- Status
Of course I don't want a game to look worse than it's previews and I can understand why some would even feel betrayed. I still have to raise a finger at some forms of critizism here, one might say "their volume". We don't even have the game yet. Yes, I know, not even 2 weeks left, the game is finished and so on, but the game still isn't out and not a single one of the previews or trailers showed the actual gold master.
You might not believe it, but there is still a chance CDP really MENT what they said when they mentioned the slap across the face. Who even says that the options of the previews had the actual highest settings; no one saw the actual .ini-file! So please, don't get lost in despair and keep your cool until you see review-footage or start up your own game.
After all the hard work those guys and gals put into the game while keeping us interested and fed with info, one more awesome than the next, some people in here should be very ashamed if that happens. Just sayin'.
You might not believe it, but there is still a chance CDP really MENT what they said when they mentioned the slap across the face. Who even says that the options of the previews had the actual highest settings; no one saw the actual .ini-file! So please, don't get lost in despair and keep your cool until you see review-footage or start up your own game.
After all the hard work those guys and gals put into the game while keeping us interested and fed with info, one more awesome than the next, some people in here should be very ashamed if that happens. Just sayin'.
Nobody here is questioning their hard work only some really strange decision they've been making. And I would like to be ashamed but who will be in the end we will know in less then 2 weeks.
Maybe you should also compare the game budgets as well.
It's not about budgets. The thing is CDPR HAD great if not better foliage assets back in the reveal trailer up to VGX timeframe as shown down here
All I'm wondering is what's up with the extreme downhill progression? The devs were on the right track to make the game visually pleasing. Maybe the current version grass lacks of HBAO+ shadowing I'm not sure, but heck it doesn't look good for a 2015 game. Look at the pictures, the foliage quality degrades over time. I'm just sharing my opinion that's all
What version were those screenshots from? I highly doubt it's from X360 or PS3. If it was the PC on Ultra, well, that game came out last month. They even pushed it back several times to optimize it.
And if you think that budgets don't matter, you are mistaken. Working on the game engine is hard work and foliage doesn't magically appear.
Joke all you want, but it matters how many people are working on the engine to optimize those extra pixels and blades of grass. Or maybe you think you can place as many as you want without a performance penalty?
It's not about budgets. The thing is CDPR HAD great if not better foliage assets back in the reveal trailer up to VGX timeframe as shown down here
All I'm wondering is what's up with the extreme downhill progression? The devs were on the right track to make the game visually pleasing. Maybe the current version grass lacks of HBAO+ shadowing I'm not sure, but heck it doesn't look good for a 2015 game. Look at the pictures, the foliage quality degrades over time. I'm just sharing my opinion that's all
Indeed. Grass looks straight up bad. It affects the visuals profoundly because its always going to be there as it is going to be everywhere, and it stands out like an eyesore because its so ugly, the texture shape itself is terrible because it forms lines on the ground everywhere like pieces of paper. That's old-school, nobody does it like that nowadays who knows what they are doing, and the earlier foliage/grass didn't do that at all. I'm sorry to anyone this might offend but that's truly how I feel about it. I have no idea why on earth they would go from what they had before, to this.
They should explain why it was changed, because consoles could have handled what they had before if they can handle gta 5 grass, and they can.
Last edited:
Theres couple of new pics on dual shockers preview in the links only thread. I think the foliage in those looks great. At least in bar with gta 5
http://www.dualshockers.com/2015/05...-you-see-it-without-youtubes-odd-compression/
The upper picture looks gorgeous
http://www.dualshockers.com/2015/05...-you-see-it-without-youtubes-odd-compression/
The upper picture looks gorgeous
Last edited:
So you also think that great foliage comes at no cost to performance? Good for you.
Good thing that you don't need money to hire those people to optimize the game engine, after all everyone has a 600$ GPU.
that's a pretty bad shot of grass though.
Here's what I'm talking about https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/h...5_10152937396559331_4965878422242611151_o.jpg
Everything here looks good, the trees look amazing, but this grass is just mind-blowing bad. Look at the tree, then look at the grass. Do that a few times, it should stand out when you do that a few times. It's awful.
Last edited:
I agree regarding the upper pic but the second one meh
Attachments
-
1431015814765.jpg
It's understandable that people react like they do because it's commonplace in the industry to bullshit with bullshots that are not representative of the final game.
CDPR, due to the "good guys" image they've built for themselves over the years were held to higher standards and were expected to actually deliver on their promises. All the more disappointing now that it seems they are just like the rest of the AAA devs.
Of course we'll only know for sure once the game is actually out.
So you also think that great foliage comes at no cost to performance? Good for you.
Good thing that you don't need money to hire those people to optimize the game engine, after all everyone has a 600$ GPU.
If the Witcher 1 has foliage better than what is shown in those screen shots then I expect a 2015 DX11 game to have better quality.
Yes, if only we PC folks had an options menu to configure texture quality and the like to make our games run smoothly...Joke all you want, but it matters how many people are working on the engine to optimize those extra pixels and blades of grass. Or maybe you think you can place as many as you want without a performance penalty?
And seriously, what optimization? The game runs 60fps maxed out on a single GTX 980. Don't tell me the game will just crumble at the weight of those extra pixels.
I'd gladly run the game at 45 fps on my gtx 980 if it meant having better grass/foliage. 60fps is a luxury, but 45fps is definitely playable. 30fps.... not so much.
Yes. your picture is in a grass field. The other is next to a forest. Grass looks sickly in that sort of places anyway.
Just look at my picture. theres even baby baby trees
. Dont know what u call them in englishYes. your picture is in a grass field. The other is next to a forest. Grass looks sickly in that sort of places anyway.
Just look at my picture. theres even baby baby trees
yeah but here you can SEE the damned grass lol, in your shot it was blurred to hell you can't see any grass man. You can't be seriously telling me that when you look at one of the trees in this image:
https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/h...5_10152937396559331_4965878422242611151_o.jpg
...then look at the grass, that something doesn't feel off about it. Just look at the trees, then the grass. It's almost like two different art styles are clashing or something. This grass is just SO chunky and under-resolution. I've seen unpaid modders do better work than this in skyrim.
Last edited:
Every time someone says that 30fps is unplayable, somewhere in the world a GPU dies....seriously guys you are over exaggerating...20fps is unplayable, everything 30fps and up is perfectly fine, and if you have the "horse power" to push a game on 60fps, than that's great, but don't go around forums saying that 30fps is the pest -_-
- Status