I did and understood what I replied about wasn't your only point. I just found that reference weird so I responded to that one only. I can't comment on other aspects you mentioned because I haven't examined VGX/SOD or any footage since that thoroughly, I've been keeping myself spoiler free as much as I can...
- Status
Gee I don't know, maybe by telling us stuff.
They show us how it is now and then ignore everything else lol. That is the problem..
Youtubers showing off preview footage is NOTHING new mate. Even Ubisoft does that
They said something like that for CP 2077, not TW3, as far as I remember.
Oh, and I also hate CDPR for making the game actually playable.
How long do you guys think it will take for people to create decent enough mods for DOF, foliage, draw distance, lighting, animations, and sweetfx? Because I'll happily wait even after the game releases for those things to happen.
I can only hope that Witcher 3 is as mod friendly as Skyrim.
---------- Updated at 07:28 PM ----------
Also
..WOW.
You do realize that PLAYABLE GAMES should be a standard right? Just because CDPR is creating a game that is playable amidst a bunch of other games that are unplayable doesn't mean we should bow down and call them developer gods.
I can't tell if all you guys actually think CDPR is a great dev team, or if they are just good compared to the other crappy devs out there.
I can only hope that Witcher 3 is as mod friendly as Skyrim.
---------- Updated at 07:28 PM ----------
Nope, "We are aiming for CGI quality graphics"-Witcher 3 dev. And hell, they delivered too. At least at first.. http://ps4daily.com/2013/04/the-witcher-3-cg-quality-graphics/
Also
..WOW.
You do realize that PLAYABLE GAMES should be a standard right? Just because CDPR is creating a game that is playable amidst a bunch of other games that are unplayable doesn't mean we should bow down and call them developer gods.
I can't tell if all you guys actually think CDPR is a great dev team, or if they are just good compared to the other crappy devs out there.
Last edited:
>Tries to negate my argument by claiming I can't back up my fact in earlier post
>After I do, tries to negate my fact by insufficiently dissecting what they said.
After this interview..they came out with AMAZING footage that DID look CGI.
They issue, which you seem to be ignoring, is that they never told us about the changes. They just did what all other devs do. "There is no downgrade we promise".
They SHOWED us something and then took it away. That is the issue. Because now we will all wonder what could have been
Well as long as they have great 3dvision support like witcher 2 I'm all set. Mods will come I'm sure if it's doable
Hey, if a dev actually comes onto this thread and gives an actual response clarifying what exactly changed, and what is just du to different time of day or weather or something, and actually EXPLAIN, then I will eat my own words and relent. Even if their honesty has come at a VERY late date..
The reason this hurts so much is BECAUSE I am a huge fan. I have been following this game since the very beginning.
It hurts that they took out so much stuff...the graphics is just a single part lol.
The reason this hurts so much is BECAUSE I am a huge fan. I have been following this game since the very beginning.
It hurts that they took out so much stuff...the graphics is just a single part lol.
Last edited:
Reminds me of ubisoft and that Watch dogs game big contrast is quality of graphics differences that where advertised at e3 and such compared to release version. Wish the industry would get out of that methodology.
Alright, I did not remember that. Well, guess what, they aimed, they shot and they might've missed the target by a few inches, now what are we going to do?.
I've never claimed that. I'd just like to naively assume that they had to "downgrade" in order to make the game playable at all, and not because they are "liars" or "backstabbers".
Last edited:
Hey man,i'm sure that the VGX build has a much better draw distance and maybe even better texture quality or even tessellation quality but....i'm kinda glad it got a bit downgraded(a 660 owner here just making the cut for this game)...because form the looks of that footage it would need a 980 just to run...the game looked unrealistically good...and of course there is the factor of consoles which are not that strong in terms of hardware.
Ubisoft showed off gameplay that turned out to not to look nearly as impressive in the final game.
The first real demonstration of gameplay for the Witcher 3 is the 35 minute demo and if you compare that to the the build we are being shown now you will notice the game for the most part still looks the same.
The first real demonstration of gameplay for the Witcher 3 is the 35 minute demo and if you compare that to the the build we are being shown now you will notice the game for the most part still looks the same.
Wait for another game to promise the same thing I guess. Maybe Witcher 4. And hope they tell us the truth
Well I only assume that is the reason. But they just decided to not tell any of us. In fact they worked hard to deny it.
Last edited:
The only part that really looks worse than what we've seen before is the foliage. It's unevenly distributed and that makes the game look rather poor in some areas. LOD is also lowered it seems, but that shouldn't matter as it doesn't affect immersion. The draw distance/LOD is fine as it is.
The 35 minute demo was even worse that it is now..terrible draw distance, poor interior lighting, poor water and reflections...hell
---------- Updated at 07:51 PM ----------
Yes they seemed to have replaced individual blades and twigs with generic grass dotted with a few bunches of swaying wheat..thingies...it looks strange.
If you really compare the builds, the assets look rather similar. The most difference I see is a lack of sharpening and a different color palette. The foliage has gotten worse from build to build though. Like you said, it is really 2D and the uneven distribution of 2D grass looks bad in any game. Think about this, if the grass wasn't 2D and filled up areas properly, wouldn't it look a lot better?
Immensely better. They messed up the trees and the grass..which is basically 90 percent of the game anyway.
But they are also missing things like higher quality tessellation, shaders, reflections, depth of field, and draw distance.
Also not quite sure what feature exactly they got rid of to make it look so cartoony..maybe lack of quality sub surface scattering of lighting.
And then there's just the issue about color palette, which is a whole other thing
- Status