The Witcher 3 - Visuals

[YTF]

I have just one stupid question about this thread, a question adressed to the regulars of this forum. Since this thread is all about saying that the game is pretty ugly now (that's not my opinion), and that CDPR are (I exaggerate) liars and bad game developpers, why are there no Reds to intervene ? From what I know, they are very close to their fans, is it not embarrassing for them ?

Well, it could be a couple of things, but I'd say most likely reason is simply they don't see any benefit they would gain from doing so.

Keep in mind, they have access to data we do not.
For example, preorders might be huge anyway and remember they just tapped into huge console market of both PS4 and XBone and console customers have no reason to complain or cancel preorders atm. It's just an example of course, but let's say it's true. Maybe it's better to stay quiet and not risk angering even more people because unless they have something to show what could they say anyway. They just released new trailer today.

 

[djmedvedd]

witcher 3 has the 2015 equivalent of witcher 2 visuals

Its a joke, right?

ie. can be maxed out only after a few years

Only one tiny AA graphic setting.

but is there anyone here who will feel O.K if they wont be able to max out witcher 3 ?

Yes. why not? But only if they give us true next-gen graphic — whats problem? True Beauty require true investition in RIG

 

[gaktem]

Its a joke, right?

Only one tiny AA graphic setting.

Yes. why not? But only if they give us true next-gen graphic — whats problem? True Beauty require true investition in RIG

It benefit you, but not the other 99% gamers. Only very small percentage of pc gamers can run the game at ultra. So it is pointless to up the requirement even further. Remember the game is moddable, graphic is the easiest stuff to improve with mods, so we shouldn't worry too much about it.

 

[YTF]

but is there anyone here who will feel O.K if they wont be able to max out witcher 3 ? i mean would a 970 owner be o.k if they play it at medium while there is a low/verylow option for lower cards? just curious

I would be 100% ok with that. Heck that's one of the advantages on PC.
I won't be able to max TW3 with my current PC no matter what, downgrade or not lol. But guess what, I know next year I will upgrade my video card and then I'll be able too max it. I love that about PC.

 

[uthvag]

actually , you would expect normal rigs to max out witcher 2 right?
sadly, no the 750 ti gets around 50 without uber

---------- Updated at 04:42 AM ----------

anyway , back to the topic - visuals

do you guys think the (supposed) 980 requirement justifies ultra ?

This is purely speculation of course , no one can know how ultra looks for sure till the game has been released

keep in mind that mostly the requirements will be lower+there will be drivers from nvidia/amd to maximize the performance

 

[Sardukhar]

It's a good question.

How many people here can run Ultra? Now how many can run Ultra at 4K for super-awesome visuals? How many own one or 2 980s?

This isn't a trap, I'm honestly curious as to how many of us run a rig capable of pumping out maximum visuals?

I declare 1080, even at Ultra, to NOT be maximum visuals. In this worrd of 1440+, 1080 just seems very mid-range.

4K Ultra ( In no way similar to MK Ultra. Probably) should be the target for max-level graphics. Or better.


dj...looking at youuuu. We get you're disappointed, ( because you KEEP SAYING IT) but what rig are you running?

 

[djmedvedd]

do you guys think the (supposed) 980 requirement justifies ultra ?

Hell NO! Not this "Ultra", what we've seen in youtube.

 

[sidspyker]

do you guys think the (supposed) 980 requirement justifies ultra ?

It's not a 'requirement' tho, it's just what they used. We don't know how other cards perform, all we know it they used that GPU and it was constant 60... which means nothing because Vsync is a thing. The card could be capable of rendering 100fps but we wouldn't know unless uncapped.

 

[djmedvedd]

j...looking at youuuu. We get you're disappointed,

I do not break forum rules. I just want to comment.

but what rig are you running?

Does it really matter? If CDPR give me this graphic - i will upgrade my PC(i5-3570k@4.5|GTX970@1560\7610|GTX560Ti(PhysX)|DDR3@1866\16) for it.

 

[gaktem]

I do not break forum rules. I just want to comment.

Does it really matter? If CDPR give me this graphic - i will upgrade my PC(i5-3570k@4.5|GTX970@1560\7610|GTX560Ti(PhysX)|DDR3@1866\16) for it.

Isn't that video a tech demo for the redengine3?

 

[djmedvedd]

Isn't that video a tech demo for the redengine3?

Yes. That video shows us what beauty CDPR create in 2013 (first The Witcher 3 builds and first 2 trailers)

 

[uthvag]

It's not a 'requirement' tho, it's just what they used. We don't know how other cards perform, all we know it they used that GPU and it was constant 60... which means nothing because Vsync is a thing. The card could be capable of rendering 100fps but we wouldn't know unless uncapped.

that why i included supposed. MOst games i know do this( not pointing at CD projekt) esp when partnered with nvidia just to sell higher tier cards.

6GB vram? 680 as minimum? haha....

 

[gaktem]

Yes. That video shows us what beauty CDPR create in 2013 (first The Witcher 3 builds and first 2 trailers)

Basically Witcher 3 is just a testing ground for the engine, and our current GPU couldn't render all the effects unless going sli gtx Titan (just an example lol). We will probably see these visuals in cyberpunk 2077.

 

[Sardukhar]

I do not break forum rules. I just want to comment.

Oh, those rules are pretty vague. Have you looked at them? Hell, I can do nearly anything for nearly any reason! It's quite frightening, really. Such...sweet..power....ahem.

You - and everyone else- are free to comment. Be constructive and don't repeat what you already said. Be...helpfully constructive. CDPR doesn't pay for this bandwidth just so people can bitch at them for 2000 posts. I mean, I presume. Maybe they do? BUT I DON'T LIKE IT. So, bitching for, like, 200 posts, and then CLEVERER BITCHING.

Does it really matter? If CDPR give me graphic - i will upgrade my PC(i5-3570k@4.5|GTX970@1560\7610|GTX560Ti(PhysX)|DDR3@1866\16) for it.

Well, that's nice of you, and I'm totally on-side with paying for better hardware for better results...but first, wait for the game. Then, see if you need to upgrade. Then, upgrade.

Right now, you couldn't run it at anywhere near max settings. As I'm sure you know. To do so, will take thousand(s) of dollars after twin 290x or 980's and a monitor worthy enough to display it, presuming your CPU isn't an issue.

So you're upset that a game you can't run at max values is maybe downgraded? It is a good reason to wait before upgrading..sort of. I mean, if W3 wasn't coming out, I'f have still upgraded because, you know, PC's can do that. I might still upgrade again.

But when the game does come out and you are playing it, you're going to have to either settle for mid-upper settings or upgrade to see how it looks, in the real world, not crappy youtube.

Basically Witcher 3 is just a testing ground for the engine, and our current graphic power couldn't render all the effects. We will probably see these visuals in cyberpunk 2077.

You're quite possibly correct.

And when this thread starts in the CP forums, here's my plan: everyone gets to say or suggest downgrade oooonce. One time. Make it good. Because after that, I plan to go back into their subsequent yelling posts, change them totally and add this instead:

 

[uthvag]

Can anyone compare visuals of AC unity and witcher 3.Just want to compare one of the best looking games ( and very VERY badly optimized) , to a game which has not been released ( i know how this sounds)

AC unity screenshots
http://imgur.com/gallery/FLrGe/new

these were taken in high settings ( HABO+/Fxaa), 2 of them are from cutscenes

Sorry if this is a bit off topic

 

[Sardukhar]

Can anyone compare visuals of AC unity and witcher 3.Just want to compare one of the best looking games ( and very VERY badly optimized) , to a game which has not been released ( i know how this sounds)

AC unity screenshots
http://http://imgur.com/a/FLrGe#q3bEoGK

these were taken in high settings ( HABO+/Fxaa), 2 of them are from cutscenes

Sorry if this is a bit off topic

It kind of IS on topic! I mean, it's visuals. Comparison visuals.

Someone already did this. I'm much too lazy to find it amidst the 1819 posts here, plus the same or more on the other I HATE CONSOLES/CDPR/BEING LIED TO/AGH MY EYES HAVE BEEN EATEN thread. But it's there.

IIRC, It was a loaded comparison, though. Which, you know, is easy to do. Find a crappy image of subject A and compare it to subject B. Declare for Khorne. Begine sacrificing unbelievers to the Skull Throne. EMBRACE HERESY.

Etc.

 

[djmedvedd]

Right now, you couldn't run it at anywhere near max settings. As I'm sure you know.

I disagree. You talking about 4k.. Well, Its not "true definition of ultra graphic", its nonsense (IMHO).Textures and detailed pic in DSR do not make graphic looks really next-gen. This makes: lightning\quality and quantity of shaders\particle\light and shadow\AO\reflections etc.
Im pretty sure, that i can max out this The Witcher 3 with 60fps on 1080p in my rig. But it is not enough for me (high resolution - will not resolve grass and other problems)

 

[sidspyker]

Can anyone compare visuals of AC unity and witcher 3.Just want to compare one of the best looking games ( and very VERY badly optimized) , to a game which has not been released ( i know how this sounds)

That wouldn't be a fair comparision though, Unity has tons of prebaked lighting and it uses Global Illumination(well, cheap GI atleast). TW3 doesn't use any kind of GI, all realtime.

Unity also uses a completely different lighting for cutscenes and gameplay, both look completely different and the switch between them is very jarring.

 

[Sardukhar]

I disagree. You talking about 4k.. Well, Its not "true definition of ultra graphic", its nonsense (IMHO).Textures and detailed pic DSR do not make graphic looks really next-gen. This makes: lightning\quality and quantity of shaders\particle\light and shadow\AO\reflections etc.
Im pretty sure, that i can max out this The Witcher 3 with 60fps on 1080p in my rig. But it is not enough for me (igh resolution - will not resolve grass and other problems)

Have you -seen- 4K running Ultra anything? Dude. It's amazing. I went from 6400x 1600 to 3160x21..whatever. HellifIremember. Anyway, such a difference.

Technically less pixels, of course, but the 4K render is so much better. The pixel density across a single monitor is gorgeous.

You're right of course that high res won't fix grass issues and it won't. What it will do is make everything So.Much.Crisper. you won't care. At least, I don't. I mean, I care a little, ( screw you, texture pop-in!) but much less than when I was running a 2560x1440 and twin 1080p to make 6400x1600.

Also, and this is important, it's the added level of details and how to say this...surround on a high res monitor running at full max. Little things in the distance become much clearer now.

Try it. Trust me, you -will- not go back and you -will- forgive inferior graphical engine anomalies a lot more.

 

[ignatiusXIX]

Have you -seen- 4K running Ultra anything?...
Try it. Trust me, you -will- not go back and you -will- forgive inferior graphical engine anomalies a lot more.

But for me its VR sometime this year/early next for Elite Dangerous etc, or a new 4K monitor. Gah! Decisions! hahaha