The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

[Artorias]

Blame it on publishers too, developers want to achieve their vision but almost never get the funding to maximize the potential on the PC.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Its been posted. Consoles can't hack it and the devs decided to consolidate based on the worst platform. So, a tablet CPU and a tired old 7770 equivalent at best can run at sub 1080p and peasant 30FPS, but a slight increase to 1080p and 60FPS on PC magically requires a 3770 and a 980. Of course I'm still buying it, I didn't play the first 2 3 times apiece for nothing but I'll keep on moaning about it. Consoles strike again.

You make no sense. You bitch about it yet still buy it. I bet it'll even be a fantastic game and you'll bitch about it again. You're why I generally hate calling myself a PC gamer. Never happy and always looking down on anyone who doesn't use a PC exclusively.

 

[RussianSensation]

You make no sense. You bitch about it yet still buy it. I bet it'll even be a fantastic game and you'll bitch about it again. You're why I generally hate calling myself a PC gamer. Never happy and always looking down on anyone who doesn't use a PC exclusively.

Come on! You are being totally unreasonable here in criticizing a fellow PC gamer who is simply stating that CDPR promised us one thing, showed us a game that actually looked different, released a ton of amazing looking screenshots and now it seems the game has been made for consoles from the ground-up, with only minor differences on the PC being higher textures and NV GWs features. It's hard to believe it was SO difficult to make draw distance algorithm/setting 2-3X better for the PC.

If these screenshots prove true for the PC version, it indeed appears that the game has been downgraded.

Look, no one is criticizing this game's gameplay or denying that it will be an amazing RPG. However, as far as business practices go, what CDPR did is not right. Early on, they showcased the higher PC art assets, which isn't representative of PS4/XB1 versions, which means it wasn't fair to console gamers. As far as PC users go, there were countless interviews that kept hyping up the Ultra setting on the PC and made it a 'mythical' setting, thus raising the expectations of PC gamers. Now it appears the Ultra setting might just be a large collection of GW features and not much more. I hope I am wrong on that. Essentially it appears on the surface right now that CDPR did everything possible to hype up the game and never revealed to us over the last 2.5 years that they scrapped the initial designs/builds and started over to optimize the game around the lowest common denominator - XB1. I mean think about how many PC gamers upgraded specifically for the TW3. Is it fair to them?

The thing though PC gamers were also mislead because the developer kept releasing very high quality screenshots that supposedly depicted the awesome technical aspects of this game (see this thread) and this continued well into late 2014 and early 2015. It's only in the last 1.5-2 months that we started to notice that we might actually have been mislead all along. It's this type of tactic that upsets me and many other gamers. Essentially this is the strategy that was used were promoting AC Unity and it appears EA is using the same hype strategy when they are releasing very impressive trailers for Starwars Battlefront and keep insisting: "Yes, that's 100% in game graphics."

Also, was it really that difficult to leave out tessellation on buildings/castles? Look at the Unigine Heaven video and you can easily toggle the amount of tessellation and it makes a big difference to the graphics. Overall, many gamers have already said that despite the downgrade they will buy the game and enjoy it. It is disappointing though that the publisher/developer couldn't push the game for the PC, because one of the main reasons we get excited about CPU and GPU upgrades is to get next gen technical experiences far and above consoles. Escrow4 has a 5930K OC and a 780Ti and I can totally understand his frustration. I think it's also possible their excuse is just PR. Maybe they were pressured by MS/Sony that sales on consoles would be adversely affected if the PC version was A LOT better.

This is more about fair representation of your product vs. marketing hype. We all know TW3 isn't about graphics but gameplay, but is it fair and acceptable to present 1 thing for 2.5 years and then the final product 1.5 months before release is a different looking game? I guess these types of business tactics to get pre-orders can be upsetting imo.

 

[Gryz]

It's not misleading. All the good stuff was shown more than a year ago. During the last 12 months it seems they have shown screenshots that were pretty accurate to what we are getting.

If you pre-ordered over a year ago, and you feel cheated now, that's not CDPR's problem. That's the problem of a gamer who has has to learn patience.

 

[Zenoth]

You'd think people would learn.

I'm surprised that people get surprised by this (downgrading, cutting out content, etc). Guys, wake up? Do any of you remember the Post-E3 Dragon Age: Inquisition videos? Especially the one in which Mike Laidlaw narrates what is being presented? The first video showed the Hinterlands.

Here's a refresher:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdXvFEEBZeo

Obviously, the following will have meaning only if you've actually played Inquisition...

Skip to about 1:05, that woman, in the final game is found in a completely different location, in a house. Well ok, that's a nitpick, right? Well guess what, people compare bricks... a bunch of bricks with (or with less) tessellation in the old and newer Witcher 3 videos and pictures. And that wouldn't be nitpicking? BRICKS! For crying out loud...

To about 2:37, to quote Laidlaw: "Similarly, spread your Inquisition in a region and you'll see your troops paroling the roads and signs of their presence.". Ok, do any of you see your Inquisition troops paroling the roads of the regions you control in the final game? Well I've played the game two times to the end (and a half now), and all I can see are the very occasional pair of generic Inquisition soldiers seemingly appearing out of nowhere on a some random hill as I happen to walk by (with a chest that's sometimes empty and can't even be interacted with).

I haven't seen much in the form of "your troops paroling roads". And if they mean "random Inquisition pairs of soldiers poppin' out occasionally as you walk in the wild" as actual "signs of their presence" then ok... good effort there. You know what? Maybe it was too taxing for the lowest common denominator? Maybe poor XOne or even the PS4 would have imploded had a team of merely five soldiers or so would have actually patrolled the Hinterlands' roads after completely controlling it? Who knows, but that part of the game mechanics has been downgraded for the final game. It's "content tempered with".

The above are only two examples.

But I think that's the "best" one, the one that really showcases what can and does happen to "meaningful" content during a game's development:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAAEUFjq2K4

Skip to about 8:00 (or just watch the whole thing to get the context)... and from that point on, if you watch (and listen to what's going on as well) it should speak for itself. Now, at least from the first video I linked, I'd like to ask you guys if you've noticed anything particular? Because there is. Just look at the top-left corner of the screen. But that should have been obvious from the start, at the time too (especially at the time). If developers show off their "work-in-progress" you guys should IMMEDIATELY slow down on your expectations, heck might as well downgrade them huh. But do I really have to go Tutorial mode on you folks? Haven't we learned enough especially since the past couple of years?

I've used Inquisition as an example because it's still relatively recent, but I could go on with dozens of others. Why oh why do people go bunkers about this (graphics downgrade, etc) in this video gaming day and age. Ok, so the final ver- excuse me... the final *cough*PC*cough* version of the Witcher 3 will look "just like consoles" (let's presume just one second that it's going to be the case). There's going to be less trees than originally planned, less tessellation, less draw distance. Wow, damn I guess that CDPR sucks after all? Cancelling pre-order...

Seriously? All I want is a good, fun game to play, with some (if not a lot) of exploration thrown in. Is that what I've seen in the review (not preview) videos I've watched so far? Hell yeah! I want decent difficulty, mini-boss type battles as I enter some random crypt somewhere, I want to be able to fucking SWIM (sorry Inquisitor, but water isn't THAT deadly to Geralt) and find a lost treasure chest on the sea floor. Have I seen that actually happening in the videos I've watched? You bet! Heck, if I really feel like it I'd greatly appreciate some good time with some girls in a brothel... well holy cow, YOU CAN. Dude, just cleared a town or two of miscreants that only deserved your sword in their face as a form salutation and you're craving with some cards game? Go for it!

The Witcher 3's graphics are good, people, please. Downgrading? Ok, so what? It's going to happen with Cyberpunk 2077, it's going to happen with Dragon Age 4, 5 and 6. It's going to happen with DOOM 4, and Assassin's Creed 3000. It will keep happening after the release of the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Two. I'm saying this, because some of the gamers (not just here on these forums, but generally speaking the reactions I've seen regarding this whole graphics downgrade debacle) react to this as if THIS particular case with Witcher 3 was some sort of a "last straw". As if CDPR were "untouchables" and as if Witcher above all others should have stayed "pure" and virtuous, lest being desecrated by the filthy consoles. Well damn sorry to disappoint, 'coz it just happened.

Now, do keep in mind that I am typing all of this in direct reaction and referrence to that "insider article" linked earlier. It might ALL be untrue and the PC version might in fact be significantly better (graphically) than the consoles. But you know what, if that's NOT the case I don't care. If it IS the case I still don't care because all I want is what I've seen in the review videos. Everything about the Witcher 3's gameplay that has been shown so far are things I wanted to do in an action RPG since a long time (and which Inquisition didn't deliver on for the most part, even though that game was still generally good).

Well anyway I had to get this off of my chest. I for one do not regret my pre-order and simply cannot wait to play it.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Come on! You are being totally unreasonable here in criticizing a fellow PC gamer who is simply stating that CDPR promised us one thing, showed us a game that actually looked different, released a ton of amazing looking screenshots and now it seems the game has been made for consoles from the ground-up, with only minor differences on the PC being higher textures and NV GWs features. It's hard to believe it was SO difficult to make draw distance algorithm/setting 2-3X better for the PC.

I'm not being unreasonable. People have to give up the incessant bitching at every turn, stop looking at screenshots all day, and play the games(or don't). I for one am quite sick of the so called "PC gaming community" at times like these. The hype was purely the doing of the individual. You allow yourself to be so enamored by screenshots that you dillude yourself into believing it's the exact product you will be getting. Like those fast food commercials that show the perfectly placed sandwich with just the right amount of moisture on there to glisten in the lighting. It's all for the sale. If people haven't learned that by now they never will.

It's not misleading. All the good stuff was shown more than a year ago. During the last 12 months it seems they have shown screenshots that were pretty accurate to what we are getting.

If you pre-ordered over a year ago, and you feel cheated now, that's not CDPR's problem. That's the problem of a gamer who has has to learn patience.

I pre-ordered a long time ago, probably over a year now who knows. No reason for me not to really. As I said, I think the game looks quite good and is better than most games. I feel it looks better than Dragon Age Inquisition and I quite enjoyed that and had no issue with the graphics.
I have no doubt that once the game is released the whole graphics question will go right out the window and the game mechanics will be the focus. Look at the GTA5 thread. That game isn't exactly breaking any barriers with visual quality but it's a solid looking game with a large open world. I have no doubt The Witcher 3 will be just as well received, if not more so.

As Zenoth said there are a lot of examples out there where a game's "work in progress" trailer didn't look like the final version. To get everything playable in the game's final form changes are always made. Hell I was looking at some of the concept art for characters in Mortal Kombat X and I gotta say they downgraded a lot of them. Are the current models used bad? No but I think some of the ideas they trashed were a lot cooler looking. It's the same here, they show you something that isn't final but you somehow believe it is final. You only disappoint yourself.

 

[RussianSensation]

It's not misleading. All the good stuff was shown more than a year ago.

If you pre-ordered over a year ago, and you feel cheated now, that's not CDPR's problem. That's the problem of a gamer who has has to learn patience.

It has nothing to do with whether I pre-ordered the game or not. Did Acura hype up the next gen NSX by saying it'll run the Nurburging sub-7 minute but the final car can only manage 7:30? No. Does Toyota hype up the next Prius and says it'll do 75 mpg but when they release the car it only does 50 mpg?

During the last 12 months it seems they have shown screenshots that were pretty accurate to what we are getting.

I disagree.

August 30, 2014 screenshots:

Source

April 13, 2015 screenshots:

They did not depict real world gameplay graphics it seems....

I'm not being unreasonable. People have to give up the incessant bitching at every turn, stop looking at screenshots all day, and play the games(or don't). I for one am quite sick of the so called "PC gaming community" at times like these. The hype was purely the doing of the individual. You allow yourself to be so enamored by screenshots that you dillude yourself into believing it's the exact product you will be getting. Like those fast food commercials that show the perfectly placed sandwich with just the right amount of moisture on there to glisten in the lighting. It's all for the sale. If people haven't learned that by now they never will.

It may be OK to exaggerate a little bit but for this game they want overboard imho.

Games like The Order 1886, Ryse: Son of Rome, Crysis 1, Crysis 3, Metro 2033/Last Light (and remakes), GTA V, all Blizzard titles, Tomb Raider, Bioshock Infinite, Dishonored, Borderlands series, Rayman series, Batman AK series, Max Payne 3, XCOM series, Hitman series, etc. all look more or less identical to the final product based on pre-release videos/screenshots over 2-3 years of their development. The Witcher 3 and AC Unity appears to be have grossly exaggerated the final version of the game from a technical perspective.

Oh well, at least the gameplay will be amazing!

 

[cmdrdredd]

Those all look like cut scenes with lots of DoF and motion blur. I wouldn't be surprised if some of those scenes do look like that.

 

[futurefields]

It's not misleading. All the good stuff was shown more than a year ago. During the last 12 months it seems they have shown screenshots that were pretty accurate to what we are getting.

If you pre-ordered over a year ago, and you feel cheated now, that's not CDPR's problem. That's the problem of a gamer who has has to learn patience.

How is it not misleading if the "good stuff" is no longer in the game and people based their pre-order decisions off of said footage?

 

[tidy]

.

 

[thilanliyan]

That would suck if they downgraded...was looking to finally use XFire lol.
I think Bethesda did it in Oblivion IIRC as well.

 

[zinfamous]

What if the day 1 PC-only "patch" is upwards of 20gb or more?

It seems to me that the delay in playable PC state during this review period with the exclusive patch, on top of some assumed conspiracy that Sony/Microsoft muzzled a superior PC version in order not to hurt console sales, is a bit too convenient....

:hmm:

 

[motsm]

So does anyone remember this comment from Marcin Momot of CDPR? Also, doing a quick Google, other employees have said the same thing.

I believe some explanation is required here. Unfortunately this time we’ve encountered some horrible YouTube compression problems. At this very moment we are working on fixing this and will upload another version of the trailer as soon as we can. It will present much higher quality. I want to assure you that there will be no downgrade – I see this game every day – it looks stunning.

I'm still waiting to see the PC version on ultra settings, but I'd be quite surprised if it made the difference required to match the 2013 build. As I said before, graphics aren't even a big deal to me, but dishonest studios can go screw themselves.

 

[chimaxi83]

How is it not misleading if the "good stuff" is no longer in the game and people based their pre-order decisions off of said footage?

You base a pre-order on promotional graphics footage? LMAO. Hold on, let me ROFL too.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Man. All the moaning over graphics is a bit ridiculous. I remember playing games when good graphics meant that the game rendered in EVGA or super CGA. 16 colors?!?!?!?!? Hell yeah!

In any case, in the past CD project has produced an enhanced edition of its witcher games, improving upon gameplay and graphics. I bet they do the same with W3,

 

[StinkyPinky]

I did chuckle at the thought of people buying Titan's just to play this game.

This is why you must never do hardware purchases based on one game.

I think it's clear it has been downgraded by the way, people saying otherwise must have vision problems.

 

[tidy]

.

 

[motsm]

That would suck if they downgraded...was looking to finally use XFire lol.
I think Bethesda did it in Oblivion IIRC as well.

Oblivion's original reveal footage had real time shadows, and yet it took them until Skyrim to get past entirely baked lighting.

 

[zinfamous]

I did chuckle at the thought of people buying Titan's just to play this game.

This is why you must never do hardware purchases based on one game.

I think it's clear it has been downgraded by the way, people saying otherwise must have vision problems.

I don't understand this kind of thing either, but those people are out there, and you will see them on these forums more than other places in life.

That's fine with me--people do their thing that they like, and I can understand their grief...but in the end, you're the one making a decision to spend 2k+ on 2 pieces of hardware, based on nothing more than an assumption. ...it's an assumption because everyone knows full well that a promo of anything is nothing more than a promo.

Anyway, that being said, I can see an issue where the more games are possibly being downsampled to the lowest denominator--whichever console just can't hack it in whatever generation--there is going to be less and less need for any kind of popular market for high end GPUs. If these type of customers ever smarten up, they'll realize that upgrading to the bleeding edge every ~6 months is a colossal waste of money, considering that the industry is making content for upper-mid to lower-high end of hardware.

There are certainly other uses for the best GPU of each generation, but if AAA games end up leaving that market due to developers scaling assets to the single lowest base source across all platforms, I wonder what that means to the pace of development and progress in the GPU market?

 

[futurefields]

You base a pre-order on promotional graphics footage? LMAO. Hold on, let me ROFL too.

What is that?

Never heard this term before.

 

[zinfamous]

What is that?

Never heard this term before.

It's like every TV ad for every game ever: FMV and such, never gameplay. Early dev stuff that was never intended to hit release. It is not a new thing.

Has a Final Fantasy game advertised on TV ever used content outside of a FMV cutscene? No, no they haven't.

 

[tidy]

.

 

[futurefields]

Yeah people were saying 680's were overkill for 1080p and you should settle with 670 back in the day. they said 980's are overkill for 1080p. They'll say the same thing again next cards that come out.

There is no such thing as overkill at 1080p. Modern games need more and more anti-aliasing with all the crap going on. Look at GTA5, even with MSAA 4x + txaa there is still jaggies and crawling and flickering bullsh1t.

 

[RussianSensation]

When I look at the Witcher 3, I see a game absolutely loaded with transparencies, so that's going to be a crawling mess without some substantial power going into AA. The people with the "overkill" GPUs will be the ones laughing.

Mafia 2 is a 2010 game, so by most people's logic a 780 Ti is "overkill" for it. But I can't stress enough what a monumental difference 4xSGSSAA makes to that game, and a 780 Ti-class GPU is what you need to enable that (at 1080p). 100% worth it, it's like a whole new game.

CDPR did say Ubersampling will kill GPUs and it's a setting they planned to enable at a later point in time.

You are right about downsampling helping in some games.

The Vanishing of Ethan Carter
1080P vs. 5120x2880 (Move the mouse over to compare)

Hitman Absolution - look at the bricks on the buildings

However, is it worth to get a $700 GPU just for that ^^^ IMO, no. I would much rather spend $700 to play Witcher 3 with no AA, than to enable super-sampling on an ancient game like Mafia 2. You can fix crawlies, but you can't fix low polygon character models, outdated animation, old gen textures, old gen lightning/shadow effects, old gen particle effects, etc. You can apply as much super-sampling as you like but Crysis 1 or Doom 3 or Hitman Absolution will never look as good as Crysis 3.

Also, we would need to compare 4K with no AA, 1440p with SMAA/4xMSAA and 1080P with DSR/VSR to be able to make an assessment of what the best balance is. Based on screenshots at TechReport, native 4K looks better than 1080P with DSR at 4K. Remember a lot of gamers don't want to run a title at 30 fps with 4xSGSSAA either. So enabling super-sampling isn't always a solution that works when performance hit is 2-2.5X.

---

"The Witcher 3 Leaked on Torrent Sites; CD Projekt RED is Asking Pirates for Their Support"
http://www.misstral.com/the-witcher...jekt-red-is-asking-pirates-for-their-support/

 

[escrow4]

Well pre-ordered today regardless as I said. Fat old 100hr AAA RPGs don't come along every month even downgraded.



And I'm proud not to have bought a Titan X for it. :whiste: