release screens/video of the fullmaxed pc settings to solve the confusion!

[VideoGamesCritic]

PCGH: Are the consoles really "to blame" for the fact that the PC version of The Witcher 3 looks worse than it might look like?

Fabian (CD project): No. We made quite early clear that we are developing 'both' versions independently. We started on PC and have a sepperate team and an own development for PC. Effects that does not work on consoles,are still being kept on PC. There are features on the PC, which does not exist on consoles. These include the 60 fps, Hairworks, the draw distance, the resolution. On a good PC you have the best version of The Witcher 3. The PC version looks better on such a PC as on consoles.

So this guy is saying "it's all different versions" and then the managing director Adam Badowski says this

Yes, there is only one version, otherwise we wouldn’t be able to make the game in time. We would have to take it all apart, and then build it and test it on three different platforms at the same time, which is impossible to do. Therefore, we have one common basis, and then transfer it to other platforms.

Honestly....do they even know what they are saying as a company right now? (Not much at all). PR lies up the wazoo

 

[phaino]

Hello people, i really dont care about ''downgrade'', i just want to ask one question.

I think Marcin told us there is only one version of the game, and i just read interview with Fabian Döhla who says:

PCGH: Are the consoles really "to blame" for the fact that the PC version of The Witcher 3 looks worse than it might look like?

Fabian (CD project): No. We made quite early clear that we are developing 'both' versions independently. We started on PC and have a sepperate team and an own development for PC. Effects that does not work on consoles,are still being kept on PC. There are features on the PC, which does not exist on consoles. These include the 60 fps, Hairworks, the draw distance, the resolution. On a good PC you have the best version of The Witcher 3. The PC version looks better on such a PC as on consoles.

so i want to ask is there only one version, or two versions?

Here is the interview http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/The-Witcher-3-Upgrade-1159166/

yeah great read - tough read even with google translate. lol To bad we can't get that interview in english.

Except for this part: The game looks different today than in 2013. Only if someone has only seen the material between 2013 and now awakes from hibernation, which could say the game looks now but worse. The game has been further developed.

 

[blizzzilla]

I translated the part that's most interesting into English. Google translate is a bit wonky sometimes:

PCGH: What would you tell your PC-fans who are unsure how good the PC version looks compared to the consoles?

Fabian (CD Projekt): I would look at recent PC footage (e.g. the Ultra-/4K-Videos made by PCGH*); anticipate the release. Who's in doubt should wait for reviews and benchmarks. We allways say: Don't buy the game right now, ask other people how the game performs. I'm confident that the people who play the game will tell you: The Witcher 3 looks awesome. I know the reactions of people who've seen the game for the first time. They are very positively surprised and ask: "Bro, Bro, how awesome does this look!?". Nobody has to worry when it comes to The Witcher 3.


It's about the whole picture, which is drowned out in the discussion. You cannot compare a screenshot from 2013 with a Youtube-grave (sic) from 2015. The game has changed. DirectX has changed. There were problems with the lighting in 2013, everything looked oversharpened. The game looks different today than it did in 2013. Only if someone had solely seen the material from 2013 and woke up from hibernation just now, he could say, that the game looks worse now. Overall the game has progressed.


I would love to have an upgrade-discussion. So much was changed since 2013. We have more monsters, better animations, new content, the dynamic weather. And what makes me really sad: It feels like nobody talks about the story right now and the incredibly thick atmosphere. Pity.

*not sure if that was added by PCGH

 

[MisterGibson]

Do we know what those "exclusive features" Marcin mentioned are (besides hairworks) ? Is it just HBAO+ ? I don't recall reading anything about that.

 

[ignatiusXIX]

Quoted post removed. My post moot. Carry on.

 

[NoBlackThunder]

teselation is shurly one other stuff pc will have .. to be honest the lasted video from that German side looks as god as the vgx trailer beside from the color correction and more sharper . ( they mentiont they had a loot of filters on the vgx trailer, most likely because of compression i guess ) that said for me the game still looks as good as they shown before =) the only question left is .. can my first gen titan run it at this high quality =P ????

 

[Cipher-Six]

I'd really like to see some footage of the final build on PC before the game launches, not after. I need to see final build footage on different rigs, at different settings, so I can decide whether or not my computer is going to be able to run this game adequately before I buy it.

Please CDPR, lets get some footage from the final PC build before the game launches!

 

[sharpappple]

Did the 35 min demo have a sharpening filter? it was released in 2014 and in comparison with the more recent footage the 35 min demo is still the better footage despite its problems. the developers have been speaking about the 2013 footage and that sharpening filter, but there is also a mark able difference between the game now and it less than a year ago, when the 35 min demo was shown I think it was in august, maybe earlier in the year. I cant remember if it was shown at E3, point being that the 35 min game play was one that built expectations like all the other demos that people have used to complain about when there is a supposed downgrade. it was not the VGX trailer which devs can sweep aside with the argument that it was at that point (in 2013 with its sharpening filter) not yet a completed enough version of the game, not developed enough, to be considered representative of the game. the 35 min demo was representative, but there are differences to me at least from what we seen now that are not explained. a dev remarked that since the 35 min demo with its new physically based rendering, the game has just continued to look better and better (I believe that it is in this interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E) the difference could be so small and simple, I don't know maybe just a post processing effect or something, but whatever it is the game doesn't look better than what I saw not just in 2013 but in 2014 as well. the newer builds have the same if not very similar assets, textures etc, but there are differences or changes that do impact quality, or at least persevered quality since late 2014. whatever these changes are, and for whatever reason things where changed, the visuals are not better looking since the 35 min demo. this is made more difficult for people when they are told that they can recreate those visuals because we have not seen that yet (not with ultra yet anyway). Its hard to understand, devs have made claims that contradict with what we where told and shown. I hope their statements turn out to be true and I will have to send a box of chocolates wrapped in fan art to make up for considering that the downgrade in some form exists out of heart shattering guilt (though I suppose I will have to send them some thank you gift anyway for every other thing they did do well).

 

[NoBlackThunder]

Did the 35 min demo have a sharpening filter? it was released in 2014 and in comparison with the more recent footage the 35 min demo is still the better footage despite its problems. the developers have been speaking about the 2013 footage and that sharpening filter, but there is also a mark able difference between the game now and it less than a year ago, when the 35 min demo was shown I think it was in august, maybe earlier in the year. I cant remember if it was shown at E3, point being that the 35 min game play was one that built expectations like all the other demos that people have used to complain about when there is a supposed downgrade. it was not the VGX trailer which devs can sweep aside with the argument that it was at that point (in 2013 with its sharpening filter) not yet a completed enough version of the game, not developed enough, to be considered representative of the game. the 35 min demo was representative, but there are differences to me at least from what we seen now that are not explained. a dev remarked that since the 35 min demo with its new physically based rendering, the game has just continued to look better and better (I believe that it is in this interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E) the difference could be so small and simple, I don't know maybe just a post processing effect or something, but whatever it is the game doesn't look better than what I saw not just in 2013 but in 2014 as well. the newer builds have the same if not very similar assets, textures etc, but there are differences or changes that do impact quality, or at least persevered quality since late 2014. whatever these changes are, and for whatever reason things where changed, the visuals are not better looking since the 35 min demo. this is made more difficult for people when they are told that they can recreate those visuals because we have not seen that yet (not with ultra yet anyway). Its hard to understand, devs have made claims that contradict with what we where told and shown. I hope their statements turn out to be true and I will have to send a box of chocolates wrapped in fan art to make up for considering that the downgrade in some form exists out of heart shattering guilt (though I suppose I will have to send them some thank you gift anyway for every other thing they did do well).

i think the 35 min demo is the representative version off the game. i feel the recent videos are all console version. if you look at the screenshot from pc gamer and so on the quality is still very high with very high texture quality and so on. i think there are some big trolls out there that basically take console graphic and mix thinks forward and back and so on. that what i believe at least so it wont look like 2013 but the 35 min trailer and so on should be representative. and if you look at the video you linked he says him self .. videos after the 2013 video are representative for the pc version. so everyone can relax and hope they can even run it so high =P

 

[misho8723]

In some shots/scenes even the PS4 can look really good.. but in many others on the other hand can look a great deal worse.. I hope the PC version is going to be more consistent in this recard:

 

[byghostlight]

I find anyone who uses the word downgrade immediately not worth listening to, optimisation is a far more optimistic way of looking at it, optimisation is always going to happen to make running a game on launch day possible. Yes sometimes that means something that was shot two years ago is no longer achievable. A lot can happen technically and in game design between such a time frame.

The key to Witcher in both books and games has and will always be the stories, the decisions and complexity of ideas, hardly the graphics.
But unlike other developers these games allow modding and give you the tools, if you arent happy with the results of CDPR building a game capable to work for the bulk of computers across the world over (so, ideally, no one is short changed), I am more than sure modders will give you and more powerful ways of destroying your own computer to make the game look better... gosh know I did that a lot with Skyrim, doesnt mean what the devs delivered there was bad either. I just wanted more.

 

[Sardukhar]

Hello. I have edited some posts! There will be more!

The game is out shortly, but you know what? I don't care. Certain subjects start fights and create or reinforce bad feelings. One of those subjects is the "downgrade" and the usual Watch Dogs references. A cursory look around the forums will tell you that's come up, why it goes wrong and why we lock it. So if you keep posting about it, you must not want to be here!

So, don't.

 

[sz0ty0l4]

Hey mods! As i can't find an option to delete my thread i'd kindly ask you to delete it. the idea behind this thread was to make people understand there is no " downgrade" but i can clearly see this became a "trend" nowdays. they do it with every game.

my original purpose was to give an idea how to solve this messed up situation( by releaseing high quality photos etc) but i admit it was a stupid idea,probably even if they released the shit talking would go on, so just delete the thread and forget about it. thx

 

[Grapefruit]

imo, only ones who are creating the confusion is people who cannot accept the truth, so they come up with elaborate theories that they're hiding the ultra settings or that game 1 patch will make the game look vastly different

There's already hours of ultra pc footage online, and even Marcin said thatt the differences between platforms are framerate,resolution,draw distance, and Nvidia features like hairworks and plus some.

 

[dragonbird]

And, as we're now firmly in the place where opinions are so firmly entrenched that there is no possibility of discussion any more, only comments about "people who cannot accept the truth", there really is no reason for this thread.