy into the console parity crap, just because someone mentioned that, the majority of people who played it say that the PC version looked better, even on High, so we remain to see what Ultra is like. So I choose to believe the majority, so many people can't be wrong or all be delusional.
It's beyond me why people choose to believe only the negative bits instead of being optimistic. It's really funny though, it takes just one no name journo to say something bad and everyone jumps on the downgrade train.
I've preordered the game for both PC and XBO, so I'll see the differences between Ultra and Console.
But is that going to take away from my fun while playing the game? Hell NO!
What I've seen from the latest video is great and it can only get better from here, still time to optimize and show what beyond High looks like.
It's beyond me why people choose to believe only the negative bits instead of being optimistic. It's really funny though, it takes just one no name journo to say something bad and everyone jumps on the downgrade train.
I've preordered the game for both PC and XBO, so I'll see the differences between Ultra and Console.
But is that going to take away from my fun while playing the game? Hell NO!
What I've seen from the latest video is great and it can only get better from here, still time to optimize and show what beyond High looks like.
Journalists say that it's PC on High. Ultra was disabled as it is not fully optimized yet.
Well, if you think the Ubersampling is included in the Ultra settings (Apparently it is included in Ultra on Witcher 2), then 30 FPS is quite the achievement. I still find this incredibly optimistic, as Ubersampling drops the FPS like crazy. But if it is true, then I'd say good job. (You should remember that no single GPU was able to run Witcher 2 on max with good frame rates when it first came out)
Edit for below: @SageFox Well, I will reserve judgement then. Although it has been said several times here, that the impression from the journalists was that the game looked better than PS4, even on PC High settings. So it is really unreasonable for the only difference being the HairWorks. And this should be included as well: Every multiplatform game, is the same game for all the platforms. Consoles usually use a setting preset (Like "Medium" for example). So that's nothing new here.
Last edited:
the demo was on i7 and gtx 980, the game ran at 35fps mostly. the MAX settings of pc are the same as the lowest settings of pc and the settings of consoles, the only difference is the nvidia hairworks and ubersampling that wont be on the release, it will come later on a patch.
It is confirmed that x box one, PS4 and PC The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt are virtually the same game, confirmed same draw distance, LOD, lighting, effects, meshes, and textures, everything it's the same except for nvidia hairworks.
I just read the polish article, they truly said it. Przepytaliśmy Adam Badowski, head of CD Projekt RED: " It is impossible to produce games for three platforms, making use of all of the great innovations and improvements that are unique to each device. This is a technical fact. Creating exclusive title allows you to squeeze much more out of the machine.", "The PC could raise the resolution, because the hardware is more powerful, but we would not be at this time afford to do something new", "Unification of platforms there - we have one build, which is distributed to each of them, the game is exactly the same ranges of drawing grasses are everywhere the same. The differences arise from the fact that, for example. GPU is parameterized differently on each console, which may cause such differences. In color temperature." , "You will be able to find some small differences, eg. In the hair Nvidia, but they are very demanding graphically, so you need to have a powerful machine. It's kind of non-political, what I say, but in the future will be able to turn ubersamplingu mode, which the Prime Minister of The Witcher 2 killed this title and now also kill you, so you do not want that for now unlocked. The game looks better, but it is absurd demands." , "Yes, there is only one version, without it we would not be able to create the game on time. We'd have to undress her, build and test separately on three platforms, which is impossible. So we do it on a single database, and then distribute it to all devices.
On platforms where there is less memory otherwise manage it. Load less complex models, it all depends on what is happening on the screen at any given time. In summary, there is little difference between the PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, rather than solve some errors reconfigure.". (translated by google)
Oh Boy....
---------- Updated at 08:30 AM ----------
Ubersamplig isn'tt on release and maybe come with some patch. And the witcher 2 ubersampling that ads almost nothing to the game turned off, you could ran it perfectly on all the other settings maxed out with mid-high, high end cards. The gtx 580 ran the witcher 2 at 30 maxed out with ubersampling, 60 ubersamplig deactivated, they are just putting the hairworks that consumes to powerful systems and not adding the ubersampling thing to that, so the media can say "the game runs at 10 fps with a gtx 980" LOL
Read this: http://www.gry-online.pl/S018.asp?ID=1132&STR=3
The thing is, we are talking about that article for more than an hour already I have read it, don't worry.
And are you sure GTX 580 runs Witcher 2 maxed out with Ubersampling enabled at 30 fps? Because the benchmarks I have just looked at state that 580 SLI machines can run it around 30-40.
Note: I am aware this is derailing the topic, so I should stop chasing this subject anyway.
I have read it, don't worry.And are you sure GTX 580 runs Witcher 2 maxed out with Ubersampling enabled at 30 fps? Because the benchmarks I have just looked at state that 580 SLI machines can run it around 30-40.
Note: I am aware this is derailing the topic, so I should stop chasing this subject anyway.
It seems, with all the confusion and arguments/debates that have been circulating over whether the graphics are downgraded or not, someone should post a new thread that accurately sums up the situation using a different statement - as we, as people, tend to lock into a given view of a topic depending on how it is stated, our hopes, beliefs, etc.
The topic should be called, "Witcher 3 is not optimized for PC" - which, according to the article above, and the discussion, that is 100% accurate in saying.
There is a quote, albeit translated, stating that there was one build to fit all, and we all know exactly what that means...
This just goes with the fact that the trailers never matched the earlier footage we have seen, the latest, while 'looking better', actually feels - cartoony, and in my own opinion, [we all have one], a, surprisingly, huge disappointment.
The topic should be called, "Witcher 3 is not optimized for PC" - which, according to the article above, and the discussion, that is 100% accurate in saying.
There is a quote, albeit translated, stating that there was one build to fit all, and we all know exactly what that means...
This just goes with the fact that the trailers never matched the earlier footage we have seen, the latest, while 'looking better', actually feels - cartoony, and in my own opinion, [we all have one], a, surprisingly, huge disappointment.
Allright lets asume they all look the same, part from a few effects. The game still looks gorgeous, even on consoles. And to have a open world game, without lading screens, look like this is a achievement in itself imo.
And if they want more out of the graphical Side of the game they can add SweetFX. Sure it shouldn't be the case but CDPR is a company and don't have unlimited funds. And most project, be it games or anything else, can change over the course of the development and usually will.
And until release or confirmation of a dev, in english and not some shitty Google translation, I doubt there is anything like "pc graphics are held back by consoles".
And please stop with streaming downgrade because the game looks like demo's we have been shown. You want it to look like the very first screenshot, use SweetFX. Because that was different renderer and not the latest engine, and a lot of effects on the shots addeds later. (And most likely how CDPR wanted the game to look)
And if they want more out of the graphical Side of the game they can add SweetFX. Sure it shouldn't be the case but CDPR is a company and don't have unlimited funds. And most project, be it games or anything else, can change over the course of the development and usually will.
And until release or confirmation of a dev, in english and not some shitty Google translation, I doubt there is anything like "pc graphics are held back by consoles".
And please stop with streaming downgrade because the game looks like demo's we have been shown. You want it to look like the very first screenshot, use SweetFX. Because that was different renderer and not the latest engine, and a lot of effects on the shots addeds later. (And most likely how CDPR wanted the game to look)
Watching the new gameplay video from Gamersyde i can honestly say that i couldn't be happier with how the game looks. There are things that could be improved here and there, like some textures people noticed on a brick wall etc, but all in all it's bloody impressive. When i saw the face of the village elder in the first part and his beard and fur around his neck, i just had to pause to look at it for a while. The same with the second guard a bit later with the beard, it's really really good.
How the game will look in it's final release, remains to be seen. I guess (we can only guess at this point) that if we can enable all the fluff on the PC version it will look even better.
I can understand where the people that talk about "downgrade" are coming from but apart from that gif that roams around the internet, with Geralt walking in that village with the kid playing beside him, i don't see much difference in anything else. Some days it feels like that particular shot caused all of this
I just hope there are no game breaking bugs in it and it will surely be one of the best experiences out there.
How the game will look in it's final release, remains to be seen. I guess (we can only guess at this point) that if we can enable all the fluff on the PC version it will look even better.
I can understand where the people that talk about "downgrade" are coming from but apart from that gif that roams around the internet, with Geralt walking in that village with the kid playing beside him, i don't see much difference in anything else. Some days it feels like that particular shot caused all of this
I just hope there are no game breaking bugs in it and it will surely be one of the best experiences out there.
That is just brilliant. I'm really happy about that. With a few tweaks here and there, they can improve on pretty much all the little things that might put off people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30evY1uLiKI&x-yt-ts=1421914688&x-yt-cl=84503534#t=36
Go to 3:30 So yeah. Now you know. Sigh. You know what? I will probably leave all W3 discussion on internet and wait for premiere. I already prordered game. I still think I will love it and that game will look great anyway. But still I have this weird feeling that I was feed with a little bit of bull shit all the time. And also all this visual parity crap. Lesson for the future. PC platform is irrelevant now. Have textures in little bit higher resolution and be happy. We didnt lied to you. After all, PC will get "best looking version". I fucking hope I will eat my words. That this game will visually hit me in the face, hard (In a good way). But from now on I dont trust anyone, anymore. Seeing is believing.
Wasn't it said in the previous page that the game was on an i7 and 980? I think it's not clear on what system the game was running after all
Yes you're right, my mistake..Wasn't it said in the previous page that the game was on an i7 and 980? I think it's not clear on what system the game was running after all
Anyway about the "console holding back PC" thing.. don't want to flame or ignite anything but we have to accept it's true. We already knew it. In the interview it's explained with honesty. Not that we can pretend that CDPR screws their sales to make happy us PC gamers which are, indeed, a tiny portion of the market. I believe them when they say it's impossible to make different games to tailor them to any platform. I blame the consoles instead because I think they were released fucking OLD and not powerful enough!!
But anyways complaining is not useful: simply accept the facts and, I repeat, I personally think that developers are not to blame. On PCs we'll still have a better experience, just not a revolution, this is what PC gamers should expect and are expecting since years. This "sacrifice" will probably pay off in sales and therefore in higher budget for better next CDPR games for us to enjoy
Yes i'm sure and don't know what benchmark you saw.....The thing is, we are talking about that article for more than an hour already
And are you sure GTX 580 runs Witcher 2 maxed out with Ubersampling enabled at 30 fps? Because the benchmarks I have just looked at state that 580 SLI machines can run it around 30-40.
Note: I am aware this is derailing the topic, so I should stop chasing this subject anyway.
To the people saying that is not clear or the translation might be bad..... really? i just saw that same thing i posted on others post and the link to the article, the article says CLEARLY the name of the CD projekt HEAD in an interview. I read it in two languages translated, English and Spanish, in both says the same thing, and there is not one quote or two, there is 4 or 5 talking about the same topic. The topic as well is pretty obvious.
If you want to say that the translation is bad enough to say that is not true the information or declarations of the CDPR head, then you are saying you speak polish language and know for sure 100% that it says other things, wich i know is not the case...... so stop saying it's a "miss translation".
Hope other media publish this article in English.
Last edited:
There's some things here and there like the odd low resolution texture or some small pop-in, but otherwise it looks really good.
Right now I'm more concerned about the optimization of the game. If it's going to take a card that's MUCH more powerful than the xbone or ps4 only to reach around 30fps, that's just stupid. I mean, the 980 is a fucking beast of a card and it it was running the game on only high at about 35 fps.... yeah.
Right now I'm more concerned about the optimization of the game. If it's going to take a card that's MUCH more powerful than the xbone or ps4 only to reach around 30fps, that's just stupid. I mean, the 980 is a fucking beast of a card and it it was running the game on only high at about 35 fps.... yeah.
- Status