Witcher 3 Graphics

[Jazios]

@Jazios - make your points without the ad hominem attacks please.
@Millian - please respect the rights of other to have and express different opinions.

We've been trying to keep moderation light in this thread. Please don't make that change.

Just calls em how I see em pal. Nice to know only my posts got deleted though. Ahh well, not to worry, thankfully nothing will come of all this complaining. CDPR will live on and the game will continue to be amazing regardless of how many people are up in arms about a non issue. Peace

---------- Updated at 05:02 PM ----------

They still use the "old" screens on the new store pages on Steam and GOG. So basically they're showing graphics that blow your mind (from several years ago), while what you get is "merely" a really good looking game. So the expectation is mind blowing graphics, for anyone who hasn't been myopically studying the forums and following every single trailer in chronological order.

They have stated themselves that it would be entirely possible to make the game look much better on PC, if that was the only platform they developed for. So it follows that all reductions in graphical fidelity are because of console parity. Very sad, even if necessary.

However, the upshot is that CDPR may eventually patch in some of the missing functionality/upgraded models that they *used* to have, to the benefit of PC players, since according to themselves the PC platform could handle it.

And I guess that's kinda the point though isn't it? The best thing for everyone was what we got, a really good looking game that also happens to have astonishing gameplay that can be enjoyed by as many people as possible, not just one market of gamers. We also live in a time where we can have improvements dished out over time so the initial product isn't always the final one. Naturally graphical upgrades and extra content as well as bug fixes all come under this. Were the game in an unplayable state I would be blowing my lid like everyone else but as it stands it's much ado about nothing.

I would also like to make one final point about your use as screenshots as an argument if you will. I don't feel that you can truly judge a games graphical fidelity on a picture any more than you can judge it's gameplay from watching a video. Iv'e seen mind blowing screenshots from World of Warcraft and yet when you jump in game you quickly understand that screencaps are almost always touched up for anything they are promoting. It makes me yearn for the days of playable demos, back then you could make a much more informed decision, however that ship has sailed and sank now thanks to the curse of early access.

One final addendum, and this is purely opinion so take it how you will. But these days those who are most invested in gaming consider themselves amongst the "hardcore" gamers and are generally the first to pint out discrepancies, find bugs and in general have access to the most information regarding an array of titles being released. I consider myself as part of this group and as such have learned to follow games that make big promises as much as possible, to be fully aware of what I'm buying. Not only that but I do read reviews and blogs and I'm sure given your knowledge on the subject you do as well. Would it be fair to say then that in this current age of video games we as buyers also have a responsibility to keep on top of development in order to best inform ourselves and the casual gamers about things we find, both good and bad? This issue is one some claim to have known for a while now and yet has only popped up a week or so around the games release. Do you knot think that if this issue is a huge as folks are making out, something should have been said earlier?

 

[caruga]

I think the worst in the game are the textures and color palette. Some textures in witcher 2 are far better than witcher 3. i dont know if its a bug but the utlra textures are week for ultra... see atachment

I hope for some hd textures for vegetations, some walls and vegetation. And put an option choice for two color pallets: an european pallete (less color, more realistic and dark) and american (more vivid color, actual pallete).

I don't know how textures like that can even make it into the game. Is that the raw asset, or a procedurally downscaled one? Is it hand-drawn or scanned? I'm curious how such a monstrosity comes to be. To avoid such a thing on PC, all they need to do is have a source asset that looks better and/or turn off the downscaling.

I can see that the PC has an edge over the console versions, but they went for the absolute minimum effort, least energy spent improvements possible. I wonder if the true nature of parity is not in the end product but rather as a mode of development: namely, keep any platform adaptations to an absolute minimum to shave off the costs. Have one single build target multiple platforms, one set of assets, and any paring down of fidelity will be felt across all target platforms... because maintaining a second directory of assets for PC's with enough memory would expend exactly how much time?

I don't know the details. I'm not a developer. But surely if they cut everyone loose save three or four of the most talented members of the team and had them work for a few more weeks, they could actually accomplish a great deal of restoration of what was lost.

Obviously the economics of doing that don't add up for them. I think part of the backlash is the consumer-base's way of saying: we do matter (economically), we can't be treated like we don't.

 

[VK88]

Is there a way to tweak the draw distance so that the landscape isnt all dull gray? Only found how to tweak foliage visibility.

 

[SofaJockey]

Obviously the economics of doing that don't add up for them. I think part of the backlash is the consumer-base's way of saying: we do matter (economically), we can't be treated like we don't.

I think the part of the consumer base expressing a 'backlash' are so small as to be economically insignificant.
Most players and purchasers are more likely to read 'TW3 10/10' adverts on general websites, than a forum thread about graphics.
In any case, what proportion of those raising concerns actually cancelled pre-orders or decided not to purchase because of the graphics?
I suspect a tiny proportion of that tiny proportion.

No issue with discussing graphics, the PR campaign and the approach to cross-platform development, those are legitimate topics.
But with 6 million TW3 sales in the bank (1.5m pre-orders) complaints about the grass are economically meaningless.

Also CDPR's interaction with the community says to me that they do consider that the player base matters,
even if 95% of that player base will never read an article, post or announcement that CDPR make.

 

[Nacho_el_Man]

Ok here is MY word on the Witcher 3 downgrade thing:

The problem in my opinion here is with consoles and the high ups at Sony and Microsoft. They are "obsessed" with 1080p, specially Sony. And this is so RIDICULOUS when their machines are not "up to" the challenge, they are great, but 1080p brings a burden they shouldn't carry.

For the people that don't know this, playing a game at 1080p requires a humongous amount of GPU resources, it's really heavy on a GPU. The best example for newbies would be to say that is like the GPU is rendering 2 games at 720!! Is that heavy!

Ok, but why do I bring this 1080p subject into the Witcher 3 downgraded, or sorry "new style" of graphics issue? The truth is this, if Sony wouldn't be so "obsessed" with 1080p, I am 100% sure that the Witcher 3 "VGC 2013 trailer graphics" could have been possible on the PS4 at 720p, no problem!! (therefore PC graphics would also had been better).

The Xbox One version should have been the "only" version looking like the version we have now!

But going back to Sony, I really don't understand them. For example, Guerrilla games used a "special" 1080p resolution on Killzone SF Multiplayer and it was a 960x1080p resolution (that requires similar bandwith as 720p!) and NO ONE complained, or even noticed this, not until Eurogamer Digital Foundry spotted it!

Guerrilla Games used a "technique" that works like interlacing, so you could say it was something similar as to play the game at 1080i, for the lack of a better way to explain it. BUT with the benefits of 720p! The MP on Killzone runs at a % of 45fps while the single player (that runs at true 1080) runs at % of 30fps or less. This is "at least" a 50% more of resources for graphics (not little), resources that the PS4 could've used to at least, "try", to get The Witcher 3 looking like the 2013 gameplay trailer.

I am 100% sure that "at this resolution" the PS4 would've been able to achieve this! So who can we blame in the end? The Xbox One, the minimum common denominator, and sure, the stubbornness of Sony and their 1080p obsession helps too.

THOSE ARE THE "REAL" REASONS WHY THE WITCHER 3 "changed its art style" Ahem.....

 

[Millian]

Do you knot think that if this issue is a huge as folks are making out, something should have been said earlier?

It's not a "huge" issue in a generalist sense. It's more about keeping people to a certain standard. You mentioned the hardcore crowd. It's the hardcore crowd that can appreciate small but significant differences, though in this case it's more like big differences
IF the original videos and screenshots had been of the quality we see today, everyone would still have been excited, but not so much for the graphical quality. Back then, a few years ago, the graphics on display in the trailers were amazing. The bar is raised every single year and the original so called in-game-footage was breathtaking. The 35 minute game play trailer was also good, not as great as VGX, but still better than what we have today. I think people were right to expect greatness because that is what they were shown.

The complaints about this reduction started as soon as more videos came out where the quality was markedly reduced. People kept asking questions and we didn't get a lot of answers, but the answers we did get seemingly confirmed we'd get the quality originally shown. Turns out those statements were patently false.

I think this particular issue does involve more than just a few people in a forum thread. Thousands upon thousands of people are aware of this issue now. It has been taken up by many major websites and can no longer be ignored. Even CDPR has been "forced" to respond to the mainstream media coverage of the subject.

Watchdogs really started this recent trend of promising too much and as such every new major AAA release is being scrutinized. With CDPR it's troubling because they had a shining image as the torch bearers for how to treat their players. I dare say that image has a few dents now, though it isn't too late to repair.
I bet you that the next game they start talking about, probably Cyperpunk, will get a lot of people wondering if we can trust their promotional material. A lot more questions will be asked and people will be skeptical. Remember, the mainstream sites are in on this now, so it isn't something that just goes away - though it may be temporarily forgotten.
The only way to avoid a PR nightmare is to throw some extra spit shine on this release so players, at the very least, get quality matching the 35 minute demo. And yes, even a small but vocal group can make a big stink about it. Big enough that it will get noticed and traction beyond a few heavily moderated forum threads. They won't have to though, since the cat is out of the bag. Everyone is watching.

 

[SofaJockey]

One of the things that CDPR was complimented on was its willingness to discuss the development process and share progress well ahead of launch, something other studios simply don't do. These debates only serve to encourage CDPR and all game studios to say nothing until the game is largely locked down.

I would expect advance reveals of Cyperpunk to happen later now, if at all, and that the hype train is only allowed to roll once pre-orders are loaded in stores.
I also expect the likely death of the cinematic trailer (except at launch), as the gap between CGI animation, in-engine footage and in-game footage narrows.

As for TW3, I suspect the game may still be optimised the best it can for PC, but I would not expect anything dramatic.

 

[Gordyne]

One of the things that CDPR was complimented on was its willingness to discuss the development process and share progress well ahead of launch, something other studios simply don't do. These debates only serve to encourage CDPR and all game studios to say nothing until the game is largely locked down.

Wich is better than to give false information.

 

[caruga]

I think the part of the consumer base expressing a 'backlash' are so small as to be economically insignificant.

Then why have they officially addressed the issue multiple times? If it's a gnat to them--no, a gnat biting the gnat that's biting them--surely they'd simply ignore the issue, period. If they're so resolutely focused on trimming costs wherever possible, then it wouldn't be worth the developers time to even conduct an interview on the subject as they've done. Those devs could actually be doing something important.

 

[SofaJockey]

Then why have they officially addressed the issue multiple times? If it's a gnat to them--no, a gnat biting the gnat that's biting them--surely they'd simply ignore the issue, period. ...

Possibly because they are upset by the feedback and want to comment?
The game's doing well, but there's professional credibility...

 

[caruga]

Possibly because they are upset by the feedback and want to comment?
The game's doing well, but there's professional credibility...

They're upset? They have no right to be.

 

[Nacho_el_Man]

They're upset? They have no right to be.

They don't care man, they are rich now! Thing is, CD Projekt have been pussies, because they should've told Microsoft and Sony that they were going to do the game as good as they could per system, not withstanding who ever is left impaired (Xbox One).

Truth be told: Xbox One should have looked as the game looks, PS4 should have look like the PC version only with a few things left out, and PC should've looked like the 2013 trailer. But no! Pussies man, I tell you and greed, they say is time issues and what not, no no no, bullcrap. At least they should have released the console version first, make their money and 2 months later they should have released the most awesome PC game ever, then everybody woud have been happy. But greed is stronger.

 

[rzn6jw]

Wow!!

I don't know what all the fuss is about downgrading the graphics. I'm running with an EVGA GTX 970 SSC and an AMD FX-8370 BE on Win 7 64bit OS with nVidia driver 352.86 and I've never seen better graphics in any game. All settings are ULTRA and I'm using nVidia Hairworks too. No framerate drops or anything.

Great game CD Projekt Red!! Well worth the $$.

 

[Gh0st787]

Honestly while I admit the downgrade is real. I mean you can see by looking at the 2013 footage. The fact is if it wasnt made the way it is now most people wouldn't even be able to play it anyways. Those with rigs awesome enough are a minority. And developers shouldn't and can't cater to only those few.

The fact is downgrading the graphics to make it playable on consoles as well was the best possible move for the game. The game wouldn't exist otherwise. They need to make money. And I for one would rather see CDPR make a downgraded game and stay in business then the alternative.

Having said all that the game is still beautiful. Obviously it could look better. Comparing this game to modded skyrim isn't exactly fair either. Vanilla Skyrim looked like shit too. But that's probably just my opinion.

 

[trgnn]

No, you're right. Vanilla Skyrim look like shit. Just like vanilla Witcher 3.

 

[Nacho_el_Man]

Honestly while I admit the downgrade is real. I mean you can see by looking at the 2013 footage. The fact is if it wasnt made the way it is now most people wouldn't even be able to play it anyways. Those with rigs awesome enough are a minority. And developers shouldn't and can't cater to only those few.

The fact is downgrading the graphics to make it playable on consoles as well was the best possible move for the game. The game wouldn't exist otherwise. They need to make money. And I for one would rather see CDPR make a downgraded game and stay in business then the alternative.

Having said all that the game is still beautiful. Obviously it could look better. Comparing this game to modded skyrim isn't exactly fair either. Vanilla Skyrim looked like shit too. But that's probably just my opinion.

That's not the point man. The game looks beautiful, sure, but "it is not" what we were sold on, it is not what it was supposed to be! At least on PC. That's the issue here, there isn't much discussion about it really, it is another "Watchdogs" with a different coat of paint.

 

[pimpdaddytoon]

Hi just wondering if people have a pc setup similar to mine and can let me know how the witcher 3 runs

• AMD FX-8350 @4ghz
• ASUS Radeon R9 280x Direct CU II Top 3gb
• HyperX FURY Series 8GB (2x 4GB) DDR3 1866MHz

Thanks for any help

 

[Domhnallaich]

The graphics are awesome, but the game isnt about the graphics, its about the story and the experience, enjoy the journey.

 

[andersonblue]

To say 'The Witcher 3 looks like shit' is kinda insulting. It looks great, right down to:

The Animations
The wardrobe of Geralt and NPC's
The high quality textures and models (Look at those faces man!)
A high variety of face models
Top notch writing and VA
Cinematography is great
The feeling the world gives you when exploring

Really can't understand how people get so worked up about ONE trailer and spurt shit out thier assess. This game offers hundreds of hours of top quality content and people are more worried that CDPR 'lied' to them over a 30min video. Get a grip and see the bigger picture.

 

[Gh0st787]

That's not the point man. The game looks beautiful, sure, but "it is not" what we were sold on, it is not what it was supposed to be! At least on PC. That's the issue here, there isn't much discussion about it really, it is another "Watchdogs" with a different coat of paint.

Yeah I can understand what your saying. And obviously the bait and switch they pulled was terrible. However there is quite a few articles from the developers stating that the game couldn't of existed in the state that everyone like yourself was 'sold' on. If it had it would have been less of a game feature/gameplay wise. Doing what they did allowed them to complete the game in the way they wanted to. And arguably setting graphics aside completely this is the definitive rpg experience. Bioware, Bethesda games etc are great but really don't even compare to this.

In the end I'm happy with the product we got. It does suck that PC version is only slightly better then that of consoles but if that's what allowed them to get everything into the game so be it.

Saying all that I've never been one to care to much about graphics. I realize why some people get hung up on this issue though.

Also who knows what modding will bring. Look what it did for Elder Scrolls games.