# [YT] Witcher 3 : Graphic downgrade analysis - The PC version of Ultra vs. Gameplay trailer



## Clockster

Yip as I thought, and there are still people defending them...


----------



## Alatar

Apparently the final version does indeed have higher LOD and better AO: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/indexb2.cfm?id=125693

however it's still nowhere close to even the 35min footage.


----------



## MaxFTW

I wonder if that day 1 patch will fix this eh? Unlikely.

It looks a real unbalanced mess in places now as you can see that some assets that could of been axed, are still there and others have just took a way a lot and made everything simple.

Graphics dont sell me a game, But lying to the playerbase doesn't make me want to buy a game too, A lot of what has been compared was not stamped with "Not in game footage"

From day 1 i didnt expect it to come out with the quality that was promised, but i also didnt expect it to be this significant.


----------



## FissioN2222

I'll just leave this here - http://whatifgaming.com/developer-insider-the-witcher-3-was-downgraded-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why


----------



## John Shepard

no amount of mods or patches will "fix" this

thanks consoles!


----------



## ThePath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clockster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yip as I thought, and there are still people defending them...


Yes I still defend it because graphics is not important, and gameplay/story is more important. This got a lot of good score by reviewers. The graphics still look good even with the downgrades.


----------



## Gunderman456

First game I ever pre-order based on CDPR's PC centric history and my thanks is getting jabbed in the ribs.

I've dropped beloved franchises and devs for less. I hate being lied too and yes consoles are a cancer on the industry.


----------



## Alatar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FissioN2222*
> 
> I'll just leave this here - http://whatifgaming.com/developer-insider-the-witcher-3-was-downgraded-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why


Sorry but no, that article is just complete garbage even though the game was clearly downgraded.

A lot of what the "supposed developer source" is talking about there is quite clearly in the game. Either the site is making stuff up or someone pulled something out of their ass and decided to troll the site.


----------



## Scorpii

The more I watched the worse it got









A very clear difference in all scenes. What a shame. It's becoming more clear to me that the silence from CDPR on this is just so they can hold on to their pre orders...

Obviously graphics do not necessarily make the game, and it will likely still be very good, but to have shown off what it could and maybe should have ended up being and then stripping out a lot of the detail and overall scene quality is very disappointing. Graphics and art direction do lend a lot to the atmosphere and immersion of games like this, so it will definitely suffer for this I think. Some of the comparisons near the end of that video made the final release look worse than a lot of other games coming out recently, which is nothing like what the Witcher 2 was when it was released


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThePath*
> 
> Yes I still defend it because graphics is not important, and gameplay/story is more important. This got a lot of good score by reviewers. The graphics still look good even with the downgrades.


This. The graphical downgrade _doesn't matter_. Game still looks good and by all accounts so far is very good. So why complain about it? Because boo hoo hoo consoles? That makes no sense to me.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Is it just me, or does it look more like a lighting/shadow change more than texture/model changes? I have paused several times and looked, and especially with grass and foliage; it looks like lighting changes more than the actual model changed. At least when out of town and in the fields and mountains.

Where I did notice assets completely missing are in towns. The road texture appears to be different entirely, candles and parts of walls are missing in the Tavern/Inn. So it looks like they changed lighting in town, and removed some minor assets. I can only imagine this was to deal with the massive shortcomings of the consoles.










On the plus side, there are points in the video that the final version is clearly better looking. So I think ultimately this is still a win for us. I think there were, based off the video, some reasonable trade-offs made. One that we should expect to happen during the development process.

This wasn't a flat-out across-the-board nerfing to the visuals of the game.


----------



## Alatar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> . The graphical downgrade _doesn't matter_.


This is completely subjective and it clearly does matter to a lot of people.

And quite honestly CDPR deserve to lose their reputation over this. And looking around the internet it seems like that's pretty much exactly what's happening. And that's a good thing. Liars shouldn't be rewarded.


----------



## xundeadgenesisx

I don't understand why everybody is up in arms over this graphic down grade. Your expectations were set by pre-alpha footage and your upset over a visual downgrade before the game even launches. Since when are teasers and pre-alpha footage supposed to be the games final look?


----------



## MaxFTW

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> This. The graphical downgrade _doesn't matter_. Game still looks good and by all accounts so far is very good. So why complain about it? Because boo hoo hoo consoles? That makes no sense to me.


If you had the option for it to look like it did in the 2013/2014 gameplay, Would you like it to look like this?

Thats why.


----------



## inedenimadam

As long as the game play and story are spot on, I dont really mind if there are a few missing assets, or lighting changes. They are giving us the "redkit" (I think that is what it is called?) to make whatever changes we would like to see. My guess is that the modding community is ripe for a new large scale project with the debacle Skyrim has become since the introduction of paid mods.

Edit: with that said, This is the first game in a long time that I have preordered, and will hold my tongue about the level of downgrade until I cal play it.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaxFTW*
> 
> If you had the option for it to look like it did in the 2013/2014 gameplay, Would you like it to look like this?
> 
> Thats why.


Based off the video in this thread, I would take the final version. The colors don't look as nearly washed out and over saturated with lighting.


----------



## Use

DRM (not that it has to do anything with downgrade) or sh**y graphics, pick your poison. Will not speak for everybody but myself, I'd rather pay more for the game if they are afraid to make the PC version looking better than console. PC 80$ console 45$ and stop false advertising let me enjoy a great game with nice graphics.

Will pick it up maybe at Xmas Steam sale.


----------



## Leopard2lx

I just watched the 4 hour IGN play though with the devs they did this week and I definitely see the lighting as the biggest culprit. The game just looks flat at certain times, but at the same time it did look very good in other areas. It almost seems to be a bit inconsistent.

Regardless, in all honesty, I think the game still looks VERY GOOD, my biggest problem is the whole concept of platform parity and sacrificing the PC platform for consoles. It's almost not even worth having a high-end PC anymore because the game will overall still look the same thanks to consoles and lazy devs.

And the practice of showing off amazing screen shots and trailers for 1 year, only to remove very important elements from the final product, is terrible business. And they haven't been axactly forthcoming about it either. In fact, employees have been told not to discuss the visual differences publicly. Shady! I also love how CDPR went on and on about how they love PC gamers and even pirates blah blah blah, only to come out and give us a console game. They weren't even competent or willing enough to include good AA options. They just have an "Anti Aliasing ON/OFF" option. Seriously? Pretty much no effort has been put into the PC version over consoles. I'm betting the "Uber" settings are pretty much the same as the consoles.

I still remember a tweet from the founder of CDPR a few months ago saying that the PC version will be the best looking version.







That must have been before they decided to gut the game for us for the sake of keeping the consoles happy.

Still one BIG question remains: Why do they recommend a 980 for 1080p, if there is no significant difference in visuals? Playing at 60fps over 30fps should not require a card that's 4 times more powerful than the PS4. So Bad optimization? Or trying to help Nvidia sell a few high end cards?


----------



## NFL

These are the games I'm building another PC for? I feel like an idiot now


----------



## luckyduck

Thanks Obama


----------



## Scorpii

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Based off the video in this thread, I would take the final version. The colors don't look as nearly washed out and over saturated with lighting.


But you're fine with the missing and lower quality assets (the main thing for me), lower quality lighting, bad quality water, reduced foliage/grass density and variety, reduced variety of textures and assets in towns, reduced draw distances, etc?


----------



## Assirra

Another thread about this exact topic?
Come on now...


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alatar*
> 
> This is completely subjective and it clearly does matter to a lot of people.
> 
> And quite honestly CDPR deserve to lose their reputation over this. And looking around the internet it seems like that's pretty much exactly what's happening. And that's a good thing. Liars shouldn't be rewarded.


\

I highly doubt CD Project Red will lose reputation over this. If they did downgrade it, they will surely make up for it somehow. People are looking for a reason to pirate this game because they know it will be HIGHLY pirate-able due to how CD Project Red treats their patches. Haters need to think "Screw this, this game is not what they promised it to be, I am not paying my money for it. *seeking favorite torrent site...* "

*What fascinates me is the most are the people with mid/low-end hardware complaining about it! As if they could've run those super-Ultra settings on their machines...*

Check out the system specs of people doing the complaining, lol! They should happy to run the game at medium-low graphics settings, but they complain about the ultra-level settings they could never run with their rigs.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scorpii*
> 
> But you're fine with the missing and lower quality assets (the main thing for me), lower quality lighting, bad quality water, reduced foliage/grass density and variety, reduced variety of textures and assets in towns, reduced draw distances, etc?


Not sure which videos you have seen, but the one gameplay video in 4K of the current version showed extreme draw distances, to say the least.


----------



## Alvarez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> This. The graphical downgrade _doesn't matter_. Game still looks good and by all accounts so far is very good. So why complain about it? Because boo hoo hoo consoles? That makes no sense to me.


Because we are betrayed. That's why.

I doubt that most of the people here slam CDP for downgrade. No. If you read carefully most of the people are angry because this community always considered CDP as pro-PC developer. They promised so many things and people pre-ordered the game because those guys deserved it with their attitude.

Until now.

Now:

They lied about the downgrade, they repeated numerous times that "the final game will look even better, we didn't downgrade anything etc."
They said everything which will be released in future will be free but added "season pass"
They started to ban people from their forums who complain or ask questions about downgrade.
They still said nothing about all these crapstorm.

If it was Ubisoft we weren't that angry, or EA. It hurts more that the company you trust . That's why we are angry.

Es tu CDP ? This is what's happening right now


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> These are the games I'm building another PC for? I feel like an idiot now


If you are building a PC for just a few games, then you should definitely feel that way.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scorpii*
> 
> But you're fine with the missing and lower quality assets (the main thing for me), lower quality lighting, bad quality water, reduced foliage/grass density and variety, reduced variety of textures and assets in towns, reduced draw distances, etc?


Except there are areas where the assets aren't lower, but better. As I said in my first post, a few areas has missing assets, but the textures and other assets don't appear to be altered. They just appear to be shadowed and lit differently. Don't pay attention to the colors, or lighting, look at the physical asset itself. The biggest example are the leaves, they appear to be the same - just different lighting.

So, yes, I am willing to not give a crap that a few candles in Pre-Alpha are gone, because the game still looks great, and over-all it looks better now than before. At least based off the video in this thread; the lighting, shadows, and colors appear to be well refined over the Pre-Alpha.

Not surprising.

Obviously some assets have been removed, others added, some just slightly changed. If anything we are seeing mostly texture/lighting balancing than anything. Yes, particle effects were cut back in certain areas, and I think for good reason. The demo shown with all the fire and particle effects was obviously running at a very low frame rate.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThePath*
> 
> Yes I still defend it because graphics is not important, and gameplay/story is more important. This got a lot of good score by reviewers. The graphics still look good even with the downgrades.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> This. The graphical downgrade _doesn't matter_. Game still looks good and by all accounts so far is very good. So why complain about it? Because boo hoo hoo consoles? That makes no sense to me.


Jesus I can't believe you guys don't get it. That game could look like Galaxian for all I care that's not the issue. The issue is with them lying to the customers. When rumors of downgrades started floating around CDPRED were simply saying ''No don't worry, it's not Ultra''. They basically kept lying until the very end, acting like they had something else in store when they did not. That's the issue. The problem is developers lying to the face of consumers.

If the game looked like an N64 title and they had admitted that form the get-go then nobody would care but when you lie all the way to the release there's a problem. I couldn't care less about console parity or any of that crap. CD Projekt RED are liars and we have every right to be pissed about it. No amount of great gameplay changes that.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> I'll just leave this here...
> http://i.imgur.com/nxUr5jZ.gif


I see a mentally unstable school drop-out too fazed out on drugs and his girly chores without absolutely no knowledge of what scientific method is and how to compare graphics in the first place.

Maybe someone should take some screenshots of a wall-close up in 2015 version and post them as an example. People like you would be so happy, yelling - LOW RESOLUTION! HAHA!

*FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!* You cannot compare graphics, assets, and whatever else UNLESS you can capture IDENTICAL SCREENSHOTS from BOTH VERSIONS for comparison, using the highest quality settings available. *There has YET to be a SINGLE valid comparison*, where all variables were under control!

I swear these complainers have either never went to Middle School and never done a Science Fair Project or have severe memory lapses of how to compare anything in a controlled environment.


----------



## SoulThief

The funny thing is, if the game has been downgraded that much, like everyone is whining and dying about. And it still needs a 980 to run on ultra, you guys would be crying anyway because I see very few people with better hardware that could run the game like you want to.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoulThief*
> 
> The funny thing is, if the game has been downgraded that much, like everyone is whining and dying about. And it still needs a 980 to run on ultra, you guys would be crying anyway because I see very few people with better hardware that could run the game like you want to.


I would love to see a Medium settings PC vs Console side-by-side of it. Fairly certain people might shut up at that point, and realize the game still looks really good.

Then again, that could totally back fire and it might look like ass at Medium.


----------



## poii

pcgh.de got access to the day1 patch and The Witcher 3 got a decent graphics update with it.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/The-Witcher-3-Screenshots-1159185/

You can move that slider thingy in the "Vergleich Preview- und Review-Version" screenshot.


----------



## TheReciever

You have no one to blame but yourselves for getting hyped into games media based on a trailer of an unfinished product.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> You have no one to blame but yourselves for getting hyped into games media based on a trailer of an unfinished product.


So the developers lie but the customers should blame themselves? This is on the level of ''she was asking for it''.


----------



## SoulThief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> I would love to see a Medium settings PC vs Console side-by-side of it. Fairly certain people might shut up at that point, and realize the game still looks really good.
> 
> Then again, that could totally back fire and it might look like ass at Medium.


I think people will be disappointed. The console versions are specifically tailored to use as much of the power that is available to them. There's a lot more tricks you can apply on a console than you can on a pc. I would not be surprised the game would look better than medium (or even high).

That doesn't mean there is parity, remember needing a 980 for ultra is hardly parity. It just shows how incredibly shafted pc users are because their hardware is not used efficiently and the console hardware is. That makes a huge, huge difference.

That is precisely the reason why DX12 'could' make a huge difference. Low-level access with high-end hardware can change the playing field considerably.


----------



## Celeras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alatar*
> 
> This is completely subjective and it clearly does matter to a lot of people.
> 
> And quite honestly CDPR deserve to lose their reputation over this. And looking around the internet it seems like that's pretty much exactly what's happening. And that's a good thing. Liars shouldn't be rewarded.


The reason for gaming's downfall right here, folks. People like this. Ya'll are straight pathetic and deserve what you get.

A "look around the internet" reveals a critically acclaimed GOTY contender with folks like you trying to rally behind a pitchfork. Good luck with that.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alvarez*
> 
> Because we are betrayed. That's why.
> 
> I doubt that most of the people here slam CDP for downgrade. No. If you read carefully most of the people are angry because this community always considered CDP as pro-PC developer. They promised so many things and people pre-ordered the game because those guys deserved it with their attitude.
> 
> Until now.
> 
> Now:
> 
> They lied about the downgrade, they repeated numerous times that "the final game will look even better, we didn't downgrade anything etc."
> They said everything which will be released in future will be free but added "season pass"
> They started to ban people from their forums who complain or ask questions about downgrade.
> They still said nothing about all these crapstorm.
> 
> If it was Ubisoft we weren't that angry, or EA. It hurts more that the company you trust suddenly becomes ****. That's why we are angry.
> 
> Es tu CDP ? This is what's happening right now


The game is not out yet, you know?


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> So the developers lie but the customers should blame themselves? This is on the level of ''she was asking for it''.


I would hardly compare it to rape, that is a gross debate tactic at worst.

What part of it being an unfinished product did you not understand? Did you sign a contract with CDPR that there will be nothing but improvements from the point of 2013 trailer, or did they retain creative freedom and do what ever the heck they want with it?


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Celeras*
> 
> The reason for gaming's downfall right here, folks. People like this. Ya'll are straight pathetic and deserve what you get.
> 
> A "look around the internet" reveals a critically acclaimed GOTY contender with folks like you trying to rally behind a pitchfork. Good luck with that.


They will be the minority anyway. I bet Witcher 3 will be one of the few top games ever made for PC, supported by both - critic and user reviews.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoulThief*
> 
> *I think people will be disappointed. The console versions are specifically tailored to use as much of the power that is available to them. There's a lot more tricks you can apply on a console than you can on a pc*. I would not be surprised the game would look better than medium (or even high).
> 
> That doesn't mean there is parity, remember needing a 980 for ultra is hardly parity. It just shows how incredibly shafted pc users are because their hardware is not used efficiently and the console hardware is. That makes a huge, huge difference.
> 
> That is precisely the reason why DX12 'could' make a huge difference. Low-level access with high-end hardware can change the playing field considerably.


Except when you factor the consoles are running at 30fps and the 980 is running at 60fps with higher settings. I even heard the PS4 was sometimes dipping below 30.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> I would hardly compare it to rape, that is a gross debate tactic at worst.
> 
> What part of it being an unfinished product did you not understand? Did you sign a contract with CDPR that there will be nothing but improvements from the point of 2013 trailer, or did they retain creative freedom and do what ever the heck they want with it?


Did you forget when they kept claiming they didn't downgrade the game and that they weren't showing Ultra to wow gamers? They blatantly mislead people right until the end. They acted like they had something up their sleeves when they didn't.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> I see a mentally unstable school drop-out too fazed out on drugs and his girly chores without absolutely no knowledge of what scientific method is and how to compare graphics in the first place.
> 
> Maybe someone should take some screenshots of a wall-close up in 2015 version and post them as an example. People like you would be so happy, yelling - LOW RESOLUTION! HAHA!
> 
> *FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!* You cannot compare graphics, assets, and whatever else UNLESS you can capture IDENTICAL SCREENSHOTS from BOTH VERSIONS for comparison, using the highest quality settings available. *There has YET to be a SINGLE valid comparison*, where all variables were under control!
> 
> I swear these complainers have either never went to Middle School and never done a Science Fair Project or have severe memory lapses of how to compare anything in a controlled environment.


I think somebody took a joke wayyyy too seriously. Calm down, sir. You're only making yourself look silly.

On the whole though, what I see from you is blind defense of an obvious downgrade. Just because it's CDPR. Newsflash - they gave us a console game this time.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *poii*
> 
> pcgh.de got access to the day1 patch and The Witcher 3 got a decent graphics update with it.
> http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/The-Witcher-3-Screenshots-1159185/
> 
> You can move that slider thingy in the "Vergleich Preview- und Review-Version" screenshot.


There, we have it! Like I was saying - Day 1 patch restores that awesome graphics we all wanted!!! I can see obvious improvement in HBAO for grass from that slider comparison!


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> I think somebody took a joke wayyyy too seriously. Calm down, sir. You're only making yourself look silly.
> 
> On the whole though, what I see from you is blind defense of an obvious downgrade. Just because it's CDPR. Newsflash - they gave us a console game this time.


Why don't we wait for release and the patch before we start calling it?

You still have to remember we are all going off review samples. Which all come with the same _"This is not the final product"_ disclaimer; usually.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> I think somebody took a joke wayyyy too seriously. Calm down, sir. You're only making yourself look silly.
> 
> On the whole though, what I see from you is blind defense of an obvious downgrade. Just because it's CDPR. Newsflash - they gave us a console game this time.


*Look up - Day 1 patch improved graphics.* My defense is not blind and backed up, but yours is based on ******ed un-scientific comparison of screenshots of different locations, angles, and possible settings that only a child could make.


----------



## Celeras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> They will be the minority anyway. I bet Witcher 3 will be one of the few top games ever made for PC, supported by both - critic and user reviews.


It already is.

And people like this will say whatever they can to push their ridiculous agenda, and this thread is no different. The guy posted a video from a leaked/non final version of the game, and then a HALF HOUR later posted a link basically showing the video was wrong. Did he edit into the OP? No. He just posted it later in the thread, rallied his pitchfork brethren and harped "apparently the video isn't accurate in the slightest, but it doesn't matter anyway! RIOTTTTT".

Sad.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> Except when you factor the consoles are running at 30fps and the 980 is running at 60fps with higher settings. I even heard the PS4 was sometimes dipping below 30.
> Did you forget when they kept claiming they didn't downgrade the game and that they weren't showing Ultra to wow gamers? They blatantly mislead people right until the end. They acted like they had something up their sleeves when they didn't.


God forbid we have consumers that can think for themselves instead of BUYING INTO THE HYPE TRAIN.

You all must get fairly disgruntled when your anti-aging cream doesn't work.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> God forbid we have consumers that can think for themselves instead of BUYING INTO THE HYPE TRAIN.
> 
> You all must get fairly disgruntled when your anti-aging cream doesn't work.


I didn't buy the game so it doesn't bother me too much(got it for free with a 970). What bothers me is people like you placing the blame on the customers. This industry practice really needs to go. From season passes to locked on-disc content to misleading trailers. The gaming industry's relation with the consumers has really gone down the drain the past couple of years.


----------



## pengs

It's the difference in rendering technique, it's not reversable even with ultra uber textures and mega super HBAO or whatever they are doing there; the lighting isn't coming back and it will be apparent when you enter a building.


----------



## MonarchX

Preview (notice absence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)


Day 1 Patch (notice existence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)


So much for all your whining. *Day 1 Patch will re-upgrade graphics*, but framerate will be LOWER. That means all your GTX 570's, 680's, and etc. can forget about getting good framerate at max settings. I'd be surprised if such rigs can pull 30fps with such settings.

EDIT: I do notice that the Day 1 Patch screenshot has Vignette PP applied to it too, but that is not the only effect and it wouldn't change the way distant grass in the middle looks.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> I didn't buy the game so it doesn't bother me too much(got it for free with a 970). What bothers me is people like you placing the blame on the customers. This industry practice really needs to go. From season passes to locked on-disc content to misleading trailers. The gaming industry's relation with the consumers has really gone down the drain the past couple of years.


So how does being an educated consumer have anything to do with locked on disc content and season passes?

Oh wait. You mean as a consumer, you dont like these practices. Its a shame especially if your a victim since no one cares about you after you throw money at them.

This is why Pre-ordering is stupid


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> So how does being an educated consumer have anything to do with locked on disc content and season passes?
> 
> Oh wait. You mean as a consumer, you dont like these practices. Its a shame especially if your a victim since no one cares about you after you throw money at them.
> 
> This is why Pre-ordering is stupid


I couldn't agree more with the pre-ordering part. I'm completely against it.

I also agree customers should do researches and educate themselves but it falls on the company to convey the right information at the right time. If they didn't lie, we wouldn't be having these talks in the first place.


----------



## kzone75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Preview (notice absence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)
> 
> 
> Day 1 Patch (notice existence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)
> 
> 
> So much for all your whining. *Day 1 Patch will re-upgrade graphics*, but framerate will be LOWER. That means all your GTX 570's, 680's, and etc. can forget about getting good framerate at max settings. I'd be surprised if such rigs can pull 30fps with such settings.


Doesn't look any better though..


----------



## MonarchX

Depends if you know what to look for and if you know what HBAO does. HBAO for grass was supposedly takes out, but Day 1 Patch restores it for sure. I am sure it restores many other things. This is exactly why the Review version of the game has not been sent out. Developers probably SAW how many people complain about graphics downgrade and decided to appease their PC fans by restoring at least some, if not all, supposedly removed effects.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> I couldn't agree more with the pre-ordering part. I'm completely against it.
> 
> I also agree customers should do researches and educate themselves but it falls on the company to convey the right information at the right time. If they didn't lie, we wouldn't be having these talks in the first place.


Nobody forces you to pre-order! This is the first game, since BF4, that I have pre-ordered and I had good reasons to do - CD Project RED has yet to let me down, Witcher 1 and 2 were among the top action RPG's I ever played, Witcher 3 looked awesome to me, even the 2015 version. I pre-ordered the game only 3 days ago, knowing about the "possible" downgrade. See, far from everyone give a damn if developers removed some effects. You can't judge a game by that nor can you judge the developers based on a SINGLE factor like downgrade. If you do, then stop playing all your games because developers always leave something out in every game, be it graphics or quests or whatever else.


----------



## iamhollywood5

So just like Crytek, CDPR sold out for consoles, forcing console parity, and abandoned the community that made them what they are. I hope they also suffer the same fate as Crytek.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamhollywood5*
> 
> So just like Crytek, CDPR sold out for consoles, forcing console parity, and abandoned the community that made them what they are. I hope they also suffer the same fate as Crytek.


They didn't and didn't and didn't and they won't suffer. YOU, on the other hand, do suffer and will suffer.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> I couldn't agree more with the pre-ordering part. I'm completely against it.
> 
> I also agree customers should do researches and educate themselves but it falls on the company to convey the right information at the right time. If they didn't lie, we wouldn't be having these talks in the first place.


Or you just wait 12 hours for reviews to not be under NDA?


----------



## djriful

Straight to the point, the ruined the game atmosphere completely. Places suppose to feel threats and dangerous feel and now I don't when I look at that area... it looks like wonderland to me now...


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> They didn't and didn't and didn't and they won't suffer. YOU, on the other hand, do suffer and will suffer.


You're pretty hardcore on the whole blind defense thing, aren't ya? I usually defend developers, but you sir, are on a whole new level; the sad part is, you're going on and on about people being angry over the downgrade when you yourself are even MORE angry about the people being angry.

*headdesks*

Sir, you need to chill the heck out.

Whether you choose to believe it or not, they did sell out to consoles. They imposed arbitrary limits on a limitless platform because of consoles. Plain and simple. You can say "no they didn't", but you'd still be wrong just like you are now.

I'm not saying the game won't be great. I can't wait to play it tomorrow, but the facts remain, they sold out and downgraded because of the consoles limitations.


----------



## MonarchX

There is one and ONLY one issue with Witcher 3 that existed with Witcher 1 and 2. The issue is that you can just take people's stuff in houses without consequences. "I am sorry your husband was butchered and monsters raided your village, making everyone really depressed, BUT Ima go and take all your stuff







".


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> You're pretty hardcore on the whole blind defense thing, aren't ya? I usually defend developers, but you sir, are on a whole new level.


There is no reason not to defend them. Haters have nothing, but completely absurd and invalid comparisons of whichever versions in whichever places form whichever sources, ignoring 1000's of variables that need to be controlled and identical to make a valid comparison. From a scientific point of view, my defense is more logical and rational than your emotional, biased, and dogmatic hatefulness.


----------



## Hyoketsu

I'm just watching this from the sidelines with a bucketful of popcorn and laughing my arse off. Seriously, some of you guys here are a riot. Judging by some of the comments here it's as if the game is ugly as sin, and the removed eyecandy somehow ruins the entire experience.
Newsflash: the game still looks gorgeous, will have an A+ tier story, and everyone will still have a blast of a time playing it. Heck, the majority of the playerbase's rigs - mine included - will probably struggle to hold 60fps on medium, much less ultra, and they're still complaining.
I only feel sorry for the devs that their impressive work is getting so much flak. There are tons of reasons why downgrading might've even been mandatory considering the hefty requirements the game has even after the alterations. I'm no master game dev, but even I know that. Most of the haters don't even bother trying to look at things from a developer's perspective.
Grow up, people.
Or not. I'll have fun at your expense.


----------



## Leopard2lx

Another PC "ultra" vs PS4 comparison video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fUGFmmikn4

Ha ha ha! Please go die in a fire CDPR!


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> There is no reason not to defend them.


Except, you know, selling out to consoles for parity sake.


----------



## h2spartan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Preview (notice absence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Day 1 Patch (notice existence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So much for all your whining. *Day 1 Patch will re-upgrade graphics*, but framerate will be LOWER. That means all your GTX 570's, 680's, and etc. can forget about getting good framerate at max settings. I'd be surprised if such rigs can pull 30fps with such settings.
> 
> EDIT: I do notice that the Day 1 Patch screenshot has Vignette PP applied to it too, but that is not the only effect and it wouldn't change the way distant grass in the middle looks.


The point of a properly made pc game is to have options to enable/disable features when a performance gain becomes necessary. Why would those with weaker cards have to be affected by those additional enhancements when they could turn them off, unless of course, the developer forced you to use them and in that case, would be a poorly developed pc version tantamount to a port.


----------



## fashric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoulThief*
> 
> The funny thing is, if the game has been downgraded that much, like everyone is whining and dying about. And it still needs a 980 to run on ultra, you guys would be crying anyway because I see very few people with better hardware that could run the game like you want to.


This is exactly what happens if a game comes out with crazy system requirements, every time. To those saying you were lied to, simply just don't buy the game. CDPR have given plenty of time for you to make an informed decision, quit playing the poor little victims its embarrassing.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Another PC "ultra" vs PS4 comparison video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fUGFmmikn4
> 
> Ha ha ha! Please go die in a fire CDPR!


I hope not, one of the few developers that can actually make a decent rpg.

It's already getting top scores across the board so they aint gonne die soon.


----------



## Boomer1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Another PC "ultra" vs PS4 comparison video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fUGFmmikn4
> 
> Ha ha ha! Please go die in a fire CDPR!


I honestly hope the PC version is better than that. I mainly game on Ps4, but I hate parity. PC should be A LOT better looking than the Ps4. Developers need to stop caving to Microsoft/Sony.


----------



## Said Nobody

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boomer1990*
> 
> I honestly hope the PC version is better than that. I mainly game on Ps4, but I hate parity. PC should be A LOT better looking than the Ps4. Developers need to stop caving to Microsoft/Sony.


The PS4 looks really good, especially for that kind of hardware lol I expected better from CDPR... I am not really bothered about the graphics but the downgrade, the worst part is they lied. Claiming that was no downgrade at all.

But hey I am happy with my purchase. ITs a really good RPG game.


----------



## Smokey the Bear

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> If you are building a PC for just a few games, then you should definitely feel that way.


So what should he build one for then? Decoration?


----------



## iCrap

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Another PC "ultra" vs PS4 comparison video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fUGFmmikn4
> 
> Ha ha ha! Please go die in a fire CDPR!


but thats PC before the day 1 patch.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smokey the Bear*
> 
> So what should he build one for then? Decoration?


Better resolution and framerate?
Just by that alone PC will be the best version for most games.


----------



## HowHardCanItBe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> These are the games I'm building another PC for? I feel like an idiot now


Building a PC for one game? Why....


----------



## BulletSponge

One thing is for certain, we might never get the exact same graphics as shown in 2013 but we will get another half dozen new threads on the subject in the next 24 hours.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smokey the Bear*
> 
> So what should he build one for then? Decoration?


No, many games, home-theater stuff, browsing the web, MS Office-stuff, etc. PC has MANY uses, but I guess not everyone knows that...


----------



## HowHardCanItBe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boomer1990*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Another PC "ultra" vs PS4 comparison video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fUGFmmikn4
> 
> Ha ha ha! Please go die in a fire CDPR!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly hope the PC version is better than that. I mainly game on Ps4, but I hate parity. PC should be A LOT better looking than the Ps4. Developers need to stop caving to Microsoft/Sony.
Click to expand...

IF you want consoles to die, stop funding the nvidia/amd/intel foundation. It's as simple as that. Developers/publishers don't care about ethics or morals. All they care is about whether something will turn into a profit and lining their deep pockets and PC gamers are beta testers for console gaming


----------



## h2spartan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HowHardCanItBe*
> 
> Building a PC for one game? Why....


A lot of people do that and a lot of people buy consoies too for just one or two games (of course console are cheaper but some would still say not worth the cost for just a couple games). I remember when BF4 was about to be released. The hype to buy up new hardware and build new PCs for that one game was huge. It's not so farfetched anymore.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Another PC "ultra" vs PS4 comparison video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fUGFmmikn4
> 
> Ha ha ha! Please go die in a fire CDPR!


Actually CD Project RED will remain with its awesome reputation, make a ton of money, and be happy, while you'll still be hating. CD Project RED = 1 vs. You = 0







.

BTW, PC version looks obviously sharper and graphics is OUTSTANDING on both, but more so on PC, just not by much. Besides, this was WITHOUT Day 1 Patch.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2spartan*
> 
> A lot of people do that and a lot of people buy consoies too for just one or two games (of course console are cheaper but some would still say not worth the cost for just a couple games). I remember when BF4 was about to be released. The hype to buy up new hardware and build new PCs for that one game was huge. *It's not so farfetched anymore*.


But it IS stupid.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> But it IS stupid.


Downgrades and imposing arbitrary limits is stupid.


----------



## JTHMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> As long as the game play and story are spot on, I dont really mind if there are a few missing assets, or lighting changes. They are giving us the "redkit" (I think that is what it is called?) to make whatever changes we would like to see. My guess is that the modding community is ripe for a new large scale project with the debacle Skyrim has become since the introduction of paid mods.
> 
> Edit: with that said, This is the first game in a long time that I have preordered, and will hold my tongue about the level of downgrade until I cal play it.


Exactly this ^


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hyoketsu*
> 
> I'm just watching this from the sidelines with a bucketful of popcorn and laughing my arse off. Seriously, some of you guys here are a riot. Judging by some of the comments here it's as if the game is ugly as sin, and the removed eyecandy somehow ruins the entire experience.
> Newsflash: the game still looks gorgeous, will have an A+ tier story, and everyone will still have a blast of a time playing it. Heck, the majority of the playerbase's rigs - mine included - will probably struggle to hold 60fps on medium, much less ultra, and they're still complaining.
> I only feel sorry for the devs that their impressive work is getting so much flak. There are tons of reasons why downgrading might've even been mandatory considering the hefty requirements the game has even after the alterations. I'm no master game dev, but even I know that. Most of the haters don't even bother trying to look at things from a developer's perspective.
> Grow up, people.
> Or not. I'll have fun at your expense.


Tired of people saying by the way they did the PC community a favor by downgrading since most would struggle to play it on PC. No, no, no, that is why you don't lie and kowtow to consoles. They should have left the promised visuals and leaving it up to in game settings so those that are capable can push the game and those that are not can chose to lower settings.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2spartan*
> 
> Haha, troll response.


I'm more of an orgre-type
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> Downgrades and imposing arbitrary limits is stupid.


Then every single game release is stupid because every single game has such limits.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alatar*
> 
> Liars shouldn't be rewarded.


They have a word for groups of people who follow someone based primarily on that person's moral qualities; it's called a cult.

I've seen this in the PC gaming community with Valve also... these companies gain very literally religious followings for their supposed moral qualities. Maybe this whole thing, along with Valve's paid mod disaster with Skyrim, should encourage all of you to judge these companies as they are - companies producing a product for you to either purchase or not, and not as religious figureheads endowed with some sort of salvific properties towards your ideals about PC gaming.


----------



## ArtistDeAlec

As someone who games on 1366x768 I wont be affected much but lt still hurts to see PC being held back, as usual.


----------



## Lord Xeb

Still looks good but not nearly as good.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lord Xeb*
> 
> Still looks good but not nearly as good.


This.

Guess we know what that last delay was *really* for.


----------



## Somasonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xundeadgenesisx*
> 
> I don't understand why everybody is up in arms over this graphic down grade. Your expectations were set by pre-alpha footage and your upset over a visual downgrade before the game even launches. Since when are teasers and pre-alpha footage supposed to be the games final look?


Because games are supposed to _get better_ as they're developed, not _worse_.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Somasonic*
> 
> Because games are supposed to _get better_ as they're developed, not _worse_.


But early footage was Alpha (pie in the sky), why do people expect the game and graphics to get better? From Alpha to Gold, people should expect worse, don't you know.


----------



## Smokey the Bear

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> No, many games, home-theater stuff, browsing the web, MS Office-stuff, etc. PC has MANY uses, but I guess not everyone knows that...


Surely he planned on doing more with it than playing the witcher, even if it's the primary reason for upgrading. How does upgrading a pc to surf the web make sense? A better GPU won't effect office, but I guess not everyone knows that. If you want to vent and call people idiots for pursing performance then your services would be more valuable on another forum.

For the record, he said "these" games. I would take that as AAA games of 2015.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Somasonic*
> 
> Because games are supposed to _get better_ as they're developed, not _worse_.


BETTER or WORSE is a matter of opinion. Witcher 3 was originally written using DirectX 9 and not DirectX 11. CD Project RED improved on a lot of things since 2013 version, even IF some assets were removed and some graphics was downgraded, which we do not know until Day 1 Patch arrives.

So far only *modded* Skyrim is the only 1st/3rd person RPG that looks better than Witcher 3. That leaves Witcher 3 as the best looking 3rd person RPG ever released.

Why are haters IGNORING the following:
- Day 1 Patch Graphics Improvement
- Countless Config (.cfg) settings that may allow graphics to look even better than 2013 version of the game
- Lack of any scientific proof or evidence that there was a downgrade (No screenshot comparison can be done when there are 1000's of variables between locations, times of day, angles, settings, etc. Thus far all "comparisons" are absurd and INVALID)
- Witcher 3 is a game consisting of numerous features OTHER than graphics
- Most gaming PC's won't be able to max out even "downgraded" graphics
- A bunch of other things I can't think of right now

???

They don't care for any validity of truth or facts, they just want to HATE. They literally think that if there was a downgrade, then it is unfair to give this game or CD Project RED a high rating, regardless of how good "downgraded" graphics looks like. What if the graphics looked just like in early screenshots, but the rest of the game sucked or most people would not be able to handle it? Would those people be happy? NO, they would find reasons to hate because they are haters. I bet they complain just about every single game release, blaming this or that.


----------



## brownbob06

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> BETTER or WORSE is a matter of opinion. Witcher 3 was originally written using DirectX 9 and not DirectX 11. CD Project RED improved on a lot of things since 2013 version, even IF some assets were removed and some graphics was downgraded, which we do not know until Day 1 Patch arrives.
> 
> So far only *modded* Skyrim is the only 1st/3rd person RPG that looks better than Witcher 3. That leaves Witcher 3 as the best looking 3rd person RPG ever released.
> 
> Why are haters IGNORING the following:
> - Day 1 Patch Graphics Improvement
> - Countless Config (.cfg) settings that may allow graphics to look even better than 2013 version of the game
> - Lack of any scientific proof or evidence that there was a downgrade (No screenshot comparison can be done when there are 1000's of variables between locations, times of day, angles, settings, etc. Thus far all "comparisons" are absurd and INVALID)
> - Witcher 3 is a game consisting of numerous features OTHER than graphics
> - Most gaming PC's won't be able to max out even "downgraded" graphics
> - A bunch of other things I can't think of right now
> 
> ???
> 
> *They don't care for any validity of truth or facts, they just want to HATE.* They literally think that if there was a downgrade, then it is unfair to give this game or CD Project RED a high rating, regardless of how good "downgraded" graphics looks like. What if the graphics looked just like in early screenshots, but the rest of the game sucked or most people would not be able to handle it? Would those people be happy? NO, they would find reasons to hate because they are haters. I bet they complain just about every single game release, blaming this or that.


Welcome to Overclock.net....


----------



## th3illusiveman

They make one of the best RPGs ever made and all PC gamers see is the graphics... no wonder we have such a bad reputation. Go play crysis 3 again if graphics are so important to you.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *th3illusiveman*
> 
> They make one of the best RPGs ever made and all PC gamers see is the graphics... no wonder we have such a bad reputation. Go play crysis 3 again if graphics are so important to you.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> BETTER or WORSE is a matter of opinion. Witcher 3 was originally written using DirectX 9 and not DirectX 11. CD Project RED improved on a lot of things since 2013 version, even IF some assets were removed and some graphics was downgraded, which we do not know until Day 1 Patch arrives.
> 
> So far only *modded* Skyrim is the only 1st/3rd person RPG that looks better than Witcher 3. That leaves Witcher 3 as the best looking 3rd person RPG ever released.
> 
> Why are haters IGNORING the following:
> - Day 1 Patch Graphics Improvement
> - Countless Config (.cfg) settings that may allow graphics to look even better than 2013 version of the game
> - Lack of any scientific proof or evidence that there was a downgrade (No screenshot comparison can be done when there are 1000's of variables between locations, times of day, angles, settings, etc. Thus far all "comparisons" are absurd and INVALID)
> - Witcher 3 is a game consisting of numerous features OTHER than graphics
> - Most gaming PC's won't be able to max out even "downgraded" graphics
> - A bunch of other things I can't think of right now
> 
> ???
> 
> They don't care for any validity of truth or facts, they just want to HATE. They literally think that if there was a downgrade, then it is unfair to give this game or CD Project RED a high rating, regardless of how good "downgraded" graphics looks like. What if the graphics looked just like in early screenshots, but the rest of the game sucked or most people would not be able to handle it? Would those people be happy? NO, they would find reasons to hate because they are haters. I bet they complain just about every single game release, blaming this or that.


Because people, not least of all seemingly entitled oinks - aren't happy unless they have something to moan about. I think the game looks great. Of course it would be even better with very high tessellation presets so I could laugh at the people moaning (still) that the games performance is sub par to what they'd (uneducated estimation) expect their system to be able to cope with.

The bigger transitivity is the cynical crap coming out of peoples mouths.


----------



## Somasonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> BETTER or WORSE is a matter of opinion. Witcher 3 was originally written using DirectX 9 and not DirectX 11. CD Project RED improved on a lot of things since 2013 version, even IF some assets were removed and some graphics was downgraded, which we do not know until Day 1 Patch arrives.
> 
> So far only *modded* Skyrim is the only 1st/3rd person RPG that looks better than Witcher 3. That leaves Witcher 3 as the best looking 3rd person RPG ever released.
> 
> Why are haters IGNORING the following:
> - Day 1 Patch Graphics Improvement
> - Countless Config (.cfg) settings that may allow graphics to look even better than 2013 version of the game
> - Lack of any scientific proof or evidence that there was a downgrade (No screenshot comparison can be done when there are 1000's of variables between locations, times of day, angles, settings, etc. Thus far all "comparisons" are absurd and INVALID)
> - Witcher 3 is a game consisting of numerous features OTHER than graphics
> - Most gaming PC's won't be able to max out even "downgraded" graphics
> - A bunch of other things I can't think of right now
> 
> ???
> 
> They don't care for any validity of truth or facts, they just want to HATE. They literally think that if there was a downgrade, then it is unfair to give this game or CD Project RED a high rating, regardless of how good "downgraded" graphics looks like. What if the graphics looked just like in early screenshots, but the rest of the game sucked or most people would not be able to handle it? Would those people be happy? NO, they would find reasons to hate because they are haters. I bet they complain just about every single game release, blaming this or that.


I don't really have a horse in this race either way. I'm sure the Witcher is going to be great fun and it's going to look great also. However I can see what people are upset about. I wasn't aware the day one patch was going to improve graphics, if that's the case then that's fantastic









Cheers.


----------



## Stuuut

Do we really need a 100 threads about the same thing?
Its getting boring, don't like it don't buy it and cancel your pre orders. And for the people saying they lied to us, the game isn't out yet and they have shown what it looks like. Yes maybe this whole thing could have been handled better but yeah the PC gaming community will whine about everything and anything anyways.

Now i would have loved to have had the 2013 versions graphics but i find story and gameplay to be more important. And the fact that you almost never get whats shown in pre alpha footage.

There is also still the possibility for modders to up the graphics tough i don't know how modable the game is. But i wouldn't count on it from the get go.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smokey the Bear*
> 
> Surely he planned on doing more with it than playing the witcher, even if it's the primary reason for upgrading. How does upgrading a pc to surf the web make sense? A better GPU won't effect office, but I guess not everyone knows that. If you want to vent and call people idiots for pursing performance then your services would be more valuable on another forum.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *th3illusiveman*
> 
> They make one of the best RPGs ever made and all PC gamers see is the graphics... no wonder we have such a bad reputation. Go play crysis 3 again if graphics are so important to you.


Graphics is important, I agree with that, and if Witcher 3 graphics SUCKED, then I'd be unhappy too, but it doesn't suck, even the patch-less Preview version. All you need to do is to check out high-quality and clean gameplay trailers of the preview version to see how good graphics really is. I cannot believe people did not even notice how on PS4 version, shadows appear 30 feet from the character, but on PC they appear much farther away.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stuuut*
> 
> Do we really need a 100 threads about the same thing?
> Its getting boring, don't like it don't buy it and cancel your pre orders. And for the people saying they lied to us, the game isn't out yet and they have shown what it looks like. Yes maybe this whole thing could have been handled better but yeah the PC gaming community will whine about everything and anything anyways.
> 
> Now i would have loved to have had the 2013 versions graphics but i find story and gameplay to be more important. And the fact that you almost never get whats shown in pre alpha footage.
> 
> There is also still the possibility for modders to up the graphics tough i don't know how modable the game is. But i wouldn't count on it from the get go.


It IS mod-able, more so than Skyrim, and once modded, it will surpass modded Skyrim and original Witcher 3 graphics, but haters will still hate. They will also secretly play the game because they are likely to pirate it, but they would never come clean and say "We were wrong". They are HATERS and they are PROUD of it.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *th3illusiveman*
> 
> They make one of the best RPGs ever made and all PC gamers see is the graphics... no wonder we have such a bad reputation. Go play crysis 3 again if graphics are so important to you.


I don't know about you but I chose PC so I can have the best visuals, otherwise I'd sit comfortably on a couch and play on a console. The way the industry is going, that is not the case anymore. It seems MS/Sony wants parity, to encourage everyone to go console since there will be no advantage to going PC. Very underhanded indeed.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Goodness, this thread devolved into "Go die" comments about a product that isn't even out yet.


----------



## Stuuut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Goodness, this thread devolved into "Go die" comments about a product that isn't even out yet.


Haha cmon now this is the OCN news section after all this time you habe to have gotten used to it from all the GPU threads and Apple threads and the likes


----------



## h2spartan

Will the patch correct this?


----------



## geoxile

CDPR, the new Crytek it seems


----------



## brownbob06

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> I don't know about you but I chose PC so I can have the best visuals, otherwise I'd sit comfortably on a couch and play on a console. The way the industry is going, that is not the case anymore. It seems MS/Sony wants parity, to encourage everyone to go console since there will be no advantage to going PC. Very underhanded indeed.


Not underhanded. Just seems as though devs know where their bread is buttered. Pretty common business practice in all actuality. The dev made these changes, not Sony or MS. As much as people love to blame them for everything, this just isn't one of those things you can blame on them unless you want to try to stretch an argument.


----------



## Said Nobody

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *geoxile*
> 
> CDPR, the new Crytek it seems


Do you mean Ubisoft? What has crytek done?


----------



## CaptainZombie

I had a question, I redeemed mine from the 980 promotion but it didn't give me a Steam code. Is this a GOG Galaxy game and not redeemable for Steam?


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2spartan*
> 
> Will the patch correct this?


NO, it will not correct your lack of intelligence that degraded to a point where you're willing to compare some unknown source of unknown Witcher 3 build with another unknown Witcher 3 build from another unknown source from a blurry small screenshot of heavily compressed blurry trailer. It will definitely not do that.

If you're willing to believe that final PC build of Witcher 3 will look just like that with all that blur from some Xbox version's crappy trailer, then you have no business voicing your opinions about this game. You might as well draw a cat on one side and a dog on another side, and ask if Day 1 Patch will fix that.

Day 1 Patch will improve graphics of the Witcher 3 Preview version. To what extent - I do not know, but it will not help with ******ation.

Hell, those 2 shots may be showing entirely different locations. Textures, characters, and etc. are drastically different, not in resolution, but in the actual drawing. One looks like a whore-house and the other one looks more like some inn. They both have different assets.


----------



## Stuuut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptainZombie*
> 
> I had a question, I redeemed mine from the 980 promotion but it didn't give me a Steam code. Is this a GOG Galaxy game and not redeemable for Steam?


Aren't GOG keys redeemable on steam?


----------



## CaptainZombie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stuuut*
> 
> Aren't GOG keys redeemable on steam?


I didn't receive a key once I redeemed through the Nvidia promotion, I'll have to look on my account.


----------



## sycron17

i would say they always make videos from nearly any game in higher resolutions like 4k and everything maxed out with monster hardware ti show people how it is...and not what the consumers actualy uses..

I mean like project cars...i love this game but it doesnt look that good like in the leaks in 1080p maxx

I gotta put it with DSR in 4k to get those grafics but is unplayable with a single 980 @4k maxxed


----------



## MonarchX

24 hours and 27 minutes and we will know the truth.


----------



## h2spartan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sycron17*
> 
> i would say they always make videos from nearly any game in higher resolutions like 4k and everything maxed out with monster hardware ti show people how it is...and not what the consumers actualy uses..
> 
> I mean like project cars...i love this game but it doesnt look that good like in the leaks in 1080p maxx
> 
> I gotta put it with DSR in 4k to get those grafics but is unplayable with a single 980 @4k maxxed


We know that's what they do, but do we move along and treat it as normal because it's standard practice in the industry?


----------



## juanitox

I think the best we can do is to wait till it comes out to find out how it looks


----------



## Zakka

The Witcher 2 looks better in a lot of areas...


----------



## StrongForce

Why ?? Console dragging us down again ? uh..

Whatever they did to the release version.. they should fix it later with a patch ! ..


----------



## xutnubu

Behold and cry, GI gone, what this game could have been...


----------



## kot0005

Is that even water in the final version? Looks like Engine oil to me..


----------



## djriful

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kot0005*
> 
> 
> 
> Is that even water in the final version? Looks like Engine oil to me..


hahaahhaa


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> It IS mod-able, more so than Skyrim, and once modded, it will surpass modded Skyrim and original Witcher 3 graphics.


I said something similar earlier in this thread. Now that Skyrim mods have gone pay on Steam, I think the community is ripe to jump ship in droves from Skyrim over to a new project. Lets hope the "redkit" is a robust tool and not just a texture replacer. As long as the story and base mechanics are on point, I will be willing to forgive this supposed downgrade. I have seen nothing in any of these threads that has made me want to get a refund for my pre-order.


----------



## Mattousai

First game I pre-order in years and I get this LOL

I never buy games on graphics alone, and I'm sure I'll enjoy the game, but still. It looks like someone found the saturation slider and cranked it all the way until it broke.

Definitely a downgrade in the lighting as well, especially indoors. The other thing is the water. Hot damn that looks bad.

Oh well. I'm sure I'll enjoy the game regardless.


----------



## SoulThief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> I said something similar earlier in this thread. Now that Skyrim mods have gone pay on Steam, I think the community is ripe to jump ship in droves from Skyrim over to a new project. Lets hope the "redkit" is a robust tool and not just a texture replacer. As long as the story and base mechanics are on point, I will be willing to forgive this supposed downgrade. I have seen nothing in any of these threads that has made me want to get a refund for my pre-order.


Have you been living under a rock or something? The whole 'pay for mods' thing was barely online before it was taken down again. And I very much doubt people will start jumping projects because of it.

Also 'forgive'? Seriously? You think CDPR cares about what you think or wants your forgiveness? No they want your money and you are more than willing to give it to them.


----------



## Espair

Lighting is BAD. Water looks terrible, like oil lol. I thought it looked like it had a plastic film covering the top. no fog, removed grass, and many other things.

They lied about no downgrade and its the lying and removing that irritates me. Knowing what could have been makes me sad.

Thats just pooping on your customers plate after showing him a juicy steak.


----------



## DerkaDerka

Glad I ended up buying this game off of eBay for $20 instead of buying it at full price. The color and quality of the water in this game reminds me of the first Just Cause, which came out 9 years ago







Very disappointed in how this game turned out, I'm sure I'll still enjoy the game but I'll always be thinking about what could have been.


----------



## Punter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kot0005*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that even water in the final version? Looks like Engine oil to me..


Having it look like a lagoon is probably an improvement over being able to surf on it.


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoulThief*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> I said something similar earlier in this thread. Now that Skyrim mods have gone pay on Steam, I think the community is ripe to jump ship in droves from Skyrim over to a new project. Lets hope the "redkit" is a robust tool and not just a texture replacer. As long as the story and base mechanics are on point, I will be willing to forgive this supposed downgrade. I have seen nothing in any of these threads that has made me want to get a refund for my pre-order.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you been living under a rock or something? The whole 'pay for mods' thing was barely online before it was taken down again. And I very much doubt people will start jumping projects because of it.
> 
> Also 'forgive'? Seriously? You think CDPR cares about what you think or wants your forgiveness? No they want your money and you are more than willing to give it to them.
Click to expand...

Guess so, after mods went pay to play, I stopped playing. Thanks for the info.
Yeah, I do think they want my money in the future, so yes, I do believe they care, because my opinion directly affects their bottom line.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stuuut*
> 
> Aren't GOG keys redeemable on steam?


No, it is the other way around.
If you own a game on steam you can reuse said key on GOG.
However if you have a GOG key you cannot use it on steam.
The GOG logo being in that promotion page and not the steam logo for the Witcher 3 part means it is probably only a GOG key.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> He's having such a difficult time getting his (lack of) point across, that he's now insulting people. Gentlemen, we have a live one here.


My point is that there is no proof or valid evidence that shows that there has been a substantial graphical downgrade, aside from extremely blurry, biased, and thus worthless compressed trailer screenshot "comparisons" done by un-educated children. Day 1 Patch added proper HBAO and shadows to vegetation and increased LOD distance. That already means that NO VERSION out there shows how the game will actually look like on the 18th/19th after Day 1 Patch, and yet just like pre-pubescent children members here continue to rate the game's graphics they have not even witnessed.

If the game looks as blurry as it does in trailers (new OR old), then Grim Fandango has better graphics. Guess what, actual graphics is not as blurry as it is in trailer screenshots, but I don't think people understand it. The blur happens due to trailer compression. Do you know what that is?

Haters can't even use common sense, so they "compare" a compressed trailer screenshot from one location, time of day, settings, and angle of UNKNOWN version of the game to another screenshot in a different location, time of day, settings, and angle of another UNKNOWN version of the game. I mean how is that not ******ed, especially since neither of the "comparison" trailer shots are shots from the actual, final release of the game that nobody even has? How can you NOT insult that?



*How can you NOT insult the "comparison" above?* Do you REALLY think the game looks like that (either version)? Have you checked out actual screenshots, not of trailers, but of in-game graphics? THESE are the screenshots of the ACTUAL game:









Very disappointing as some say..? REALLY?

Do you not see the difference between low quality compressed trailer shots and this? These shots are from the NEW 2015 build. It is obvious as the brown-ish post-processing tint has been added and was not present in earlier builds.

If you think those shots look lame in comparison to some original build, then I suggest you have your eyes examined and show me non-modded RPG that looks better!


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Snip


You seem zealous at berating and basically telling people to quell.

If people did that, then these companies would just steam role over us.

Our voices have made a difference in the past and will continue to do so.

Do you think that this day one patch would have included significant (hopefully) serious graphical improvements if CDPR has not been feeling the backlash? Most likely not.

We always need to raise our concerns as a community, it does affect change! If you don't at least try, you won't get.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> You seem zealous at berating and basically telling people to quell.
> 
> If people did that, then these companies would just steam role over us.
> 
> Our voices have made a difference in the past and will continue to do so.
> 
> Do you thing that this day one patch would have included significant (hopefully) serious graphical improvements if CDPR has not been feeling the backlash? Most likely not.
> 
> We always need to raise our concerns as a community it does effect change! If you don't at least try, you won't get.


Considering the opposing views about the game and its graphics, as well as, the likely very high ratings from both critics and users, your voices will be considered as an expectation that some people just don't like the game. It won't make ANY difference.


----------



## Gunderman456

Has there been pro and amateur reviews for the PC version yet?


----------



## Murlocke

Honestly, the graphics are good enough. It's a huge open world game with 100-150 hours of gameplay in it. Can't have everything. 22 hours until I can lose myself in the world and after a few hours of playing, I won't even notice the graphics anymore.

(BTW: The reflections in the bog are a confirmed bug and fixed in Day 1. Many things you see may be bugs because these reviewers were using earlier builds in order to get their 100 hours in)


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Honestly, the graphics are good enough.
> 
> It's a huge open world game with 100-150 hours of gameplay in it. Can't have everything.


Agreed. It looks better than any known un-modded RPG and by a good bit and it is mod-able. That's just graphics and Witcher games have never been about graphics. They have been all about emotional story/plot, Geralt's awesome bad-a** character, the overall environment, and this time about an open-world game. My biggest concern is whether CD Project RED managed to get open-world part done right because earlier games were all hub-based.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Honestly, the graphics are good enough. It's a huge open world game with 100-150 hours of gameplay in it. Can't have everything. 22 hours until I can lose myself in the world and after a few hours of playing, I won't even notice the graphics anymore.
> 
> (BTW: The reflections in the bog are a confirmed bug and fixed in Day 1. Many things you see may be bugs because these reviewers were using earlier builds in order to get their 100 hours in)


That too. Also it is supposed to run really well. ~ 45-50 fps maxed out (no Hairworks obviously) 2560x1440p on a single 290X. Don't know if that was with Day 1 Patch or not.
Quote:


> Core i7-5820K @ 4,2 GHz, 16 GiByte DDR4-2600-RAM sowie eine Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X @ 1.125/3.200 MHz


----------



## CBZ323

I dont speak German, so I dont know what the video said.

To me, it looks worse in the final PC version, especially the illumination (more uniform), the grass and the details in the buildings (courtains, ivy etc).

It also looks like there are less NPCs.

I hope they allow people to change all the settings to be able to enable the things missing from the trailer, at least for those who have capable rigs.


----------



## Nvidia Fanboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Preview (notice absence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)
> 
> 
> Day 1 Patch (notice existence of HBAO on distant grass and trees)
> 
> 
> So much for all your whining. *Day 1 Patch will re-upgrade graphics*, but framerate will be LOWER. That means all your GTX 570's, 680's, and etc. can forget about getting good framerate at max settings. I'd be surprised if such rigs can pull 30fps with such settings.
> 
> EDIT: I do notice that the Day 1 Patch screenshot has Vignette PP applied to it too, but that is not the only effect and it wouldn't change the way distant grass in the middle looks.


I must be blind because I'm not seeing a lick of difference between those two screenshots and I even used the slider from the link you provided.


----------



## CBZ323

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nvidia Fanboy*
> 
> I must be blind because I'm not seeing a lick of difference between those two screenshots and I even used the slider from the link you provided.


The left and right bottom are darker in the grass.

That's mostly it.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> That too. Also it is supposed to run really well. ~ 45-50 fps maxed out (no Hairworks obviously) 2560x1440p on a single 290X. Don't know if that was with Day 1 Patch or not.


Still haven't seen any multi-monitor or 21:9 videos. Developers still haven't said it the game works out of the box with them. TW2 didn't.

About the only deal breaker for me.


----------



## Hl86

About that hairworks, geralts hair blew with the wind inside a house. Could be the windows i dunno


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pwnzilla61*
> 
> the crying in this thread is giving me a headache.


----------



## Murlocke

Just leaving these low vs ultra comparison (with the Day 1 patch) here:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/clickSwitch.cfm?id=125691

PNG images, they take forever to load since it's from germany.


----------



## akromatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *John Shepard*
> 
> no amount of mods or patches will "fix" this
> 
> thanks consoles!


indeed, they needed parity with PCs and the best way to do it is by lowering PC quality to match while making it a bloated mess so it runs like a dog on PC even with a decently powerful GPU

http://whatifgaming.com/developer-insider-the-witcher-3-was-downgraded-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why
We just did not have the manpower, budget or the console power to produce the vision we intended before the consoles were released to create a more visually stunning game of higher fidelity like 2013 assets. The PCs themselves had more than enough power to achieve this vision, almost certainly. But working on the game across 3 platforms did not make it feasible to keep features included that could potentially break the game as we kept building around it.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> This. The graphical downgrade _doesn't matter_. Game still looks good and by all accounts so far is very good. So why complain about it? Because boo hoo hoo consoles? That makes no sense to me.


Has witcher avatar. Would have bought no matter what.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xundeadgenesisx*
> 
> I don't understand why everybody is up in arms over this graphic down grade. Your expectations were set by pre-alpha footage and your upset over a visual downgrade before the game even launches. Since when are teasers and pre-alpha footage supposed to be the games final look?


See above comment.

You know what else is a great game? Mario Brothers 3. Do I want to spend 2k on graphics cards to max out Mario? No. I spend the money so I can see any game in almost photo realistic quality. Gameplay matters, but so does graphics to make it have the ultimate immersion factor, at least until oculus and hololens get here. This game was shown using totally different graphics to sell copies, then it was announced less than 2 weeks before release... We changed the game. It was a blatant lie and it seems like you endorse it. How many more games are going to do this? Watch dogs already did, now the witcher 3, I'm guessing the division will be the next one. It's bait and switch. But of course, we should have known better. In the chase for more money, developers sell out. All have done before CDPR, not sure why I expected different.

To date, the only dev I still respect is Crytek. Yeah they messed up with crysis 2, Omg delivered with crysis 3. Pc first, then water it down for consoles. You know, the way it should be.


----------



## Baasha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FissioN2222*
> 
> I'll just leave this here - http://whatifgaming.com/developer-insider-the-witcher-3-was-downgraded-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why


This is highly disturbing.









Also,
Quote:


> PC version looks just like the console version with higher resolution and a lower-form of Hairworks in effect.


That is completely ridiculous and horrid!









Way to kill the anticipation of the game two days before launch!









Unbelievable.

We need PC-dedicated developers/studios.


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Just leaving these low vs ultra comparison (with the Day 1 patch) here:
> http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/clickSwitch.cfm?id=125691
> 
> PNG images, they take forever to load since it's from germany.


That looks pretty slick in Ultra. Cant wait to see it in 4k.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

I hope this makes up for most of the downgrade. I'll just leave this here...http://www.dsogaming.com/news/the-witcher-3-xml-will-let-you-enable-sharpening-uber-terrain-textures-lod-options-found/


----------



## xxroxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBlindDeafMute*
> 
> I hope this makes up for most of the downgrade. I'll just leave this here...http://www.dsogaming.com/news/the-witcher-3-xml-will-let-you-enable-sharpening-uber-terrain-textures-lod-options-found/


Won't enable tesselation, better water reflections, better particles and so on...


----------



## keikei

So is any of these effects still in game, besides the fur?


----------



## BBZZHH

Well there are a number of settings for water tessellation, obviously I don't know what they'll actually look like.
Quote:


> Var id="Virtual_WaterOptionVar" displayName="water_quality" displayType="OPTIONS" tags="refreshEngine">
> OptionsArray>
> Option id="0" displayName="low">
> Entry varId="GlobalOceanTesselationFactor" value="8"/>
> /Option>
> Option id="1" displayName="medium">
> Entry varId="GlobalOceanTesselationFactor" value="16"/>
> /Option>
> Option id="2" displayName="high">
> Entry varId="GlobalOceanTesselationFactor" value="32"/>
> /Option>
> Option id="3" displayName="uber">
> Entry varId="GlobalOceanTesselationFactor" value="64"/>
> /Option>
> /OptionsArray>
> /Var>


EDIT:
In the video above, they show what 16x is supposed to look like.
Some Bloom settings
Some Decal settings, but I'm not sure if thats "Screen Space Decals" from the Nvidia video (since I don't rightly know what that even is)


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Agreed. It looks better than any known un-modded RPG and by a good bit and it is mod-able. That's just graphics and Witcher games have never been about graphics. They have been all about emotional story/plot, Geralt's awesome bad-a** character, the overall environment, and this time about an open-world game. My biggest concern is whether CD Project RED managed to get open-world part done right because earlier games were all hub-based.


I think you forgot to berate and insult him. Oh wait, he agreed with you. Silly me.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> So is any of these effects still in game, besides the fur?


I think that trailer was mostly cinematic, not in-game.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> This is highly disturbing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also,
> That is completely ridiculous and horrid!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Way to kill the anticipation of the game two days before launch!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unbelievable.
> 
> We need PC-dedicated developers/studios.


That's old and we've had many developer comments since that. There's way more benefits on PC than just that. Lot of the hate is just people who haven't been keeping up, and are linking old stuff. It's not as bad as many people think.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBlindDeafMute*
> 
> I hope this makes up for most of the downgrade. I'll just leave this here...http://www.dsogaming.com/news/the-witcher-3-xml-will-let-you-enable-sharpening-uber-terrain-textures-lod-options-found/


Just like I said, but haters will IGNORE this entirely. They don't care that the game CAN be made to look like it did on early screenshots and in early trailers. They complain for the sake of it.


----------



## edo101

HAHAAHAHAHAHHA I told you fools from day 1. You don't need an uncompressed video or "Ultra" settings to see the downgrade. It was soo blatant after seeing the E3 trailer and the long gameplay with regards to what they shown lately.

Didn't even argue after seeing all the blind fanboyism. I am glad other people are blasting them

PS: I will still get the game when I figure out what I am doing this summer but you people need to quit being fanboys and call a spade a spade.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nvidia Fanboy*
> 
> Why would you believe those "screenshots" you posted are actual screenshots? Just because CDPR told you? You and other CPDR defenders have already told us countless times that companies do bullshots all the time. So why would you be so trusting that these screens weren't heavily cleaned up in photoshop? I'm just using your logic here.
> 
> You scream and yell at the haters for having no evidence when you yourself have little to go with. You claim yours are scientific but where is the empirical data? Have you played the final version? Have any of us? Nope. So why are you so convinced that this day 1 patch is the equivalent of the resurrection of Christ? Absolutely none of us know what this game will look like at this point. So how about we all refrain from calling each other idiots and *******? Everyone needs to just grab a drink.


Those shots are *RECENT* and they do represent the actual game.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> HAHAAHAHAHAHHA I told you fools from day 1. You don't need an uncompressed video or "Ultra" settings to see the downgrade. It was soo blatant after seeing the E3 trailer and the long gameplay with regards to what they shown lately.
> 
> Didn't even argue after seeing all the blind fanboyism. I am glad other people are blasting them
> 
> PS: I will still get the game when I figure out what I am doing this summer but you people need to quit being fanboys and call a spade a spade.


http://www.dsogaming.com/news/the-witcher-3-xml-will-let-you-enable-sharpening-uber-terrain-textures-lod-options-found/

HAHAHA, you were wrong!


----------



## edo101

I just hope Batman Arkham Knight doesn't pull this crap. I still expect E3 2014 gameplay trailer


----------



## di inferi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Just like I said, but haters will IGNORE this entirely. They don't care that the game CAN be made to look like it did on early screenshots and in early trailers. They complain for the sake of it.


Do you have proof that is the case?

If not I suggest you rethink your statement.


----------



## tpi2007

I'm really curious to know whether the screenshots on the Steam store page for the game are actually real or also something we won't get. I'm especially intrigued by this one, as the house on the right seems to have the same degree of tessellation on the rocks in the corner that the 2013 version had elsewhere, but is absent from the 2015 footage so far (rounded corner versus rough edge). Also note the reasonable number of NPCs on screen and the draw distance.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> http://www.dsogaming.com/news/the-witcher-3-xml-will-let-you-enable-sharpening-uber-terrain-textures-lod-options-found/
> 
> HAHAHA, you were wrong!


Uber means Ultra in german. It's already enabled by default (and are what we see in videos), it's just pulled from german config files. Nothing new learned from that link. Are you guys thinking that Uber is a step above Ultra or something?

The Day 1 patch improves some stuff, and fixes a lot of stuff, but no you won't get 2013 quality. It's impossible because the biggest thing we are missing is massive amounts of tessellation which was removed entirely from the game. Also, that sharpening filter will make the game look better 20% of the time and worse 80% of the time. It was removed for a reason, and it was _very_ distracting in TW2 for that same reason.


----------



## Fickle Pickle

The amount of anger in here about something as trivial as video game graphics just proves that people have no perspective and that gamer problems are laughable.

If these are the things that get you angry, be happy that your life is super easy.

I for one, will enjoy the game because I had realistic expectations.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> Tired of people saying by the way they did the PC community a favor by downgrading since most would struggle to play it on PC. No, no, no, that is why you don't lie and kowtow to consoles. They should have left the promised visuals and leaving it up to in game settings so those that are capable can push the game and those that are not can chose to lower settings.


seriously that logic is dumb. Give us the full graphics and then turn of features if you have inferior hardware. I would rather buy another 290 to run in CFX if it means playing the candy version from E3 rather than not. The PS4 comparison video was too damning .


----------



## GHADthc

Pretty astounding the amount of apathetic and/or apologetic people in this thread, thinking its fine to falsely advertise a product, and not receive a back lash for it...

It's all fine and dandy to say "Vote with your wallet" and to tell people to cancel their pre-order of the game..but that doesn't stop people who were looking forward to what was advertised-
originally, being highly disappointed (to say the least) at what the outcome is (whether it was obvious to some or not is beside the point).

I'm fairly sickened by the amount of people who seem to be condoning this sort of behavior...whether you care all that much or not about this game, its more a matter of principal in the end.

Yet another company has joined the sell-out band wagon, and is getting away with these despicable business practices, and thanks to how apologetic/apathetic as a whole the PC community-
seems to be now (whether its just because they are jaded or not, shouldn't matter) ...yet another company will get away with it, and will push the boundaries next time on what they can get away with.

I for one certainly wont be paying for this product, and I have very poor expectations for Cyberpunk now.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> Pretty astounding the amount of apathetic and/or apologetic people in this thread, thinking its fine to falsely advertise a product, and not receive a back lash for it...
> 
> It's all fine and dandy to say "Vote with your wallet" and to tell people to cancel their pre-order of the game..but that doesn't stop people who were looking forward to what was advertised-
> originally, being highly disappointed (to say the least) at what the outcome is (whether it was obvious to some or not is beside the point).
> 
> I'm fairly sickened by the amount of people who seem to be condoning this sort of behavior...whether you care all that much or not about this game, its more a matter of principal in the end.
> 
> Yet another company has joined the sell-out band wagon, and is getting away with these despicable business practices, and thanks to how apologetic/apathetic as a whole the PC community-
> seems to be now (whether its just because they are jaded or not, shouldn't matter) ...yet another company will get away with it, and will push the boundaries next time on what they can get away with.
> 
> I for one certainly wont be paying for this product, and I have very poor expectations for Cyberpunk now.


Like I said. Haters just needed a good reason to pirate the game!


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Uber means Ultra in german. It's already enabled by default (and are what we see in videos), it's just pulled from german config files. Nothing new learned from that link. Are you guys thinking that Uber is a step above Ultra or something?
> 
> The Day 1 patch improves some stuff, and fixes a lot of stuff, but no you won't get 2013 quality. It's impossible because the biggest thing we are missing is massive amounts of tessellation which was removed entirely from the game. Also, that sharpening filter will make the game look better 20% of the time and worse 80% of the time. It was removed for a reason, and it was _very_ distracting in TW2 for that same reason.


We are not sure how far Day 1 Patch improvement goes. There were already TWO Day 1 patches - 1.01 and 1.02.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> We are not sure how far Day 1 Patch improvement goes. There were already TWO Day 1 patches - 1.01 and 1.02.


I hope they fix the exploding corpse bug when your freeze a guy and you crit him while being higher level. It's very distracting, and their sword just floats in the air as-if they still were holding it.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Uber means Ultra in german. It's already enabled by default (and are what we see in videos), it's just pulled from german config files. Nothing new learned from that link. Are you guys thinking that Uber is a step above Ultra or something?
> 
> The Day 1 patch improves some stuff, and fixes a lot of stuff, but no you won't get 2013 quality. It's impossible because the biggest thing we are missing is massive amounts of tessellation which was removed entirely from the game. Also, that sharpening filter will make the game look better 20% of the time and worse 80% of the time. It was removed for a reason, and it was _very_ distracting in TW2 for that same reason.


thank you. I wasn't even gonna bother to reply. I know what I saw and what I can expect. We won't be getting it. I really thought we would especially seeing how it looked with respect to Arkham Knight. They both had that detail and smoothness I expected out of high end PC but I think we all need to quit expecting E3 trailers to be what we play.

This is a really bad marketing practice. I don't have the money to sue but if you're paying 60 bucks expecting a product, the product needs to deliver what was marketed. Otherwise it is false advertising which is illegal. Its building up hype, to sell copies.

Anyways I'm done with people defending this. It allows devs to keep doing it. If they don't plan on releasing what they show, then don't. Show us your actual graphics and see how many people still get excited or are willing to defend the games.

Yes I will buy the game if the gameplay is rewarding I am gameplay>>>graphics but the only thing that is getting at me is people defending this practice


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> We are not sure how far Day 1 Patch improvement goes. There were already TWO Day 1 patches - 1.01 and 1.02.


If later patches fix it, it won't be because people were like oh ok, we're fine with the downgrades, it would be because the saw the outrage and jumped to save face.


----------



## sugalumps

The worst part about it (other than being lied to and the damage control) is that we will be using £440+ gpu's(not to mention all the other hardware) to achieve the same settings just about as the ps4. Yes we get atleast double the framerate if we are capabale of running it and a higher res. But the fact we are spending so much on our gpu's to acheive the same settings in most games these days is sad.

It honestly would not have been a problem if they didn't lie about it then go into damage control, people like honesty. It's all about the way you conduct business, I thought this developer to be better than that.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxroxx*
> 
> Won't enable tesselation, better water reflections, better particles and so on...


I think will have to rely on modding for for that, which I anticipate modders are going to have a field day with this one. That alone I am excited for. Look what it did for skyrim


----------



## MonarchX

There you go! Right from developer's mouth - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E . The original trailer was never meant to show in-game graphics. The 2013 35-minute video did and since then game graphics IMPROVED (new shaders and all). The game may look DIFFERENT since 2013 trailer, but not downgraded. You also forget that screenshot's do not provide in-game experience. Some thing that look bad on screenshots may look much better during game-play.


----------



## Leopard2lx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> The worst part about it (other than being lied to and the damage control) is that we will be using £440+ gpu's(not to mention all the other hardware) to achieve the same settings just about as the ps4. Yes we get atleast double the framerate if we are capabale of running it and a higher res. But the fact we are spending so much on our gpu's to acheive the same settings in most games these days is sad.


Exactly. They recommend a 980 for 1080p and 60 ffps. What a joke, when the PS4 is running the same thing at 30 fps. This means 1 of 3 things: 1) CDPR were ignorant and drunk when they came up with system requirements, 2) The game is badly optimized or 3) they are helping Nvidia sell some high end cards by recommending this crap.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> If later patches fix it, it won't be because people were like oh ok, we're fine with the downgrades, it would be because the saw the outrage and jumped to save face.


I was going to say this. That will be in patch 2.0 etc


----------



## MonarchX

*Which awesome-graphics game EVER looked like the original trailer,* especially cinematic trailer???


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Exactly. They recommend a 980 for 1080p and 60 ffps. What a joke, when the PS4 is running the same thing at 30 fps. This means 1 of 3 things: 1) CDPR were ignorant and drunk when they came up with system requirements, 2) The game is badly optimized or 3) they are helping Nvidia sell some high end cards by recommending this crap.


That graphics looks incredible, downgraded or not, and to run it at 60fps instead of 30fps on PC that requires more optimization than consoles required optimization to make it happen.

BTW, there will also be Enhanced Editions and several I presume, one still in DirectX 11 and another in DirectX 12. Oh yeah, there WILL BE many patches of course, not just for fixing graphics, but the rest of the game. Its the most complex open-world game.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> If later patches fix it, it won't be because people were like oh ok, we're fine with the downgrades, it would be because the saw the outrage and jumped to save face.


They don't need to save any face. If anything, CD Project RED will become more popular and supported after Witcher 3 release. They could CARE LESS for haters.


----------



## NrGx

I don't understand the outrage. There was a pre-alpha version, and they decided to tone the graphics down in parts for stability and their consumer base. Is that an issue? All games are optimised in one way or another.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> The worst part about it (other than being lied to and the damage control) is that we will be using £440+ gpu's(not to mention all the other hardware) to achieve the same settings just about as the ps4. Yes we get atleast double the framerate if we are capabale of running it and a higher res. But the fact we are spending so much on our gpu's to acheive the same settings in most games these days is sad.
> 
> It honestly would not have been a problem if they didn't lie about it then go into damage control, people like honesty. It's all about the way you conduct business, I thought this developer to be better than that.
> 
> The usual funny spanish video that pops up for video game/hardware controversy, some profanity.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


It irks me too on how we still struggle to play at 60 fps some of the games on consoles that look about the same for a much higher price. Call me paranoid but why do I feel like there might be a collusion between AMD, Nvidia and devs in other to sell newer cards.

Seriously starting to doubt why you'd need a 980 GTX to run Witcher 3 at 1080p60 when PS4 can do it 30 fps with a much less powerful graphics card


----------



## tpi2007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> There you go! Right from developer's mouth - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E . The original trailer was never meant to show in-game graphics. The 2013 35-minute video did and since then game graphics IMPROVED (new shaders and all). The game may look DIFFERENT since 2013 trailer, but not downgraded. You also forget that screenshot's do not provide in-game experience. Some thing that look bad on screenshots may look much better during game-play.


Then they shouldn't call the trailer "_gameplay_ trailer", nor should they deny downgrades when confronted with them like they did seven months ago.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> They don't need to save any face. If anything, CD Project RED will become more popular and supported after Witcher 3 release. They could CARE LESS for haters.


Wasn't my argument. My argument is among PC gamers like myself I definitely have lost some respect for them. And no I won't be buying the game full price. If a lot of PC people did they same they might be inclined to save face. listen, stuff only gets done when people complain and act on their complaints
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tpi2007*
> 
> Then they shouldn't call the trailer "_gameplay_ trailer", nor should they deny downgrades when confronted with them like they did seven months ago.











Either that or put a giant watermark saying expect graphics to be downgraded


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> There you go! Right from developer's mouth - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E . The original trailer was never meant to show in-game graphics. The 2013 35-minute video did and since then game graphics IMPROVED (new shaders and all). The game may look DIFFERENT since 2013 trailer, but not downgraded. You also forget that screenshot's do not provide in-game experience. Some thing that look bad on screenshots may look much better during game-play.


That video has been known about for awhile now (linked in multiple threads) and it's pretty flawed logic. They advertised it as playable and "gameplay footage" in 2013. Therefore, it was playable and his whole argument was "you can't downgrade something that wasn't playable and not graded to begin with".
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Exactly. They recommend a 980 for 1080p and 60 ffps. What a joke, when the PS4 is running the same thing at 30 fps. This means 1 of 3 things: 1) CDPR were ignorant and drunk when they came up with system requirements, 2) The game is badly optimized or 3) they are helping Nvidia sell some high end cards by recommending this crap.


1440p maxed without fur on a 980 according to NVIDIA. The PS4 isn't running fur, so that's a more fair comparison.

30 vs 60FPS is 2 times harder to run. Your going from 2.0 million pixels, to 3.6 million pixels while also doubling the FPS. Roughly 4 times the processing power needed. Draw distance and other things are also improved on the PC version over the PS4 version, and things such as HBAO as well. So yea, it adds up. Consoles have low level access because they are all the same hardware and can optimize for that specific hardware, PCs cannot so there is always diminishing returns.


----------



## Leopard2lx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> That video has been known about for awhile now (linked in multiple threads) and it's pretty flawed logic. They advertised it as playable and "gameplay footage" in 2013. Therefore, it was playable and his whole argument was "you can't downgrade something that wasn't playable and not graded to begin with".


Yes, and then he proceeded to call it "optimization". "Optimization" for what? Consoles?







Why did the graphics need to be turned down as part of the "optimization" when they could have left them in for high-end PC users. Let's face it" they didn't want to put an extra effort and provide the PC version with some extra options. They sold out!
And don't even get me started on the sharpening filter because they removed A LOT more than a stupid sharpening filter (which is actually still in the game and can be turned on). They gutted the lightning, tessellation, draw distance and water etc....


----------



## NrGx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Let's face it" they didn't want to put an extra effort and provide the PC version with some extra options. They sold out!


Why should they spend unnecessary money on 0.1% of the market? How many people actually own a GTX980?


----------



## MadRabbit

I find it funny, if EA did this it would be "boycott" all over this place. But this is fine all of the sudden...


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NrGx*
> 
> Why should they spend unnecessary money on 0.1% of the market? How many people actually own a GTX980?


Doesn't taking out what is already there take resources lol?


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Just leaving these low vs ultra comparison (with the Day 1 patch) here:
> http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/clickSwitch.cfm?id=125691
> 
> PNG images, they take forever to load since it's from germany.


Wait wait a minute. Is this with the Day 1 patch. Cause I can't see a difference between low and Ultra. Actually there is a little diffrence but it is almost not noticeable. How does this look slick.

Wait can some actually confirm if this is with the patch I have been hearing about. This game in this shot looks like the Witcher 2.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Like I said. Haters just needed a good reason to pirate the game!


LOL! I guess fanboys just gonna fanboy, huh? Love how you keep using the pirate line. Who cares. Downgrade has happened, doesn't matter what you say or think. You aren't God. Your thoughts don't just make thinks magically happen. Look at yourself through this thread. It's embarrassing. Borderline comedic.

Are you trolling or is CDPR just that deep inside you?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> There you go! Right from developer's mouth - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E . The original trailer was never meant to show in-game graphics. *The 2013 35-minute video did and since then game graphics IMPROVED (new shaders and all).* The game may look DIFFERENT since 2013 trailer, but not downgraded. You also forget that screenshot's do not provide in-game experience. Some thing that look bad on screenshots may look much better during game-play.


You mean besides all the missing features and worse lighting etc? That 2013 trailer clearly was in game. I don't care what they say. Why would you make a 35 minute video showing all the tessellation and advanced graphics techniques all just to be like "HERP DERP! The game was never supposed to look like that! Trolololol!!!!!1!1!"

THEN WHY SHOW THAT VIDEO THEN??? 35 minutes of "game play" is not the same as some 1 minute CGI video. Clearly the 2013 game play is what the game was SUPPOSED to look like and what they were originally aiming for because if it wasn't THEN WHY SHOW IT? To deceive people? To be a "tech demo" while delivering a worse in almost every way final product?

Your logic here makes as much sense as CDPR's when they spouted this crap.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> *Which awesome-graphics game EVER looked like the original trailer,* especially cinematic trailer???


https://youtu.be/2F3_JMYNB6A


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBlindDeafMute*
> 
> https://youtu.be/2F3_JMYNB6A


Hell yeah, game looked and still looks amazing.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> *Which awesome-graphics game EVER looked like the original trailer,* especially cinematic trailer???


Dude are you for real? You're basically saying if everyone else downgrades, it's ok for CD Projekt RED to do it to? Your post is also stupid because many games(dare I say most games?) actually live up to their trailers. Misleading trailers are becoming more and more widespread because consumers don't take a stand against it. We also have some people like you who will defend a company for truly nefarious actions. You're a huge part of the problem.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Wait wait a minute. Is this with the Day 1 patch. Cause I can't see a difference between low and Ultra. Actually there is a little diffrence but it is almost not noticeable. How does this look slick.


Did you actually wait for the images to load? There's a big difference.









Crap quality GIF can even show them:


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Did you actually wait for the images to load? There's a big difference.


There is one but it definitely isn't big. Ultra is supposed to look far, far superior to low. This looks a tad better. Anyway it's just a screenshot. In-game the difference should be more noticeable.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> Dude are you for real? You're basically saying if everyone else downgrades, it's ok for CD Projekt RED to do it to? Your post is also stupid because many games(dare I say most games?) actually live up to their trailers. Misleading trailers are becoming more and more widespread because consumers don't take a stand against it. We also have some people like you who will defend a company for truly nefarious actions. You're a huge part of the problem.


Nah you're wrong. MonarchX says so. You just want to pirate the game and the 2013 35 minute game play video was just a ruse and made for the lulz. Obviously. Don't be a shill.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Just leaving these low vs ultra comparison (with the Day 1 patch) here:
> http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/clickSwitch.cfm?id=125691
> 
> PNG images, they take forever to load since it's from germany.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Did you actually wait for the images to load? There's a big difference.


I did and there was not much of a diffrence. I wish there was but there isn't. There is slightly more texturing and lighting but that's about it.

Actually I had to do a double take to notice the difference. It is there but the game doesn't look that good. Looks like W2 in that shot.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> I did and there was not much of a diffrence. I wish there was but there isn't. There is slightly more texturing and lighting but that's about it


Your telling me you don't see any difference in the GIF i just linked above?

Have you looked in the distance at all? Look at the textures on the floor. It's not even close.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Your telling me you don't see any difference in the GIF i just linked above?
> 
> Have you looked in the distance at all? Look at the textures on the floor. It's not even close.


There is a difference. Certainly not a Low vs Ultra difference. More like Low vs Medium difference.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Hell yeah, game looked and still looks amazing.


First thing I did when I got the titans was fire up c3 maxxed with 8x MSAA on surround. Then drooled lol. WHY CAN'T THEY ALL BE LIKE THIS!?


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> Dude are you for real? You're basically saying if everyone else downgrades, it's ok for CD Projekt RED to do it to? Your post is also stupid because many games(dare I say most games?) actually live up to their trailers. Misleading trailers are becoming more and more widespread because consumers don't take a stand against it. We also have some people like you who will defend a company for truly nefarious actions. You're a huge part of the problem.


I am saying that the hate towards CD Project RED over this is absurd. The game could be the best ever, but haters will ignore that fact, focus on downgrade and use it as a single metric to rate the game and it's developers. Nothing else matters to haters. To haters game is crap because it was downgraded regardless of how good downgraded graphics looks and eveeything else that makes up the game. The same goes for developers and their hard work - it will not be appreciated by haters because of that single issue. If there was no downgrade and graphics looked like it did in early trailers, then the same haters would complain why their PC's could not handle that graphics with good frame rate, like it happened with AC Unity. They just need a reason to hate, does not matter what it is.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBlindDeafMute*
> 
> First thing I did when I got the titans was fire up c3 maxxed with 8x MSAA on surround. Then drooled lol. WHY CAN'T THEY ALL BE LIKE THIS!?


Surround? Try 4K ;-)

Have you SEEN 4K? 27 inches @ 1080p must look terrible! LOL! I had 3x24 inch 1080p's in Eyefinity and just after owning my cheap 39 inch 4K TV I became spoiled.

4K bruh...yeah you'd lose the Surround but I promise, you won't miss it. I know I don't. Dat crispness.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> I am saying that the hate towards CD Project RED over this is absurd. The game could be the best ever, but haters will ignore that fact, focus on downgrade and use it as a single metric to rate the game and it's developers. Nothing else matters to haters. To haters game is crap because it was downgraded regardless of how good downgraded graphics looks and eveeything else that makes up the game. The same goes for developers and their hard work - it will not be appreciated by haters because of that single issue. If there was no downgrade and graphics looked like it did in early trailers, then the same haters would complain why their PC's could not handle that graphics with good frame rate, like it happened with AC Unity. They just need a reason to hate, does not matter what it is.


Yet again you missed the point. It doesn't matter how good the game is. It could score 120/10 and the issue would still be the same. The issue people have is with CD Projekt lying to their faces. The game could have looked like Super Mario Bros 2 on the NES from the beginning and if it had remained like that and CD Projekt had stayed true to their words, there wouldn't be so much of a backlash.

CD Projekt just kept on lying and lying and doing damage control for what was a very obvious downgrade and claimed they weren't showing Ultra to surprise gamers. Well surprise, Ultra doesn't restore the game to its pre-downgrade level. If they had delivered what they had shown we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Again, the quality of the game has nothing to do with the problem at hand.


----------



## battletoad

At the very least CDPR should remove that the 35-minute game play footage found on the Witcher 3's official site homepage right at this very moment. The video's description is "The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - gameplay" for crying out loud.

I want my water ripples and bloody water at the very least if they are going to still be advertising this as what the game looks like.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> I am saying that the hate towards CD Project RED over this is absurd. The game could be the best ever, but haters will ignore that fact, focus on downgrade and use it as a single metric to rate the game and it's developers. Nothing else matters to haters. To haters game is crap because it was downgraded regardless of how good downgraded graphics looks and eveeything else that makes up the game. The same goes for developers and their hard work - it will not be appreciated by haters because of that single issue. If there was no downgrade and graphics looked like it did in early trailers, then the same haters would complain why their PC's could not handle that graphics with good frame rate, like it happened with AC Unity. They just need a reason to hate, does not matter what it is.


Being lied too matters. I know you don't care about the gaming industry going down the drain...even the "good" developers...but some of us do. If you don't mind being fed bull after bull then that's you. Don't dare try and say that people are just whining and crying for no reason.

We were told NO DOWNGRADES...what did we get? DOWNGRADES!

THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

Man...are you a brick wall that can type?


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> There is a difference. Certainly not a Low vs Ultra difference. More like Low vs Medium difference.


*Sigh*

I swear some people can never be pleased. The game looks good enough, I feel many are just complaining to pass the time and help reduce their hype. It's like you guys expected Crysis 4 level graphics in a huge open world. Wasn't going to happen. Yea, they lied, but at the same time you should of known it was too good to be true and not got dead set about this being the best graphics ever.

If they actually launched with the 2013 graphics, then you'd have threads full of people screaming "It's unoptimized garbage my two Titan X can't even max it!". It's no wonder why companies hate the PC community, they can't win. The console players will put the disc in and just enjoy the game - at reduced settings, 30fps, and 900p/1080p!

*17 hours until launch.* Just be glad the game is getting raving reviews, it could of been a bad game.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Being lied too matters. I know you don't care about the gaming industry going down the drain...even the "good" developers...but some of us do. If you don't mind being fed bull after bull then that's you. Don't dare try and say that people are just whining and crying for no reason.
> 
> We were told NO DOWNGRADES...what did we get? DOWNGRADES!
> 
> THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
> 
> Man...are you a brick wall that can type?


How about toning down on the personal attacks. He has a right to his opinion, as do you, and you don't need to insult his intelligence just because you disagree.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> How about toning down on the personal attacks. He has a right to his opinion, as do you, and you don't need to insult his intelligence just because you disagree.


No, it's not about disagreeing, it's about him being wrong and spouting assumptions and insults to others because we're getting tired of being treated like imbeciles by game developers/publishers.

I mean, he's sitting here saying that people are complaining simply so they'll have a reason to pirate the game...



If you want to support his blind fanboyism and total lack of comprehension and logic then by all means, go right on ahead.

Just because someone has an opinion doesn't make them right or that we should even listen to them.


----------



## Popple

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> I swear some people can never be pleased. The game looks good enough, I feel many are just complaining to pass the time and help reduce their hype. It's like you guys expected Crysis 4 level graphics in a huge open world. Wasn't going to happen.
> 
> If they actually launched with the 2013 graphics, then you'd have threads full of people screaming "It's unoptimized garbage my two Titan X can't even max it!". It's no wonder why companies hate the PC community, they can't win. The console players will put the disc in and just enjoy the game - at reduced settings, 30fps, and 900p/1080p!
> 
> How about toning down on the personal attacks. He has a right to his opinion, as do you, and you don't need to insult his intelligence just because you disagree.


?


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Being lied too matters. I know you don't care about the gaming industry going down the drain...even the "good" developers...but some of us do. If you don't mind being fed bull after bull then that's you. Don't dare try and say that people are just whining and crying for no reason.
> 
> We were told NO DOWNGRADES...what did we get? DOWNGRADES!
> 
> THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
> 
> Man...are you a brick wall that can type?


It matters so much that it completely negates everything else about the game and its developers and requires extreme hate? Total nonsense.

Again you will be the angry minority and your hate will have ZERO effect.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> *Sigh*
> 
> I swear some people can never be pleased. The game looks good enough, I feel many are just complaining to pass the time and help reduce their hype. It's like you guys expected Crysis 4 level graphics in a huge open world. Wasn't going to happen. Yea, they lied, but at the same time you should of known it was too good to be true and not got dead set about this being the best graphics ever.


How was I supposed to know? CD Projekt RED were traditionally a PC-centric developer so there was no reason to assume their vision wouldn't fit on modern day PC's. If they were releasing the games exlcusively for consoles then sure, I would have had my doubts as a gimped CPU and gutted 7870 can only get you so far. CD Projekt RED fully knows some of us have incredibly powerful hardware with the capability to run pretty much anything you throw at them. They didn't downgrade TW2 did they? They fully knew they could crank the settings all the way up because it was a PC first game and some people would be able to run it.
Quote:


> If they actually launched with the 2013 graphics, then you'd have threads full of people screaming "It's unoptimized garbage my two Titan X can't even max it!". It's no wonder why companies hate the PC community, they can't win. The console players will put the disc in and just enjoy the game - at reduced settings, 30fps, and 900p/1080p!


I'm not aware of companies hating the PC community any more than the Xbox or PS community. Also, It's hypothetical so this part of your post is irrelevant.

Again, it is irrelevant that the game is great or has amazing storytelling. We're talking about them lying. Does the game being good have anything to do with that?


----------



## Luciferxy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Your telling me you don't see any difference in the GIF i just linked above?
> 
> Have you looked in the distance at all? Look at the textures on the floor. It's not even close.


the differences are there, e.g. lod, ao. But everything still looks kinda jagged on ultra. And the stone wall corner looks like its missing a lot of tesselation ...


----------



## MonarchX

Considering that they also improved some graphics from 2013, you cannot say it was a downgrade, but simply CHANGED graphics.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> It matters so much that it completely negates everything else about the game and its developers and requires extreme hate? Total nonsense.


Where did I even say ANY of that? Your comment is nonsense. Literally.
Quote:


> Again you will be the angry minority and your hate will have ZERO effect.


And that's why this crap will keep happening. Hope you're happy! What a great service you provide to the gaming community. Good sheep.


----------



## di inferi

Lol. MonarchX if anything you are highly entertaining.

Not downgraded... CHANGED graphics....

Where have I heard that... Not downgraded... OPTIMIZED.

How's the shill life?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Considering that they also improved some graphics from 2013, you cannot say it was a downgrade, but simply CHANGED graphics.


Link? Article? What ever they "improved" is certainly peanuts to what they've taken away. Fact.

Now let's see you argue it...


----------



## xundeadgenesisx

All this pointless hate, arguing, and name calling makes me glad I never saw the 2013 trailer.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Link? Article? What ever they "improved" is certainly peanuts to what they've taken away. Fact.
> 
> Now let's see you argue it...


For once I actually agree with you.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xundeadgenesisx*
> 
> All this pointless hate, arguing, and name calling makes me glad I never saw the 2013 trailer.


Yes, you are lucky indeed. It looked AMAZING. Jaw dropping. Makes the final Ultra settings PC version of the game look like the last gen console version in comparison, literally.


----------



## Popple

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Considering that they also improved some graphics from 2013, you cannot say it was a downgrade, but simply CHANGED graphics.


It's exceedingly rare (if possible) for something to be inferior to its competitor in every way and every circumstance. That doesn't invalidate judgments that say 'this is (on the whole) much better than that".


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Yes, you are lucky indeed. It looked AMAZING. Jaw dropping. Makes the final Ultra settings PC version of the game look like the last gen console version in comparison, literally.


This as well. The downgrade here is on par with the whole Aliens: Colonial Marines downgrade. Except I'm positive that unlike that piece of crap, TW3 will at least be a good *game*. But that doesn't make artificial limits okay.


----------



## MonarchX

People keep saying that the downgrade is the reason they will not buy the game or support developers, this negating everything else. Maybe it is not you in particular.

Yes I do support developers even after this graphics change because it is nowhere as important as providing an excellent product, consisting of many aspects, including awesome graphics, even if it is not the graphics advertised in original trailer. It makes more sense than making sure developers provide identical graphics to original trailers over everything else.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> People keep saying that the downgrade is the reason they will not buy the game or support developers, this negating everything else. Maybe it is not you in particular.
> 
> Yes I do support developers even after this graphics change because it is nowhere as important as providing an excellent product, consisting of many aspects, including awesome graphics, even if it is not the graphics advertised in original trailer. It makes more sense than making sure developers provide identical graphics to original trailers over everything else.


They lied to our faces. Multiple times. That's the only issue here that you can't seem to get your mind around. You don't mind being lied to and played for a fool. We get that. Why do you keep repeating yourself?

Also, you didn't link me anything showing what they've improved. I'm guessing you never will. Why is that?


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> People keep saying that the downgrade is the reason they will not buy the game or support developers, this negating everything else. Maybe it is not you in particular.
> 
> Yes I do support developers even after this graphics change because it is nowhere as important as providing an excellent product, consisting of many aspects, including awesome graphics, even if it is not the graphics advertised in original trailer. It makes more sense than making sure developers provide identical graphics to original trailers over everything else.


Fair enough. I can understand where you're coming from when you say providing a quality product outweighs the misleading pre-release campaign. For me however it does not. If I had bought the game I would be essentially supporting lying to customers and I don't want to do that. Then again, I got the game for free so it works both ways for me.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Your telling me you don't see any difference in the GIF i just linked above?
> 
> Have you looked in the distance at all? Look at the textures on the floor. It's not even close.


I did and I see the difference. Not sure why i didn't earlier.

However Ultra looks like crap and very Witcher 2 esque. I really hope thats without the patches you guys keep raving about.

I am gonna wait for a sale because I don't like blatant bait and switch and lying about said bait and switch


----------



## kurei

I would reserve Judgement till I know more about these things

Impact of the Day 1 patch
Release of the Modding Tools that CDPR talked about and the extent of Modding one can do
The Reason that CDPR provides for the downgrade (if it exists) and their legitimacy. If they remain silent on the issue I would assume Console parity to be the reason.
The free access to DLC that was touted. The season pass may just be early access to DLC that will be available to everyone at a later date.
General performance (Bugs etc. They delayed the game thrice if I recall correctly and there should be evidence to tell us that the delay was justified or they just twiddled their thumbs and shook down consoles and such.
Quality of gameplay and experience when I compare it to Witcher 2. One very important factor for me is the progress of a franchise. One of the reasons that I gave up on Crysis and AC was that the experience of latter installments ended up becoming significantly poorer than previous ones with few exceptions like AC2 after AC1. One of the reasons I'm a big fighter of SF and Tekken is that they usually listen to the community and take steps in the direction the community is leaning towards.
If the downgrade exists what are they offering in lieu of it, Larger world, more mechanics , better Loading times or transition times..
Depending on the answers to these things, CDPR will move up or down the list of Devs that I currently have in my head regarding what quality to expect out of them.

Right now It would look something like this

Valve
Square Enix
CDPR
Bethesda
Several Indie Developers
Blizzard
Ubisoft
EA


----------



## edo101

That is what I think about when you say low to Ultra

Instead I am looking at E3 2013 and actual Ultra. No amount of patches will bring that back


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Popple*
> 
> ?


...Are you implying I personally attacked someone?

Stating "are you a brick wall that can type?" and saying some people can't be pleased are very different things. I don't follow your logic.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> How was I supposed to know? CD Projekt RED were traditionally a PC-centric developer so there was no reason to assume their vision wouldn't fit on modern day PC's. If they were releasing the games exlcusively for consoles then sure, I would have had my doubts as a gimped CPU and gutted 7870 can only get you so far. CD Projekt RED fully knows some of us have incredibly powerful hardware with the capability to run pretty much anything you throw at them. They didn't downgrade TW2 did they? They fully knew they could crank the settings all the way up because it was a PC first game and some people would be able to run it.


Because the videos were leaps and bounds better than anything we had in 2013, and anything we have now. The 2014 video was a clear downgrade which should of lowered people's expectations of the game. It should make you raise an eyebrow and doubt the content you are being shown (The Divison is another example of this, soon as we saw it most of us knew it was fake gameplay).

I'm not defending the developers. I think they made a mistake by showing "gameplay" footage back in 2013 when it clearly wasn't. Then they lied and claimed it wasn't going to be downgraded and wasn't going to be downgraded. I think they know it was a mistake, and I think it's pretty ignorant they still claim it wasn't downgraded "only optimized".

I just hope a good game doesn't suffer in sales because the graphics are a ~7/10 instead of the best looking game ever made. It's been blown way out of proportion and you can't even read about this game now without hearing about it. Stream forums, Reddit, CDPR forums, OCN, etc. The entire PC community is complaining about a game that is getting GOTY worthy reviews because the graphics aren't the best in the world. It's quite absurd.


----------



## Popple

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Stating "are you a brick wall that can type?" and saying some people can't be pleased are very different things. I don't follow your logic.


You put words in people's mouths and made caricatures of them. In fact those reactions and attitudes that you impart on the CDPR detractors are completely presumptuous, whereas at least AndroidVageta was referring to an existing conversation that was ongoing.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is what I think about when you say low to Ultra
> 
> Instead I am looking at E3 2013 and actual Ultra. No amount of patches will bring that back


Nah, that's just time differences. It's just the shadowing of the sun. That explains the dark and light differences along with the less detailed everything, duh.









Edit: Seriously...those building differences are like PS2 to PS4. It's stuff like that where I fail to see the point of downgrading. You already have the models done. They're RIGHT THERE! So WHY aren't they in the game? All that time and energy spent making all that and for what? To just toss it all away?

MonarchX...you don't call that above gif significant downgrading? They literally went from full modeled buildings to basically flat shacks. Sheesh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> ...Are you implying I personally attacked someone?
> 
> Stating "are you a brick wall that can type?" and saying some people can't be pleased are very different things. I don't follow your logic.


I called MonarchX the typing brick wall and stand by it. He makes claims that he can't back up and doesn't want to understand other peoples positions. Pretty brick wall-ish to me.

Also, how do you get someone implying that you attacked someone simply from them replying with a question mark? Jump the gun much?


----------



## Silent Scone

lol comparing a walled in first person shooter to an open world game. Derp. I stand by you have absolutely no idea what you're ranting about. Come on then Captain Armchair, give me some examples of highly tessellated sandbox environments within any game remotely of this size? That isn't _everything_ but it's certainly a start.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> lol comparing a walled in first person shooter to an open world game. Derp. I stand by you have absolutely no idea what you're ranting about.


?


----------



## Fresh Sheep

Almost makes me want to wait for the enhanced edition or whatever if they actually end up making it. Might bring back the nicer lighting and tessellation. What a bummer, really expected more from CDPR....


----------



## Popple

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fresh Sheep*
> 
> Almost makes me want to wait for the enhanced edition or whatever if they actually end up making it. Might bring back the nicer lighting and tessellation. What a bummer, really expected more from CDPR....


I think they said there would not be an enhanced edition this time, additional content is to come in the form of those planned expansions.


----------



## perablenta

Let me show what High vs low graphics should look like, I would show you in Act of Aggression but the beta finished today so I can only show you the maxed out options so you can see what a PC game is supposed to look like when you visit the graphics options menu: http://imgur.com/zYpB8fo

Here is another for Rome 2, even with it's own graphics downgrade, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33c34SI3t_w

Max vs Low Cities Skylines
I left the shadows off so they don't change the look of the textures and hide detail.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> ?


That's the most sense you've made so far. One has to wonder if so completely obsessed on the visuals in a game of this scale and type whether it's really meant for you. Would you agree (yes or no will do) that when it comes to this genre graphics don't take top priority? What do you believe is the reason for the removal of said effects?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> That's the most sense you've made so far.


Ohhhhhh jeeeezzzzzz!!!!!!...........









Are you MonarchX's alt account?


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Nah, that's just time differences. It's just the shadowing of the sun. That explains the dark and light differences along with the less detailed everything, duh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Seriously...those building differences are like PS2 to PS4. It's stuff like that where I fail to see the point of downgrading. You already have the models done. *They're RIGHT THERE! So WHY aren't they in the game? All that time and energy spent making all that and for what? To just toss it all away?*
> 
> MonarchX...you don't call that above gif significant downgrading? They literally went from full modeled buildings to basically flat shacks. Sheesh!
> I called MonarchX the typing brick wall and stand by it. He makes claims that he can't back up and doesn't want to understand other peoples positions. Pretty brick wall-ish to me.
> 
> Also, how do you get someone implying that you attacked someone simply from them replying with a question mark? Jump the gun much?


Thats what I said earlier when that guy said why should the spend so many resources on PC. Unless the created very few assets like this to put into a "gameplay trailer" why would they make all of that and then spend the rest of the time cutting back on it. YOu already have it. Port it to PC then do the cutting back on consoles


----------



## Silent Scone

I thought not.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Popple*
> 
> You put words in peoples' mouths and made caricatures of them. In fact those reactions and attitudes that you impart on the CDPR detractors are completely presumptuous, whereas at least AndroidVageta was referring to an existing conversation that was ongoing.


I have a hard time believing someone will or won't buy a game because of graphics. So yes, it's hard to understand why some people are taking this so seriously, and now we're starting to see personal insults thrown at each other. It's going too far, and it's not surprising why many companies don't communicate with the PC community at all anymore.

Bottom line: "They" lied. Companies lie all the time. Every single one them. Almost all forms of marketing are exaggerated. They are a business, and it will happen again. In this case, one guy claiming "It won't be downgraded" doesn't even speak for the entire company. He doesn't have that type of control. Personal quotes from people working in a company should always be taken with a grain of salt.

The PC community as a whole should stop focusing on the one negative amongst many many positives. Don't preorder games if you worry about this stuff, and if someone in here complaining hasn't even bought the game yet then why on earth are they complaining? They aren't entitled to anything and CDPR doesn't owe them anything. They could of canned the entire project at anytime.

We still have a GOTY worthy title that will last a hundred or more hours. Some reviews even claim the best RPG of all time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Also, how do you get someone implying that you attacked someone simply from them replying with a question mark? Jump the gun much?


It was pretty clear what he was implying and based on his second reply it confirms it. So I guess I didn't jump the gun, eh?


----------



## james8

graphics downgrade = instead of me paying $60 at launch i wait a year or 2 and get it for $10.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Thats what I said earlier when that guy said why should the spend so many resources on PC. Unless the created very few assets like this to put into a "gameplay trailer" why would they make all of that and then spend the rest of the time cutting back on it. YOu already have it. Port it to PC then do the cutting back on consoles


Only thing I can think of is console parity. The whole "don't make the PC version look THAT much better".

I really don't get it either. Not like the PC can't handle that stuff...even mid-range PC's. Like, that's what graphics options are for.

Regardless, doesn't change the fact that they said no downgrade when that gif alone clearly shows that to not be true.


----------



## sterob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> \
> 
> *What fascinates me is the most are the people with mid/low-end hardware complaining about it! As if they could've run those super-Ultra settings on their machines...*


nice ad hominem as if their pc spec have anything to do with their argument validity


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I thought not.


Thought not about what? Your nonsense comment before then saying that I'm the one not making sense? I didn't respond to your comment because it wasn't worth my time to "discuss" with one that starts off on the wrong foot.

Do you want to try again or are you going to respond with some other ridiculous "checkmate!" type comment?


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> they said no downgrade when that gif alone clearly shows that to not be true.


There was no "they". It was one low level guy getting quoted, followed by a company turning it into an article which spread across the web, quickly getting turned into "CDPR claims there will be no downgrades". One person that works for a company =! An official company statement. It was just one guy trying to do damage control, when he probably shouldn't of commented at all.

This is why companies just refuse to comment, people go nuts with any information given and it gets twisted up.


----------



## james8

Anyway yet another awesome developer sold out to consoles.

First it was Crytek. Now CDPR. Who's next?

Looks like multi-platform = bad PC version.

Also, look at how Crytek is doing after selling out to consoles. Surprised that we haven't seen a bankruptcy report from them.

All traitors will end up the same and I expect CDPR to be where Crytek is now in a few years


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> I have a hard time believing someone will or won't buy a game because of graphics. So yes, it's hard to understand why some people are taking this so seriously, and now we're starting to see personal insults thrown at each other. It's going too far, and it's not surprising why many companies don't communicate with the PC community at all anymore.


So people being upset that CDPR...the savior of PC gaming...lied. And lied for years now about downgrading. It's not really about the graphics, it's about the principle of the matter. You don't care that they lied to our faces and now don't want to fess up to it. Cool. Your decision.
Quote:


> Bottom line: They lied. Companies lie all the time. Every single one them. Almost all forms of marketing are exaggerated. They are a business, and it will happen again. In this case, one guy claiming "It won't be downgraded" doesn't even speak for the entire company. He doesn't have that type of control. Personal quotes from people working in a company should always be taken with a grain of salt.


So basically since other companies lie it's OK that CDPR, when they know their stance with PC gamers, lie too? That's exactly what you're saying. Seems Legit™
Quote:


> The PC community as a whole should stop focusing on the one negative amongst many many positives. Don't preorder games if you worry about this stuff, and if someone in here complaining hasn't even bought the game yet then why on earth are they complaining? They aren't entitled to anything and CDPR doesn't owe them anything. They could of canned the entire project at anytime.


No, it's because the PC gaming community keeps getting shafted. Whether you own the game or not it's just the continuation of this stuff that's getting ridiculous.
Quote:


> We still have a GOTY worthy title that will last a hundred or more hours. Some reviews even claim the best RPG of all time.
> It was pretty clear what he was implying and based on his second reply it confirms it. So I guess I didn't jump the gun, eh?


That's fine. GOTY yay! Still doesn't take away from the fact that CDPR has been dishonest this whole time when they had to have known for a long while now that the game wouldn't turn out how they showed.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Thought not about what? Your nonsense comment before then saying that I'm the one not making sense? I didn't respond to your comment because it wasn't worth my time to "discuss" with one that starts off on the wrong foot.
> 
> Do you want to try again or are you going to respond with some other ridiculous "checkmate!" type comment?


Yeah ignoring the questions is a great way to set me straight. Or it could be because frankly you don't care for right nor reasoning and are entirely obsessed with the colour pallet of the game and removal of certain visual effects?

Am I happy these effects have been removed? Well, no of course not. But I fail to see how one gets so utterly enraged in a hate campaign based on footage seen over 2 years ago, that quite clearly given there have been tens of videos since then - has taken a change of art direction and visual fidelity changes. Should that make you not want to buy the game? If it does maybe this game isn't for you.

Maybe downgrade to a more washed out TN panel if you're having a hard time with the colour pallet as well, who knows - might make the 100 hours of game time more enjoyable for you?

Better still you can tell us all why tessellation was removed from the game? I'd really like to know. Seeing as the thread is filled with part time developers.

Whether the reasons were right or not, some of you should be disgusted with the way you're bad mouthing something that (if you have any inclination into how games are made) has had untold hours put into it.

The least you could have done is trash talk the game after you've played it, like any normal person would do.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> There was no "they". It was one low level guy getting quoted, followed by a company turning it into an article which spread across the web, quickly getting turned into "CDPR claims there will be no downgrades". One person that works for a company =! An official company statement. It was just one guy trying to do damage control, when he probably shouldn't of commented at all.
> 
> This is why companies just refuse to comment, people go nuts with any information given and it gets twisted up.


Dude:

http://gamingbolt.com/cd-projekt-red-on-the-witcher-3-there-is-no-downgrade

The art director of the game is a low level no body?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *james8*
> 
> Anyway yet another awesome developer sold out to consoles.
> First it was Crytek. Now CDPR. Who's next?
> 
> Looks like multi-platform = bad PC version.
> Also, look at how Crytek is doing after selling out to consoles. Surprised that we haven't seen a bankruptcy report from them.
> All traitors will end up the same and I expect CDPR to be where Crytek is now in a few years


Eh, I don't know, Crysis 3 was pretty good. Not the same size levels as Crysis but the graphics were certainly there and the levels were larger.

Definitely a better game and story than Crysis 2. I actually enjoyed Crysis 3 once I sat down and played it.

Soo...sold out? Sure, most def...but maybe got a slight redemption?


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> So people being upset that CDPR...the savior of PC gaming...lied. And lied for years now about downgrading. It's not really about the graphics, it's about the principle of the matter. You don't care that they lied to our faces and now don't want to fess up to it. Cool. Your decision.
> So basically since other companies lie it's OK that CDPR, when they know their stance with PC gamers, lie too? That's exactly what you're saying. Seems Legit™
> No, it's because the PC gaming community keeps getting shafted. Whether you own the game or not it's just the continuation of this stuff that's getting ridiculous.
> That's fine. GOTY yay! Still doesn't take away from the fact that CDPR has been dishonest this whole time when they had to have known for a long while now that the game wouldn't turn out how they showed.


The difference is when you say "CDPR lied", I think an employee lied and CDPR can't be held responsible for every single employee.

You have to take everything with a grain of salt, and a single employee stating something as fact does not mean CDPR lied. It just means that CDPR needs to ensure that reps and employees aren't spewing false information.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Dude:
> 
> http://gamingbolt.com/cd-projekt-red-on-the-witcher-3-there-is-no-downgrade
> 
> The art director of the game is a low level no body?


No I don't, but that was only one of many cases. That guy shouldn't of said that and an Art director is still not a voice for an entire company.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> The difference is when you say "CDPR lied", I think an employee lied and CDPR can't be held responsible for every single employee.
> 
> You have to take everything with a grain of salt, and a single employee stating something as fact does not mean CDPR lied. It just means that CDPR needs to ensure that reps and employees aren't spewing false information.


I would agree but the continuance of saying no downgrade and now not saying anything about it, banning people on their forums, etc is pretty telling to me. Take it as you will. Plus to me, it's the level of downgrade. We're talking completely different graphics here. Half the stuff that we've seen that's changed doesn't even make sense to change unless we're looking at console parity.

Like with the detailed buildings and crowd population...why take those away unless you're aiming for the lowest common denominator.
Quote:


> No I don't, but that was only one of many cases. That guy shouldn't of said that and an Art director is still not a voice for an entire company.


Still, it's multiple people at multiple levels of the development team saying no downgrades. No one ever came forward officially and said "we were wrong and/or lied". It's not like there's no blame here.


----------



## deadwidesmile

Best thread of 2015.

I don't know about you guys but honest to Jesus on a Cross himself... I'm excited for the game.

Let's not fight.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> I would agree but the continuance of saying no downgrade and now not saying anything about it, banning people on their forums, etc is pretty telling to me. Take it as you will. Plus to me, it's the level of downgrade. We're talking completely different graphics here. Half the stuff that we've seen that's changed doesn't even make sense to change unless we're looking at console parity.
> 
> Like with the detailed buildings and crowd population...why take those away unless you're aiming for the lowest common denominator.


I read an inside quote from a developer that stated the final game wasn't up to par with their final vision of the game, and that they expected the game to look way better on every platform.

However, game development is so complex that a quote from a single guy (Art director or not), shouldn't be taken as fact. At the time, he probably believed what he was saying. However, things happen. I'd argue that he was wrong more than he lied. He made a mistake. They should of came out and said exactly what was downgrade though and why.


----------



## Silent Scone

Looks fine to me. But then what do I know.


----------



## faizreds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *james8*
> 
> Anyway yet another awesome developer sold out to consoles.
> First it was Crytek. Now CDPR. Who's next?
> 
> Looks like multi-platform = bad PC version.
> Also, look at how Crytek is doing after selling out to consoles. Surprised that we haven't seen a bankruptcy report from them.
> All traitors will end up the same and I expect CDPR to be where Crytek is now in a few years


Wow. Wishing bad thing to happen to the developer is really classy thing to do.
I dissapointed with the downgrade too but i will never wish bad thing happen to them.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> I read an inside quote from a developer that stated the final game wasn't up to par with their final vision of the game, and that they expected the game to look way better on every platform.
> 
> However, game development is so complex that a quote from a single guy (Art director or not), shouldn't be taken as fact. At the time, he probably believed what he was saying. However, things happen. I'd argue that he was wrong more than he lied. He made a mistake. They should of came out and said exactly what was downgrade though and why.
> 
> I'm sure they were disappointed they had to downgrade too.


If any of that is true they sure as hell didn't do jack to squash those claims of no downgrading though did they? No one officially came out and said those statements were false.

So regardless of the fact that those who made those statements (all of them up til very recently...keep in mind it wasn't just one person saying "no downgrades") maybe shouldn't have made them, that doesn't change the point that no one there tried to say otherwise.

In other words, even knowing that there was significant downgrading not a single person tried to correct the false claims...so it's still fishy as all get out and wrong. Their lack of correction is still a lie.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Looks fine to me. But then what do I know.


No one is saying it looks bad. No one. The problem is that it looked glorious before and now doesn't really look that spectacular over existing games or those coming out relatively soon.

Not only that but this is more with the morals of CDPR and the obligations they have of being honest with their customers. All we've heard for years now is "no downgrade" from multiple inside sources. No one ever cared to correct themselves now that we know there have been massive changes for the worse.


----------



## kurei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> The difference is when you say "CDPR lied", I think an employee lied and CDPR can't be held responsible for every single employee.
> 
> You have to take everything with a grain of salt, and a single employee stating something as fact does not mean CDPR lied. It just means that CDPR needs to ensure that reps and employees aren't spewing false information.
> No I don't, but that was only one of many cases. That guy shouldn't of said that and an Art director is still not a voice for an entire company.


Well, Anyone who Is authorized to speak to the Media by Any Company, is a voice of the company. That's how stuff works. Content Creators don't just allow anyone to speak to the media. If you are speaking to the media, that means that you are authorized by the powers that be at your company (Board of Directors, Management etc have authorized you to speak on behalf of the company) or are overstepping your contract( such people don't usually make it to the sunset, employment wise ). If an employee of CDPR Said something to the media and a subsequent clarification or amendment did not issue forth from CDPR's PR Department in short order, then it is safe to assume that they wanted said statement to be on public record and anyone chastising them for it is completely justified.

I have already said that My judgement is reserved till Day 1 Patch but you can't say that one employee's statement doesn't count for anything.


----------



## NrGx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kurei*
> 
> Depending on the answers to these things, CDPR will move up or down the list of Devs that I currently have in my head regarding what quality to expect out of them.
> 
> Right now It would look something like this
> 
> Valve
> Square Enix
> CDPR
> Bethesda
> Several Indie Developers
> *Blizzard*
> Ubisoft
> EA


Heroes of the Storm aside...really? Square Enix has been promising FFXV for eons. JUST GIVE ME MY GAME @*$&*#&%*#&%....


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Looks fine to me. But then what do I know.













My thoughts on the subject.

I bought the game, will enjoy the game. Don't mind the downgrading. Despise deception.. which is what marketing in the gaming industry has become. Tired of false representations used to fuel a hype train and then continuously lied to. It's that simple. Stop showing amazing PC versions of games at E3 when announced and this kind of controversy wouldn't happen. I.E. WatchDogs, the same will probably happen for the division. It's the principle of the matter and for those saying this is how a business works or that's how marketing goes. Your right but that by no means justifies it or makes it right. Lying is lying. People don't like to be lied to including myself. It is literally just that simple. FWIW i didn't pre-order, i don't pre-order games. Been down that road once, never again.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts on the subject.
> 
> I bought the game, will enjoy the game. Don't mind the downgrading. Despise deception.. which is what marketing in the gaming industry has become. Tired of false representations used to fuel a hype train and then continuously lied to. It's that simple. Stop showing amazing PC versions of games at E3 when announced and this kind of controversy wouldn't happen. I.E. WatchDogs, the same will probably happen for the division. It's the principle of the matter and for those saying this is how a business works or that's how marketing goes. Your right but that by no means justifies it or makes it right. Lying is lying. People don't like to be lied to including myself. It is literally just that simple. *FWIW i didn't pre-order, i don't pre-order games*. Been down that road once, never again.


Yeah I did it with Bioshock Infinite and got burned bad. Not only did the gameplay not live up to its E3 trailer, the world was way smaller and the DLC content was lacking. Worst mistake I ever made gaming wise.

Now that i think about, this type of marketing has been going on for a long long time.

If nobody remember what I'm talking about, I'm talking about this:


----------



## NrGx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rliezhepet*
> 
> I hate being lied too and yes consoles are a cancer on the industry.


Without consoles there is no industry. PC gaming lost. Get over it.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Yeah I did it with Bioshock Infinite and got burned bad. Not only did the gameplay not live up to its E3 trailer, the world was way smaller and the DLC content was lacking. Worst mistake I ever made gaming wise.
> 
> Now that i think about, this type of marketing has been going on for a long long time.
> 
> If nobody remember what I'm talking about, I'm talking about this:


Oh man...Infinite. Talk about a disappointment that I never understood how it got the praise it did. Completely different game then what was shown multiple times through multiple years .

Found it pretty bland and repetitive myself. Honestly fell asleep playing it...twice...and I had never done that before. Bleh...anyways...don't want to get started on that!


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NrGx*
> 
> Without consoles there is no industry. PC gaming lost. Get over it.


PC gaming is larger than it's ever been (aren't there more gaming PC's then consoles now?) and without consoles then everything moves to PC. You really think gaming will just die if consoles do? That's silly.


----------



## Menta

This INDUSTRY has become boring and deceptive at best, that feeling of innovation has gone out the window a long time a go actually....remakes and then more remakes, first day DLC, SEASON PASS.....fake announcements and so on.....its all about the cash in the end! nothing else


----------



## Boyd

Everyday I find something that irritates me more, and more about stuff of this matter. PC version that could of been alot better than what it is gets downgraded for ... what ever reasons.

In the end, we as PC gamers, Could have games that look, play and run better than of their current state, but THANKS TO CONSOLE "Next Gen" GAMING, this "better" yet very achievable PC experience is being demolished.


----------



## Imglidinhere

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NrGx*
> 
> Without consoles there is no industry. PC gaming lost. Get over it.


What? Is this a joke? xD

PC gaming is more popular than ever nowadays, what with most games being multi-platform and allowing you to hook up a controller to play said game? That and to say that PC gaming lost is kiiiiinda biased toward the crappier consoles out there. Yeah the PS3 and the 360 were great... up until around five years ago when no one cared about them anymore.


----------



## sterob

i will just leave it here


----------



## Blackops_2

That was five months ago my friend. Try asking those questions now and BOOM ban-hammer!









Meh we'll see in less than 24, with our very own eyes non the less!


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> That was five months ago my friend. Try asking those questions now and BOOM ban-hammer!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meh we'll see in less than 24, with our very own eyes non the less!


I think that was his point. It was someone at CDPR saying that the graphics would be the same.

My question still is, where are the graphics we saw 2 years ago and why did they go away so hard core?


----------



## Menta

in the old days we saw those those letters at the end of a presentation or what ever " not the representative of final quality " and thought wow the final version might just be better now a days its the opposite


----------



## ghost_z

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> in the old days we saw those those letters at the end of a presentation or what ever " not the representative of final quality " and thought wow the final version might just be better now a days its the opposite


Lol ikr xD
These days just pray to whatever deity you beleive in that the final product at least matches the presentation.

Thats the best case scenario now.

Anyhow i might pick w3 up in a sale or something, this whole fiasco tought me something, not to ever preorder any game, and not to get hyped based on gameplay trailer.

Now i kinda respect rockstar, though they were more than a year late, and are console centric devs ,at least they didnt use any shady stuff to hype the game and gave us exactly what they promised.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> No one is saying it looks bad. No one. The problem is that it looked glorious before and now doesn't really look that spectacular over existing games or those coming out relatively soon.
> 
> Not only that but this is more with the morals of CDPR and the obligations they have of being honest with their customers. All we've heard for years now is "no downgrade" from multiple inside sources. No one ever cared to correct themselves now that we know there have been massive changes for the worse.


Like a couple of people have tried to explain to you already though, what do you perceive as a downgrade? With most things like this you have to put your beliefs aside almost and just break it down.

1. What do you perceive to be a downgrade? In the early 2013 footage there are seemingly more NPC, the games colour pallet has changed drastically and from certain screenshots the draw distance has been reduced.

2. Draw distance - what end goal is there to reducing draw distance? Improving performance. Perhaps the earlier footage was overly optimistic - and thus an end goal that wasn't able to be achieved, after all this was over 2 years ago?

3.Removal of tessellation - why was tessellation removed from the PC build, would the console build have had tessellation? Will we see tessellation added in the future? See point 2.

4. Particle effects, not much to be seen from past footage, and the game still contains what _looks_ (from what one can tell) to have seemingly decent particle effects.

4. Sharpening filter - it's quite apparent that when a game is played from the 3rd person perspective that texture fidelity can be compromised or be seemingly better than when played in the 1st person. However it is also easier to manipulate what is drawn when played from the 1st person due to the field of view. From the early footage and images, one can clearly see shader based ground reflection which sharpens the ground level and also as a press shot - the image will have been post processed, not really all that surprising.

5. The games general art style seems to have taken a turn. The games original look was overly 'grey' which can have a massive impact on how the game appears overall. Like with ENB visual effects, the general tone of the game can be changed to suit the player better - whether that be to increase or decrease the realism of the games general look. This is entirely subjective - and this is a fantasy world. This change in direction is a huge part in why the game now looks so different to the original pre-alpha footage.

6.Are these changes for the better? The only change that I feel that has most likely had a large impact on the visual fidelity is the removal of tessellation, how large is still questionable as people are basing their opinion on the game from one or two short (2 to 3 second) sequences. Of which do not really show any conclusive evidence of tessellation anyway. The nature of tessellation may mean that it might possibly come in the form of a patch at a later date. it's frustrating, but as there is no real evidence of tessellation in the game, it should be fairly difficult to get worked up about it.

Not to throw CD into the same basket as Ubisoft, but AC: Unity is a decent example of a game looking fairly amazing without tessellation - which in a slightly worse turn of events was shown added by NVIDIA and has to this day not seen the light of day in a patch. Nevertheless, Unity is a very good looking game on all three platforms.

Another point worth of note, is that heavy use of tessellation is yet another avenue for bickering. When companies have done this in the past when being associated with GameWorks, they've been accused of deliberately crippling AMD hardware due to the poorer performance on AMD hardware. Even though frankly this is hardly an issue any more since the changes in the pipeline since the debut of DX11. The point being and one Murlock has mentioned, *you cannot ever please everyone...*


----------



## Wishmaker

We are almost there before everyone will see how the PC version looks on Titans at 4k. Give it a few more hours.


----------



## benbenkr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> This INDUSTRY has become boring and deceptive at best, that feeling of innovation has gone out the window a long time a go actually....remakes and then more remakes, first day DLC, SEASON PASS.....fake announcements and so on.....*its all about the cash in the end*! nothing else


Cash is king. Haven't you heard?


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> That was five months ago my friend. Try asking those questions now and BOOM ban-hammer!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meh we'll see in less than 24, with our very own eyes non the less!


Well of course, can you imagine the spam on their forums currently if they didn't?
Every single random internet person feels the need to create their own thread, it's a goddam mess.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Looks fine to me. But then what do I know.


Pah, my Super Nintendo can do better graphics.


----------



## WorldExclusive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> This. The graphical downgrade _doesn't matter_. Game still looks good and by all accounts so far is very good. So why complain about it? Because boo hoo hoo consoles? That makes no sense to me.


Hmmm if video cards didn't cost the price of a PS4 and more, maybe I would agree. But we spend a hell of a lot more on our hardware, so we should get more.
You're welcome to pay for this game. I'll wait until the 2016 Winter Sale.


----------



## Hl86

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDilcyyyKJM
This one hits the spot right on.

Lets not give ubisoft any ideas, i broke in laughter


----------



## Edge Of Pain

I don't understand why they didn't just leave the features in the game on the PC version and only downgrade the console ones, since they said the consoles were the limiting factor.


----------



## fashric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadwidesmile*
> 
> Best thread of 2015.
> 
> I don't know about you guys but honest to Jesus on a Cross himself... I'm excited for the game.
> 
> Let's not fight.


Did you not get the memo? It's not cool to be excited for a game any more you have to find something wrong with it that makes anyone involved literally worse than Hitler and the game a write off. /s
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WorldExclusive*
> 
> Hmmm if video cards didn't cost the price of a PS4 and more, maybe I would agree. But we spend a hell of a lot more on our hardware, so we should get more.
> You're welcome to pay for this game. I'll wait until the 2016 Winter Sale.


Do people really only game on PC just for the graphics? Its only one of the benefits for me. Also a developer owes you nothing, you decided to buy an expensive piece of hardware they didn't tell you too.


----------



## 47 Knucklehead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *John Shepard*
> 
> no amount of mods or patches will "fix" this
> 
> thanks consoles!


Pretty much this.

I am so sick and tired of developers (and people in general) destroying an otherwise great thing, just to cater to the lowest common denominator.

I have no problem with only paying $400 for their gaming experience, but damn it, stop destroying my $1000 plus experience because someone else is too cheap to experience it better.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Edge Of Pain*
> 
> I don't understand why they didn't just leave the features in the game on the PC version and only downgrade the console ones, since they said the consoles were the limiting factor.


Because they would have to make 2 games instead of 1? We are not talking about a couple settings here and there.


----------



## FCSElite

I think his saying these features were there already in 2013 gameplay footage which was on Pc , so why remove them now? although ithe art directer of the game denied any downgrade on highest setting


----------



## 47 Knucklehead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FCSElite*
> 
> I think his saying these features were there already in 2013 gameplay footage which was on Pc , so why remove them now? although ithe art directer of the game denied any downgrade on highest setting


Just another Aliens "bait and switch".

Honestly, I am so sick of this garbage. I was going to buy Witcher 3, but given this attitude, I'll give my money to someone else ... maybe a homeless guy on the street who isn't lying to my face.


----------



## Silent Scone

If you think pre alpha footage 2 years ago to final release is a clear case of bait and switch you must have been living under a rock. That goes without saying regardless of whether the game has changed or not - they've shown plenty of footage since.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> If you think pre alpha footage 2 years ago to final release is a clear case of bait and switch you must have been living under a rock. That goes without saying regardless of whether the game has changed or not - they've shown plenty of footage since.


This......

Even if you look at the 2014 footage, current footage is respectably close to it. This would even be disregarding all of the content that we have seen since E3 2014. Given what is listed in the day 1 patch and known graphical option/features, it looks like the 2014 footage is generally what we can expect out of the game. We are still at a point where we haven't seen the game at highest settings.

All we have is poorly made comparison videos and a gaggle of forum posters blowing the entire ordeal out of the water. Most of which don't have the hardware to run the game on high settings let alone ultra/uber.


----------



## Luxer

Why did they desaturate all the trees/grass/foliage? Looks way better in the trailer.


----------



## aDyerSituation

A lot of you are missing the point. It's not about the graphics as much as it is the concept. Watchdogs anyone?


----------



## Pwnography

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *47 Knucklehead*
> 
> Pretty much this.
> 
> I am so sick and tired of developers (and people in general) destroying an otherwise great thing, just to cater to the lowest common denominator.
> 
> I have no problem with only paying $400 for their gaming experience, but damn it, stop destroying my $1000 plus experience because someone else is too cheap to experience it better.


The reality is that the market of people who paid $1000 for their gaming experience isn't worth the effort required to make a second version of the game with all the features in. If it was, they would make it.

Its pretty simple guys...

Maybe they should have run a crowd funding for the extra PC settings or maybe charged us more for the more work, I'm sure they would have liked to make the game look amazing, it just clearly wasn't economically viable.

You might argue they should have came out and said "we had to make it look worse for consoles" but maybe they couldn't. Honestly, it looks good enough and if this means i can get 144fps or something i might be happy with the trade off.


----------



## B-rock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pwnography*
> 
> The reality is that the market of people who paid $1000 for their gaming experience isn't worth the effort required to make a second version of the game with all the features in. If it was, they would make it.


But thats the whole reason the PC platform praised CDPR so much, because they were PC centric. Any downgrade due to consoles is really a slap in the face because it doesnt make CDPR special anymore, theyre just another dev.


----------



## e6800xe

seems like it could be fixed with a enb like sweetfx or gemfx


----------



## Pwnography

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *B-rock*
> 
> But thats the whole reason the PC platform praised CDPR so much, because they were PC centric. Any downgrade due to consoles is really a slap in the face because it doesnt make CDPR special anymore, theyre just another dev.


Real talk, i totally get you, but limiting you can see that limiting themselves to PC would hurt profit, therefore they would have to have a smaller team, which would most likely mean the game had less (or lesser quality) content, maybe toning down the graphics is a better option.

And lets be honest here, were hardly going to find a 30 FPS cap or something that you find with other devs.


----------



## CasualCat

I think what is weird watching that video is they appear to use tessellation in some places, but not others where it'd be even more beneficial. That building/tower corner that has been shown in other threads which is in the comparison video of 2014 vs 2015 not 2013 vs 2015 and matches this picture:







Just wonder why they wouldn't have some tessellation options there to bring some additional geometry to that edge. Even though it wouldn't look the exact same as the 2014 trailer as the stones appear different, at least it wouldn't be a hard single edge. I believe the video also mentions there being less people (nicht so viele Menschen) in 2015 vs the 2014 gameplay demo. That also seems like something that could be an option similar to GTAV.

To be clear I'm sure I'll still enjoy the game, but there do appear to be downgrades even from the 2014 35min gameplay demo (which some people here are calling the 2013 demo) that seem like they should be options on a PC and it is disappointing CDPR took this route.


----------



## Juub

Truth be told consoles are where the real profits are for normal developers. MOBA and competitive FPS aside, games tend to sell much more on consoles at a higher average price. If a team starts as a small PC dev and makes a critically acclaimed and successful game, you can be sure the sequel will be on consoles and held back as a result.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> Truth be told consoles are where the real profits are for normal developers. MOBA and competitive FPS aside, games tend to sell much more on consoles at a higher average price. If a team starts as a small PC dev and makes a critically acclaimed and successful game, you can be sure the sequel will be on consoles and held back as a result.


I cant think of one title over the last 5 years that could support the development and marketing budget of a modern AAA title with a PC only release. The first Witcher title sold relatively well (over 1 million or so), but had a very low development and marketing budget and anymore 1 million sold is a relatively low number for high caliber titles.


----------



## fashric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> A lot of you are missing the point. It's not about the graphics as much as it is the concept. Watchdogs anyone?


This is nothing like Watch_Dogs keep seeing it compared and its just not the same situation. The major difference is the review embargo put in place by Ubisoft that did not lift until the day of the games release plus the fact that the performance was awful despite the game being "downgraded" and not looking that great then add that Ubisofts support is just abysmal and you can see that they are very different cases.


----------



## fragamemnon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Popple*
> 
> ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...Are you implying I personally attacked someone?
> 
> Stating "are you a brick wall that can type?" and saying some people can't be pleased are very different things. I don't follow your logic.
Click to expand...

I'm not directly opposing you, but let's be objective here:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> I'll just leave this here...
> http://i.imgur.com/nxUr5jZ.gif
> 
> 
> 
> I see a mentally unstable school drop-out too fazed out on drugs and his girly chores without absolutely no knowledge of what scientific method is and how to compare graphics in the first place.
> 
> Maybe someone should take some screenshots of a wall-close up in 2015 version and post them as an example. People like you would be so happy, yelling - LOW RESOLUTION! HAHA!
> 
> *FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!* You cannot compare graphics, assets, and whatever else UNLESS you can capture IDENTICAL SCREENSHOTS from BOTH VERSIONS for comparison, using the highest quality settings available. *There has YET to be a SINGLE valid comparison*, where all variables were under control!
> 
> I swear these complainers have either never went to Middle School and never done a Science Fair Project or have severe memory lapses of how to compare anything in a controlled environment.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> I just hope a good game doesn't suffer in sales because the graphics are a ~7/10 instead of the best looking game ever made. It's been blown way out of proportion and you can't even read about this game now without hearing about it. Stream forums, Reddit, CDPR forums, OCN, etc. The entire PC community is complaining about a game that is getting GOTY worthy reviews because the graphics aren't the best in the world. It's quite absurd.


1) A game's sales are directly affected by the reputation of the developer/publisher, for the better or worse. In fact, in the recent years, a game's sales are _very_ dependent on that. Franchises that provide nothing new with each year's iteration sell millions of copies just because of the momentum they initially gained with the early parts of the series (or the good ones, anyway) and the slow rate of dissipation said momentum has. Moreover, to further battle the decrease in the 'hype' generated, the marketing budgets often supercede the game's budget itself.

2) A company such as CDPR, which:
a) has always vowed to stay on the PC side of the industry;
b) has a very good history of delivering what is promised;
c) has never gimped products in order to cater to [x] and/or [y] inferior subjects (be it consoles, very low-end specs and whatnot), but instead has optimized for a big part of the PC spectrum;
d) provides customization which brought top-end rigs to their knees, barely providing a playable experience,

set precedents in its practice, such as:
a) attempting to release a multi-platform game at once
b) postponing the game once the "other platforms'" specs were announced
c) cut back on assets, and overall downgraded modified/altered/simplified/optimized visual fidelity of the game.

These three precedents, combined with:
a) publishing what was advertised as *gameplay* footage in 2013;
b) demonstrating new gameplay footage at a later point in time which was nowhere as complex - and, obviously, nowhere as demanding - in terms of computing power, without prior notice about this (when, mind you, pre-orders were already available and doubtless lots of people had already purchased it);
c) admitting to removing some assets and technologies in order to allow for said "platform parity";
d) coming out with a statement about _textures_ not being downgraded rather than a straightforward announcement on what exactly has been modified, what remains intact, and how close to the quality of the 2013 gameplay we will be able to get

are sufficient reasons for causing community backlash at the company's questionable practices.

Now, I say questionable, because (and you should know best) CDPR used to be the Paragon among developers who always catered to PC gamers in the dawn and boom of the console era; CDPR established a relationship with the consumers of its products built just as much on trust as the great content they deliver.
What we witnessed in the course of a couple of years (read: there was plenty of time to announce the path they intend to take, rectify the situation, warn us about the changes taking place, or whatever they would find appropriate to disclose with the community) was, well, there is no need to repeat the points above.

This is how you demolish a trust-based customer relationship in a single broad swipe, and why the PC community is outraged - because we had expectations and we were promised something by someone whom we trusted.
I don't care about the graphics and I probably wouldn't have cared if it wasn't CDPR who promised this, or at least they didn't act like nothing happened after the obvious alterations were exposed.

I am mad because they turned their backs on us and you see the what I described in the underscored sentence in 1).
If you are in disagreement with me on that statement, please ask who here would have bought the copy on PC and the console he has, or more than one PC copy, just to support the company. Hell, people who don't like RPGs and wouldn't play the game at all were willing to buy it to show their support. Gamers supported CDPR for its honesty and openness towards the community.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Like a couple of people have tried to explain to you already though, what do you perceive as a downgrade? With most things like this you have to put your beliefs aside almost and just break it down.
> 
> 1. What do you perceive to be a downgrade? In the early 2013 footage there are seemingly more NPC, the games colour pallet has changed drastically and from certain screenshots the draw distance has been reduced.
> 
> 2. Draw distance - what end goal is there to reducing draw distance? Improving performance. Perhaps the earlier footage was overly optimistic - and thus an end goal that wasn't able to be achieved, after all this was over 2 years ago?
> 
> 3. Removal of tessellation - why was tessellation removed from the PC build, would the console build have had tessellation? Will we see tessellation added in the future? See point 2.
> 
> 4. Particle effects, not much to be seen from past footage, and the game still contains what _looks_ (from what one can tell) to have seemingly decent particle effects.
> 
> 4. Sharpening filter - it's quite apparent that when a game is played from the 3rd person perspective that texture fidelity can be compromised or be seemingly better than when played in the 1st person. However it is also easier to manipulate what is drawn when played from the 1st person due to the field of view. From the early footage and images, one can clearly see shader based ground reflection which sharpens the ground level and also as a press shot - the image will have been post processed, not really all that surprising.
> 
> 5. The games general art style seems to have taken a turn. The games original look was overly 'grey' which can have a massive impact on how the game appears overall. Like with ENB visual effects, the general tone of the game can be changed to suit the player better - whether that be to increase or decrease the realism of the games general look. This is entirely subjective - and this is a fantasy world. This change in direction is a huge part in why the game now looks so different to the original pre-alpha footage.
> 
> 6.Are these changes for the better? The only change that I feel that has most likely had a large impact on the visual fidelity is the removal of tessellation, how large is still questionable as people are basing their opinion on the game from one or two short (2 to 3 second) sequences. Of which do not really show any conclusive evidence of tessellation anyway. The nature of tessellation may mean that it might possibly come in the form of a patch at a later date. it's frustrating, but as there is no real evidence of tessellation in the game, it should be fairly difficult to get worked up about it.
> 
> Not to throw CD into the same basket as Ubisoft, but AC: Unity is a decent example of a game looking fairly amazing without tessellation - which in a slightly worse turn of events was shown added by NVIDIA and has to this day not seen the light of day in a patch. Nevertheless, Unity is a very good looking game on all three platforms.
> 
> Another point worth of note, is that heavy use of tessellation is yet another avenue for bickering. When companies have done this in the past when being associated with GameWorks, they've been accused of deliberately crippling AMD hardware due to the poorer performance on AMD hardware. Even though frankly this is hardly an issue any more since the changes in the pipeline since the debut of DX11. The point being and one Murlock has mentioned, *you cannot ever please everyone...*


Let's see.
I will not speculate on the NPC count since I am not sure of it. What do you mean by overly optimistic? It was rendered in real time, wasn't it? Even if 2013's hardware wasn't strong enough - things are moving on, we have far more powerful machines nowadays. This point doesn't make sense - the Ultra settings are called so for a reason, these are not supposed to be for everyone, don't you think?
Regarding 6. Let me decide what change is for the better for myself - it's subjective. And again, even this doesn't annoy me as much as CDPR's approach (or lack thereof) to the changes does.
Reducing draw distance, for example, is definitely a downgrade in my book. Why cut the maximum value if you can manually lower it?
I am not going into detail about the other things I am annoyed with, but where's the fairness in this situation?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> This INDUSTRY has become boring and deceptive at best, that feeling of innovation has gone out the window a long time a go actually....remakes and then more remakes, first day DLC, SEASON PASS.....fake announcements and so on.....*its all about the cash in the end*! nothing else


Well then, ask how many people:
- bought the game on both PC and console, in spite of the simultaneous release;
- bought two or more copies on PC;
- bought the game although they do not plan on playing it.
All this just to show support for CDPR.

There are plenty more posts I'd reply to, but there would be no point in doing so, would there?
PC Gamers are not bashing the game - the game is good and many will play it. It's CDPR who's getting all the hate for their sudden abandonment of all that they have been standing up for and walking down the path of other publishers with whom we'd rather not associate CDPR.


----------



## Master__Shake

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fashric*
> 
> This is nothing like Watch_Dogs keep seeing it compared and its just not the same situation. The major difference is the review embargo put in place by Ubisoft that did not lift until the day of the games release plus the fact that the performance was awful despite the game being "downgraded" and not looking that great then add that Ubisofts support is just abysmal and you can see that they are very different cases.


false

do you remember aliens: colonial marines?

that was the biggest bag over the head ever!


----------



## Asmodean

Well, at least they've dealt with some glaring visual issues in the latest launch patch. (some lighting issues, orange-saturated color correction, lod, grass shading, etc). Not bad for a start imo.

*Before patch*








*After patch*









Source Comparison


----------



## Mumbles37

Most minds in this thread have already been made either way. That's sad only in respect to how firmly and stubbornly set those minds are without proper evidence, and this goes for those in either camp.

Fortunately the .exe will be out in just a few hours, and then we can legitimately debate either the massive graphics downgrade, if it does truly exist, or move onto another topic to whine about (which most certainly will exist).


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> I cant think of one title over the last 5 years that could support the development and marketing budget of a modern AAA title with a PC only release. The first Witcher title sold relatively well (over 1 million or so), but had a very low development and marketing budget and anymore 1 million sold is a relatively low number for high caliber titles.


Yes and that is too bad. As much as people like looking at Steam's number of simultaneous users and popularity, high-end PC gaming is still a niche market and too expensive for most people. Most gamers don't know about the crazy good PC deals and I also believe a good portion of them like their physical, retail copies which is why they won't move to PC.

There is also the fact that people still think PC gaming is complicated when it's really not. Long term, a 1,000$ PC can be cheaper than a 400$ PS4 but most people don't know that which is a shame.


----------



## fashric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Master__Shake*
> 
> false
> 
> do you remember aliens: colonial marines?
> 
> that was the biggest bag over the head ever!


What's false? Yep Aliens: CM was a bad one.


----------



## GHADthc

Holy cow there is bunch of people who cant seem to wrap their minds around the fact that its not just a matter of the level of graphical fidelity, its the matter of CDPR falsely advertising said fidelity, and then getting away with it because of apologizers/defenders of such a deceitful slimy act...but oh that's right there is more to graphics hey?

So that means its perfectly fine to bait and switch, to get more pre-orders...every Dev team should just adopt these tactics now shouldn't they? Because its perfectly fine isn't it?....

I could care less if they have made a master piece of story telling, they should have repercussions for their despicable behavior (Along with any other Dev that tries this crap), its pretty straight forward really.


----------



## KYKYLLIKA

Maybe there'll be ENB…


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Juub*
> 
> Yes and that is too bad. As much as people like looking at Steam's number of simultaneous users and popularity, high-end PC gaming is still a niche market and too expensive for most people. Most gamers don't know about the crazy good PC deals and I also believe a good portion of them like their physical, retail copies which is why they won't move to PC.
> 
> There is also the fact that people still think PC gaming is complicated when it's really not. Long term, a *1,000$ PC can be cheaper than a 400$ PS4* but most people don't know that which is a shame.


Yeah these days it really is. I only needed to change to a 290 since 2010 and i bought it for 310. If I had waited, I could have bought a new Tri-x for 270.

As for development and all that, word spreads. When the game was announced back in 2013 and they talked about no DRM, i actually made a thread I think saying how we should all preorder the game even if you wont play it on GOG not even Steam in other for the dev to get the most money. Boy am I eating my words.

point is we support devs that are good to us and this finance thing is sounding like a lame excuse. TW2 was made on PC and it looks great. I still think it looks comparable to TW3 that we got.


----------



## Liranan

And the drama continues and we're hours from release.


----------



## KYKYLLIKA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Liranan*
> 
> And the drama continues and we're hours from release.


Maybe we can see sales drop below zero. That'll teach them crooks.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Liranan*
> 
> And the drama continues and we're hours from release.


Just like the wait for uncompressed videos crowd, I am certain the graphics quality won't jump back to 2013 level just because its officially been released


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Surround? Try 4K ;-)
> 
> Have you SEEN 4K? 27 inches @ 1080p must look terrible! LOL! I had 3x24 inch 1080p's in Eyefinity and just after owning my cheap 39 inch 4K TV I became spoiled.
> 
> 4K bruh...yeah you'd lose the Surround but I promise, you won't miss it. I know I don't. Dat crispness.


Yup, I went and maxed Crysis 3 on 4k just for the fidelity.. my frames were obviously through the floor with a single 290x but the visuals are IMO the best to this day by far


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> Maybe we can see sales drop below zero. That'll teach them crooks.


So far we got top scores and people are counting down the hours.
This will be a GOTY contender and a big success.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> So far we got top scores and people are counting down the hours.
> This will be a GOTY contender and a big success.


but how many people know about the game though/series. This isn't Eldar Scrolls.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> but how many people know about the game though/series. This isn't Eldar Scrolls.


If this was the witcher 1 or maybe the witcher 2 you had a pont. Here nope.

Sure it maybe not elder scrolls or CoD popular but over the years it got known a lot more.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

I am pretty shure we will get E3 2013 video on Witcher 4.


----------



## Fickle Pickle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> PC gaming is larger than it's ever been (aren't there more gaming PC's then consoles now?) and without consoles then everything moves to PC. You really think gaming will just die if consoles do? That's silly.


Nintendo saved the gaming industry in the 80s after the crash. So that is factual.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> If this was the witcher 1 or maybe the witcher 2 you had a pont. Here nope.
> 
> Sure it maybe not elder scrolls or CoD popular but over the years it got known a lot more.


I do want to know if its mainly PC gamers or console people. It would help me understand the visually nerfed game we got.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> I do want to know if its mainly PC gamers or console people. It would help me understand the visually nerfed game we got.


Consoles in general sell better then PC, i don't see why it would be different here.

Note that the whole complaining is just once again the vocal minority. Most people will just play it and enjoy a amazing game stead.


----------



## JTHMfreak

I can't wait to play my copy regardless.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fickle Pickle*
> 
> Nintendo saved the gaming industry in the 80s after the crash. So that is factual.


Apples and oranges. The gaming industry was new back then, and not only that there was no focus point in PC gaming. These days there are far too many PC's out there for it just to die off


----------



## Punter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Consoles in general sell better then PC, i don't see why it would be different here.
> 
> Note that the whole complaining is just once again the vocal minority. Most people will just play it and enjoy a amazing game stead.


300 posts in less than 24hrs about an unreleased game's graphical quality


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punter*
> 
> 300 posts in less than 24hrs about an unreleased game's graphical quality


Well i am just posting cause i am waiting for the game to be released, once it clicks 1am here you won't see me anymore and the only ones left are the ones bickering


----------



## Silent Scone

Or the ones waiting for the crack.


----------



## kooldog

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-graphics-performance-and-tweaking-guide

virtually no difference between ultra and high except in the case of foliage visibility.

also looks like editing the config files yields little result


----------



## Assirra

Yea yea i know, with the whole downgrade people suddenly think they are in their right to pirate the game.

All they required was an excuse and they would have found 1 anyway


----------



## Rahldrac

I actually believed in CD Red, they have never disappoint me, so I actually pre-ordered the game. Again I learn never to pre-order no matter what.

And yes, this is the same as the 970 discussion all over again.

Yes the 970/Witcher is still going to be a great Card/Game, but they lied. I do not understand why people defend people when they lie?
I am still looking forward to the game, and the many hours I am going to spend in it. But it still does not change the fact that they said this was how the game was going to look like, and that was a lie.


----------



## BBZZHH

Honestly though, I feel they would actually end up in a better financial position even if they lost the PC market by catering
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kooldog*
> 
> http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-graphics-performance-and-tweaking-guide
> 
> virtually no difference between ultra and high except in the case of foliage visibility.
> 
> also looks like editing the config files yields little result


*Hairworks* looks pretty amazing on fur, but rather poor on human hair.
*HBAO+* is noticeable and nice, but it isn't dramatically different
*Depth of Field* looks identical on or off
*Foliage* Ultra vs High appears to only increase draw distance
*Grass Density* Ultra vs High adds a few more tufts here and there
*Shadow* difference is pretty marginal from Low to Ultra
*Textures* High vs Ultra looks identical
*Water Quality* looks the same the me across all settings
*Foliage and Grass Distance* is noticeable from 6 to 1.5, but 3 is pretty much the same as 6
*Grass Density* 9600 is dramatically different from the other settings
*Cascade Shadow* looks mostly the same


----------



## kooldog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> *Grass Density* 9600 is dramatically different from the other settings


in my opinion 9600 looks much worse than 2400 (ultra)

http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-grassdensity-config-file-tweak-interactive-comparison-1-9600-vs-2400.html


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kooldog*
> 
> in my opinion 9600 looks much worse than 2400 (ultra)
> 
> http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-grassdensity-config-file-tweak-interactive-comparison-1-9600-vs-2400.html


True that.


----------



## BBZZHH

Yeah, it seems to remove the flowers and fill all the space on the ground with grass, not necessarily better. Hairworks has a huge hit ~15 FPS to enable all, but hopefully its less demanding at 1080p. Though I'd honestly prefer to be able to only turn it on for monsters and not Geralt


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kooldog*
> 
> in my opinion 9600 looks much worse than 2400 (ultra)
> 
> http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-grassdensity-config-file-tweak-interactive-comparison-1-9600-vs-2400.html


Have to agree here, going from flowers and puddles to a pure grassland is a bit meh.

Guess 1 option i can lower already to get hairworks working


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kooldog*
> 
> in my opinion 9600 looks much worse than 2400 (ultra)
> 
> http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-grassdensity-config-file-tweak-interactive-comparison-1-9600-vs-2400.html


Looks to me like increasing the grass density has eliminated the wildflowers. Not sure I would want to increase the grass density if doing so results in eliminating other folliage.


----------



## KYKYLLIKA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> So far we got top scores and people are counting down the hours.
> This will be a GOTY contender and a big success.


Sad, really, as false advertising is legally fraud. At least give someone a jail time or a fine too large to pay off in a lifetime.

No question this will be an awesome game. As the game, it will probably be a very competent contender for multiple awards (and the lore for Witcher is so deep&#8230; there are crowds upon crowds of book fans that will eat this game up). But this does not deserve commercial success. It should be a massive financial loss just to make the point.


----------



## BBZZHH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> Sad, really, as false advertising is legally fraud. At least give someone a jail time or a fine too large to pay off in a lifetime.


That's really over the top excessive


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> give someone a jail time
> 
> No question this will be an awesome game. .


Jail time, for making an awesome game?


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Or the ones waiting for the crack.


Why would anyone wait for a crack when CD Projekt Red said the Day 1 patch will work on any preloaded game, including pirated copies?


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> Sad, really, as false advertising is legally fraud. At least give someone a jail time or a fine too large to pay off in a lifetime.
> 
> No question this will be an awesome game. As the game, it will probably be a very competent contender for multiple awards (and the lore for Witcher is so deep&#8230; there are crowds upon crowds of book fans that will eat this game up). But this does not deserve commercial success. It should be a massive financial loss just to make the point.


Wow, you want these people to have long life suffering just because that what they originally envisioned was impossible?
Can you at least go after a developer that doesn't make awesome games like Ubisoft or something?


----------



## KYKYLLIKA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> That's really over the top excessive


Normal people get their life ruined when their fraud gets called out. What makes these cats an exception? Oooh, poor stupid programmers decided they going to lie to everyone to get tons of hype and fraudulently increase their preorders and day-one sales. Let's give 'em a pat on the back and a kiss on the cheek.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> Jail time, for making an awesome game?


For fraud. When a convicted BnE robber saves a child from the fire, it doesn't acquit him of robbery. What difference is there between fraud and theft? And, mind you, saving a child from the fire is much more deserving in my books than making a lifetime of awesome games.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Wow, you want these people to have long life suffering just because that what they originally envisioned was impossible?
> Can you at least go after a developer that doesn't make awesome games like Ubisoft or something?


I want law to apply indiscriminately and without exception. What they envisioned was not impossible, it just required more than they were willing to commit. But they have committed and now backing out while saying "no, everything is as it was supposed to be".


----------



## Blackops_2

Hmm there is certainly some tessellation in scenes of this video or so i thought?. Who knows though? 12 more hours?

There are definitely some framerate drops GJ Green team!


----------



## BBZZHH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> Normal people get their life ruined when their fraud gets called out. What makes these cats an exception? Oooh, poor stupid programmers decided they going to lie to everyone to get tons of hype and fraudulently increase their preorders and day-one sales. Let's give 'em a pat on the back and a kiss on the cheek.
> For fraud. When a convicted BnE robber saves a child from the fire, it doesn't acquit him of robbery. What difference is there between fraud and theft? And, mind you, saving a child from the fire is much more deserving in my books than making a lifetime of awesome games.


You could have just canceled the pre-order.


----------



## Shaba

My 1st thought when I saw some of the comparison screens attached to this thread was: looks like they used a different ENB (been playing waayyy too much Skryim)

I do believe that any form of graphical downgrade (if any) was because of the consoles. We do not know what happens behind the scenes but it is completely possible that Microsoft or Sony could have put pressure on CDPR to not allow them to make the PC version too much better looking then the consoles. I realize that is tin foil hat stuff but the screams of rabid console gamers are much louder then what comes out of the PC community when it comes to feeling cheated. I would like to believe that those type of behind closed doors strong arm tactics dont happen, but I am not that naive.

Despite everything, I will enjoy this game and I am happy to support CDPR.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Wow, you want these people to have long life suffering just because that what they originally envisioned was impossible?


What was impossible exactly? They already had a lot of their vision working in previous videos then took it away. Most likely due to consoles. It really did go from basically being an amazing PC game to a console port.
Quote:


> Can you at least go after a developer that doesn't make awesome games like Ubisoft or something?


What AAA games has Ubisoft had lately that weren't pretty good? Sure Watch Dogs, FC4, Unity, etc had some performance issues but they were still good games and hella fun. Watch Dogs delivered on the game play front based on what we were shown (with the obvious graphics downagrade). FC4 was FC3 but better/same...no surprise...still a blast. And Unity, I think, was the best AC yet. Great story, awesome graphics, and the game play (especially the parkor) was much improved.


----------



## KYKYLLIKA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> You could have just canceled the pre-order.


I didn't pre-order. Didn't even consider pirating. I just take law personally, that's all. I have a sore an unyielding hatred for all fraud, lies and law-bending.

Edit:
I shouldn't have put pirating down. I only used pirated software in Russia in the nineties, where the ONLY source of software was the next bazzaar, with CD stalls selling cd's at 1.5-3 dollars each. Collections of "160 best games" and whatnot. Then I moved to Canada and first I didn't have time to play, then I had enough money of my own to buy games on sale. Ughh.

Point is I wasn't even interested in Witcher until this controversy came up.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> You could have just canceled the pre-order.


They could have just not lied. And his point still stands. False advertising, fraud, yet nothing happens.


----------



## Blackops_2

A 960 runs this game on high @ 1080p with Nvidia gameworks enabled..well that settles it. The end.


----------



## BBZZHH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> They could have just not lied. And his point still stands. False advertising, fraud, yet nothing happens.


I think they definitely did downgrade at some point from their original 2013 vision, but I don't understand how this warrants jail time or a "fine too large to pay off in a lifetime." Especially any claim of damages is rather small.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> Normal people get their life ruined when their fraud gets called out. What makes these cats an exception? Oooh, poor stupid programmers decided they going to lie to everyone to get tons of hype and fraudulently increase their preorders and day-one sales. Let's give 'em a pat on the back and a kiss on the cheek.


Oh grow up and get over it.

Do you go and stand in McDonald's and whine and cry like a baby when your burger doesn't look exactly like the picture on the menu?

If not, shut up and stop being such a hypocrite. Things don't turn out EXACTLY as depicted in commercials and advertisements all of the time. Everything from cars to food to drinks to clothes to makeup, it's all airbrushed, computer generated, modeled, or faked. How much of it do you complain about on a daily basis? None, right? So why do you have your panties all bunched up in a tight wad over this? Did one of the developers come to your house and kick your puppy?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> I think they definitely did downgrade at some point from their original 2013 vision, but I don't understand how this warrants jail time or a "fine too large to pay off in a lifetime." Especially any claim of damages is rather small.


I didn't say that those punishments were fair, just that people keep doing this stuff then getting off scot-free thus allowing developers to keep doing this stuff.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Oh grow up and get over it.
> 
> Do you go and stand in McDonald's and whine and cry like a baby when your burger doesn't look exactly like the picture on the menu?
> 
> If not, shut up and stop being such a hypocrite. Things don't turn out EXACTLY as depicted in commercials and advertisements all of the time. Everything from cars to food to drinks to clothes to makeup, it's all airbrushed, computer generated, modeled, or faked. How much of it do you complain about on a daily basis? None, right? So why do you have your panties all bunched up in a tight wad over this? Did one of the developers come to your house and kick your puppy?


Major difference though bud. McDonalds doesn't sit there and tell people constantly that their burgers look perfect all the time and to not expect any different. CDPR however was constantly on the "there is no downgrade!" train then when it comes out what do we get? Massive downgrades. Like, noticeably worse in nearly every way.

It's false advertising. At least with McDonalds you can get a perfect looking burger. That's not the case with this game. Multiple stuff has been cut out that we'll never see again.


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> For fraud.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> They could have just not lied. And his point still stands. False advertising, fraud, yet nothing happens.


Where is the false advertising? Where is this fraud?



I don't see you complaining about this. Have you ever complained about your burger or taco not looking exactly like the picture as much as your complaining about a video game?

Here's a simple solution for you. If it bothers you that much, don't buy the game, don't play the game. There. Easy wasn't it?


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KYKYLLIKA*
> 
> Normal people get their life ruined when their fraud gets called out. What makes these cats an exception? Oooh, poor stupid programmers decided they going to lie to everyone to get tons of hype and fraudulently increase their preorders and day-one sales. Let's give 'em a pat on the back and a kiss on the cheek.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh grow up and get over it.
> 
> Do you go and stand in McDonald's and whine and cry like a baby when your burger doesn't look exactly like the picture on the menu?
> 
> If not, shut up and stop being such a hypocrite. Things don't turn out EXACTLY as depicted in commercials and advertisements all of the time. Everything from cars to food to drinks to clothes to makeup, it's all airbrushed, computer generated, modeled, or faked. How much of it do you complain about on a daily basis? None, right? So why do you have your panties all bunched up in a tight wad over this? Did one of the developers come to your house and kick your puppy?
Click to expand...

It's actually against the law to misrepresent a product if it is materially different. The big mac is still a big mac, even if it doesn't look exactly liek the picture because it's put together by HAND. If the Witcher 3 was advertised with X set of textures/IP and is delivered with a lowered set of textures/IP, that is fraud technically. It works the same as any other product, even a big mac. And in that case McD's would have to change the material makeup of the big mac, which they know better than to mess with the FDA.


----------



## KYKYLLIKA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Oh grow up and get over it.
> 
> Do you go and stand in McDonald's and whine and cry like a baby when your burger doesn't look exactly like the picture on the menu?
> 
> If not, shut up and stop being such a hypocrite. Things don't turn out EXACTLY as depicted in commercials and advertisements all of the time. Everything from cars to food to drinks to clothes to makeup, it's all airbrushed, computer generated, modeled, or faked. How much of it do you complain about on a daily basis? None, right? So why do you have your panties all bunched up in a tight wad over this? Did one of the developers come to your house and kick your puppy?


I don't go to McDonald's (Burger king/Tim Horton's/Starbucks/Subway/etc. etc. etc.)
I don't have a puppy.
I am a strong proponent against advertising, and I have multiple posts on this forum written against modern advertising practices (which also go against advertising as a source of information about a product, but instead go for painting an unrealistic image of said product).

I don't have a quarrel with games that have bad graphics. I like Longest Journey, after all.

My quarrel is: illegal action followed by no legal consequences.

So maybe I was wrong, I have a puppy. Yes, the law is my puppy, I treat it like my puppy, I nurture it and grow it and care for it. And this scumbag came and kicked it and broke its paw.


----------



## CasualCat

Wish I knew which shadow settings in the tweaking guide are coming into play here. The examples above (in the guide) are talking about or showing foliage, but it is clearly affecting non-foliage:

http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-config-file-tweaks-interactive-comparison-2-on-vs-off.html


----------



## KYKYLLIKA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*


The topic of this thread is the mole hill. Let's talk about the mountain in its own thread.


----------



## MonarchX

So has everyone seen nVidia Witcher 3 Guide? You can tweak the game's graphics to a point where it will barely run on your PC. Happy now? Whatever else they could have added would be IMPOSSIBLE to run on 99% of systems.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Major difference though bud. McDonalds doesn't sit there and tell people constantly that their burgers look perfect all the time. CDPR constantly with the "there is no downgrade!" then it comes out and what do we get? Massive downgrades.


Define "Massive downgrade" in legal terms that could be applied equally to any business that is not biased by your own personal opinion.

Quote:


> It's false advertising. At least with McDonalds you can get a perfect looking burger. That's not the case with this game. Multiple stuff has been cut out that we'll never see again.


Can I now sue you for making false claims? You absolutely cannot get a "perfect looking burger" from McDonald's because they don't use real food in their advertisements and the real food doesn't look anything like the plastic models they make for pictures and commercials.

So you're lying. You're committing fraud. You should be fined, or thrown in jail, and punished severely for telling lies to people. You're dishonest and you shouldn't be allowed to get away with it at any level. There are laws, and you're breaking them by making false claims in defense of a product's advertising.

See how grownup that sounds? That's precisely how you come across to everyone else. Think that makes you look justified, or does it just look like the ramblings of an idiot?


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Where is the false advertising? Where is this fraud?
> 
> I don't see you complaining about this. Have you ever complained about your burger or taco not looking exactly like the picture as much as your complaining about a video game?
> 
> Here's a simple solution for you. If it bothers you that much, don't buy the game, don't play the game. There. Easy wasn't it? Now it has absolutely no effect on your life in any way, and you can simply leave this thread since you no longer have anything meaningful to say.


I haven't but i also don't pay 60$ when i go to any of those restaurants, nor did any of their management tell me they were really selling the best gourmet burger in town and then give me crap..


----------



## jojoenglish85

pretty simple way to go here, either buy it, play it, and enjoy it
Or
buy it, don't play it, and over analyze every detail to make arguments.

All comes down to if the game is good or not. If your too upset about the downgrade in graphics, then just don't buy the game


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Here's a simple solution for you. If it bothers you that much, don't buy the game, don't play the game. There. Easy wasn't it? Now it has absolutely no effect on your life in any way, and you can simply leave this thread since you no longer have anything meaningful to say.


Poor argument. Much like "if you don't like "X", then leave!" - thing is, people are still missing the point. This has absolutely zero to do with the graphics and everything to do with the lies. I could care less if this looked like vanilla Morrowind if that is what was shown. People were told no downgrades and got the exact opposite.

I'm reserving final judgment until it's in joe public's hands but the blind defending is really depressing.


----------



## SlimDim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> I haven't but i also don't pay 60$ when i go to any of those restaurants, nor did any of their management tell me they were really selling the best gourmet burger in town and then give me crap..


I don't know..those people in the McDonalds commercials look really happy...why don't they include a part of the commercial where the customer is punishing their toilet after?

Solution A: Sue McDonalds
Solution B: Don't eat McDonalds

I will go with Solution B. If consumers are angry about this sort of behavior. Stop buying products before they are released. Pre-Order is equivilant to Kick Starter...same level of risk.


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Major difference though bud. McDonalds doesn't sit there and tell people constantly that their burgers look perfect all the time. CDPR constantly with the "there is no downgrade!" then it comes out and what do we get? Massive downgrades.
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Massive downgrade" in legal terms that could be applied equally to any business that is not biased by your own personal opinion.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> It's false advertising. At least with McDonalds you can get a perfect looking burger. That's not the case with this game. Multiple stuff has been cut out that we'll never see again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Can I now sue you for making false claims? You absolutely cannot get a "perfect looking burger" from McDonald's because they don't use real food in their advertisements and the real food doesn't look anything like *the plastic models they make for pictures and commercials.*
> 
> So you're lying. You're committing fraud. You should be fined, or thrown in jail, and punished severely for telling lies to people. You're dishonest and you shouldn't be allowed to get away with it at any level. There are laws, and you're breaking them by making false claims in defense of a product's advertising.
> 
> See how grownup that sounds? That's precisely how you come across to everyone else. Think that makes you look justified, or does it just look like the ramblings of an idiot?
Click to expand...

I've worked in the film industry for some time and every product shot has used the real product. It would actually be misleading and fraud to advertise a fake you know. They are allowed to doll it up to make it look the best it will ever look. This is different than what CFDPR is doing obviously.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101664104

Quote:


> A Wendy's spokesman said about food stylists, "We supply the same ingredients to them as our restaurants receive. We also require that they prepare and build the products to operational procedures. The big difference is how much time we take to get an appealing shot."


See real food.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> So has everyone seen nVidia Witcher 3 Guide? You can tweak the game's graphics to a point where it will barely run on your PC. Happy now? Whatever else they could have added would be IMPOSSIBLE to run on 99% of systems.


I know you hate everyone that is on CDPR's butt about all this, but lets be frank. I can tweak many games with Nvidia gameworks to not run... just enable Nvidia Gameworks







sorry i couldn't resist









Yeah that wouldn't bother me. Not a single bit. Just like Crysis didn't bother me, not a single bit. I even replayed the game once i had a 8800gt and could actually run it decently at 1024x768







and then after that with my 4890.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Define "Massive downgrade" in legal terms that could be applied equally to any business that is not biased by your own personal opinion.


Have you not seen the same comparisons I have? There are many major changes.
Quote:


> Can I now sue you for making false claims? You absolutely cannot get a "perfect looking burger" from McDonald's because they don't use real food in their advertisements and the real food doesn't look anything like the plastic models they make for pictures and commercials.


This doesn't make sense. For one I'm not McDonalds so I'm not advertising anything and unless the McD's in your area is complete crap I've many a time gotten nice pretty burgers from mine. The Wendys down the street constantly has picture perfect burgers.
Quote:


> So you're lying. You're committing fraud. You should be fined, or thrown in jail, and punished severely for telling lies to people. You're dishonest and you shouldn't be allowed to get away with it at any level. There are laws, and you're breaking them by making false claims in defense of a product's advertising.


Again, doesn't make sense.
Quote:


> See how grownup that sounds? That's precisely how you come across to everyone else. Think that makes you look justified, or does it just look like the ramblings of an idiot?


Oh the irony! I see how immature and ignorant you are about advertising haha!


----------



## GTR Mclaren

Wait for the enchanted edition then.

Differences are there, but not as huge as Watch Dogs for example


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jojoenglish85*
> 
> pretty simple way to go here, either buy it, play it, and enjoy it
> Or
> buy it, don't play it, and over analyze every detail to make arguments.
> 
> All comes down to if the game is good or not. If your too upset about the downgrade in graphics, then just don't buy the game


People are upset by the fact CDPR lied and perpetrated the lie for years without anything near a "we were wrong". Up until this very day they haven't said ANYTHING about certain aspects of the game being pulled or downgraded. Has little to do with people just being upset over the graphics and that they just shouldn't buy it if they don't like it.

I mean, if you're OK with being lied to constantly by the savior of PC gaming then that's your problem.


----------



## Clockster

I have to say, I'm over all the talk now, I'll just play the game..enjoy the story and game play but I will never pre order or buy dlc for a cdpr game again.
I spent close to $300 just on game copies for myself and friends, I bought the dlc, I bought a ******* Titan X and a 4K Ips Monitor just for this game..

So yeah cdpr, you guys have really screwed up, you handled this poorly, your pr was/is shocking and I'll never trust you again.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GTR Mclaren*
> 
> Wait for the enchanted edition then.


Apparently there isn't going to be an Enhanced Edition. This is what you get and that's it.
Quote:


> Differences are there, but not as huge as Watch Dogs for example


See I don't think Watch Dogs was that different though. Sure some stuff was different and the pre-release footage certainly looked better but there wasn't much that was actually changed. A lot of the effects could be re-enabled where as with the Witcher we're talking entirely different props and assets, graphical features (like lighting, tessellation, etc).

Same thing in principle, sure, but I think the TW3 downgrade is more substantial. Just sayin!


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> So has everyone seen nVidia Witcher 3 Guide? You can tweak the game's graphics to a point where it will barely run on your PC. Happy now? Whatever else they could have added would be IMPOSSIBLE to run on 99% of systems.


Bullcrap. Srsly thats your argument? Crysis 1 crippled systems but at least it looked the part. Years later people bought cards that could run it. Witcher 3 looks slightly better than 2 and hairworks which makes the game tough to play rarely adds anything that makes it half close to 2013 standard.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Bullcrap. Srsly thats your argument? Crysis 1 crippled systems but at least it looked the part. Years later people bought cards that could run it. Witcher 3 looks slightly better than 2 and hairworks which makes the game tough to play rarely adds anything that makes it half close to 2013 standard.


Witcher 3 does look incredible and WAY ahead of Witcher 2. Its THE BEST LOOKING RPG at the moment! Modded Skyrim does not count because it has been MODDED. By the time those new powerful cards come out, there will be Witcher 3 Enhanced Edition, like with previous Witcher games. Why would they release a build that nobody could run? Hell, Witcher 3, if tweaked for more visuals cripples even the most powerful rigs! Any more and you'd get 5 unplayable FPS. You also ignore than Witcher 3 can ALSO be modded and it will be and it might look better than 2013 build. They IMPROVED upon many aspects since 2013 build, enhancing graphics in some places! You don't even have the game and cannot properly compare 2013 build to this one. All you have are some trailer shots taken at unknown locations, unknown settings, unknown angles, unknown times of day, and a ton of other unknown variables.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clockster*
> 
> I have to say, I'm over all the talk now, I'll just play the game..enjoy the story and game play but I will never pre order or buy dlc for a cdpr game again.
> I spent close to $300 just on game copies for myself and friends, I bought the dlc, I bought a ******* Titan X and a 4K Ips Monitor just for this game..
> 
> So yeah cdpr, you guys have really screwed up, you handled this poorly, your pr was/is shocking and I'll never trust you again.


Sorry, but you have no one to be mad at but yourself in your situation. Anyone willing to drop that kind of cash, supposedly for a pre-ordered game, is just asking to get a foot in the ass.

Something else that people need to consider; in 2013 the entire "future" of the industry was different! In the year 2013 we were still thinking the following....


*GPUs would move to 20nm and provide significant improvement* - We now know that 20nm has to be skipped completely.
*Consoles were still ultra-hyping their ability to run games* - Remember early "PS4" and XB1 demos that were clearly being ran on a PC?
*Intel's next CPU anticipation* - Ended up being a small gain in actual raw performance.
*AMD's next CPU anticipation* - Never showed up to the party

I think forgiving these guys for maybe making some claims based of projected capabilities in the future is alright. After all, the game still looks really good with the official Day 1 Patch. I am more pissed about having to say "Day 1 patch" than the looks of the game, or holding them to screenshots from 2 years ago. Really, from what content I have seen, we win some we lose some. Certain areas 2013 looks better, and other areas release Day 1 looks better.

People are splitting hairs on this one, this isn't WatchDogs.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> I haven't but i also don't pay 60$ when i go to any of those restaurants, nor did any of their management tell me they were really selling the best gourmet burger in town and then give me crap..


SO CANCEL YOUR PRE-ORDER! Nobody FORCED you to buy the game. NOBODY! You can still cancel your pre-order and go and be happy!


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Witcher 3 does look incredible and WAY ahead of Witcher 2.


Does it though, really?
Quote:


> Its THE BEST LOOKING RPG at the moment!


Opinion. Preference.
Quote:


> Modded Skyrim does not count because it has been MODDED.


Where does he say anything about Skyrim?
Quote:


> By the time those new powerful cards come out, there will be Witcher 3 Enhanced Edition, like with previous Witcher games.


They said there would be no EE. Also, since there was no downgrade, according to you, why would there need to be a EE for a game that's already perfect?
Quote:


> Why would they release a build that nobody could run?


For the same reason Crytek did so. Future ready. Also, the amazing looking 2013 video was real time so apparently there is definitely the hardware needed to run it.
Quote:


> Hell, Witcher 3, if tweaked for more visuals cripples even the most powerful rigs!


Yeah and applying 128xAA to Crysis 1 will cripple the most powerful rigs, what's your point? It's not like the assets and models and what not are the crippling properties here.
Quote:


> You also ignore than Witcher 3 can ALSO be modded and it will be and it might look better than 2013 build.


We shouldn't HAVE to mod anything to get the graphics they PROMISED by saying "no downgrades"
Quote:


> They IMPROVED upon many aspects since 2013 build, enhancing graphics in some places!


*WHERE??? You keep saying this while not providing a lick of evidence for this. GIVE US PROOF. Everything I'm seeing, EVERYTHING, points to the complete opposite being true.
*
Quote:


> You don't even have the game and cannot properly compare 2013 build to this one. All you have are some trailer shots taken at unknown locations, unknown settings, unknown angles, unknown times of day, and a ton of other unknown variables.


Compressed video, pictures, doesn't matter. It's clear there have been many many changes that have resulted in some pretty serious downgrading over the past couple years.

Do I need to see the final game to know that this happened:



That's far from just some time of day changes.


----------



## BBZZHH

While they haven't been terribly forthcoming about this, they have at least release plenty of footage of gameplay before the actual release. It is quite a step up from showing the 2013 trailer, nothing for two years, and then surprising everyone at release.


----------



## Clockster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Sorry, but you have no one to be mad at but yourself in your situation. Anyone willing to drop that kind of cash, supposedly for a pre-ordered game, is just asking to get a foot in the ass.
> 
> Something else that people need to consider; in 2013 the entire "future" of the industry was different! In the year 2013 we were still thinking the following....
> 
> 
> *GPUs would move to 20nm and provide significant improvement* - We now know that 20nm has to be skipped completely.
> *Consoles were still ultra-hyping their ability to run games* - Remember early "PS4" and XB1 demos that were clearly being ran on a PC?
> *Intel's next CPU anticipation* - Ended up being a small gain in actual raw performance.
> *AMD's next CPU anticipation* - Never showed up to the party
> 
> I think forgiving these guys for maybe making some claims based of projected capabilities in the future is alright. After all, the game still looks really good with the official Day 1 Patch. I am more pissed about having to say "Day 1 patch" than the looks of the game, or holding them to screenshots from 2 years ago. Really, from what content I have seen, we win some we lose some. Certain areas 2013 looks better, and other areas release Day 1 looks better.
> 
> People are splitting hairs on this one, this isn't WatchDogs.


Yeah entirely my fault, never again.
My thinking was that CDPR has always done right by pc gamers and I really wanted something that looked spectacular..Anyway like I said I'll enjoy the game but I'll never go nuts like this again.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Sorry, but you have no one to be mad at but yourself in your situation. Anyone willing to drop that kind of cash, supposedly for a pre-ordered game, is just asking to get a foot in the ass.
> 
> Something else that people need to consider; in 2013 the entire "future" of the industry was different! In the year 2013 we were still thinking the following....
> 
> 
> *GPUs would move to 20nm and provide significant improvement* - We now know that 20nm has to be skipped completely.
> *Consoles were still ultra-hyping their ability to run games* - Remember early "PS4" and XB1 demos that were clearly being ran on a PC?
> *Intel's next CPU anticipation* - Ended up being a small gain in actual raw performance.
> *AMD's next CPU anticipation* - Never showed up to the party
> 
> I think forgiving these guys for maybe making some claims based of projected capabilities in the future is alright. After all, the game still looks really good with the official Day 1 Patch. I am more pissed about having to say "Day 1 patch" than the looks of the game, or holding them to screenshots from 2 years ago. Really, from what content I have seen, we win some we lose some. Certain areas 2013 looks better, and other areas release Day 1 looks better.
> 
> People are splitting hairs on this one, this isn't WatchDogs.


I already made a similar post, showing how haters IGNORE logic, reason, and turn to their feminine girly emotional tantrums because they are HATERS. They need a reason. IF CD Project RED did release the exact build shown in early trailers, they would STILL hate them for something, such as performance or whatever else. Most of them are haters who go around and talk about how almost every game out there is utter crap. Most of them are likely to pirate this game and ENJOY IT secretly too! Its a TYPE of individual - cynical, depressed, emotional, probably low testosterone, etc. It has nothing to do with Witcher 3. Nothing at all. They do not listen to reason, logic, rational thought. Period.


----------



## WorldExclusive

Modern Gaming. When the final release is worse than the Alpha build.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> SO CANCEL YOUR PRE-ORDER! Nobody FORCED you to buy the game. NOBODY! You can still cancel your pre-order and go and be happy!


Easy on the caps there, if your really shouting at the screen you need to take a vicodin buddy. I didn't pre-order. I am happy just disappointed with what they did and how they went about it. Something from your previous post seems you just can't grasp. People can still like the game and be rubbed the wrong about how CDPR handled things. I love the witcher, it's going to be a great game. Doesn't mean i have to fall in line and think it's simply okay being lied to. Sure i still bought it but i didn't pay full price and am glad i didn't. Again though it really is just a matter of honesty. That's what your seemingly misunderstanding, these people don't hate CDPR or the Witcher. Quite the contrary or they wouldn't be in this thread. They are disgruntled at the marketing practice of Video Games and how CDPR raked in PC pre-orders based on the predication that they were a true PC dev and promised this and that, and thus didn't deliver. It would've been as easy as simply stating they had to scrap that build for (insert reason here) instead of blatantly lying. And sure you can go on and on about how this is the norm, but i'll say it again just because it's a common practice in no way makes it right.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Does it though, really?
> Opinion. Preference.
> Where does he say anything about Skyrim?
> They said there would be no EE. Also, since there was no downgrade, according to you, why would there need to be a EE for a game that's already perfect?
> For the same reason Crytek did so. Future ready. Also, the amazing looking 2013 video was real time so apparently there is definitely the hardware needed to run it.
> 
> *Yeah and applying 128xAA to Crysis 1 will cripple the most powerful rigs*, what's your point? It's not like the assets and models and what not are the crippling properties here.
> 
> We shouldn't HAVE to mod anything to get the graphics they PROMISED by saying "no downgrades"
> *WHERE??? You keep saying this while not providing a lick of evidence for this. GIVE US PROOF. Everything I'm seeing, EVERYTHING, points to the complete opposite being true.
> *
> Compressed video, pictures, doesn't matter. It's clear there have been many many changes that have resulted in some pretty serious downgrading over the past couple years.
> 
> Do I need to see the final game to know that this happened:
> 
> 
> 
> That's far from just some time of day changes.


Ha, there you go! The tweaks I talked about have NOTHING to do with AA, but foliage density, LOD distance, and other graphical aspects, but you decided to degrade yourself and fall down as low as saying something as insane as what you did to TRY to prove a point. Didn't work. Your statement was absurd. None of the Witcher 3 settings that can be tweaked for better visuals have anything to do with some insane level of AA. Maybe you should CHECK the nVidia Guide FIRST before making false statements?


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> Easy on the caps there, if your really shouting at the screen you need to take a vicodin buddy. I didn't pre-order. I am happy just disappointed with what they did and how they went about it. Something from your previous post seems you just can't grasp. People can still like the game and be rubbed the wrong about how CDPR handled things. I love the witcher, it's going to be a great game. Doesn't mean i have to fall in line and think it's simply okay being lied to. Sure i still bought it but i didn't pay full price and am glad i didn't. Again though it really is just a matter of honesty. That's what your seemingly misunderstanding, these people don't hate CDPR or the Witcher. Quite the contrary or they wouldn't be in this thread. *They are disgruntled at the marketing practice of Video Games and how CDPR raked in PC pre-orders based on the predication that they were a true PC dev and promised this and that, and thus didn't deliver.* It would've been as easy as simply stating they had to scrap that build for (insert reason here) instead of blatantly lying. And sure you can go on and on about how this is the norm, but i'll say it again just because it's a common practice in no way makes it right.


Pre-orders can be canceled!


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Pre-orders can be canceled!


That's fair enough but it doesn't simply fix the problem does it?


----------



## Murlocke

Based on the benchmarks we have, the game needed to be downgraded even more.









20FPS @ 1440p on a 780, no hairworks or HBAO.
21FPS @ 1440p on original Titan, no hairworks or HBAO.
35FPS @ 1440p on 980, no hairworks or HBAO.
50FPS @ 1080p on Titan X, maxed out.

Doesn't matter how good the game is if it looks and run like that. The PC community will demand refunds. No one buys a $1000 GPU with intent to play at 50FPS on 1080p. That would make this the most demanding game of all time, by a large margin, while not looking close to the best.

I was honestly expecting an almost always 60FPS at 3440x1440, maxed out with hairworks on a single Titan X given the downgrade.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Ha, there you go! The tweaks I talked about have NOTHING to do with AA, but foliage density, LOD distance, and other graphical aspects, but you decided to degrade yourself and fall down as low as saying something as insane as what you did to TRY to prove a point. Didn't work. Your statement was absurd. None of the Witcher 3 settings that can be tweaked for better visuals have anything to do with some insane level of AA. Maybe you should CHECK the nVidia Guide FIRST before making false statements?


Dude, be honest. Are you really just trolling everyone or do you actually believe everything you say? Feel free to PM me if you don't want to admit it here in public.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Based on the benchmarks we have, the game needed to be downgraded even more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20FPS @ 1440p on a 780, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 21FPS @ 1440p on original Titan, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 35FPS @ 1440p on 980, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 50FPS @ 1080p on Titan X, maxed out.
> 
> Doesn't matter how good the game is if it looks and run like that. The PC community will demand refunds. No one buys a $1000 GPU with intent to play at 50FPS on 1080p. That would make this the most demanding game of all time, by a large margin, while not looking close to the best.












Thus why I don't pre-order games, from anyone......

Ignore the IGA Kickstarter.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Based on the benchmarks we have, the game needed to be downgraded even more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20FPS @ 1440p on a 780, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 21FPS @ 1440p on original Titan, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 35FPS @ 1440p on 980, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 50FPS @ 1080p on Titan X, maxed out.
> 
> Doesn't matter how good the game is if it looks and run like that. The PC community will demand refunds. No one buys a $1000 GPU with intent to play at 50FPS on 1080p. That would make this the most demanding game of all time, by a large margin, while not looking close to the best.
> 
> I was honestly expecting an almost always 60FPS at 3440x1440, maxed out with hairworks on a single Titan X.


Where did you find those benchmarks and were the settings tweaked PAST the Ultra? A whole bunch of other sites report 50-60fps @ 1080p with everything set to Ultra on GTX 980 and 40-50fps on R9 290X.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> That's fair enough but it doesn't simply fix the problem does it?


It does actually. You don't like developers and the product and you do not want to support developers - CANCEL the pre-order!


----------



## GTR Mclaren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Based on the benchmarks we have, the game needed to be downgraded even more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20FPS @ 1440p on a 780, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 21FPS @ 1440p on original Titan, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 35FPS @ 1440p on 980, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 50FPS @ 1080p on Titan X, maxed out.
> 
> Doesn't matter how good the game is if it looks and run like that. The PC community will demand refunds. No one buys a $1000 GPU with intent to play at 50FPS on 1080p. That would make this the most demanding game of all time, by a large margin, while not looking close to the best.
> 
> I was honestly expecting an almost always 60FPS at 3440x1440, maxed out with hairworks on a single Titan X given the downgrade.


lol seriusly?? that performance is bad, really bad

Better play it in the PS4, it looks barely the same and with better frames


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GTR Mclaren*
> 
> lol seriusly?? that performance is bad, really bad
> 
> Better play it in the PS4, it looks barely the same and with better frames


Those must have been tweaked MAXED OUT settings, the ones PAST Ultra. I have seen several reports that the game DOES play at 60fps on Ultra on GTX 980.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Where did you find those benchmarks and were the settings tweaked PAST the Ultra? A whole bunch of other sites report 50-60fps @ 1080p with everything set to Ultra on GTX 980 and 40-50fps on R9 290X.


There's a thread in the news section from a german site, and no they were in-game settings only. Latest drivers with v1.02 too.

50-60FPS at 1080p with everything Ultra (no sites were using hairworks based on videos I saw) isn't that far off from 35FPS at 1440p with the same settings. 1440p is almost double the pixels.


----------



## Catscratch

If mods could filter this thread of "people trying to change how others think" there would be 2-3 messages.

Dudes, stop responding to everything. No one is supposed to like or hate a game exactly like you. I see the first 2 sentences then I skip to another message, same things over and over.


----------



## BBZZHH

Those benchmarks are from here I believe. It's using the latest Nvidia driver for Witcher 3 as well. The Nvidia tweaking guide showed SLI Titan X getting ~52 FPS at 4K with Hairworks on so the German results were surprising as it seems to imply 400% SLI scaling.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Based on the benchmarks we have, the game needed to be downgraded even more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20FPS @ 1440p on a 780, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 21FPS @ 1440p on original Titan, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 35FPS @ 1440p on 980, no hairworks or HBAO.
> 50FPS @ 1080p on Titan X, maxed out.
> 
> Doesn't matter how good the game is if it looks and run like that. The PC community will demand refunds. No one buys a $1000 GPU with intent to play at 50FPS on 1080p. That would make this the most demanding game of all time, by a large margin, while not looking close to the best.
> 
> I was honestly expecting an almost always 60FPS at 3440x1440, maxed out with hairworks on a single Titan X given the downgrade.


So not only is it a console port, it's a mediocre console port at that.

CDPR has gone full-Ubisoft on us


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> Those benchmarks are from here I believe. It's using the latest Nvidia driver for Witcher 3 as well. The Nvidia tweaking guide showed SLI Titan X getting ~52 FPS at 4K with Hairworks on so the German results were surprising as it seems to imply 400% SLI scaling.


Something doesn't add up unless the second day 1 patches reduced performance due to increasing some graphics.









I'd consider 2x Titan X getting 52FPS at 4K pretty freaking bad given the graphics. They aren't amazing enough to deserve two Titan X and still not achieve solid 60FPS.

5 more hours...


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> It does actually. You don't like developers and the product and you do not want to support developers - CANCEL the pre-order!


Yet again your missing the entire point and what the problem is. Lol just forget i said anything.


----------



## vmatt1203

But it doesn't look "downgraded" just different. On the old trailer everything just looks more shiny and less fxaa injection. The actual looks more colorful and less washed out. Plus wasn't the original trailer on the old engine? The actual game looks amazing, just a little less gritty and more of a fantasy atmosphere. Both look great. Stop complaining and enjoy the game. (guess I don't expect much from the same 5 to 10 people complaining on every thread related to this topic...)


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> So not only is it a console port, it's a mediocre console port at that.
> 
> _CDPR has gone full-Ubisoft on us_


Amen. Not sure whats worse, the downgrade or the gpu performance numbers. Dont think anyone is getting sleep @ CDPR right now.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmatt1203*
> 
> But it doesn't look "downgraded" just different. On the old trailer everything just looks more shiny and less fxaa injection. The actual looks more colorful and less washed out. Plus wasn't the original trailer on the old engine? The actual game looks amazing, just a little less gritty and more of a fantasy atmosphere. Both look great. Stop complaining and enjoy the game. (guess I don't expect much from the same 5 to 10 people complaining on every thread related to this topic...)




That doesn't look downgraded to you? Just look at the building in the top left corner...that alone is a pretty major downgrade. That's just one thing.

Either way, to each their own. Stop telling people to "stop complaining" though as if they have no reason to do so. If you, like MonarchX, liked being lied to then that's your choice. A lot of us however are sick and tired of it.


----------



## xxroxx

I just find it pathetic that it is 2015 and we still have hard corners on stone walls... Like, what the hell? Skyrim was like already outdated with that in *2011*. Wake up, CD.


----------



## BBZZHH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Something doesn't add up unless the second day 1 patches reduced performance due to increasing some graphics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd consider 2x Titan X getting 52FPS at 4K pretty freaking bad given the graphics. They aren't amazing enough to deserve two Titan X and still not achieve solid 60FPS.
> 
> 5 more hours...


The Nvidia benchmarks actually drop down to ~43 fps with 4 wolves, Geralt, and Roach (?). In a scene with just Geralt, it hits ~62 fps. It's a pretty large performance hit, but worth it in my opinion.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Something doesn't add up unless the second day 1 patches reduced performance due to increasing some graphics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd consider 2x Titan X getting 52FPS at 4K pretty freaking bad given the graphics. They aren't amazing enough to deserve two Titan X and still not achieve solid 60FPS.
> 
> 5 more hours...


Yes, something really does not add up. Even 2013 build could run at 60fps on GTX 980 stock 4770K stock with 4x MSAA on Ultra. My 3770K is at 4.8Ghz and my GTX 980 is at 1550/8000Mhz. I was hoping I could run the game at 50-60fps with that. *Now if performance is really bad on Ultra on my system without config tweaks - I WILL be angry!*


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> The Nvidia benchmarks actually drop down to ~43 fps with 4 wolves, Geralt, and Roach (?). In a scene with just Geralt, it hits ~62 fps. It's a pretty large performance hit, but worth it in my opinion.


Given those numbers, the fact that 4K is roughly 2x the pixels of 3440x1440, and the fact they definitely aren't getting close to 100% scaling in such a new title.... A single Titan X should be able to max this game at 3440x1440 with roughly the same FPS as they are getting, if not slightly more FPS due to SLI scaling. 2560x1440 should be almost a solid 60.

This isn't even factoring in GPU overclocking, which NVIDIA doesn't seem to mention so one can only assume they ran stock. A Titan X with +150 - +200 on the core is a huge 10-20% improvement in some titles, which would push it close to a solid 60FPS at 3440x1440 and *definitely* at 2560x1440.

Rough math in my head, but I think it's accurate?

My conclusion:
1) That german site is lying or made big mistakes.
2) NVIDIA is lying or made big mistakes.

They can't both be true.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Given those numbers, the fact that 4K is roughly 2x the pixels of 3440x1440, and the fact they definitely aren't getting 100% scaling in such a new title.... Unless NVIDIA is lying, a single Titan X should be able to max this game at 3440x1440 with roughly the same FPS as they are getting, if not slightly more FPS due to SLI scaling. 2560x1440 should be almost a solid 60.
> 
> This isn't even factoring in GPU overclocking, which NVIDIA doesn't seem to mention so one can only assume they ran stock. A Titan X with +150 - +200 on the core is a huge 10-20% improvement in some titles.
> 
> My conclusion:
> 1) That german site is lying or made big mistakes.
> 2) NVIDIA is lying or made big mistakes.
> 
> They can't both be true.


_*wrench in the system*_

Someone had a corrupted installation when testing, and didn't realize it.


----------



## BBZZHH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Given those numbers, the fact that 4K is roughly 2x the pixels of 3440x1440, and the fact they definitely aren't getting close to 100% scaling in such a new title.... A single Titan X should be able to max this game at 3440x1440 with roughly the same FPS as they are getting, if not slightly more FPS due to SLI scaling. 2560x1440 should be almost a solid 60.
> 
> This isn't even factoring in GPU overclocking, which NVIDIA doesn't seem to mention so one can only assume they ran stock. A Titan X with +150 - +200 on the core is a huge 10-20% improvement in some titles.
> 
> My conclusion:
> 1) That german site is lying or made big mistakes.
> 2) NVIDIA is lying or made big mistakes.
> 
> They can't both be true.


I think the German site is using all the .ini tweaks. Even the Nvidia site tanks down to ~20 fps at 4k when "GrassDistanceScale" is set to 6 with basically no change in graphical fidelity. The only difference I can see is about 1.5 inches above the pointy rock where it appears to be a few extra pixels of grass in the distance.
EDIT: I'm looking at the 6 vs 3 picture. There is a fairly noticeable difference between 3 and 1.5


----------



## vmatt1203

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't look downgraded to you? Just look at the building in the top left corner...that alone is a pretty major downgrade. That's just one thing.
> 
> Either way, to each their own. Stop telling people to "stop complaining" though as if they have no reason to do so. If you, like MonarchX, liked being lied to then that's your choice. A lot of us however are sick and tired of it.


lol, I wasnt lied to. Again that is old engine vs new, Also that "better looking" still was from the alpha/beta version of the game. At that point how can you expect it not to change? It was still being developed. It looks like the assets changed from the old engine to the new. The only thing they said for 100% did not change was the textures. I haven't seen one of the actual dev's from CDPR come out and say "WE CHANGE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO"... In all the dev diaries/AMA's I have seen they just said they were trying to stick to the original as much as they could. They are keeping in mind as a developer for a multi platform game that not everyone has 4-way sli 980's (IIRC) to push what they were showing in the alpha which is what was running that in game footage.

Now I would agree that it is crap to take away the option to make it look that good... but again they will do what is best for the company. If they put out a beautiful game that runs like crap everyone will complain. If they tweek the graphics and optimize the engine and it doesn't look as good as a alpha state game, people complain. In the end either buy it or don't. Don't complain about a change. Its business. As long as console hold the larger share of the market this will continue to happen... There is absolutely nothing we can do as the masses to stop this from happening; other than NOT BUY IT. Unfortunately if people keep giving dev's the money nothing will change.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> I think the German site is using all the .ini tweaks. Even the Nvidia site tanks down to ~20 fps at 4k when "GrassDistanceScale" is set to 6 with basically no change in graphical fidelity. The only difference I can see is about 1.5 inches above the pointy rock where it appears to be a few extra pixels of grass in the distance.


Haha, yeah. That setting gave me a good laugh. Some of those INI tweaks seem to do a lot with very little cost of performance, while others were a complete waste.


----------



## A7xConnor

I know everyone keeps saying there won't be an Enhanced edition like they had for TW1/TW2, but how much thus far have they said that has ended up not being the case? why not this too?


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *A7xConnor*
> 
> I know everyone keeps saying there won't be an Enhanced edition like they had for TW1/TW2, but how much thus far have they said that has ended up not being the case? why not this too?


I would be more interested in a DX 12 version.


----------



## BBZZHH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Haha, yeah. That setting gave me a good laugh. Some of those INI tweaks seem to do a lot with very little cost of performance, while others were a complete waste.


With all the .ini tweaks enabled:
Mountains/Wilderness
City
The shadows look much better in my opinion and the increased draw distance outdoors is quite nice as well. It's just I don't think I'll be able to run this at 1080p


----------



## A7xConnor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> I would be more interested in a DX 12 version.


Me too! if it delivers what they are proposing.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *A7xConnor*
> 
> I know everyone keeps saying there won't be an Enhanced edition like they had for TW1/TW2, but how much thus far have they said that has ended up not being the case? why not this too?


I found a leaked new edition... not quite the enhanced I was hoping for...


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *A7xConnor*
> 
> I know everyone keeps saying there won't be an Enhanced edition like they had for TW1/TW2, but how much thus far have they said that has ended up not being the case? why not this too?


If gamers push on CDPR enough, they will bend. How much 'enough' to affect their bottom-line, that we'll see.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> I found a leaked new edition... not quite the enhanced I was hoping for...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Blackops_2




----------



## A7xConnor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> I found a leaked new edition... not quite the enhanced I was hoping for...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Lol!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> If gamers push on CDPR enough, they will bend. How much 'enough' to affect their bottom-line, that we'll see.


Maybe, I don't think PC players "boycotting" sales would have a big enough impact on their profits for them to act on that reason alone, considering console sales. But maybe they will for the sake of their reputation. Not saying people shouldn't though if that's how they feel of course!


----------



## majin662

I walked away from these threads once it became angry men yelling at people how stupid they were but I thought this little comment on pcgamer was hilarious

Quote:


> "CPR was supposed to bring balance to the pixels"


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *A7xConnor*
> 
> Lol!
> Maybe, I don't think PC players "boycotting" sales would have a big enough impact on their profits for them to act on that reason alone, considering console sales. But maybe they will for the sake of their reputation. Not saying people shouldn't though if that's how they feel of course!


I'll concede to the fact consoles still hold top sales for gaming. The PC crowd is not an insignificant number however. Its not just boycotting, its the bad PR being spread around that can damage CDPR. We can make the developer act (in our favor). Do you remember Maxis?


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *majin662*
> 
> I walked away from these threads once it became angry men yelling at people how stupid they were but I thought this little comment on pcgamer was hilarious


Lol that's good stuff right there.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *majin662*
> 
> I walked away from these threads once it became angry men yelling at people how stupid they were but I thought this little comment on pcgamer was hilarious


After just rewatched the first (chronological) trilogy of Star Wars this week. i applaud you


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BBZZHH*
> 
> With all the .ini tweaks enabled:
> Mountains/Wilderness
> City
> The shadows look much better in my opinion and the increased draw distance outdoors is quite nice as well. It's just I don't think I'll be able to run this at 1080p


Nah, probably not even on a Titan X at 1080p. That kind of draw distance doesn't exist in titles for a reason. It's just way too much to render all around the character and will easily 1/4th the FPS. It's not *that* much better either, certainly not worth playing at 15FPS instead of 60FPS.

I have a feeling people will have a hard time maxing the game as-is. Unless I'm seeing a solid 60 at 3440x1440, I won't be touching them.


----------



## Blackops_2

You were my brother CDPR, i loved you!


----------



## Baasha

It shows this on GOG Galaxy for me:



I thought it was releasing at 4:00 PM PST?


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> It shows this on GOG Galaxy for me:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was releasing at 4:00 PM PST?


Did you click away and reclicked on it in your library? it doesn't update dynamically there.
Just check the store page with a nice countdown timer.


----------



## vmatt1203

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> It shows this on GOG Galaxy for me:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was releasing at 4:00 PM PST?


It is. My steam version unlocks 7:00pm ET


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> It shows this on GOG Galaxy for me:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was releasing at 4:00 PM PST?


For me it's releasing in 3 1/2 hours, - 7:00PM Eastern Time!


----------



## Murlocke

I slowly went over the NVIDIA Tweak guide, found the most meaningful settings that didn't have large impacts:

GrassDistanceScale = 3 (Biggest hit, but also biggest benefit)
GrassDensity = 3600 (Any higher causes overgrowth issues in some areas)
CascadeShadowDistanceScale0 = 2 (4 if FPS holds up)
CascadeShadowDistanceScale1 = 2 (4 if FPS holds up)
CascadeShadowDistanceScale2 = 3
CascadeShadowmapSize = 4096
CascadeShadowQuality = 2 (4 if FPS holds up)

These are what i'll be applying in the rare case FPS is good at Ultra. You could also apply GrassGenerationEfficiency = .001 but I think it looks less realistic. Going any higher or using the other tweaks seem to only result in big FPS loss at a very little (or no noticeable) improvement.


----------



## Assirra

Will probably leave it at stock without messing for my first run like i do in all the games.
When i do a second run it's time to go crazy with settings and settings


----------



## A7xConnor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> I'll concede to the fact consoles still hold top sales for gaming. The PC crowd is not an insignificant number however. Its not just boycotting, its the bad PR being spread around that can damage CDPR. We can make the developer act (in our favor). Do you remember Maxis?


Yeah, I just meant from the money-side of things alone from the PC guys, I don't think would be a big enough impact or concern upon them to cause anything. Obviously there is a lot more that is going to cause them harm than just the PC market's money. And yes of course I do


----------



## Dunan

So does this come out tomorrow? I've been watching a youtuber play and it looks pretty sweet with the open world. Actually thinking about ordering it even though I couldn't stand Witcher 1.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dunan*
> 
> So does this come out tomorrow? I've been watching a youtuber play and it looks pretty sweet with the open world. Actually thinking about ordering it even though I couldn't stand Witcher 1.


Witcher 1 is a lot different. Game comes out in 1 hour.


----------



## Said Nobody

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptainZombie*
> 
> I had a question, I redeemed mine from the 980 promotion but it didn't give me a Steam code. Is this a GOG Galaxy game and not redeemable for Steam?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Witcher 1 is a lot different. Game comes out in 1 hour.


300 mb update


----------



## Dunan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Witcher 1 is a lot different. Game comes out in 1 hour.


One hour? I was expecting a Tuesday release, that's what I've been reading, but even better in a way but not so better seeing as the servers are going to be slammed when I try to download.


----------



## SlimDim

I downloaded the update from gog five minutes ago an am playing now.


----------



## CasualCat

Well hairworks appears to be really taxing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SlimDim*
> 
> I downloaded the update from gog five minutes ago an am playing now.


Thanks for heads up


----------



## Paladin Goo

Playing right now, day one patch included. Game looks good still, but the downgrade is 100% real.

No matter what any blind defender will say, there was a significant downgrade.


----------



## Gunderman456

I was expecting patch 1.01 and 1.02?


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> Playing right now, day one patch included. Game looks good still, but the downgrade is 100% real.
> 
> No matter what any blind defender will say, there was a significant downgrade.


Are you getting 60fps?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Are you getting 60fps?


He is getting 144 fps. The downgrade is real and it's very easy to see why. The game is very hard to run even now.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Are you getting 60fps?


60 solid, with hairworks off.

Hairworks tanks FPS.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> 60 solid, with hairworks off.
> 
> Hairworks tanks FPS.


Cool. Hopefully a quick patch will optimize the hairworks. Any difference between low & ultra settings? Wonder what my AMD bro's getting.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Best looking open world game on the market.

No it doesn't look like the 2013 target render, but is remarkably close to the 2014 demonstration. Maybe a few differences in geometry and tessellation but not much.

Color scheme isn't anywhere near as vibrant as in some of the pics, but that may be my display.


----------



## Murlocke

I'm getting 40-45FPS or so regardless of Hairworks on or off at 3440x1440 with the Titan X at +150.

EDIT: After leaving the tutorial area, disabling HairWorks seems to have a HUGE impact. Solid 60 maxed out basically. Strange.


----------



## SlimDim

Medium to ultra is pretty tough to tell apart. Pcgamer took some screens from the pc version for comparison. http://www.pcgamer.com/witcher-3-graphics-options-performance-and-settings/


----------



## Ass Dan

Runs like a stuttery mess. With a 5960/quad titan x setup, this is unacceptable.


----------



## majin662

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> Best looking open world game on the market.


Think that depends on preferences though as I'm sure some would say GTA V looks better. (To think of a recently released open world game)


----------



## Ass Dan

Something is VERY wrong. This game runs terribly.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ass Dan*
> 
> Something is VERY wrong. This game runs terribly.


I'm willing to bet it has to do with a quad sli setup, try knocking it down two cards.


----------



## Ass Dan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> I'm willing to bet it has to do with a quad sli setup, try knocking it down two cards.


Attempting that now. I'll let you guys know how it goes.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *majin662*
> 
> Think that depends on preferences though as I'm sure some would say GTA V looks better. (To think of a recently released open world game)


As far as model detail, structure complexity, overall detail, texture quality, etc no I don't think that is in any way preference.

Now some aspects of gtav are better like in sheer scale and model number, there is also the relevant difference between a modern and fantasy setting. There are a few areas where GTAV is clearly superior.


----------



## djriful

Going to wait for Pascal GPUs + this game then.


----------



## Murlocke

I have yet to see below 55FPS after leaving the tutorial area. The tutorial area ran badly for me apparently.

3440x1400, Maxed out, HairWorks Off, Blur and Motion Blur Off (preference). It should perform way better with HairWorks on. Just standing in a Tavern it's a 30-40% FPS difference and Geralt's hair looks the exact same. Definitely not worth using. So yeah if you are having problems with 4x Titan X then it's gotta be driver issue, or disable FailWorks.

Also, this game looks a lot better than I expected it to. Not as good as the 2013 videos obviously, but it's dang pretty and immersive. My major gripe is the fact 21:9 doesn't work during cutscenes and dialog. It flips to 16:9 and puts bars on the side. Pretty big immersion killer. =/


----------



## Woundingchaney

Whole lot of hate for people to be upset over a 2013 target render......


----------



## MonarchX

Anyone got ReShade or SweetFX to work? This game NEEDS SMAA and FXAA wrapper/injection at 1080p. Too much aliasing otherwise. So far I bumped foilagedistance and grassdistance from 1.5/1.8 to 3.0 and its wonderful! 50-60fps!


----------



## Boyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> Whole lot of hate for people to be upset over a 2013 target render......


2013 target render or not. the false information fed to the PC community is what makes it a big deal imo


----------



## zealord

played an hour. Game looks alright, but worse than I would've expected 1-2 years ago. Some things like the stairs in the very first building (ultra quality) look like they are from Skyrim. Overall the game does look a lot better than skyrim though!

Performance on a 290X seems pretty good, but nothing phenomenal considering how the graphics currently look. Already found a few things I dislike like the FoV change between walking around and attacking suddenly. Camera also feels a bit off. Maybe I need to tweak a bit with the sensitivity.
I don't like Geralts movement when running around. Feels a bit floaty. Animation are not in total alignment with the world imho. (Perfect animations would be Metal Gear Solid V for comparison imho). Still probably good enough, but they feel a bit like a free 2 play MMORPG if you know what I mean.

This game would be a beauty with tesselation everywhere. Lots of flat walls etc.

Overall VRAM usage seems super low. around 1200 MB on a 290X if I am not mistaken. Need to check again.

I really would like an FOV option. Is there one. have I overlooked it?

Performance in cutscenes is weird. GPU goes down to 374mhz and FPS in cutscenes is like 27.4. Looks kind of stuttery. don't like it.

Some keyboard buttons are displayed weirdly in the tutorial. It say press "S" to jump over an obstacle or when dodging and rolling it also says something weird. Can't remember.

Need to spend more time with the game. Don't take too much away from my rambling. Overall my currentl attitude toward the game is neutral. Will probably change to positive once I am fully immersed into it.


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> Best looking open world game on the market.
> 
> No it doesn't look like the 2013 target render, but is remarkably close to the 2014 demonstration. Maybe a few differences in geometry and tessellation but not much.
> 
> Color scheme isn't anywhere near as vibrant as in some of the pics, but that may be my display.


I doubt it's going to look better than gta, that game looks so good. Though I will know in 30 minutes(almost done dling it).


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> So far I bumped foilagedistance and grassdistance from 1.5/1.8 to 3.0 and its wonderful! 50-60fps!


FoliageDistance appears to do almost nothing but decrease FPS based on NVIDIA screenshots. Have you noticed otherwise?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Dual R9 290's here...game runs like crap. Most post processing is disabled, no HairWorks, HBAO+, everything maxed, 4K...20FPS.

GPU usage is all over the place. Definitely not utilizing Crossfire properly at all.

So yeah performance is crap and the graphics don't justify the performance.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> I doubt it's going to look better than gta, that game looks so good. Though I will know in 30 minutes(almost done dling it).


So far I don't think it does. Not close. GTA 5 is amazing maxed.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> Whole lot of hate for people to be upset over a 2013 target render......


You have to figure TW3 is probably THE most anticipated PC game of year. Hailed by many as goty before it even released. Any perceived small controversy is going to blowup. I'd say the graphics downgrade is not small. CDPR have made many gamers not satisfied. I think we are past just saying, "it was just a demo". That is not going to fly anymore.


----------



## Ass Dan

Down to 2 way sli, still terrible hitching. 4K res. Settings do nothing to curb it.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

I am going to wait for drivers from AMD. The game is too good to play otherwise.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> FoliageDistance appears to do almost nothing but decrease FPS based on NVIDIA screenshots. Have you noticed otherwise?


It improves some trees look further away. They look fuller.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I am going to wait for drivers from AMD. The game is too good to play otherwise.


I think I'll wait a bit too. Although I do not have CrossFire I hope that CDPR can bring a tad better performance and graphical fidelity with a couple of patches (Don't know if AMD has anything that can increase performance for a single card with a driver update). Probably good to wait for all the bug fixes, that will inevitably come soon, too.

Still have Final Fantasy X to finish anyways


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> It improves some trees look further away. They look fuller.


The performance hit is too big to justify at 3440x1440, foliage and grass at 3 take me from 60 to 45FPS. I took screenshots and the foliage difference is laughable for the performance cost, however the grass difference is big. GrassDistance = 3 is about 52FPS. Probably going to settle for 2.5 grass or so.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> The performance hit is too big to justify at 3440x1440, foliage and grass at 3 take me from 60 to 45FPS. I took screenshots and the foliage difference is laughable for the performance cost, however the grass difference is big. GrassDistance = 3 is about 52FPS. Probably going to settle for 2.5 grass or so.


Sounds a lot like the draw distance in Dying Light.


----------



## Yvese

Yea.. GTA 5 looks better than this game TBH ( played it for 2 hours so far ) which is pretty sad.

Thanks for the downgrade.


----------



## majin662

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> As far as model detail, structure complexity, overall detail, texture quality, etc no I don't think that is in any way preference.
> 
> Now some aspects of gtav are better like in sheer scale and model number, there is also the relevant difference between a modern and fantasy setting. There are a few areas where GTAV is clearly superior.


Id have to disagree with overall detail but I can dig your points.


----------



## Assirra

Just came back from 2hours or so.

resolution 1440p
most post processing off except hbao+ = personal choice
graphics options to ultra except folliage level to high and hairworks off

runs at 60+fps most of the time bar a couple cutscenes.

Gonne mess around a bit tomorrow to see if i can get some settings lower for hairworks.

Oh and getting my arse abslutely destroyed


----------



## Woundingchaney

Ok an update after a couple hours of gaming.

Beautiful looking game. Character models, texture work, most animations, terrain, edifice detail, etc are very well done. Some animations like the jump for example look a bit out of place, not as bad as other title but not good either. Foliage looks very good, possibly the best forest/swamp etc settings I have ever seen. Lighting is very well done. Enemies of all sorts are very good looking. Water looks very good as well, lakes and ponds respond how they should and react the weather patterns and the environment. Now for the some of the drawback. As mentioned the game could use a bit more tessellation, nothing over the top but it would be nice to have a separate setting. Geometry seems very well done but there is some areas where it could be seen as lacking.

I will go on record and state it is the best looking open world game I have ever seen when considering the total presentation. Certain other titles have strengths over this game of course.

If for whatever reason you are expecting the 2013 target render, no it isn't like that; not even close. Finished product mirrors the 2014 gameplay demo. Im sure there is a difference here and there, but not all of it is downgrade nor all of it exactly improved. Most things look generally to be cosmetic rather than any advanced changes.

For those interested in the book series or previous games. The art direction captures the world nearly perfectly, things aren't too dark but it isn't a carnival either. Much like the books, think along the lines of Grimm lore (darker European fantasy). Story line seems very solid but there is a considerable amount of quests to do, so that could distract from the main story.

This game is much more like The Witcher rather than The Witcher 2, which should make some of the legacy players happy. You really have to fight in this game. It isn't a point and click gun battle or even a DAI destruction path. It is very easy to become over come by enemies and timing is extremely important. I also believe on the harder difficulties that potions and signs are going to be integral to victory.

The map is huge and varied.

Ultimately for those outraged about whatever downgrade they seen on a target render, don't buy the game and keep lighting your torches. Everyone else that has actually been following the game, or just looking for an excellent game to play should really enjoy the title.

Im running max setting except shadows on High and no AA @4k everything else is enabled. I cant speak about performance other than I am having no problems what so ever, but I am also playing with and extremely powerful rig.

Suffice to say I am very pleased with the finished product of course it would of been great to see the 2013 trailer come to life. I seriously doubt that could be a possibility for everyone except us 1% of high end pc gamers. It is also important to note that I have been a fan of the games and novel since they were first released, well since the novel were translated to English anyways.


----------



## Vintage

Will play tommorow morning and repot in on what I think.... Excited to play regardless









I wouldn't expect amazing scaling on a CFX setup though on day 1 with no AMD release driver though...


----------



## MonarchX

I agree, it is an excellent game! It does need more AA @ 1080p than in-game options allow. I used ReShade FXAA + SMAA + LumaSharpen to get rid of the remaining aliasing without any cost to performance. Too bad I have to run the game in Borderless Window mode to use my ICC profile, but its no biggie because it allows me to get steady 45fps on my 120hz monitor without ANY tearing and frame drops.

Graphics is truly THE BEST for an RPG. All this hate and for what? Losing your own nerve cells? No thank you, I'd rather be happy and play the game.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> I agree, it is an excellent game! It does need more AA @ 1080p than in-game options allow. I used ReShade FXAA + SMAA + LumaSharpen to get rid of the remaining aliasing without any cost to performance. Too bad I have to run the game in Borderless Window mode to use my ICC profile, but its no biggie because it allows me to get steady 45fps on my 120hz monitor without ANY tearing and frame drops.
> 
> Graphics is truly THE BEST for an RPG. All this hate and for what? Losing your own nerve cells? No thank you, I'd rather be happy and play the game.


So many games don't support proper AA anymore and the best solution is stop using 1080p.

The AA problems vanish completely at 1440p, or at least I haven't noticed any AA problems and I'm sensitive to them.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> So many games don't support proper AA anymore and the best solution is stop using 1080p.
> 
> The AA problems vanish completely at 1440p, or at least I haven't noticed any AA problems and I'm sensitive to them.


I have noticed this as well. Coding for AA has become a beast of its own. There are now so many different forms of AA with different implementations that it is ridiculously difficult to tell if the performance trade is worth the visual upgrade. I have been gaming at 1440p and above for about 6 years and one thing I have never missed since then is using AA.


----------



## Serandur

I've been playing for a bit. First off, I need either GM200 or Fiji immediately. Secondly, all settings on max (except chromatic aberration and sharpening) at 1440p slaughtered my lone 980 (30-40 FPS); turning hairworks off and shadows and detail to high got me 60 FPS most of the time (some dips into the 50s). My 980's fluctuating between 1507 and 1520 MHz right now.

The game looks really nice in person, very little aliasing or anything, and I'm enjoying it. I'm still angry about the downgrade stuff, but thankfully it still looks good. I can't get the Steam screenshot function to work with my GOG copy, though.


----------



## steelbom

Regardless of their reason, if they needed it reduce the graphics quality then so be it. They still look good, just not phenomenal like in the trailer.

I loved the Witcher 1 and 2 and am super keen to finish the story. The gameplay looks good, and the story I expect will be fantastic. And the game I'm sure will be supported as well as The Witcher 2 was.


----------



## Blackops_2

Game does look good, on my primary rig which i've been lazy about and haven't put it on water yet :/ downclocking from 1137mhz to 1040-1090 sucks lol. Looks good just not E3 but we knew this from the past 5 days, it was apparent.

Hairworks hits pretty dang hard. Running everything on ultra with draw distance on med, NPC on high, no blur or motion blurr. 28-40fps is about norm 60s in certain areas. Though i've already had a crash, dunno what that's about.


----------



## XKaan

Believe the hype, is all I can say.

Titan X runs this beautifully with hairworks and physx - no issues.

It's hard to describe, but it's one thing to pick the game apart from a YT video, and it's quite another to see it maxed out at 1440 IN MOTION.....stunning!!!









Played 3 hours and wish I didn't have to work tomorrow - the game is that engrossing. Combat is a huge step up from W2, as far as I am concerned.

The extra little effects Physx and hairworks provide was totally worth the price of admission - it just makes the game that much more immersive.

I felt kind of dirty after spending a G on a gpu - but now that I finally have my rig underwater and running this game, I can tell you it is worth it.


----------



## DoomDash

This game looks absolutely incredible. None of the videos and screen shots have done it justice. Best looking game out.

You guys can believe the downgrade gate all you want, and even if its true, it's still the king.


----------



## Swolern

IS the game capped at 60fps?


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DoomDash*
> 
> You guys can believe the downgrade gate all you want, and even if its true, it's still the king.


Crysis 3 is so easily forgotten around these parts


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Swolern*
> 
> IS the game capped at 60fps?


No. There are 30 and 60fps caps with an unlimited setting.


----------



## DoomDash

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Crysis 3 is so easily forgotten around these parts


I've played Crysis 3 probably more than 99% of this site lol. I thought Crysis 3 was the best in the series. I didn't forget, but this game has far more going on. It's close, but the amount of detail in the world of Witcher 3 is crazy.


----------



## Creator

I'm getting ~90% GPU usage on my 3x Titans. Not very many games do that. Unfortunately, my room got very warm within 2 hours. It's just a bad time of year to be running three of these cards and overclocked.


----------



## Swolern

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Creator*
> 
> I'm getting ~90% GPU usage on my 3x Titans. Not very many games do that. Unfortunately, my room got very warm within 2 hours. It's just a bad time of year to be running three of these cards and overclocked.


Nice! Is that on the Swift? What is your FPS?


----------



## Creator

Yes it's on the Swift. The FPS bounces around from 50 - 80 (usually around ~65-70). Hairworks on, and everything ultra except the shadows bumped down to high, and the "blur" (whatever this setting is) and motion blur are turned off. I will be tweaking as guides come along to get more performance without performance loss. Also, hopefully NV stops being NV and actually optimizes Kepler for once this year!

I think the game looks great, though the trees "swaying" look a bit odd. Either way, I'm having fun.


----------



## DNMock

Yeah, downgrade talk was total garbage. Been playing it for a couple hours now, it's gorgeous just on ultra and by editing the config files you can push it way further.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DoomDash*
> 
> This game looks absolutely incredible. None of the videos and screen shots have done it justice. Best looking game out.
> 
> You guys can believe the downgrade gate all you want, and even if its true, it's still the king.


I played it and Unity looks better.


----------



## Ghoxt

I'm trying to understand why members of OCN who understand technology and exactly how small scale "Demo's" on quad SLI/CF PC's 3 years before can have better "Detail in areas" than a released version with an entire Zone worth of processing, CPU and GPU to deal with and targetted for the masses, and how this can and should be "optimized". We are the 1% in PC performance, so should the game be optimized just for us? or for the avg Witcher user's PC.

I think we have to get over ourselves and our Rigs...My point is I'm surprised at your surprise, like this is new to you. Really. This is not our first Rodeo...

Some of us see this as no big deal, but for some it's apparently a deal breaker per your posts. I've already purchased the game and will judge for myself when I install it and play with the settings I choose to see if it's a good game on all it's merits and definitely not some demo video from 3 years ago... Lemmings all. j/k but not really...









Let the News and Video sites have their clicks...but I question overblowing something that's all too normal and cheap today for clicks and nothing else. And we wonder why some studios don't bother giving a glimpse of the game at all beforehand. Double edge sword, where some game devs lose early on...

[edit] Oh Steam says it's ready...ok now...


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ghoxt*
> 
> I'm trying to understand why members of OCN who understand technology and exactly how small scale "Demo's" on quad SLI/CF PC's 3 years before can have better "Detail in areas" than a released version with an entire Zone worth of processing, CPU and GPU to deal with and targetted for the masses, and how this can and should be "optimized". We are the 1% in PC performance, so should the game be optimized just for us? or for the avg Witcher user's PC.
> 
> I think we have to get over ourselves and our Rigs...My point is I'm surprised at your surprise, like this is new to you. Really. This is not our first Rodeo...


Well considering the performance reports seen thus far, you'd need a rig in the 1% just have a decent frame rate with graphics marginally better than a ps4


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Yeah, downgrade talk was total garbage.


NO it was not. Just because this game doesn't look horrible doesn't mean it didn't look better. Downgrade is very real.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Well considering the performance reports seen thus far, you'd need a rig in the 1% just have a decent frame rate with graphics marginally better than a ps4


This. The game is horribly optimized on my end. None of my CPU cores go about 30% and my Crossfire 290's bounce between 0 to 90-ish percent constantly.

These graphics absolutely do not warrant the performance I'm getting. At all. People I think are massively hyping the graphics up in this game in their minds. It looks great, sure, but it's not some be all end all of graphics. GTA 5 looks just as good, if not better. Especially it's water and to an extent it's nature environments.


----------



## Blackops_2

The downgrade from 2013 build is not just here say it's real. 2014 build/preview however is very much still the target area. I'm not a graphics aficionado so i'm not sure about all the tessellation comments and such. It does look good and does cripple most systems. However it's nowhere near the E3 debut trailer. Look at the density on screen in those videos it's ridiculous. Having said that they might have not been able to get that to run even if they would've had a build going just for PC. Idk. It does look better than some of the leaked footage.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> It does look good and does cripple most systems.


I think this is more a driver/optimization issue though. On my end my CPU is no where near max usage and my Crossfired 290's usage is all over the place. Certainly, to me, isn't just demanding...it's screwy.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> This. The game is horribly optimized on my end. None of my CPU cores go about 30% and my Crossfire 290's bounce between 0 to 90-ish percent constantly.
> 
> These graphics absolutely do not warrant the performance I'm getting. At all. People I think are massively hyping the graphics up in this game in their minds. It looks great, sure, but it's not some be all end all of graphics. GTA 5 looks just as good, if not better. Especially it's water and to an extent it's nature environments.


GTA 5 does not look anywhere as good as Witcher 3 and its an nVidia game anyway. Have you disabled ALL nVidia options - HairWorks, PhysX, and HBAO+? PS4 versions lacks quite a few important features, from texture resolution to HBAO, HairWorks, LOD distance, Grass distance, Foliage distance, and so on and so forth. CrossFire BLOWS monkey nuts! SLi performs well, nVidia cards perform well, and single AMD cards perform more or less acceptable with nVidia settings turned off @ 1080p. You can hate the game all you want, but it is an EXCELLENT game, very well optimized. I run it with 0 issues now, aside from 45-50fps, but I increased some settings PAST Ultra.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> GTA 5 does not look anywhere as good as Witcher 3 and its an nVidia game anyway. Have you disabled ALL nVidia options - HairWorks, PhysX, and HBAO+?


Sure GTA 5 looks as good as W3. You're bias...you've proven this time and time and time again.

Regardless, HW is off, Physx is CPU and can't be turned off (as per Nvidias performance guide), and HBAO+ makes like a 3-4fps difference between SSAO so I leave it on.

Again, it's a software issue...not a graphics being hard to push issue.


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Sure GTA 5 looks as good as W3. You're bias...you've proven this time and time and time again.
> 
> Regardless, HW is off, Physx is CPU and can't be turned off (as per Nvidias performance guide), and HBAO+ makes like a 3-4fps difference between SSAO so I leave it on.
> 
> Again, it's a software issue...not a graphics being hard to push issue.


Turn off HBAO anyway, it may cause FPS flux, its nVidia feature mostly. AMD uses HDAO, not HBAO. You're PISSED the game does not run well for you, so you will blame it for everything, even though you should blame AMD CrossFire drivers that suck extremely bad not just in Witcher 3, but in numerous games. GTA V does not have the amount of detail Witcher 3 does and it uses much lower resolution textures. Hell, GTA V's HBAO setting does nothing - it does not even use SSAO and unlike Witcher 3, @ 1080p, GTA V is covered is horrific amount of aliasing, even with ReShade/SweetFX!


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> Turn off HBAO anyway, it may cause FPS flux, its nVidia feature mostly. AMD uses HDAO, not HBAO. You're PISSED the game does not run well for you, so you will blame it for everything, even though you should blame AMD CrossFire drivers that suck extremely bad not just in Witcher 3, but in numerous games. GTA V does not have the amount of detail Witcher 3 does and it uses much lower resolution textures. Hell, GTA V's HBAO setting does nothing - it does not even use SSAO and unlike Witcher 3, @ 1080p, GTA V is covered is horrific amount of aliasing, even with ReShade/SweetFX!


DUDE READ!
Quote:


> it's a software issue


Did I say it was an issue with just the game? NO. Clearly drivers need work as well as the game.

Please, stop talking to me or do I just need to block you?


----------



## Alvarez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> DUDE READ!
> Did I say it was an issue with just the game? NO. Clearly drivers need work as well as the game.
> 
> Please, stop talking to me or do I just need to block you?


Block him, he's working for CDP


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alvarez*
> 
> Block him, he's working for CDP


Bro, I'd straight up bet HARD money on that. Part of the CDPR shill task force.


----------



## Ghoxt

Playing the game the last hour it looks fine to me at 4K 60fps. But again, I don't give a damn about some demo 3 years ago nor anyone else's Internet Reviewer opinion. Judge it for yourself.

The Gameplay seems decent, although I'm only getting used to the combat now, and as soon as I figure out how, I'd love to stop my character jumping forward in combat and just let me swing the sword and move as I please with the keyboard WASD. I'm praying that is a setting somewhere though I fear it's a console mechanic hardcoded. /wrists

I'll check it out tomorrow.

Again at 4K many scenes were pretty damn awesome. I'm not sure if there's a console pic to compare with...


----------



## edo101

GTA V looks more impressive in my opinion. And yes at 1440p, this game still looks about the same with PS4 version. Yes its not bad looking but its not what I saw in 2013 or 2014 for that matter. And yes maybe it'll run a little better with drivers but no the hit does not warrant the less than stellar visuals.

I can't believe I'm saying this but GTA V actually seems to be the most impressive PC title this year visually


----------



## kurei

Anyone with a single GTX 980 and 2560x1440 monitor can tell me what kind of Graphics settings and FrameRates I can expect to run on?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kurei*
> 
> Anyone with a single GTX 980 and 2560x1440 monitor can tell me what kind of Graphics settings and FrameRates I can expect to run on?


Seems to be very all over the place. Some are running it fine, some not so much. I'd say, if you run the game properly, you'll probably get around 30-40FPS at max or near-max settings give or take.

Drivers and optimizations seem to have a good way to go on this one. If you haven't bought it yet I'd say to wait. Even the new Nvidia drivers don't fix everything according to people on their forums.


----------



## Leopard2lx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kurei*
> 
> Anyone with a single GTX 980 and 2560x1440 monitor can tell me what kind of Graphics settings and FrameRates I can expect to run on?


I play at 4k max settings and SSAO on + Hairworks Off and I am locked at 30fps. Never seen anything under. I would think you'd be able at get around 50-60 at 1440p maybe. Make sure you overclock your card.


----------



## kurei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> I play at 4k max settings and SSAO on + Hairworks Off and I am locked at 30fps. Never seen anything under. I would think you'd be able at get around 50-60 at 1440p maybe. Make sure you overclock your card.


Thanks
Yeah I got about the same OC going as you . Around 1576 MHz IIRC. Does The RAM OC Help in the game? If i take down the RAM OC I'm good for another 50-60Mhz on the Core.
I do have a 670 lying around that i can plug in and dedicate as a physics card for Hairworks. Maybe I'll see better framerates then. I Usually just start with Nvidias' optimal settings from GeForce Experience and tweak it minimally towards the performance side of things.

I haven't bought it yet and can't seem to since Hard copies everywhere in India seem to be sold out and I do want to get the physical edition on this one. So I Guess I'm waiting for now.


----------



## Mygaffer

So I've been playing the game and it looks good and plays well. I'm not far enough into it to really have formed a complete opinion but so far I am really feeling good about it. A GTX 980 can't max it at 2560x1440.


----------



## ghost_z

Tried the game, the game itself aside, gta v indeed looks better and people saying otherwise are either too biased or their definition of looking good differs from mine.

This whole scene has only made me respect rockstar more.

Lastly i dont understand how can people justify the performance with the kind of visuals on offer ?

Have they forgotten how skyrim runs and looks with enb ?

The love for cdpr is just too strong with some peeps.


----------



## velocd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ghoxt*
> 
> I'd love to stop my character jumping forward in combat and just let me swing the sword and move as I please with the keyboard WASD. I'm praying that is a setting somewhere though I fear it's a console mechanic hardcoded. /wrists


It's not really a console mechanic, TW2 did it also and that game didn't release on console until a year after its PC release. Consoles may have popularized it though? I just think of it as more realistic combat.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghost_z*
> 
> Tried the game, the game itself aside, gta v indeed looks better and people saying otherwise are either too biased or their definition of looking good differs from mine.
> 
> This whole scene has only made me respect rockstar more.
> 
> Lastly i dont understand how can people justify the performance with the kind of visuals on offer ?
> 
> Have they forgotten how skyrim runs and looks with enb ?
> 
> The love for cdpr is just too strong with some peeps.


In that respect Rockstar does deserves a ton of credit. Their last two PC games were great successes, both ran great as well. Max Payne 3 both looked pretty gorgeous at the time and ran very very well on all my systems.


----------



## XKaan

A game can always run better, but I think a lot of you are downplaying just how much more taxing higher resolutions and the NVidia features are.

"Marginally Better" than PS4? Please!

I know a guy that looks at every single game that is multiplatform and says "oh, it looks just like the XBOx version I have" The thing is people like myself that are willing to buy a Titan X or similar know and understand that to make a game look 20% better and have some extra effects comes with a price.

Maybe I'm alone, but the price of admission is fine with me. Call resolution a number all you want, but the difference between 1080 and 1440 is huge for me, and the difference between 1440 and 4k even more so. Taking it a step further, some people think hairworks isn't worth the processing power, but I totally disagree. The same goes for the extra effects provided by Physx - yeah you are paying for those luxuries, but they make the game that much more immersive.

If the game was made for PC Only then yes, I guarantee you would have seen more work put into optimization for various platforms etc - but this day and age it just isn't possible. As far as I'm concerned the game looks amazing and it fun as hell.


----------



## Woundingchaney

It is also important to note that it has always been very rendering demanding to create forest and outdoor scenes. Every game ever released receives a dramatic performance cut once vegetation comes into play. This is evident in GTAV, when one leaves the city scenes and moves into unpopulated mountainous areas there is a framerate hit of a bit above 20% (depending on the settings for vegetation of course).


----------



## MapRef41N93W

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HowHardCanItBe*
> 
> IF you want consoles to die, stop funding the nvidia/amd/intel foundation. It's as simple as that. Developers/publishers don't care about ethics or morals. All they care is about whether something will turn into a profit and lining their deep pockets and PC gamers are beta testers for console gaming


If you want consoles to die stop funding their direct competitors (Intel and NVIDIA)? That has to be the most illogical thing I've read in a while.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> GTA 5 does not look anywhere as good as Witcher 3 and its an nVidia game anyway. Have you disabled ALL nVidia options - HairWorks, PhysX, and HBAO+? PS4 versions lacks quite a few important features, from texture resolution to HBAO, HairWorks, LOD distance, Grass distance, Foliage distance, and so on and so forth. CrossFire BLOWS monkey nuts! SLi performs well, nVidia cards perform well, and single AMD cards perform more or less acceptable with nVidia settings turned off @ 1080p. You can hate the game all you want, but it is an EXCELLENT game, very well optimized. I run it with 0 issues now, aside from 45-50fps, but I increased some settings PAST Ultra.


GTA V is so much better looking than this game it's not even funny. Stop being biased. I've played both games at max on 4K and there is no comparison. The only exception is the character models where by Witcher 3 looks incredible. One game runs at barely 30% on any CPU core (Witcher 3) one game will use about as much CPU power as you throw at it. CDPR wet the bed with this game graphically.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MapRef41N93W*
> 
> If you want consoles to die stop funding their direct competitors (Intel and NVIDIA)? That has to be the most illogical thing I've read in a while.
> GTA V is so much better looking than this game it's not even funny. Stop being biased. I've played both games at max on 4K and there is no comparison. The only exception is the character models where by Witcher 3 looks incredible. One game runs at barely 30% on any CPU core (Witcher 3) one game will use about as much CPU power as you throw at it. CDPR wet the bed with this game graphically.


So animations, building detail, post processing, model detail, surface details (cloths, environmental, etc), lighting, texture detail, physics, particle effects etc don't have anything to do with the discussion?

I think GTAV does look better in many areas and play the game maxed at 4k 60fps, but it is still built upon a relatively old game that was in development many years ago and that shows in many areas. There are some aspects of GTAV that represent an over head that Witcher just doesn't have to deal with like travel speed, population density (density in general), ability to fly, reflections, etc. But to outright say it isn't even a comparison isn't realistic.

I think the texture work in Witcher appears to be better individually, but that is more of a personal preference as there is no realistic way to quantify that on a technical level. GTAV is stunning because of the sheer amount of unique textures in a given scene.

Oddly enough both games could use more tessellation, there must be some type of relevant limiting factor for this.


----------



## skawster

I can only imagine that everyone following the developement of Witcher knew this was going to happen but then again this is what happens when LunchBoxOnes and StutterStations are the limiting factor, too bad would have been an even better game, it still is great gameplay and plot-wise but the eye-candy could have pushed it even further.

P.S. Consoles have become PCs in the past few years, their game libraries aren't that unique and different (Poor sales of the WiiU until MK was released is pretty concrete proof) and with the latest generation even their arch is the same makes me wonder why not just buy a 400-500$ PC, hook it up to the TV and use a joystick with it?


----------



## XKaan

Game looks significantly better with a proper re-shade as well. Check this: https://sfx.thelazy.net/games/screenshot/25185/

As much as I am adoring the game as it is, I'm not naive to think if it was PC only it could be even better. (But isn't that always the case?)

Game is still very impressive, though.


----------



## MonarchX

Witcher 3 runs better for me than GTA V with ReShade's FXAA @ 1080p, most settings @ Ultra, but Grass Quality set to High and Post-Processing set to Very High.


----------



## Murlocke

Got my first crash while browsing inventory. Seems to be a common problem.

Overall game is not as big as I thought it would be. It's 3 medium sized area, and each area is no where near as big as Skyrim as early reports were claiming. There are loading screens going between each of these area, so it's not a true open world which is a disappointment. They don't even connect with each other, you fast travel between them.

Combat seems OK but has nothing on Shadows of Mordor or Dark Souls 2. The game tries to be hard, but doesn't have the animations to hold up. It's very hard to see when certain enemies are about to attack, and then they just 4 shot you. Its very frustrating. It makes you want exploit combat to survive. The controls are very clunky on KB+M, and still quite clunky (although better) on a 360 controller. I am constantly shooting extra arrows, and sometimes he randomly switches to the wrong sword during the middle of a fight.

Humans are very easy compared to monsters so far. Like you just smash fast attack and kill all humans. Monsters, even low level drowners can do massive amounts of damage quickly. It seems very unbalanced in that regard. Started on hard, went to normal after I realized hard makes it so you can't heal during mediating. Eating 5 stacks of food to heal is tedious. I don't even think I can buy/find the food needed to do that. Is there no way to get some 24/7 passive regen healing?

The card game is boring/bad or maybe I don't understand it enough. I came across my 2nd card player and he just destroys me every time. He has tons of cards that have 10-12 strength each, while I'm sitting with cards that have a max of 4-5. I don't know where to get new cards without beating other people, but as far as I can tell this is the next guy to beat.

Witcher Senses are used too much. I'd like to be able to tell whats lootable without changing my FOV and blurring my screen every few seconds. I actually get motion sickness and headaches if I use it too much. Never happened in a game before.

I've already failed 3 side quests because I advanced the mainstory a couple steps after receiving them. No where did it tell me they were time sensitive. It didn't even tell me I failed them, they are just in the failed section now.

Roach movement is terrible. He gets stuck on everything and comes to a complete halt randomly. He has a mind of his own, constantly pulling left or right. I get that's realistic, but its annoying. I generally just run everywhere on foot...

Overall I see why they delayed the game. I feel it should of been delayed more though. It lacks a sense of final polish, but so far it's an OK game that will probably get way better with some patches.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MapRef41N93W*
> 
> GTA V is so much better looking than this game it's not even funny. Stop being biased. I've played both games at max on 4K and there is no comparison.


Agreed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *XKaan*
> 
> Game looks significantly better with a proper re-shade as well. Check this: https://sfx.thelazy.net/games/screenshot/25185/
> 
> As much as I am adoring the game as it is, I'm not naive to think if it was PC only it could be even better. (But isn't that always the case?)
> 
> Game is still very impressive, though.


So much black crush it isn't even funny. Yeah sure, it looks better in that scene... but you are losing so much detail and any dark areas of the game will be completely washed out.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

I dont find GTA V all the impressive graphically. To me Witcher 3 looks better. GTA V is just a last gen tittle that is given the Skyrim treatment increasing all the values to the max.


----------



## Dunan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Got my first crash while browsing inventory. Seems to be a common problem.
> 
> Overall game is not as big as I thought it would be. It's 3 medium sized area, and each area is no where near as big as Skyrim as early reports were claiming. There are loading screens going between each of these area, so it's not a true open world which is a disappointment. They don't even connect with each other, you fast travel between them.
> 
> Combat seems OK but has nothing on Shadows of Mordor or Dark Souls 2. The game tries to be hard, but doesn't have the animations to hold up. It's very hard to see when certain enemies are about to attack, and then they just 4 shot you. Its very frustrating. It makes you want exploit combat to survive. The controls are very clunky on KB+M, and still quite clunky (although better) on a 360 controller. I am constantly shooting extra arrows, and sometimes he randomly switches to the wrong sword during the middle of a fight.
> 
> Humans are very easy compared to monsters so far. Like you just smash fast attack and kill all humans. Monsters, even low level drowners can do massive amounts of damage quickly. It seems very unbalanced in that regard. Started on hard, went to normal after I realized hard makes it so you can't heal during mediating. Eating 5 stacks of food to heal is tedious. I don't even think I can buy/find the food needed to do that. Is there no way to get some 24/7 passive regen healing?
> 
> The card game is boring/bad or maybe I don't understand it enough. I came across my 2nd card player and he just destroys me every time. He has tons of cards that have 10-12 strength each, while I'm sitting with cards that have a max of 4-5. I don't know where to get new cards without beating other people, but as far as I can tell this is the next guy to beat.
> 
> Witcher Senses are used too much. I'd like to be able to tell whats lootable without changing my FOV and blurring my screen every few seconds. I actually get motion sickness and headaches if I use it too much. Never happened in a game before.
> 
> I've already failed 3 side quests because I advanced the mainstory a couple steps after receiving them. No where did it tell me they were time sensitive. It didn't even tell me I failed them, they are just in the failed section now.
> 
> Roach movement is terrible. He gets stuck on everything and comes to a complete halt randomly. He has a mind of his own, constantly pulling left or right. I get that's realistic, but its annoying. I generally just run everywhere on foot...
> 
> Overall I see why they delayed the game. I feel it should of been delayed more though. It lacks a sense of final polish, but so far it's an OK game that will probably get way better with some patches.
> Agreed.
> So much black crush it isn't even funny. Yeah sure, it looks better in that scene... but you are losing so much detail and any dark areas of the game will be completely washed out.


Where are you seeing black crush? I don't see any black crush in that scene, maybe configure your monitor?


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> Got my first crash while browsing inventory. Seems to be a common problem.
> 
> Overall game is not as big as I thought it would be. It's 3 medium sized area, and each area is no where near as big as Skyrim as early reports were claiming. There are loading screens going between each of these area, so it's not a true open world which is a disappointment. They don't even connect with each other, you fast travel between them.
> 
> Combat seems OK but has nothing on Shadows of Mordor or Dark Souls 2. The game tries to be hard, but doesn't have the animations to hold up. It's very hard to see when certain enemies are about to attack, and then they just 4 shot you. Its very frustrating. It makes you want exploit combat to survive. The controls are very clunky on KB+M, and still quite clunky (although better) on a 360 controller. I am constantly shooting extra arrows, and sometimes he randomly switches to the wrong sword during the middle of a fight.
> 
> Witcher Senses are used too much. I'd like to be able to tell whats lootable without changing my FOV and blurring my screen every few seconds. I actually get motion sickness and headaches if I use it too much. Never happened in a game before.
> 
> I've already failed 3 side quests because I advanced the mainstory a couple steps after receiving them. No where did it tell me they were time sensitive. It didn't even tell me I failed them, they are just in the failed section now.
> 
> Roach movement is terrible. He gets stuck on everything and comes to a complete halt randomly. He has a mind of his own, constantly pulling left or right. I get that's realistic, but its annoying. I generally just run everywhere on foot...
> 
> Overall I see why they delayed the game. I feel it should of been delayed more though. It lacks a sense of final polish, but so far it's an OK game that will probably get way better with some patches.
> Agreed.
> So much black crush it isn't even funny. Yeah sure, it looks better in that scene... but you are losing so much detail and any dark areas of the game will be completely washed out.


You sound like this is your first Witcher game. Witcher 2 is very much the same as I am playing it now. I hate the use of of Witcher sense. map still sucks since you have to go back and forth often though in 3 it is an improvemenet over the second and definitely the first. And yeah the quest stuff is annoying. I stuck with it for the story but I don't get how this game got soo high praised.


----------



## lacrossewacker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I dont find GTA V all the impressive graphically. To me Witcher 3 looks better. GTA V is just a last gen tittle that is given the Skyrim treatment increasing all the values to the max.


Have you played the whole game? There are just some scenes that are just breath taking. Flying a jet through the mountains with the sun shafts pouring through....beautiful and completely dynamic.

Heck, even scubadiving through the coral reefs is beautiful. I play this game on the Xbox 1 (lowest common denominator) and it's just a visual treat.

Everybody looks like people walk around with a purpose....not just standing around waiting to say "hey you there.....carry on"


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dunan*
> 
> Where are you seeing black crush? I don't see any black crush in that scene, maybe configure your monitor?


lol, yes my 34UM95 that has hardware calibration and is calibrated with a i1 Display Pro is the problem. There is black crush there when compared to the default shaders. Look at Geralt's boots and glove, you lose a lot of detail in his armor. There is also a lot of black crush in the darkest shadows under the trees/foliage. Look at the tree without leafs on the left side, it gets almost completely masked by the bush behind it, yet you can easily see it with the default shaders.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> You sound like this is your first Witcher game. Witcher 2 is very much the same as I am playing it now. I hate the use of of Witcher sense. map still sucks since you have to go back and forth often though in 3 it is an improvemenet over the second and definitely the first. And yeah the quest stuff is annoying. I stuck with it for the story but I don't get how this game got soo high praised.


Nope, i've played both the previous games multiple times through. I wasn't a big fan of the second. I greatly enjoyed the first minus the complexity mess that was the second act.

So far this one is in-between the first and second for me, but yes I don't see how critics praised it so much. It's an 8 at best, and if it wasn't a Witcher-themed game I'd rate it a 7 or so at best. I've already broke another side quest because I was exploring and looted a chest before I had the actual quest. Now it tells me to read notes I don't have, looks like there's a thread about it on CDPR forums.


----------



## edo101

Okay is there a Witcher 3 graphics thread cause I have a few complaints that have nothing to do with the downgrade. Why does everything look oily and why does the game look oversaturated in some areas and not in others. Also what is up with the muddy look. I just got through a couple of minutes in Witcher 2 and it looks more crisp than Witcher 3. Mind you I am not talking about textures just manily why the game looks blurry as hell. There is no pop

I'm gonna need to see some people on red team that have figured out how to sort through this mess


----------



## lacrossewacker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Okay is there a Witcher 3 graphics thread cause I have a few complaints that have nothing to do with the downgrade. Why does everything look oily and why does the game look oversaturated in some areas and not in others. Also what is up with the muddy look. I just got through a couple of minutes in Witcher 3 and it looks more crisp than Witcher 3. Mind you I am not talking about textures just manily why the game looks blurry as hell. There is no pop
> 
> I'm gonna need to see some people on red team that have figured out how to sort through this mess


have you enabled any sort of FXAA or other shader based AA?


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lacrossewacker*
> 
> have you enabled any sort of FXAA or other shader based AA?


I'm just going off of the AA settings in the game menu. Is there somewhere else I can tweak the AA that doesn't involve digging through config files?


----------



## MonarchX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> lol, yes my 34UM95 that has hardware calibration and is calibrated with a i1 Display Pro is the problem. There is black crush there when compared to the default shaders. Look at Geralt's boots and glove, you lose a lot of detail in his armor. There is also a lot of black crush in the darkest shadows under the trees/foliage. Look at the tree without leafs on the left side, it gets almost completely masked by the bush behind it, yet you can easily see it with the default shaders.
> Nope, i've played both the previous games multiple times through. I wasn't a big fan of the second. I greatly enjoyed the first minus the complexity mess that was the second act.
> 
> So far this one is in-between the first and second for me, but yes I don't see how critics praised it so much. It's an 8 at best, and if it wasn't a Witcher-themed game I'd rate it a 7 or so at best. I've already broke another side quest because I was exploring and looted a chest before I had the actual quest. Now it tells me to read notes I don't have, looks like there's a thread about it on CDPR forums.


Make sure to calibrate your display using the most accurate and most powerful calibration software (its free) dispcalGUI 3.0.0 and ArgyllCMS 1.7.0 and select BT.1886 gamma tone curve. That is the correct gamma (NOT power-law 2.2) for display devices. It will get rid of the black crush. Make sure to uninstall any X-Rite software and remove all related entries from StartUp, Scheduled Tasks, and Services. When you get dispcalGUI 3.0.0 installed, you will need to point it to extracted ArgyllCMS 32bit folder by selecting "File" > "Locate ArgyllCMS executables " within dispcalGUI. Point it to the "BIN" sub-folder of ArgyllCMS x86. Once that is done, in "Display & Instrument" tab select "Video (D65, Rec.1886)" for Settings in upper part of dispcalGUI. Then select your monitor under Display, then select Correction [must be "Spectral: White LED IPS (WLED AC LG Samsung)" for your monitor]. Then go Calibration tab, disable or enable Interactive Display Adjustments (which depends on whether you used your monitor's hardware calibration settings to calibrate your white point to D65 standard), then select "Whitepoint - Chromaticity Coordinates 0.3127 x 0.3290", "White Level - as measured", "Tone Curve - BT.1886", "Calibration Speed - Slow (Slow = best quality)", then press "Calibrate & Profile" on the very bottom. If you enabled Interactive Adjustments, then it will show you how far off you are from D65 white point and you can use your monitor's hardware controls (manual R, G, and B adjustments) to get it as close to 100% as possible and THEN let the software calibrate the rest by pressing "Continue..(something, don't recall)". If / When dispcalGUI asks whether you want Windows or dispcalGUI to manage your profiles, select dispcalGUI. Calibration may take about 40 minutes or so. *The end result will be FANTASTIC.*

X-Rite i1Profiler PALES to dispcalGUI / ArgyllCMS in terms of accuracy. i1Profiler uses some 10-20 measurements to calibrate your grayscale, while ArgyllCMS uses about 228 measurements to achieve *near-perfect calibration accuracy*.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Okay is there a Witcher 3 graphics thread cause I have a few complaints that have nothing to do with the downgrade. Why does everything look oily and why does the game look oversaturated in some areas and not in others. Also what is up with the muddy look. I just got through a couple of minutes in Witcher 3 and it looks more crisp than Witcher 3. Mind you I am not talking about textures just manily why the game looks blurry as hell. There is no pop
> 
> I'm gonna need to see some people on red team that have figured out how to sort through this mess


That just how the game looks.

- If you are on 1440p or better, disable the in-game AA because it offers 0 improvements other than blurring the picture slightly and lowering FPS by about 3-4%.
- Disable Blur, Motion Blur, and Chromic Abberation because all they do is lower FPS slightly and blur certain elements of the game, making it look worse.
- Depth of Field can be disabled to make things look sharper in the distance, but at the same time you'll notice more problems with the draw distance. I personally leave this on.

I also have a hard time making stuff out in this game, I did in the second game too. It's one of the big reasons I preferred the first game.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> That just how the game looks.
> 
> - If you are on 1440p or better, disable the in-game AA because it offers 0 improvements other than blurring the picture slightly and lowering FPS by about 3-4%.
> - Disable Blur, Motion Blur, and Chromic Abberation because all they do is lower FPS slightly and blur certain elements of the game, making it look worse.
> - Depth of Field can be disabled to make things look sharper in the distance, but at the same time you'll notice more problems with the draw distance. I personally leave this on.
> 
> I also have a hard time making stuff out in this game, I did in the second game too. It's one of the big reasons I preferred the first game.


Yeah I am on 1440p. Wow thanks. Instant difference after I changed it. It did highlight the obvious flaws in the graphics, namely the horrid painting looking grass, terrain and water more but at least it looks sharper now. Thanks man. 1.02 is the latest version right? I have GOG version i got off discount so no auto update for me or steam love


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Yeah I am on 1440p. Wow thanks. Instant difference after I changed it. It did highlight the obvious flaws in the graphics, namely the horrid painting looking grass, terrain and water more but at least it looks sharper now. Thanks man. 1.02 is the latest version right? I have GOG version i got off discount so no auto update for me or steam love


Yes


----------



## Ghoxt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> That just how the game looks.
> 
> - If you are on 1440p or better, disable the in-game AA because it offers 0 improvements other than blurring the picture slightly and lowering FPS by about 3-4%.
> - Disable Blur, Motion Blur, and Chromic Abberation because all they do is lower FPS slightly and blur certain elements of the game, making it look worse.
> - Depth of Field can be disabled to make things look sharper in the distance, but at the same time you'll notice more problems with the draw distance. I personally leave this on.
> 
> I also have a hard time making stuff out in this game, I did in the second game too. It's one of the big reasons I preferred the first game.


Thanks for the suggestions, I play at 4K and that blur from the beginning walking down the initial steps was annoying, I'll turn those settings off pronto tonight.

Should have called in sick like all you guys. Admit It!!


----------



## XKaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ghoxt*
> 
> Thanks for the suggestions, I play at 4K and that blur from the beginning walking down the initial steps was annoying, I'll turn those settings off pronto tonight.
> 
> Should have called in sick like all you guys. Admit It!!


I'm at work, although last night I was seriously considering staying home. lol


----------



## Assirra

8hours played so far and loving it.

Going to see if i can mess around with hairworks and keep decent framerate. The puffy dogs/wolfs are just nice to look at.


----------



## Superplush

If you're wondering about how this game got high praise from critics, have you seen some of the suck ups over at metacritic ? Clicky-Linky

So far I've played for a few hours and the bluring together with the lack of being able to make out a wolf that's nearly sat on top of me are annoying. It's such a blatant port too, from the lack of hot-keys right through to the obvious analogue stick movement.

It isn't a terrible game but to me, it's a mediocre console port, not a crap one but definitely a port. Making for one disappointed gamer.

BTW thank you Murlocke for pointing out some troubling settings. ATM I'm using my "Isaac" rig and getting decent framerates on ultra with Hairworks off. I'll mess around with the other blur settings for aesthetic quality of life.


----------



## Gunderman456

I played a bit of The Witcher 3. CDPR lied big time.







They have definitely lost my respect. I will now wait for Cyberpunk 2077 reviews before considering another game from them.

I have everything maxed, except vegetation is on high. No Gameworks features enables. The graphics are disappointing to say the least. Everything is flat (no tessellation and detail is lacking). Other then the character models, I'd say the world looks and feels a hair better then an unmodded Skyrim. Nothing we have not seen in games from this decade (2010-2015).

I get 45-55fps.

They have sold out by devoting their attention to console parity, releasing a highly unoptimized game (certainly those low quality visuals are not to blame), and the keyboard controls are some of the wackiest I've seen in a while - press S/A(called it left)/Alt to dodge left, what the? Who has time to press these buttons while also swinging a sword to either parry/block. The keybind for shift/left mouse button to block is buggy and I had to stop the game and Google the bug and one guy said that he had to press it 10-15 times to get it to work. It took me that many tries and I was finally able to complete the fighting tutorial. I will definitely have to redo most of the key bindings here and hope to work out something. Also the game will sometimes do things reminiscent of a console mechanic. I came close to a tavern, but the game loaded me right into the building even though I wasn't done investigating the outer building. The game should have left it up to me to decide when to open the door and enter the building. Things happening automatically around you, without consent, is very annoying.

This whole thing feels a lot like Dragon Age: Inquisition; cut scenes are capped at 30fps and there is a lot of flickering textures/shadows which was eventually fixed with Dragon Age but that took a lot of time and numerous big patches. Oh, Dragon Age has better graphics.

Again, between the onslaught of patches and AMD getting their act together to release a Witcher 3 driver and Crossfire support, for those that did not purchase the game yet, I'd wait for a Christmas Steam special or something to purchase the game and hopefully by that time it might be in a playable condition. I would have recommended getting it from GOG, but if you don't use Galaxy then your file downloads may loose connection with their server, like what happened with me, and you'll have to start again. Galaxy is in Beta and does not have many features yet, but on the upside it has no DRM tied to it either.

Personally, I have to stop playing and wait for at least AMD to release new Crossfire drivers to see if they solve this:



I'm saddened by all the false advertising and misleading promises. I'm saddened by the ongoing mind set for console parity. I'm saddened that no game ever plays well out of the box anymore; devs/publishers dish out incomplete (DLS/Expansions/Season Passes) Betas and sometimes it takes a full year before you can actually play a game free of bugs, texture flickering, stuttering and smooth/max fps. On top of that the GPU companies don't want to compete by providing better GPUs and drivers, but by attempting to herd gamers to their own side of the fence.


----------



## edo101

^Still cant believe GTA 5 large bodies of water have better water effects than TW3.


----------



## Murlocke

It took me 8 hours to do _everything_ on the first map, granted it seems the smallest of the 3 explorable maps. I'd say 2 of those hours were tweaking graphics and config files. Makes me wonder how every single critic claims "100 hours and I still have a ton to do". We'll see...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> ^Still cant believe GTA 5 large bodies of water have better water effects than TW3.


And everything under that water looks amazing, incredibly detailed.

Everything in the water in TW3 is just bland and boring... and the swimming controls are so bad.


----------



## Wishmaker

Oh, new game out and AMD has no drivers to offer the experience you paid for? *shocker* this has never happened before


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> Oh, new game out and AMD has no drivers to offer the experience you paid for? *shocker* this has never happened before


I'm not complaining. Game runs fine on my R9 290 @1440p. Actually beats a bunch of older stronger Geforce cards from what I hear or peforms on par. Not sure what you are getting at


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> I'm not complaining. Game runs fine on my R9 290 @1440p. Actually beats a bunch of older stronger Geforce cards from what I hear or peforms on par. Not sure what you are getting at


I am happy it runs for you. I got two R280x and you want me to say how it runs? Oh yeah, I need to disable one card if I want proper FPS.


----------



## Superplush

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> Oh, new game out and AMD has no drivers to offer the experience you paid for? *shocker* this has never happened before


To be fair this is a pro-nvidia game .. it's plastered everywhere. Title screen, instruction booklet, every CD has 2 logo's on it; not to mention with it being Gameworks Nvidia would've had the code / head start on the games optimisation. Not much of an excuse but they still held the lead-time on this.

Personally: HD 7970 6GB Vapor-X runs @ 35-ish FPS with EVERYTHING on @ 1080p. Even full hairworks. Putting Crossfire on and pairing it with a 3GB card, I lose 4 fps. Dispie the framerate the game doesn't look impressive. Unmodded skyrim looks better ? Mmm I might agree. Personally I think that TW2 was much better looking than this, bar Murlockes haltered for anything overly-sharp







The detail and tone seemed much better by comparison.

The artistic cut-scenes seem to be capped at 30fps though.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Superplush*
> 
> If you're wondering about how this game got high praise from critics, have you seen some of the suck ups over at metacritic ? Clicky-Linky
> 
> *So far I've played for a few hours and the bluring together with the lack of being able to make out a wolf that's nearly sat on top of me are annoying. It's such a blatant port too, from the lack of hot-keys right through to the obvious analogue stick movement.*
> 
> It isn't a terrible game but to me, it's a mediocre console port, not a crap one but definitely a port. Making for one disappointed gamer.
> 
> BTW thank you Murlocke for pointing out some troubling settings. ATM I'm using my "Isaac" rig and getting decent framerates on ultra with Hairworks off. I'll mess around with the other blur settings for aesthetic quality of life.


What?

First of all there are hotkeys for almost everything, so i don't see what in the world you are even talking about here.
I don't get the whole burring together with the lack of being able to make out a wolf, i see them perfectly and i have eye sight issue since i was born.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> I am happy it runs for you. I got two R280x and you want me to say how it runs? Oh yeah, I need to disable one card if I want proper FPS.


alright I understand. Just seen too many trolls lately.


----------



## coelacanth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Superplush*
> 
> To be fair this is a pro-nvidia game .. it's plastered everywhere. Title screen, instruction booklet, every CD has 2 logo's on it; not to mention with it being Gameworks Nvidia would've had the code / head start on the games optimisation. Not much of an excuse but they still held the lead-time on this.
> 
> Personally: HD 7970 6GB Vapor-X runs @ 35-ish FPS with EVERYTHING on @ 1080p. Even full hairworks. Putting Crossfire on and pairing it with a 3GB card, I lose 4 fps. Dispie the framerate the game doesn't look impressive. *Unmodded skyrim looks better ? Mmm I might agree.* Personally I think that TW2 was much better looking than this, bar Murlockes haltered for anything overly-sharp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The detail and tone seemed much better by comparison.
> 
> The artistic cut-scenes seem to be capped at 30fps though.


You lost all credibility right there.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coelacanth*
> 
> You lost all credibility right there.


Its a matter of personal opinion. Beauty in the eye of the beholder. I'm with him, nothing besides character models and light rays looks any better than what I saw in Skyrim and have seen for years


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> ^Still cant believe GTA 5 large bodies of water have better water effects than TW3.


Can't beat them whitecaps


----------



## saeedkunna

i played about tow hours so far the game looks good @4k there is a big dffrent between 1080p and 4k in this game i have tow titan black on sli watercooled i mange to get between 25-35 fps with everthing maxed i am getting one titan x in few days so will see how that performe against 2 titan black and maybe get another one if sold the 2 titan blacks at good price .


----------



## edo101

is it just me or does Hairworks look awful on everything? Granted I have it turned on on AMD vard. Using default settings in game with no config tweaks, is it supposed to look bad. It really doesn't look that good. Jesus its actually distracting. As if I don't have enough oil paint foilage to deal with


----------



## Dunan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> lol, yes my 34UM95 that has hardware calibration and is calibrated with a i1 Display Pro is the problem. There is black crush there when compared to the default shaders. Look at Geralt's boots and glove, you lose a lot of detail in his armor. There is also a lot of black crush in the darkest shadows under the trees/foliage. Look at the tree without leafs on the left side, it gets almost completely masked by the bush behind it, yet you can easily see it with the default shaders.


That's a pretty good monitor but it lacks an internal hardware LUT so it can't be hardware calibrated.

I use a hardware calibrated NEC so I'll check out the pic when I get home. I don't remember seeing any black crush in scenes though when playing last night and don't see it on my HTC phone here so I'm curious what that picture you posted looks like on my own monitor.


----------



## Dunan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> is it just me or does Hairworks look awful on everything? Granted I have it turned on on AMD vard. Using default settings in game with no config tweaks, is it supposed to look bad. It really doesn't look that good. Jesus its actually distracting. As if I don't have enough oil paint foilage to deal with


Hair works is an nvidia feature, don't be surprised if it looks weird or kills your FPS. Can't imagine it would work anyway.


----------



## Somasonic

Jesus I'm glad I didn't buy this game - I was very tempted to pre-order but it looks like I'll need a GPU upgrade to really enjoy it. Looks like a good time for Nvidia to release the 980 Ti eh?


----------



## sgtgates

I getting 57fps average on a 980- strix mild overclock with a 4790k at 4.8 on 1080p. Setting all on and ultra, w/ vsync with nvidia hair lol. Looks good, tuned my screen gamma so colors really pop.

I'm on GOG v1.02 downloaded it yesterday, its pretty fun.... Looks great except still cant kill first griffin lol. 2nd highest difficulty? First TW experience tho


----------



## ntherblast

I like how when watchdogs did this everyone was riled up but witcher they get a free pass


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ntherblast*
> 
> I like how when watchdogs did this everyone was riled up but witcher they get a free pass


Yeah the last four threads of hostility completely exemplifies CDPR getting a "free pass" please..don't.


----------



## sugalumps

The art style is just not there, it ends up making things stick out especially the foliage and not in a good way it's to cartoony. Far cry 4, gta v and crysis 3 all look and run better as they use a more realistic approach. This game is still great just not the tech marvel we were hoping for.


----------



## deadwidesmile

Ha, I killed the griffin and was like, f yeah! Then a drowner solo'd me.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> The art style is just not there, it ends up making things stick out especially the foliage and not in a good way it's to cartoony. Far cry 4, gta v and crysis 3 all look and run better as they use a more realistic approach. This game is still great just not the tech marvel we were hoping for.


FC4 is nothing special. GTA V has so good part but lacks a lot of detail in certain part. Crysis 3 is Crysis, good graphics, ok story but in the end forgettable. Witcher 3 to me looks graphically balanced. There is nothing in the game that has been give more of less work.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Witcher 3 to me looks graphically balanced.


You're kidding right? Are we playing the same game? This is probably the most all over the place graphically game I've ever seen.

Some textures are amazing...some are horrible. Some character models and textures are amazing...some are quite bad.

Some areas are cartoony and overly saturated...some look like they were from the 2013 demo. Some buildings and props look great some look like some last-gen console stuff.

Don't even get me started on the foliage...

Nah, opinion is opinion but in this case I think you need to really look at the game. This game not only doesn't look how it performs but it's quite mediocre over all to my eyes. Nothing has really stood out to me as "next gen". Even Crysis 1 had better water like EIGHT years ago!

The game is fun though and I am enjoying it for sure, but graphically it's nothing to get excited about at all.


----------



## Somasonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> You're kidding right? Are we playing the same game? This is probably the most all over the place graphically game I've ever seen.
> 
> Some textures are amazing...some are horrible. Some character models and textures are amazing...some are quite bad.
> 
> Some areas are cartoony and overly saturated...some look like they were from the 2013 demo. Some buildings and props look great some look like some last-gen console stuff.
> 
> Don't even get me started on the foliage...
> 
> Nah, opinion is opinion but in this case I think you need to really look at the game. This game not only doesn't look how it performs but it's quite mediocre over all to my eyes. Nothing has really stood out to me as "next gen". Even Crysis 1 had better water like EIGHT years ago!
> 
> The game is fun though and I am enjoying it for sure, but graphically it's nothing to get excited about at all.


Is this perhaps why I'm finding screenshots of the game so confusing? What I mean is that in some of them the environment textures look blurry as hell yet Geralt looks fantastic, in others both look great. All of the screenshots are supposedly at Ultra settings. If that's the case it would seem like maybe they only optimsed the 'problem' areas and would explain the IQ disparity throughout. I have not played the game though so don't have first hand experience.

Cheers.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Somasonic*
> 
> Is this perhaps why I'm finding screenshots of the game so confusing?


Probably. This game is all over the place quality wise. Honestly the best example of this I've seen ever with a game. It's like they were making it for last-gen then decided to go next-gen half way through development or something.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> Probably. This game is all over the place quality wise. Honestly the best example of this I've seen ever with a game. It's like they were making it for last-gen then decided to go next-gen half way through development or something.


Consoles...nuff said.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> Consoles...nuff said.


Prob.


----------



## MerkageTurk

Is the game worth it? 290x?


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MerkageTurk*
> 
> Is the game worth it? 290x?


With current performance issues, lies, etc I don't think so unless you're just a fan. Decent enough game...but not GOTY. Might be worth getting a copy from someone who has vouchers or something...$30.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Somasonic*
> 
> Is this perhaps why I'm finding screenshots of the game so confusing? What I mean is that in some of them the environment textures look blurry as hell yet Geralt looks fantastic, in others both look great. All of the screenshots are supposedly at Ultra settings. If that's the case it would seem like maybe they only optimsed the 'problem' areas and would explain the IQ disparity throughout. I have not played the game though so don't have first hand experience.
> 
> Cheers.


Just wait till you play the game. Steam needs to take down those bullshots it has because nothing I've run into the game looks like that.

Srsly I am wondering if anyone who defends the visuals has actually played the game
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sgtgates*
> 
> I getting 57fps average on a 980- strix mild overclock with a 4790k at 4.8 on 1080p. Setting all on and ultra, w/ vsync with nvidia hair lol. Looks good, tuned my screen gamma so colors really pop.
> 
> I'm on GOG v1.02 downloaded it yesterday, its pretty fun.... Looks great except still cant kill first griffin lol. 2nd highest difficulty? First TW experience tho


Dunno why but I don't believe you are gettting those frames on the all ultra settings with HW


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dunan*
> 
> That's a pretty good monitor but it lacks an internal hardware LUT so it can't be hardware calibrated.
> 
> I use a hardware calibrated NEC so I'll check out the pic when I get home. I don't remember seeing any black crush in scenes though when playing last night and don't see it on my HTC phone here so I'm curious what that picture you posted looks like on my own monitor.


The 34um95 definitely has hardware calibration.

Though like monarch pointed out, i'm calibrated to 2.2 gamma. If you calibrated to BT1886 you'd have less black crush.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> With current performance issues, lies, etc I don't think so unless you're just a fan. Decent enough game...but not GOTY. Might be worth getting a copy from someone who has vouchers or something...$30.


For 30$ yeah i'd say it is. It's a playable enough port for 30$. It's not worth full retail in it's current state. I got mine for 30$ on ebay. I'll be waiting for reviews on Arkham Knight before jumping though.


----------



## AndroidVageta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blackops_2*
> 
> For 30$ yeah i'd say it is. It's a playable enough port for 30$. It's not worth full retail in it's current state. I got mine for 30$ on ebay. I'll be waiting for reviews on Arkham Knight before jumping though.


I am farely optimistic about the new Arkham. Rocksteady has delivered on every front with the last two games so I don't really see it changing. CDPR however have been spotty and all over the place with their games.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> I am farely optimistic about the new Arkham. Rocksteady has delivered on every front with the last two games so I don't really see it changing. CDPR however have been spotty and all over the place with their games.


I thought CDPR had the same track record until this point?

I do agree Rocksteady has done a pretty damn good job at Arkham Asylum and Arkham City. Even with AMD cards i had no issues, hell even played it on my 7690m.


----------



## Saq

Luckily for me I avoided all the media and screenshots from the start of Witcher 3's development, so in all honesty, I'm hooked. Graphically it looks like a visual update over the Witcher 2, taking into consideration that most of what you saw wasn't always explorable (near the floatsam town for example), and suddenly been thrown into limited exploration range zones in the Witcher 3 does take some getting used to, but overall the visual style that Witcher 3 is using at the moment feels very fitting. We aren't playing Dark Souls 2 here guys, and not everyone wants a hard as nails experience. I've always played through Witcher 1 and 2 for the story first and foremost, and if I feel compelled to, I'll come back to the game later on to challenge myself to the harder difficulties. One thing that did strike as odd to me is Geralt looks thinner in the cheeks and doesn't have an as full upper lip as he did in Witcher 2, but I'm going to assume it was probably something to do with the Lore, maybe he burned off alot of weight on hes journey? Heck I dunno, but I preferred Geralts witcher 2 face more imo.


----------



## XKaan

I've been playing games since 1986 on my Tandy 1000 TL (16 color crt!), and by now I am horribly pessimistic about most big launches. However, this game is well written, insanely atmospheric and above all FUN. (at least for me)

As I've said in previous posts, if this game was pc only I have no doubt at all it would look and perform better - but regardless it's still a visual treat especially when you consider everything else it offers.

The day\night cycle and weather cycles are fantastic. Someone tried comparing FC4 to this game - huh? FC4 looked great, but had no weather cycles, and the day\night looked atrocious. Not to mention every single door you walked through came with a loading screen.

I appreciate the fact that unless you are fast traveling or moving to a new map, loading screens in W3 are non-existent. I can go into any building and it is seamless.

The crafting and inventory is a nice step up from W2 as well.

This game is worth retail - seriously.


----------



## curly haired boy

game meets and exceeds all expectations. it is quite simply the prettiest game my rig has ever run









worth the money imo!


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curly haired boy*
> 
> game meets and exceeds all expectations. it is quite simply the prettiest game my rig has ever run
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> worth the money imo!


Are we playing the same game? lol GTA V takes the cake for me even in first person mode.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Coming to a store near you... The Witcher 3 Enhanced Edition . Includes everything that was already in the game that we removed. Now only $39.95!


----------



## Wezzor

I'll just leave this here: https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/36lvp5/some_polish_brothers_have_already_played_with/


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Are we playing the same game? lol GTA V takes the cake for me even in first person mode.


Note that pretty does not mean graphical prowess.
When you stand in the forest with the sun shining through the leaves or a storm going on with trees shaking in the wind it looks beautiful.


----------



## Rahldrac

Some comparisons posted on reddit.
It really makes a difference with the SweetFX, have not tried it yet tho.
I don't like the new "yellow tint" that is in the vanilla version, not sure why they went with a more "cartoonish" look.

http://sfx.thelazy.net/games/preset/3708/

Edit:
Here is another preset:
http://sfx.thelazy.net/games/preset/3696/


----------



## Assirra

Instead of yellow tint you got a blue one








Although i am still curious why vibrant colors are considered cartoonish, i guess its the current trend of brown fps 92132 so everything with colors is considered cartoonish.


----------



## Rahldrac

I just feel that the "happy vibrant world" does not really go well with the dark fantasy theme of the game?


----------



## Dunan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> The 34um95 definitely has hardware calibration.
> 
> Though like monarch pointed out, i'm calibrated to 2.2 gamma. If you calibrated to BT1886 you'd have less black crush.


I'm calibrated to 2.2 and don't see the black crush... Do you have a 10 point gamma adjustment on your monitor? It will be very hard to get a BT.1886 gamma curve without one.


----------



## JTHMfreak

Just started playing, so far I'm pleased with the game. I'll have to check out the tweaks later on, after I finish overclocking my cards.


----------



## JSTe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Although i am still curious why vibrant colors are considered cartoonish, i guess its the current trend of brown fps 92132 so everything with colors is considered cartoonish.


They're not.

Witcher 3 is just visually poorly designed.

Any coherence is lost after about 20m when that blue fog sets in to cover up the laughably low draw distance.

Then there's the clothing that everyone wears, like it was the most bright piece they could buy and always looks fresh and like it came straight from the factory.

These few "vibrant colours" are either completely out of place or the effect is lost instantly due to technical limits.

This game is just ugly.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dunan*
> 
> I'm calibrated to 2.2 and don't see the black crush... Do you have a 10 point gamma adjustment on your monitor? It will be very hard to get a BT.1886 gamma curve without one.


I believe the LG software does 20pt when running hardware calibration. Just to see if it's the picture that removed the details or my monitor, I turned my brightness up and it is still there so it is either that picture, Firefox, or we have different opinions on black crush.

If you take the picture as-is, then it doesn't seem that bad, but when comparing to the original "intended" FX it is much darker.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JSTe*
> 
> Any coherence is lost after about 20m when that blue fog sets in to cover up the laughably low draw distance.


Blue fog? Can't say I know what your talking about and i'm sitting at 13 hours played according to Steam. Any blurriness in the distance can be removed from disabling Depth of FIeld, however many games do what you are describe to give a sense of focus and to cover up any problems with LOD.

The game does tend to make objects blend in with each other a little too much, but so did TW2. That's be my biggest compliant, there's overly vivid colors at times and at the same time nothing "pops" or stands out. Feel like I play most of the game in Witcher sense mode because I can't find stuff otherwise, which completely warps the graphics.


----------



## XKaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JSTe*
> 
> They're not.
> 
> Witcher 3 is just visually poorly designed.
> 
> Any coherence is lost after about 20m when that blue fog sets in to cover up the laughably low draw distance.
> 
> Then there's the clothing that everyone wears, like it was the most bright piece they could buy and always looks fresh and like it came straight from the factory.
> 
> These few "vibrant colours" are either completely out of place or the effect is lost instantly due to technical limits.
> 
> *This game is just ugly*.


----------



## Juub

I wouldn't say the game looks ugly but it certainly isn't jaw dropping. I was far more impressed with Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor, Assassin's Creed Unity and even GTA V on Ultra as far as open-world games graphics go. I'm a bit surprised the game really doesn't look outstanding given CD Projekt RED's track record but I'm liking it so far. Completely disabled the HUD including the mini-map for optimal immersion.


----------



## JTHMfreak

So playing at 1200p with everything maxed out got me a steady 45fps at the first fight with the ghouls


----------



## Catscratch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Instead of yellow tint you got a blue one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although i am still curious why vibrant colors are considered cartoonish, i guess its the current trend of brown fps 92132 so everything with colors is considered cartoonish.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rahldrac*
> 
> I just feel that the "happy vibrant world" does not really go well with the dark fantasy theme of the game?


Is it vibrant like this ? I don't think so. I'm still deciding if I should buy.


----------



## Woundingchaney

I suppose maybe Im not quite agreeing with what is a happy vibrant world? Most of the locals are rather downtrodden (at least in the first area). I don't see happy or vibrant in the color palette.


----------



## MerkageTurk

Games are looking far worse then 2007 lol


----------



## Orthello

Well i was very disappointed to hear of a visual downgrade for pc i was going to pass the game by to be honest.

Then Nvidia started giving it away to TitanX owners so i thought , heck its free , why not.

Installed it and must say - if the game was any more intensive , on dual 1600/8100 mhz overclocked Titan Xs i would not hit 60 fps constant in 4k. Its the highest GPU usage game i've got installed at present. Regurlarly hitting 80-95% of each gpu . Ultra everything - nothing dialled back.

Played ~ 1 hr so far. Shadows look great , some of the best i've seen. Facial Textures / body textures also some of the best i've seen. Its overbright in some areas and yes i'm using the minimap to find shrubs etc as hard to tell otherwise. Generally i would have liked it to be a bit darker / more gritty .

I guess what i'm saying is although its had a downgrade from e3, its actually using all the horsepower i've got so i can't complain too much really .Whilst its not jaw dropping its does still look good enough for me to play , and i do like my graphics.


----------



## Juub

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Catscratch*
> 
> Is it vibrant like this ? I don't think so. I'm still deciding if I should buy.


Todd McFarlane(Spawn) was an artist for that game so that's mostly why it has a very comic-bookish looks. The Witcher 3 has vibrant colors but it stops there. Character designs are very realistic.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JSTe*
> 
> They're not.
> 
> Witcher 3 is just visually poorly designed.
> 
> Any coherence is lost after about 20m when that blue fog sets in to cover up the laughably low draw distance.
> 
> Then there's the clothing that everyone wears, like it was the most bright piece they could buy and always looks fresh and like it came straight from the factory.
> 
> These few "vibrant colours" are either completely out of place or the effect is lost instantly due to technical limits.
> 
> This game is just ugly.


Well we must be playing a completely different game then cause i seen none of that.
But whatever makes you happy, i am just enjoying the game a ton.


----------



## JTHMfreak

Game is great so far. I get 45 fps with max everything. True some foilage could look better, but damn on those character models.
Overall I think cdpr did a great job.mood and atmosphere are definitely there


----------



## Dunan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> I believe the LG software does 20pt when running hardware calibration. Just to see if it's the picture that removed the details or my monitor, I turned my brightness up and it is still there so it is either that picture, Firefox, or we have different opinions on black crush.
> 
> If you take the picture as-is, then it doesn't seem that bad, but when comparing to the original "intended" FX it is much darker.


Even better for gamma.. Yes if you're comparing to the E3 it's a huge difference.


----------



## zealord

They finally admit it. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-05-19-cd-projekt-red-tackles-the-witcher-3-graphics-downgrade-issue-head-on

Sounds a lot more reasonable than the old crap that tried to tell us. Of course they can be more honest about it now since the game has been released









He is still trying to sugarcoat it a bit, but he admits that they couldn't get the 2013 version working.


----------



## Menta

it is a sad way when company's out straight recommend a titan x, i really don't know what to think if they just plain mad or thinking pc gamers have all deep pockets or just plain stupid

https://www.facebook.com/Corsair?fref=ts


----------



## JTHMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> 
> 
> it is a sad way when company's out straight recommend a titan x, i really don't know what to think if they just plain mad or thinking pc gamers have all deep pockets or just plain stupid
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/Corsair?fref=ts


At least it is a solid system for the future


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> At least it is a solid system for the future


solid? lol

some said that about the 780ti and older titans look at them now.... nice driver support bty

future proof in pc does not exist and getting worst on purpose because they want to sell the next big thing..that is what we should be worried about


----------



## inedenimadam

For those that have not purchased and are kind of getting a feel for the game quality before dropping 45-70 bucks.

The good:
The game is beautiful
The mechanics are great
There are 0 loading screens except when you first boot the game up.
Wide open world
Tons of content
No DRM to clog up the works
Will be mod supported shortly

The bad:
No FoV adjustment without cheatengine hack
Only 16:9 support without .ini tweaks
STEEEEEEEP hardware requirements
The 2013 trailer looks better (how many movies/games is this true for? Most/ALL)
It doesn't do your laundry while you play.


----------



## BBZZHH

Well, I think they just want to associate Corsair with "high end" by recommending a top of the line GPU.


----------



## djriful

The final touch whatever that was, they killed the game atmosphere. It was used to be more dark looking or dull weathers. Now it just vibrant as hell. Really want to use SweetFX to tone down the vibrancy and correct the color tone to more grey or beige.


----------



## Menta

i really cant consider the titan a gaming card more of a cheap 3d render option....but this why people get so afraid or confused of pc gaming...the the pc industry growing and having more gamers then ever the prices should be going sown and not up..


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djriful*
> 
> The final touch whatever that was, they killed the game atmosphere. It was used to be more dark looking or dull weathers. Now it just vibrant as hell. Really want to use SweetFX to tone down the vibrancy and correct the color tone to more grey or beige.


weather seems to be random. from time to time a storm will roll in... i actually think the weather effects (graphics/sounds) are the best i've seen in any game. you can almost feel the rain. it's very well done. the wind is nice. i actually enjoy walking through the hills and trees without riding. i find all the plantlife looks horrid from a distance, it's better looking when you're standing in it.

really this game is a mixed bag. combat is my favorite part, and from up close everything looks rather good. but anything more then 15' away from Geralt looks like junk.

the story.... meh. not doing it for me. i'm just roaming the countryside looking for stuff to kill and stuff to loot mostly. that's far more interesting then herding a lost sheep (seriously? this is a main quest challenge?! ugh... killing random ghool nest no.301 is far more entertaining then that garbage) or following slow walker no.2048891297845 to some destination to talk to meandering main quest giver no.21237108279... the main quest stuff has been DULL thus far; i've only been doing it when i run out of random stuff to do in hopes to open new areas with more random stuff to fight


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> future proof in pc does not exist and getting worst on purpose because they want to sell the next big thing..that is what we should be worried about


I don't know, anyone who bought a HD 7970 when it was released sure got their money's worth. It's still kicking strong. so there are some cards that ARE plenty futureproof. I expect except for certain AAA releases the r9-280x will remain a viable option for 1080p gaming for years yet.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> I don't know, anyone who bought a HD 7970 when it was released sure got their money's worth. It's still kicking strong. so there are some cards that ARE plenty futureproof. I expect except for certain AAA releases the r9-280x will remain a viable option for 1080p gaming for years yet.


Especially if you don't fall under the I want to say I play on "Ultra spec". I think I'm gonna stick with my 290 for a while. I'm begining to see how much of a Sham Ultra is. Most of the time its just barely noticeable from High unless you are looking for it or side by side comparison. If you are willing to take 10 mins to change out Ultra spec, and change settings you'll notice most of the time Ultra don't look much different and you can get much better performance as well


----------



## majin662

Especially in this game. No lie. Go drop the dials to high. Hell put some on medium. Your frames will thank you and the game will still be 90% the same looking.

Not sure if thats a blessing to the game. Or A curse


----------



## BBZZHH

I think companies probably spend more time trying to optimize/improving mid-level visuals since (1) that's about the level consoles will run and (2) most PC probably have rigs that will only run medium or high.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *majin662*
> 
> Especially in this game. No lie. Go drop the dials to high. Hell put some on medium. Your frames will thank you and the game will still be 90% the same looking.
> 
> Not sure if thats a blessing to the game. Or A curse


Yep finally got something that works for me:
On a R9 290 @ 1100Mhz, I get 45 fps avg @1440p across the board. I was hitting 37 but Made my windows to FULLSCREEN and its 45 fps smoothness even in cities with Hairworks:

Shadows (low)
Foillage density (medium)
Terrain (high)
Water (High)

Turned off all Post processing except for SSAO and DOF and Bloom
Didn't do it for performance but because I like it sharper and it looks sharper with everything off except for those

Hairworks 16X tessellation via CC.
Hairworks AA X4 via Config file

Hope that helps anyone with Red Team hoping for some Hairworks goodness


----------



## kurei

I don't know if people know this already or if it helps someone but i'll just leave it here in case someone else comes up against the same problem.
My Overclocked MSI GTX980 was pushing up against 80C 5 minutes when I turned on HBAO+, I left everything the same and changed to SSAO and the max temp I saw after a couple of hours of gaming was around 76 degrees. My OC settings are +169Mhz/+200 MHz on the Core/VRAM.


----------



## 8-Ball

What's up with the cartoonish look for the witcher 3?

-_-

I am new to the series but I can see why you guys are mad. Shown one thing , given a hint no downgrade was made, and on release it was indeed a downgrade.


----------



## 8-Ball




----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> I don't know, anyone who bought a HD 7970 when it was released sure got their money's worth. It's still kicking strong. so there are some cards that ARE plenty futureproof. I expect except for certain AAA releases the r9-280x will remain a viable option for 1080p gaming for years yet.


true, but if they start gimping cards out and using tricky tactics it wont be so.....

companies have to make money and be viable but not at that cost...

"PC gaming" ( hate that sentence ) is alive and well but don't push it, enthusiasts don't have to be mental.....


----------



## MonarchX

How the hell do they make these E3 demo's run well? They run them on PC's for sure, so SOME kind of PC CAN handle that graphics!


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MonarchX*
> 
> How the hell do they make these E3 demo's run well? They run them on PC's for sure, so SOME kind of PC CAN handle that graphics!


Spend lots of time cherry picking exactly what you show and the conditions under which it is running + show it on incredibly powerful hardware.

In a trailer as early as what we had from 2013, you're not really seeing something that resembles a playable build of a game. Just a cherry picked slice that will look best in a presentation. This is (part of) why pre-ordering is such a bad practice.


----------



## ntherblast

http://ca.ign.com/articles/2015/05/21/the-witcher-3-dev-on-accusations-of-graphical-downgrades

"Developing only for the PC: yes, probably we could get more [in terms of graphics] as there would be nothing else - they would be so focused, like if we would develop only on Xbox One or PlayStation 4. But then we cannot afford such a game."


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ntherblast*
> 
> http://ca.ign.com/articles/2015/05/21/the-witcher-3-dev-on-accusations-of-graphical-downgrades
> 
> "Developing only for the PC: yes, probably we could get more [in terms of graphics] as there would be nothing else - they would be so focused, like if we would develop only on Xbox One or PlayStation 4. But then we cannot afford such a game."


/thread because the DEVS confirmed what we already knew







.


----------



## MerkageTurk

How do a few people feel, as they were reluctant that there was no down grade


----------



## Xeio

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8-Ball*
> 
> I am new to the series but I can see why you guys are mad. Shown one thing , given a hint no downgrade was made, and on release it was indeed a downgrade.


The trailer most people are using as a reference point for the downgrade was from VGX *two years ago*.

They've been showing footage for the last year. A ton of near final gamelpay footage even it in the last 2 months.

I really hope people aren't making purchase decisions just based on 2 year old trailers.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeio*
> 
> I really hope people aren't making purchase decisions just based on 2 year old trailers.


I dunno if they made purchase decisions based on it but lots of people clearly set their expectations based on it. Which just shows that lots of people in the PC community have more money than critical thinking skills.









A downgrade has been obvious for about a year and the final release is not exactly a surprise to anyone paying attention.


----------



## XKaan

Game is phenominal regardless -

I feel bad for anyone having issues, but so far the game has been solid for me. After enabling hardware cursor and making a few other tweaks it has been smooth sailing.

That being said, devs should be more cognizant not to inflate expectations too much too early on. Altough I still think the game si beautiful!


----------



## JTHMfreak

Griffin fight with everything maxed at 1200p, including hairworks, never dipped below 60


----------



## Rahldrac

Anybody tried the SweetFX mods?


----------



## Wezzor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rahldrac*
> 
> Anybody tried the SweetFX mods?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1556520/ac-the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-with-sweet-fx/0_20


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wezzor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Rahldrac*
> 
> Anybody tried the SweetFX mods?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1556520/ac-the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-with-sweet-fx/0_20
Click to expand...

Yeah, sharpens stuff up a bit, a bit less oil painted cartoon, little more rustic. I like it.

Not much hit to FPS.


----------



## JTHMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> Yeah, sharpens stuff up a bit, a bit less oil painted cartoon, little more rustic. I like it.
> 
> Not much hit to FPS.


Was it easy to install?


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> Was it easy to install?


Very easy. Download reshader, extract contents anywhere. I suggest making its own folder in case you want to use it for other games and placing it in a directory you feel is appropriate.

Run the exe, select The Wither 3 exe, it'll auto select your DXversion.

Close the window.

Grab whatever preset you've downloaded. Follow the instructions (they'll tell you to replace a file in your Witcher 3 folder which reshader created so doing this in order is important).


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> Yeah, sharpens stuff up a bit, a bit less oil painted cartoon, little more rustic. I like it.
> 
> Not much hit to FPS.
> 
> 
> 
> Was it easy to install?
Click to expand...

unzip to the /64/bin
done.

there is an .ini inside the sweetfx folder if you want to play with the settings yourself. The preset is pretty good.

Turning off the in game AA and using the SweetFX AA did not net me any FPS I dont think, but the in game AA seems to introduce intermittent hitching for me, where the SweetFX doesnt seems smooth.


----------



## JTHMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> unzip to the /64/bin
> done.
> 
> there is an .ini inside the sweetfx folder if you want to play with the settings yourself. The preset is pretty good.
> 
> Turning off the in game AA and using the SweetFX AA did not net me any FPS I dont think, but the in game AA seems to introduce intermittent hitching for me, where the SweetFX doesnt seems smooth.


I'm definitely looking forward to some more mods, currently I'm running on max everything at 60 fps steady, so I have some room to play with.
I'll Gove this sweet f2f thing a try tomorrow, as well as dsr. Any sweet spot res for dsr? I'm currently running 1200p on my monitor


----------



## deadwidesmile

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> I'm definitely looking forward to some more mods, currently I'm running on max everything at 60 fps steady, so I have some room to play with.
> I'll Gove this sweet f2f thing a try tomorrow, as well as dsr. Any sweet spot res for dsr? I'm currently running 1200p on my monitor


I honestly always DSR to 1440p. The improvement in general quality is astounding.


----------



## Gunderman456

Note this Post will Continue to be Updated as Play Continues:

Let's face it, Witcher 3 is a sub RPG AAA game. Any reviewer giving this any more then a 6-7, mark them dead in your book. Since either they are shills or they have no idea about games or at least PC games.

Now that I've played it for over 10 20 hours and find myself on the second map, CDPR have lied about 3 things;

1. The downgraded visuals.
2. About game being open world.
3. No loading screens in that open world.

We've all discussed the visual downgrade due to visual parity with the consoles, however no one seems to be outraged with the fact that this is not an open world game. It's more like Dragon Age: Inquisition or Two Worlds II, where you play in varied big zones and to go from zone to zone you do in fact need loading screens.

You can't even compare Witcher 3 to Skyrim (which has also suffered from consolitis since Morrowind);

01. Hardly anything in the world can be manipulated.
02. Everything in the world is treated like a treasure chests, even shelf units. It's not like what you see is what you get.
03. NPC are way dumber and duller, more like bots then anything else. There are less conversations to be had and they run into things.
04. You can loot from regular people but not the military. Why? Is it because peasants don't have the right to protest?
05. They removed anything to do with stealth from Witcher 2. Why? You now effectively have no way to tell if you are being detected while looting.
06. There is no lock picking mechanism.
07. Why can't I make as many grenades or potions as I want? And why the need to meditate for refills instead of making things the old fashioned way? Refilling everything that I may not even want is counterproductive and uses resources that I may have wanted to invest some where else.
08. Perk trees instead of skill sets still grind my gears. I guess people can't work out skills points since they often affect multiple skills so devs just keep making things easier for the masses.
09. I hate giving everything an auto icon. Want to blow up a monster nest? Just click on the use icon. Why? I can see that this is a nest, and I can throw my own grenade at it.
10. Hardly any control when fighting. Give me control over my character. Why does he keep moving forward with every sword swing. Let me do that when I want, otherwise this forward momentum leaves me open to attack.
11. They show you everything on the map, so it kills the sense of exploration for me. Willpower may not be there for some to toggle that feature off.
12. What's with the "!" a la Japanese Nintendo game for quest givers?
13. Why are you telling me what level I need to be to tackle a quest? Let me find out for myself.
14. The game world somehow feels like it's still on rails. You get best results if you follow the quest script, deviate and you'll hardly be engaged. This was very jarring when I traveled to a mid sized city and no one spoke to me, most of the doors were locked and the only quest giver was the city bulletin board. Even the local bar tender was sterile.

Some here wanted to give CDPR a pass because well it's an open world and it's difficult to make those you know. Really? It is not an open world, it's just bigger, segregated maps. Not much in the world can be manipulated and everything in the world is treated like a treasure chest, unlike Skyrim that has to keep tabs on thousands of items and their displacement. So I don't see why the visuals are so horrible on the PC. Witcher 3 has nothing on Skyrim which has to do a lot more in fact and the visuals are not much better then Skyrim in 2015, but then again we know why. Some RPG "open world" play fundamentals aren't even present in the game. So those that keep excusing the game because "it's open world", please stop. Dumbing down at every turn and holding my hand at every step. At every nuance, the game keeps reminding me that I'm playing a console game and for console parity's sake.

Excusing, at minimum, parallel PC centric development and any or one of the noted concerns will only set us, as RPG gamers, back as more and more developers will start cutting from the games since the player base is deemed more forgiving, accepting and receptive.


----------



## Assirra

I always love these statements "If you disagree with me you are a shill or have no clue about games".
Makes the rest of your post not even worth reading.


----------



## edo101

Having played quite a bit. This game is GOTY. I have been vocal about the graphics but I am glad the gameplay was left alone.

Srsly best game I have ever played. and definitely best RPG. I like how its not a grindfest.

It does make me sad that the game could have been much more visually


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> I always love these statements "If you disagree with me you are a shill or have no clue about games".
> Makes the rest of your post not even worth reading.










Read the full post, so you know why I'm saying this in my intro.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the full post, so you know why I'm saying this in my intro.


I don't care tbh.
If you start with that line you show you have no intention of a discussion so why would i even try to counter your arguments?
Curious if you also start your real life discussions like that, would pay to see how that would end up.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> I don't care tbh.
> If you start with that line you show you have no intention of a discussion so why would i even try to counter your arguments?
> Curious if you also start your real life discussions like that, would pay to see how that would end up.


The purpose of an intro is suppose to give you a quick snap shot of the... oh never mind.


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> Let's face it, Witcher 3 is a sub RPG AAA game. Any reviewer giving this any more then a 6-7, mark them dead in your book. Since either they are shills or they have no idea about games or at least PC games.
> 
> Now that I've played it for over 10 hours and find myself on the second map, CDPR have lied about 3 things;





Spoiler: Points and reply



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 1. The downgraded visuals.


its probably 90/100 what we saw in trailers, but will be easily modded back soon, I have a pair of 980s and have had to compromise on lots of the eye candy to get it to a playable framerate...are you playing 1080p with a pair of TitanXs and just need to justify the hardware purchase? You have to at least consider what the target market is, and the hardware they run.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 2. About game beeing open world.


Huh? Seems pretty darn open to me.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 3. No loading screens in that open world.


I can play for hours without ever encountering a load screen. Walk right into a city, into any home...you cant open a door in Skyrim without fear of the infinite loading screen.

We've all discussed the visual downgrade due to visual parity with the consoles, however no one seems to be outraged with the fact that this is not an open world game. It's more like Dragon Age: Inquisition or Two Worlds II, where you play in varied big zones and to go from zone to zone you do in fact need loading screens.

You can't even compare Witcher 3 to Skyrim (which has also suffered from consolitis since Morrowind); [/quote]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 1. Hardly anything in the world can be manipulated.


There could stand to be more 'items" to interact with, no argument here
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 2. Everything in the world is treated like a treasure chests, even shelf units. It's not like what you see is what you get.


pretty much saying the same thing as #1?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 3. NPC are way dumber and duller, more like bots then anything else. There are less conversations to be had and they run into everything.


I think you forget how boring vanilla NPCs are in Skyrim, try turning down the NPC density, and the ones that you see will be more interactive.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 4. You can loot from regular people but not the military. Why? Is it because peasants don't have the right to protest?


I wondered this too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 5. They removed anything to do with stealth from Witcher 2. Why?


Kind of goes hand in hand with #4?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 6. Why can't I make as many grenades or potions as I want? There is a bug here too; when I used my 2 grenades, the game did not let me make more saying I already had some. My workaround was to drop my 0/2 grenades so I could make more.


Bomb/Potions/Oils all refill whenever you meditate.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 7. Perk trees instead of skill sets still grind my gears. I guess people can't work out skills points since they often affect multiple skills so devs just keep making things easier for the masses.


I think the perk system is wonderful.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 8. I hate giving everything an auto icon. Want to blow up a monster nest? Just click on the use icon. Why? I can see that this is a nest, and I can throw my own grenade at it.


same agrument as #1 again?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 9. Hardly any control when fighting. Give me control over my character. Why does he keep moving forward with every sword swing. Let me do that when I want, otherwise this forward momentum leaves me open to attack.


I actually enjoy the fighting thoroughly, step back and analyze...dont just go in hack and slash style.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 10. They show you everything on the map, so it kills the sense of exploration for me.


You can turn that on/off in the options.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 11. What's with the "!" a la Japanese Nintendo game for quest givers?


Really?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 12. Why are you telling me what level I need to be to tackle a quest? Let me find out for myself.


Its a suggestion, so you dont waste your afternoon failing on a quest that is going to make you rage your keyboard to bits.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> Some here wanted to give CDPR a pass because well it's an open world and it's difficult to make those you know. Really? It is not an open world, it's just bigger maps. Not much in the world can be manipulated and everything in the world is treated like a treasure chest, unlike Skyrim that has to keep tabs on thousands of items and their displacement. So I don't see why the visuals are so horrible on the PC. Witcher 3 has nothing on Skyrim which has to do a lot more in fact and the visuals are not much better then Skyrim in 2015, but then again we know why. So those that keep excusing the game because "it's open world", please stop. Dumbing down at every turn and holding my hand at every step. At every turn the game keeps reminding me that I'm playing a console game and for console parity's sake.


Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe, just maybe you bought into all of the hate hype, and now you are not allowing yourself to enjoy what is one of the best RPGs for PC ever? Sometimes we are our own worst enemies. Yes, CPDR made some compromises to graphics to make the game playable for the masses, but you still cant crank the games settings on most hardware and expect decent frames. I think they did a fine job. Most fun I have had in an RPG since Skyrim. I cant wait for the modding community to really grab this thing by the balls.

Edit to add: Nexus is up to 12 mods for the game...nothing for me yet, but its coming...this game is going to get the love.


----------



## XKaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> The purpose of an intro is suppose to give you a quick snap shot of the... oh never mind.


People keep comparing W3 to Skyrim like Skyrim was some untoucbale masterpiece - it is not.

Nostalgia is a powerful thing - the game has major flaws like all games do.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *XKaan*
> 
> People keep comparing W3 to Skyrim like Skyrim was some untoucbale masterpiece - it is not.
> 
> Nostalgia is a powerful thing - the game has major flaws like all games do.


Honestly, Skyrim isn't even remotely in the same tier of quality as the Witcher series...unless of course you insist on listening to the garish English voice acting in the Witcher.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> Snip...


I really enjoyed you're comments. At least you took the time to actually read and respond.

I'm old school when it comes to RPG and unfortunately where we find ourselves now has been years in the making. Many younger people here can't appreciate where we've come from and what we've lost.

While you can't really blame the Devs, as PC gaming had gradually moved from niche to a wider audience in parallel with consoles, simplification has been the name of the game to reach as many people as possible. Game budgets go up but it seems quality keeps going down in an attempt to make as much money as possible. Thinking and the genuine satisfaction for reaching milestones are simply being eroded from PC gaming.

In the end, they should included the best graphics possible and let the people and their hardware decide how far to push them.

You are right about the issue not just being about graphics though, but in this day and age, you have to feel for the old school PC gamer. Witcher 3 maintains that trend and does PC gamers no favor.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeio*
> 
> The trailer most people are using as a reference point for the downgrade was from VGX *two years ago*.
> 
> They've been showing footage for the last year. A ton of near final gamelpay footage even it in the last 2 months.
> 
> I really hope people aren't making purchase decisions just based on 2 year old trailers.


........

Where have you been? There is a dozen threads over comparisons between the current build and the 2013 target demo.

The game itself looks nearly identical to what we seen out of the 2014 E3 demonstration and all of the gameplay clips up until now, but apparently none of this matter because people for whatever reason keep going back to a 2 year old trailer.


----------



## WorldExclusive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndroidVageta*
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't look downgraded to you? Just look at the building in the top left corner...that alone is a pretty major downgrade. That's just one thing.
> 
> Either way, to each their own. Stop telling people to "stop complaining" though as if they have no reason to do so. If you, like MonarchX, liked being lied to then that's your choice. A lot of us however are sick and tired of it.


The funny thing, from their words, they realized it wasn't possible to create an open world using that level of detail.

Wait right there CD.....

So you're telling me [insert meme] that you have your own Game Engine [REDengine] and you don't know what it's capable of before you start a project?

DICE and Epic Games never pulled this nonsense, because they always get the most from their engines.
The dev with their own engine that pulled this in the past was Crytek with Crysis 2. They later admitted the downgrade and released an Ultra Textures Patch, after the community flamed them for months.

The same is happening here. CD knows what can be done, they chose not to do it because of console sales.


----------



## Threx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> 6. Why can't I make as many grenades or potions as I want? There is a bug here too; when I used my 2 grenades, the game did not let me make more saying I already had some. My workaround was to drop my 0/2 grenades so I could make more.


The mechanic here is when you meditate it will automatically refill for you; you don't have to keep crafting them over and over.

Edit: Actually, I'm not sure if the auto-refill also applies to bombs or just potions.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Threx*
> 
> The mechanic here is when you meditate it will automatically refill for you; you don't have to keep crafting them over and over.


I don't meditate much but also if you have alcohol, it will refill right? So if you don't have alcohol, there would not be any refills and you'd still have to do it the old fashioned way which I prefer anyway. So if it's not a bug, CDPR will still have to reconsider that mechanic.


----------



## JTHMfreak

Why are people comparing this to skyrim? Skyrim had insane amounts of loading, plus it needs mods to look fantastic.
W3 maybe different from what we were shown, but still looks gorgeous off the bat.


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WorldExclusive*
> 
> The funny thing, from their words, they realized it wasn't possible to create an open world using that level of detail.
> 
> Wait right there CD.....
> 
> So you're telling me [insert meme] that you have your own Game Engine [REDengine] and you don't know what it's capable of before you start a project?
> 
> DICE and Epic Games never pulled this nonsense, because they always get the most from their engines.
> The dev with their own engine that pulled this in the past was Crytek with Crysis 2. They later admitted the downgrade and released an Ultra Textures Patch, after the community flamed them for months.
> 
> The same is happening here. CD knows what can be done, they chose not to do it because of console sales.


Try turning up the settings in your ini file. If you get great perormnace still then you have a point. But you won't unless you're running SLI Titan Xs.

Pairity is definitly part of the issue but the other part is that most computers aren't strong enough to handle TW3 at beyond ultra settings. Even high end cards like the Titan Black don't push past 40 fps very often @ 1440p ultra. Past utrra Im looking at a stuttery 20 fps mess.


----------



## Punter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> Why are people comparing this to skyrim? Skyrim had insane amounts of loading, plus it needs mods to look fantastic.
> W3 maybe different from what we were shown, but still looks gorgeous off the bat.


People just overreacting to their expectations being let down. The graphics are what they are, doesn't stop me from enjoying the game. Graphically, the game is mediocre for current games, but it's right up here in terms of atmosphere.


----------



## JTHMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punter*
> 
> People just overreacting to their expectations being let down. The graphics are what they are, doesn't stop me from enjoying the game. Graphically, the game is mediocre for current games, but it's right up here in terms of atmosphere.


Really, you think the graphics are mediocre? I find the game to look quite amazing, but I'm also coming from playing nothing but Diablo 3, so that might be why I think the way that I do, lol. You are right on the atmosphere though, loving this game, aside from the crashes present.


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> Why are people comparing this to skyrim? Skyrim had insane amounts of loading, plus it needs mods to look fantastic.
> W3 maybe different from what we were shown, but still looks gorgeous off the bat.


Becasue Skyrim is the Litmus test for open world RPGs.

Did anybody else really enjoy The Baron's quest line? I thought the baron was an increadibly well thought out and executed.

Also, I had to do a double take when I was in a building with glass in the window...blew my mind a little bit.


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> Becasue Skyrim is the Litmus test for open world RPGs.
> 
> Did anybody else really enjoy The Baron's quest line? I thought the baron was an increadibly well thought out and executed.
> 
> Also, I had to do a double take when I was in a building with glass in the window...blew my mind a little bit.


I haven't beaten it yt, I'm supposed to track down all other leads in Valen for finding Anna, there's no map marker so Ive moved onto other quests, hoping I'll discover an important location or whatever to further that quest line.

The Baron quest line is so tragic.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Finding out he beat his wife was bad, really bad and I made damn sure that he knew he was a bad human for doing that but at the same time I couldn't help but feel bad for the character. He lost his family and is stuck in a place he hates. He's already in hell.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> Becasue Skyrim is the Litmus test for open world RPGs.
> 
> Did anybody else really enjoy The Baron's quest line? I thought the baron was an increadibly well thought out and executed.
> 
> Also, I had to do a double take when I was in a building with glass in the window...blew my mind a little bit.


I liked the barron quest so far although i still need to do 1 thing.
However, i would ask to put spoiler tags for anything after the training zone, some people (like me) are paranoid on this subject and this is not a place to discuss this.


----------



## Punter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> Really, you think the graphics are mediocre? I find the game to look quite amazing, but I'm also coming from playing nothing but Diablo 3, so that might be why I think the way that I do, lol. You are right on the atmosphere though, loving this game, aside from the crashes present.


Mediocre might sound a bit harsh, but I think they're pretty standard for a recent release from a technical viewpoint. It is definitely a good looking game, but until recently people were expecting a game that would be a graphical benchmark.

Couple of screenshots. Settings are all ultra at 3440x1440, without hairworks enabled.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *inedenimadam*
> 
> Becasue Skyrim is the Litmus test for open world RPGs.
> 
> Did anybody else really enjoy The Baron's quest line? I thought the baron was an increadibly well thought out and executed.
> 
> Also, I had to do a double take when I was in a building with glass in the window...blew my mind a little bit.


Haven't finished this quest yet been trying, didn't realize it was combined with other quest.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

It can all be summed up in one statement. The game in its current state looks good, the story is great. Although, it could have looked much better of it wasn't hindered by consoles, and that the graphics downgrade makes people feel betrayed by the trailer that was shown and takes away some of the immersion factor. So far, I enjoy the game, but it's noticeable that corners were cut.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WorldExclusive*
> 
> The funny thing, from their words, they realized it wasn't possible to create an open world using that level of detail.
> 
> Wait right there CD.....
> 
> So you're telling me [insert meme] that you have your own Game Engine [REDengine] and you don't know what it's capable of before you start a project?
> 
> DICE and Epic Games never pulled this nonsense, because they always get the most from their engines.
> The dev with their own engine that pulled this in the past was Crytek with Crysis 2. They later admitted the downgrade and released an Ultra Textures Patch, after the community flamed them for months.
> 
> The same is happening here. CD knows what can be done, they chose not to do it because of console sales.


Shhh... Quiet. You can't speak reason or mention graphics because the story is good. /sarcasm


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBlindDeafMute*
> 
> Shhh... Quiet. You can't speak reason or mention graphics because the story is good. /sarcasm


Also, all the people hating on skyrim. The game when modded properly is one of the most beautiful games I have ever seen. The modding community really made skyrim shine. Add on a few HD texture packs and foliage mods and see what the Witcher 3 could have been


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBlindDeafMute*
> 
> Also, all the people hating on skyrim. The game when modded properly is one of the most beautiful games I have ever seen. The modding community really made skyrim shine. Add on a few HD texture packs and foliage mods and see what the Witcher 3 could have been. It's like comparing the bmw 3 series to an m3. Yes it's good, but it could have been truly great


Edit * using mobile, sorry for reposts and errors


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Also don't forget Skyrim Was released in 2011 <- 2011 not 2015


----------



## Noufel

The solution for Hairworks performance issue

Tadaaa


----------



## FrankoNL

Wondering if the witcher 3 will result in just as big of a mod community as we have seen with Skyrim. Or are there certain limitations which prevent this?


----------



## WorldExclusive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DIYDeath*
> 
> Try turning up the settings in your ini file. If you get great perormnace still then you have a point. But you won't unless you're running SLI Titan Xs.
> 
> Pairity is definitly part of the issue but the other part is that most computers aren't strong enough to handle TW3 at beyond ultra settings. Even high end cards like the Titan Black don't push past 40 fps very often @ 1440p ultra. Past utrra Im looking at a stuttery 20 fps mess.


But why does it take so much GPU to run? Why patches after launch needed to increase/correct performance?

I think they didn't optimize the PC version at all, and figured patches will resolve issues over time.
Patches are standard practice to give PC gamers the feeling like the dev is doing something, when it was on their To-Do List during development, but decided to do it after launch.


----------



## FrankoNL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WorldExclusive*
> 
> But why does it take so much GPU to run? Why patches after launch needed to increase/correct performance?
> 
> I think they didn't optimize the PC version at all, and figured patches will resolve issues over time.
> Patches are standard practice to give PC gamers the feeling like the dev is doing something, when it was on their To-Do List during development, but decided to do it after launch.


One word: Consoles.

They focus on the consoles because that is where they make their money. 30 euro's for the pc version. 55 euro's for the console version which will probably sell 10 times more..... People think that game development is about passion for games. It is not. It is just like every other part of the entertainment industry, like films, a money game. How can we make a lot of money and in which time-period?

In this case: By focussing on the consoles.

Does that make it right? No, it does not. But that's how the cookie crumbles when you are running a multi milion dollar business.


----------



## sterob

I finally have more time for Witcher and go kill the griffin. This game is definitely NOT open world. Bigger make sure but no way it is open world.


----------



## SoulThief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrankoNL*
> 
> One word: Consoles.
> 
> They focus on the consoles because that is where they make their money. 30 euro's for the pc version. 55 euro's for the console version which will probably sell 10 times more..... People think that game development is about passion for games. It is not. It is just like every other part of the entertainment industry, like films, a money game. How can we make a lot of money and in which time-period?
> 
> In this case: By focussing on the consoles.
> 
> Does that make it right? No, it does not. But that's how the cookie crumbles when you are running a multi milion dollar business.


If I take the wording of the official statement correctly, and yours for that matter, it seems you 'blame' consoles for the current state of the game. The official statement however, seemed to state that without consoles the game would likely not even exist because the funds would run out well before the game would come out.

Coming from an i7 920 and HD7970 I cannot, for the life of me understand why people would argue this is an unoptimised game. My i7 has never been used as efficiently as in W3 neither has my GPU. And that is before an official AMD driver.


----------



## inedenimadam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sterob*
> 
> I finally have more time for Witcher and go kill the griffin. This game is definitely NOT open world. Bigger make sure but no way it is open world.


O really? Please elaborate.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sterob*
> 
> I finally have more time for Witcher and go kill the griffin. This game is definitely NOT open world. Bigger make sure but no way it is open world.


You are still in the tutorial area if you are at the Griffin.
Also like i said before, open world is just another name for sandbox of free roam. As long as you aren't pulled in a certain path and can do random stuff on the map it is considered open world.
Witcher 3 is as open world as assassin's creed yet i see nobody raising a stink for that. Note i am talking only about 1-3 since i did not play the ones after that.


----------



## Silent Scone

Uh ja, zee grafix as bin downgraded. Give me refund. It zee principle. I dunt cargh if it's an aweghsom game ja. Alpha, I want alpha.

What? What the hell iz a draw cawghl limit? I don't understand - where is my money, you tricked little Gomptah.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## FrankoNL

I dont blame the consoles. I blame the industry for not focussing on the games but focussing on the short term Financial gain. BF4 is a great example of how games should be developed. One team focussing on the console version and ond team building the PC part. From the ground up.

Having full load on a 7970 does not mean the game is optimized well. There have been 3 patches in 4 days trying to fix numerous things. This is not a good thing. It is a disgrace really.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoulThief*
> 
> If I take the wording of the official statement correctly, and yours for that matter, it seems you 'blame' consoles for the current state of the game. The official statement however, seemed to state that without consoles the game would likely not even exist because the funds would run out well before the game would come out.
> 
> Coming from an i7 920 and HD7970 I cannot, for the life of me understand why people would argue this is an unoptimised game. My i7 has never been used as efficiently as in W3 neither has my GPU. And that is before an official AMD driver.


----------



## Assirra

Of all things you say BF4? The game that was still broken almost half a year after it came out?


----------



## FrankoNL

Problems with netcode yes. But thuis was both on console and PC. I am talking about graphical optimizations
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Of all things you say BF4? The game that was still broken almost half a year after it came out?


----------



## sugalumps

Ah ye lets mock people that give a stuff. I really enjoy this game(it's amazing, really not going to dispute that or claim otherwise) but for some reason the fans are just the worst with this game more so than other games. People even defending the random £15 price hike(should be £35 like other AAA games but has been increased to £50), "oh they should charge even more".

If it was any other game it would not be ok.


----------



## ThePath

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUtquPxjp7w

There is big difference between the two


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Ah ye lets mock people that give a stuff. I really enjoy this game(it's amazing, really not going to dispute that or claim otherwise) but for some reason the fans are just the worst with this game more so than other games. People even defending the random £15 price hike(should be £35 like other AAA games but has been increased to £50), "oh they should charge even more".
> 
> If it was any other game it would not be ok.


Nah i think the price nonsense goes to the new batman game where people say it is worth more then 100 euro.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Ah ye lets mock people that give a stuff. I really enjoy this game(it's amazing, really not going to dispute that or claim otherwise) but for some reason the fans are just the worst with this game more so than other games. People even defending the random £15 price hike(should be £35 like other AAA games but has been increased to £50), "oh they should charge even more".
> 
> If it was any other game it would not be ok.


Ok, have you tried raising foliage distancing and other items that reflect the image quality? There is a lot of stutter...this is because DX11 isn't able to render anymore than it already is with the level of vegetation, I don't know what they're using to render the foliage, but GTA 5 has a similar issue. For the scope of the game, I'm not going to complain, but I will voice genuine reason why certain aspects may have been removed. Instead of putting on the tin foil.

The only thing that one can ask reasonably is am I a little disappointed that I'm not getting the particle effects and certain visual effects that I wasn't when the game was taking a different route in 2013? Yes, I am. Do I think I could have done better given the scope of the game? No, obviously.


----------



## sterob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> You are still in the tutorial area if you are at the Griffin.
> Also like i said before, open world is just another name for sandbox of free roam. As long as you aren't pulled in a certain path and can do random stuff on the map it is considered open world.
> Witcher 3 is as open world as assassin's creed yet i see nobody raising a stink for that. Note i am talking only about 1-3 since i did not play the ones after that.


i was at vizima. If i can't use horse to go from a place to another then it is not open, simply that. Or people start saying FFXIV is open world MMORPG now? And no, i don't think anyone saying AC is open world.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sterob*
> 
> i was at vizima. If i can't use horse to go from a place to another then it is not open, simply that. Or people start saying FFXIV is open world MMORPG now? And no, i don't think anyone saying AC is open world.


What AC is considered open world everywhere...
Like i said before, open world has nothing to do with 1 part of the world to the next without loading screens, its just another name for sandbox or free roaming where you can do stuff off the beaten path in a open world.
And you are at a story point city where you will leave to see the "real world" think of it like like a Skyrim city.


----------



## SoulThief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrankoNL*
> 
> Problems with netcode yes. But thuis was both on console and PC. I am talking about graphical optimizations


Those issues that existed for more than half a year before properly addressed, in a multiplayer-driven game no-less. Optimisations don't mean jack if the core of your game (multiplayer) does not work.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrankoNL*
> 
> I dont blame the consoles. I blame the industry for not focussing on the games but focussing on the short term Financial gain. BF4 is a great example of how games should be developed. One team focussing on the console version and ond team building the PC part. From the ground up.
> 
> Having full load on a 7970 does not mean the game is optimized well. There have been 3 patches in 4 days trying to fix numerous things. This is not a good thing. It is a disgrace really.


That's funny, I don't recall mentioning that my 7970 was running full load. Nope, not there. Efficient does not mean full load. Battlefield 4 received various patches even months after its release, but since EA apparently optimised the game, that's okay. Double standards.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Ah ye lets mock people that give a stuff. I really enjoy this game(it's amazing, really not going to dispute that or claim otherwise) but for some reason the fans are just the worst with this game more so than other games. People even defending the random £15 price hike(should be £35 like other AAA games but has been increased to £50), "oh they should charge even more".
> 
> If it was any other game it would not be ok.


I noticed that too. It was $37 for me and when the reviews started rolling in, they scrolled those next to their new price of $46,so funny.


----------



## Frankzro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThePath*
> 
> Yes I still defend it because graphics is not important, and gameplay/story is more important. This got a lot of good score by reviewers. The graphics still look good even with the downgrades.


Story can only get you so far.... GFX help pull us into the game.... When you spend or have spent over 2-3 grand for a gaming pc you are not expecting to have 400 dollar console quality experience , period. PCs are not consoles and the devs need to stop with the bait and switch.

Its now becoming normal for devs to bait and switch and that mentality we are losing trust.

God, I can only imagine how bad StarWars is going to look when that comes out for PC. Consoles have PC gaming back as a whole?


----------



## Punter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sterob*
> 
> i was at vizima. If i can't use horse to go from a place to another then it is not open, simply that. Or people start saying FFXIV is open world MMORPG now? And no, i don't think anyone saying AC is open world.


You're still haven't seen the main map then, which would be silly to not be described as an open-world. It's not like there are no other open-world games with loading screens to smaller, separate maps...


----------



## Mel0ns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frankzro*
> 
> Story can only get you so far.... GFX help pull us into the game.... When you spend or have spent over 2-3 grand for a gaming pc you are not expecting to have 400 dollar console quality experience , period. PCs are not consoles and the devs need to stop with the bait and switch.
> 
> Its now becoming normal for devs to bait and switch and that mentality we are losing trust.
> 
> God, I can only imagine how bad StarWars is going to look when that comes out for PC. Consoles have PC gaming back as a whole?


So the current gfx doesnt help us getting pulled into the game? Im running 3440x1400 on ultra and im loving the atmosphere so far. So tired of all the downgrade threads, without consoles, the game wouldnt exist, period.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mel0ns*
> 
> So the current gfx doesnt help us getting pulled into the game? Im running 3440x1400 on ultra and im loving the atmosphere so far. So tired of all the downgrade threads, without consoles, the game wouldnt exist, period.


The game would have existed, in his form? I don't know. The Witcher 1 and 2 existed as PC first and then they made Witcher 2 available to consoles a year later.

I don't believe the Dev PR speak when they said that Witcher 3 would not exist without consoles. They just wanted to quell the controversy quick and get some empathy thrown their way.

Maybe a smaller team, not a ballooned 250 employees, and maybe an enhancement on Witcher 2 to Witcher 3 would have been the case, but Witcher 3 would have existed in some form!

I would have forgone a bigger scope for a tighter PC centric story/visuals over a consolised focused Witcher 3.

Let's not overlook the fact that they also own GOG.com, so they make money from other sources.

In the end though, a bigger team employs more people which is good and they also have other developments in the works like Cyberpunk 2077, so they need cash flow. Investors also want to see a return on their investments, so I get it.

They could have said that, it would have been more honest.


----------



## Murlocke

I see 99% of the complaints from people still in the prologue. This is a 100-150 hour game *easily*, if you do everything. The prologue, White Orchard, takes people 4-8 hours to beat on average but I've seen people take up to 20-25. It's a very very small map compared to the rest of the world.

I'm at 52 hours now and the game is incredible. If I had to guess based on maps and level, i'm _maybe_ 30-35% of the way done. I would say its probably the best RPG ever made. The fact we have another 30+ hours of expansions coming is amazing.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> I see 99% of the complaints from people still in the prologue. This is a 100-150 hour game *easily*, if you do everything. The prologue, White Orchard, takes people 4-8 hours to beat on average but I've seen people take up to 20-25. It's a very very small map compared to the rest of the world.
> 
> I'm at 52 hours now and the game is incredible. If I had to guess based on maps and level, i'm _maybe_ 30-35% of the way done. I would say its probably the best RPG ever made. The fact we have another 30+ hours of expansions coming is amazing.


I did everything in the first map and it took 8 hours.


----------



## biz1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> I see 99% of the complaints from people still in the prologue. This is a 100-150 hour game *easily*, if you do everything. The prologue, White Orchard, takes people 4-8 hours to beat on average but I've seen people take up to 20-25. It's a very very small map compared to the rest of the world.
> 
> I'm at 52 hours now and the game is incredible. If I had to guess based on maps and level, i'm _maybe_ 30-35% of the way done. I would say its probably the best RPG ever made. The fact we have another 30+ hours of expansions coming is amazing.


the game might have lots of content, but there's a lot of repetitive filler (not unusual for the genre). the scope is just way too large for their dev budget

i just think the crutch of GPS + witcher senses killed any chance the game had of being amazing, since they used it for pretty much every quest and turning it off makes things way too obscure

it'll probably be a great RPG all things considered, but it really needed a much better combat system if they chose to fill the world with "go find and kill this monster" quests


----------



## majin662

woooo whoooo. Finally finished 2 today. Now I can finally fire this baby up for more than some grphx testing. Im so friggin pumped how the story leads straight into 3. Assirra thanks for the recommendation to finish and take my time. So much more hype now. So much to find out.

Sorry off-topic. I mean......downgrade and stuff...rawr.....rabble and such. Im over the downgrade now especially coming off the high of part 2.


----------



## Mel0ns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> The game would have existed, in his form? I don't know. The Witcher 1 and 2 existed as PC first and then they made Witcher 2 available to consoles a year later.
> 
> I don't believe the Dev PR speak when they said that Witcher 3 would not exist without consoles. They just wanted to quell the controversy quick and get some empathy thrown their way.
> 
> Maybe a smaller team, not a ballooned 250 employees, and maybe an enhancement on Witcher 2 to Witcher 3 would have been the case, but Witcher 3 would have existed in some form!
> 
> I would have forgone a bigger scope for a tighter PC centric story/visuals over a consolised focused Witcher 3.
> 
> Let's not overlook the fact that they also own GOG.com, so they make money from other sources.
> 
> In the end though, a bigger team employs more people which is good and they also have other developments in the works like Cyberpunk 2077, so they need cash flow. Investors also want to see a return on their investments, so I get it.
> 
> They could have said that, it would have been more honest.


Sure it might have existed, but i doubt it would be anywhere near this form. How much money do you think consoles will net them? Quite a lot i would say. Games today cost so much more than they use to, and considering pirating is huge on PC i can understand them wanting more cash from consoles.

If they would have kept the E3 graphics for PC, no one except people on oc.net would be able to play it over 30 fps, its heavy on the hardware as it is already.

Them owning GOG has nothing to do with it. You can just plow money into a project from another source just to make a great game then lose money on it.

I think the game looks great, sure it could have looked top notch, but i find it really immersive as it is. Skellige and all the islands are just beautiful. 40 hours in and lvl 20(spent way too much time playing Gwent). Considering i paid 0 for it, im not complaining.


----------



## Murlocke

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biz1*
> 
> the game might have lots of content, but there's a lot of repetitive filler (not unusual for the genre). the scope is just way too large for their dev budget
> 
> i just think the crutch of GPS + witcher senses killed any chance the game had of being amazing, since they used it for pretty much every quest and turning it off makes things way too obscure
> 
> it'll probably be a great RPG all things considered, but it really needed a much better combat system if they chose to fill the world with "go find and kill this monster" quests


Huh?!

This is far less repetitive than pretty much every game i've played in the last 10 years. There are literally *zero* "go kill this monster" quests. They all have twists and side stories with them, all believable and interesting. This game doesn't even have boring collectibles or artificial "collect X of these" type achievements/quests like the majority of games. The closest you get to "collecting" things is Gwent cards, but Gwent is fun and many have said they prefer it over hearthstone. The combat system is good enough for a story based RPG. I'd take this over badly implemented turned based combat that most RPGs with good stories have.

The game has 100+ hours of real content, not a single thing has seemed like padding or repetitive to me. Honestly, the only reason I could see someone calling it repetitive is if they aren't playing for the story, skipping dialog, and just going from A to B like an MMO. I even read the Journals/Notes.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mel0ns*
> 
> I think the game looks great, sure it could have looked top notch, but i find it really immersive as it is. Skellige and all the islands are just beautiful. 40 hours in and lvl 20(spent way too much time playing Gwent). Considering i paid 0 for it, im not complaining.


Have you been skipping a lot of side quests or playing on easy/normal? I'm 58 hours in and level 15. I haven't went to Skellige yet, I'm purposely finishing off the other area before I leave it. Still probably another 20 hours before I accomplish that.

I just spent a good 12 hours playing Gwent, I was ignoring it because it seemed awful at first. After I got a better deck, it started to get good and now I regret ignoring it. Been going back and unlocking cards. This is my GOTY.


----------



## majin662

Coming straight from witcher 2 today I can definitely already see the improved story telling. Also as far as comparisons go folks who link this game against 2 I really think they should replay 2. It could look great but it had some issues as well and did not look great at all in some areas.

I do already miss being able to pause dialogue. Unless it just the first few conversations that are like thAt


----------



## Moragg

Don't know about anyone else, but if downgrading the visuals (even if just for M$) was the price for making the story and scope bigger it's one I'd pay gladly. Visuals can be upgraded, by mods or a future "edition", but the rest of it is worth far, far more.

As artists I'm sure it galled CDPR to downgrade visuals for this, but it's still a very pretty game and if more people can play it, and you can make it bigger and better, is that not worth it?

w/e, it's hardly like graphics make a difference when playing gwent anyway.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Moragg*
> 
> Don't know about anyone else, but if downgrading the visuals (even if just for M$) was the price for making the story and scope bigger it's one I'd pay gladly. Visuals can be upgraded, by mods or a future "edition", but the rest of it is worth far, far more.
> 
> As artists I'm sure it galled CDPR to downgrade visuals for this, but it's still a very pretty game and if more people can play it, and you can make it bigger and better, is that not worth it?
> 
> w/e, it's hardly like graphics make a difference when playing gwent anyway.


Witcher 3 does exactly the right thing but people just don't want that. People will always complain. Witcher 3 is about the story first. The graphics are pretty good for the immersion.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Witcher 3 does exactly the right thing but people just don't want that. People will always complain. Witcher 3 is about the story first. The graphics are pretty good for the immersion.


Everyone who flooded the internet complaining about CDPR and The Witcher 3 over the past couple weeks should be ashamed of themselves. The graphics are great - as good as anything else that is open world. And this is the best RPG I've played in a very long time, easily superior to The Witcher 2 in every respect - and TW2 was already very good.


----------



## Assirra

1 thing The Witcher 2 had over Witcher 3 tough.
That amazing prologue with 1 amazing king on the front lines.


----------



## Moragg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Witcher 3 does exactly the right thing but people just don't want that. People will always complain. Witcher 3 is about the story first. The graphics are pretty good for the immersion.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone who flooded the internet complaining about CDPR and The Witcher 3 over the past couple weeks should be ashamed of themselves. The graphics are great - as good as anything else that is open world. And this is the best RPG I've played in a very long time, easily superior to The Witcher 2 in every respect - and TW2 was already very good.
Click to expand...

Not really. You've seen the comparison gif - the downgrade is huge, so people were rightly annoyed that they weren't getting the game they expected.

As to what CDPR could do about it... now they have M$'s money, slowly drop these features back in? The difference between high/ultra is a joke, especially considering what E3 2013 looked like.

Realistically though, we'll just have to accept TW3 isn't a blazing 11/10 everything game, just one of the best RPGs for years. But let's be honest; even if graphics were 11/10 now they wouldn't be in 10 years time, but the story, scope and voice acting won't be worse. We can hardly blame them, and just hope that some decades down the line the entire series gets reproduced in a single, epic, VR adventure.


----------



## Assirra

Don't you think the standards are a tiny bit too high here?
"Just" one of the best RPGs for years?


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Don't you think the standards are a tiny bit too high here?
> "Just" one of the best RPGs for years?


There has been many great rpgs over the last few years but in many different genre of rpg, though this is one of them undoubtedly.

I think developers shoot themselves in the foot with these pre release trailers as if they had never shown it we would have no idea it had been "downgraded" as it still looks incredible. The more I play it the more I keep running into stunning looking areas, and I am only 10 hours in so far. Just wish I didn't suck so much at the combat.


----------



## Assirra

you get better at the combat in time. Especially once you learn how to combo signs during your attacks to make a nice fluent combo.
I cannot imagine playing this on controller tough, not having hotkeys for all signs and having to deal with that wheel in the middle of combat would probably drive me nuts.









And yea i wish developers would stop doing that. I remember gears of wars 3 being mocked for releasing footage a year ahead of the game, now the standard is 2-3years and its getting crazier by time.
Just release no footage before you are 100% it will at least resemble the game once it's out.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> I cannot imagine playing this on controller tough, not having hotkeys for all signs and having to deal with that wheel in the middle of combat would probably drive me nuts.


I'm enjoying it on the controller so far, though I basically just rely on Quen sign + lots of dodging and stabbing. IMO they nailed the combat in this game... such a vast improvement over TW2.


----------



## deadwidesmile

The combat is refreshing. I don't feel like I'm always blocking when I SHOULD be (holding down right click) but it's not nearly as face roll as the Batman series (which I still love the combat in that game! Smashing bad guys? Yessir) or SoM. It's challenging on a different level.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I'm just starting off in TW2 (yeah, I know) and I already enjoy the story but the combat is massively difficult to me. It is so complex that I don't see how I'm ever going to get any good at this? I guess I really need to use hotkeys but my current crap KB doesn't have any extras. I feel like the M95 would be great for this game as well, over my M60 which I got mostly for FPS.

Is the combat in TW3 less "clunky"? I mean, I'm sure its still very complex but TW2's combat seems really over complex to me...


----------



## deadwidesmile

Yeah, they refined the combat system quite a bit. I still haven't used hotkeys much to be honest. But, I've only logged maybe 8 hours on W3. The life of a parent + attempting to build PC's for a little side cash, ha.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I'm just starting off in TW2 (yeah, I know) and I already enjoy the story but the combat is massively difficult to me. It is so complex that I don't see how I'm ever going to get any good at this? I guess I really need to use hotkeys but my current crap KB doesn't have any extras. I feel like the M95 would be great for this game as well, over my M60 which I got mostly for FPS.
> 
> Is the combat in TW3 less "clunky"? I mean, I'm sure its still very complex but TW2's combat seems really over complex to me...


Yea it is a lot better, the dodge addition (note not roll) alone makes it a different game entirely.

The Witcher 2 combat takes a bit of time to get used to it but you get used to it fast enough.

you should be aggressive in the game and cannot play pure defense or you get swamped.
A lot of stuff you can outright stunlock to a certain point.
Also, signs and bombs can be great, even traps have their place.

A couple tips.
Flammable gas bomb + igni = big aoe fire
signs are made so you can use them mid combo now, aard is espcially good to stun a opponent quickly to keep going
Quen is a insanely OP and can make everything except dark mode a complete joke
Axxii is great to cause confusion and have not everything pile on to you since there is now a second target
Riposte talent is amazing vs a single big enemy
Try to start the fight with a enemy trapped with Yrden, unless its a very big enemy or a boss, that thing will be dead before it is free if you focus it

And if you just want to utterly break the game, go alchemy route. Its beyond broken


----------



## majin662

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I'm just starting off in TW2 (yeah, I know) and I already enjoy the story but the combat is massively difficult to me. It is so complex that I don't see how I'm ever going to get any good at this? I guess I really need to use hotkeys but my current crap KB doesn't have any extras. I feel like the M95 would be great for this game as well, over my M60 which I got mostly for FPS.
> 
> Is the combat in TW3 less "clunky"? I mean, I'm sure its still very complex but TW2's combat seems really over complex to me...


Having just finished 2 id say dont over think it. Use your signs. Roll (ALOT) sneak in some hits and roll again. Make sure you got some bombs with you. I rarely used traps and didn't even use daggers.

Some Stuff you can bully. Some stuff its better to bomb away.some stuff you can just game the fight.

Also if youre just trying to get through it to start 3 just play on normal.


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punter*
> 
> You're still haven't seen the main map then, which would be silly to not be described as an open-world. It's not like there are no other open-world games with loading screens to smaller, separate maps...


Most open world games with a seperate map have a loading screen between the two.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Yea it is a lot better, the dodge addiction (note not roll) alone makes it a different game entirely.
> 
> The Witcher 2 combat takes a bit of time to get used to it but you get used to it fast enough.
> 
> you should be aggressive in the game and cannot play pure defense or you get swamped.
> A lot of stuff you can outright stunlock to a certain point.
> Also, signs and bombs can be great, even traps have their place.
> 
> A couple tips.
> Flammable gas bomb + igni = big aoe fire
> signs are made so you can use them mid combo now, aard is espcially good to stun a opponent quickly to keep going
> Quen is a insanely OP and can make everything except dark mode a complete joke
> Axxii is great to cause confusion and have not everything pile on to you since there is now a second target
> Riposte talent is amazing vs a single big enemy
> Try to start the fight with a enemy trapped with Yrden, unless its a very big enemy or a boss, that thing will be dead before it is free if you focus it
> 
> And if you just want to utterly break the game, go alchemy route. Its beyond broken


Sounds like what Im planning to do: fast attack spam+poisons/oils+axii+quen. The only major difference is I roll around a lot, it's not as effective as in TW2 whee you could power through dark mode by abusing roll and horrible AI pathing but it's still pretty effective when you're able to roll, attack twice, roll again cast a sign, attack twice, roll again against bosses and ither enemies double your level. Hell I was even beating lvl 14 content at level 4 using roll. I had to start grinding to level due to 10 freaking level 15 pirates attacking me on my way to do a main quest...and even then the only reason why I didn't just keep trying was becasue I can't deal with 2 ranged hammering me while I try to position the melee so I can not get surrounded and insta-die.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Witcher 3 does exactly the right thing but people just don't want that. People will always complain. Witcher 3 is about the story first. The graphics are pretty good for the immersion.


I think they're just tired of the falsity of the gaming industry, and when they see a beloved dev/game do the same it infuriates them. Including me to a degree but i do agree. TW is and will always be about the marvelous mature story and it's characters. That is what separates from every other generic RPG, is the massive lore that is The Witcher Universe. It's pretty unique really or at least to me.

I have to say i've already sunk 16 hours into it, and i had 4 in TW2 and it's been 5 days? That is alot for me considering i'm trying to study 6-8hours a day. It's doing plenty right. Needs some refinement and driver updates (kepler) or patches to improve stability and then we can throw mods at it.

While the visuals might not be E3, and there was a downgrade, it does look marvelous at times. And the main part is it feels so alive. There is so much intricate detail in the world that it's nothing short of amazing IMHO. I mean honestly they spent some hard hard work at looking at every little character and side quest and giving variety, fluidity, and vibrance to the world around you that it doesn't just feel like your walking around in a fish bowl talking to zombies. It could be my love for the TW universe more so than achievement but i see myself finishing this game and most if not all the side quest. I haven't done anything like that since Red Dead Redemption or Guild Wars.

All the freaking awesome armor/weapon quest are lvl 20+


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DIYDeath*
> 
> Most open world games with a seperate map have a loading screen between the two.
> Sounds like what Im planning to do: fast attack spam+poisons/oils+axii+quen. The only major difference is I roll around a lot, it's not as effective as in TW2 whee you could power through dark mode by abusing roll and horrible AI pathing but it's still pretty effective when you're able to roll, attack twice, roll again cast a sign, attack twice, roll again against bosses and ither enemies double your level. Hell I was even beating lvl 14 content at level 4 using roll. I had to start grinding to level due to 10 freaking level 15 pirates attacking me on my way to do a main quest...and even then the only reason why I didn't just keep trying was becasue I can't deal with 2 ranged hammering me while I try to position the melee so I can not get surrounded and insta-die.


Those were W2 tips tough.
Can't give much W3 tips yet before i at least get a bit more abilities. atm i am just level11 and taking my sweet time by reading books, running around or just doing some sidequests minigames.
Also, npc's are so goddam rude in this game. Pass a random guard *fart* and he starts laughing or some random person starts talking about premature buttwiping.


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Those were W2 tips tough.
> Can't give much W3 tips yet before i at least get a bit more abilities. atm i am just level11 and taking my sweet time by reading books, running around or just doing some sidequests minigames.
> Also, npc's are so goddam in this game. Pass a random guard *fart* and he starts laughing or some random person starts talking about premature buttwiping.


Haha, yeah they're a tad bit crude. Makes sense though, If you lived in a world where you'd be lucky to turn 50 a whole lot of pleasantries would get discarded.

So far I've been finding leveling fast attack asap has helped immensely. Ive been finding power attacks get you caught in an animation which can in turn lead to you getting surrounded and then obliterated so I don't use them often. The crappy part about that is that means I need to repair more often. Damn me and my inefficient fast attacks.


----------



## majin662

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Those were W2 tips tough.
> Can't give much W3 tips yet before i at least get a bit more abilities. atm i am just level11 and taking my sweet time by reading books, running around or just doing some sidequests minigames.
> Also, npc's are so goddam rude in this game. Pass a random guard *fart* and he starts laughing or some random person starts talking about premature buttwiping.





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Don't forget the attitude that was spreading toward all non humans though at the end of 2. They were on a witch hunt all throughout the north and I'm sure that attitude was spreading south as well. Sure that has something to do with it as well.



So far I like the little touches. Like the night sky filled with meteor showers. Different kind of "freaks" (nice touch CDPR)

I got to say though, the looting everybody thing is weird. Mama is crying in the corner and daddy is dead in the living...ooooh don't mind me I'm just stealing errr'thing


----------



## ZealotKi11er

The trick with Witcher 3 combat is you dont fight each enemy the same way and you have to use all your arsenal to kill some stuff. If you are lower level and fighting a much stronger monster you have to use strategic combat.


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The trick with Witcher 3 combat is you dont fight each enemy the same way and you have to use all your arsenal to kill some stuff. If you are lower level and fighting a much stronger monster you have to use strategic combat.


I'd rather they did not tell you about level requirements for each quest. If you tend to wait for that, then you just plough through them.

With some strategy, I was able to complete a level 9 quest while being on level 4, without even knowing it.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> I'd rather they did not tell you about level requirements for each quest. If you tend to wait for that, then you just plough through them.
> 
> With some strategy, I was able to complete a level 9 quest while being on level 4, without even knowing it.


Generally speaking, being within 5 levels is usually pretty doable as far as quests go. Depending in how one levels their Geralt he can do a considerable amount of damage even at a lower level. The fast attack buffs with the light armor buff can do some impressive damage (just work quen).


----------



## Alvarez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *majin662*
> 
> woooo whoooo. Finally finished 2 today. Now I can finally fire this baby up for more than some grphx testing. Im so friggin pumped how the story leads straight into 3. Assirra thanks for the recommendation to finish and take my time. So much more hype now. So much to find out.
> 
> Sorry off-topic. I mean......downgrade and stuff...rawr.....rabble and such. Im over the downgrade now especially coming off the high of part 2.


Good, you'll be happy to know that your save will mean next to nothing


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> I'd rather they did not tell you about level requirements for each quest. If you tend to wait for that, then you just plough through them.
> 
> With some strategy, I was able to complete a level 9 quest while being on level 4, without even knowing it.


It is probably to prevent you trying something near impossible.
I got a 20+ quest at lvl 6 for instance.
I also failed a lvl9 quest at lvl5 because i simply got overrun and the person i needed to protect died.

I assume there will be a mod that makes it toggleble or straight up removes it.
Already mods are popping up on nexus.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alvarez*
> 
> Good, you'll be happy to know that your save will mean next to nothing


There is 1 choice that WILL have a big effect on a certain sidequest.
Hell i am not even sure how you would do that sidquest at all if you did something else then i did in Witcher 2.


----------



## Alvarez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> It is probably to prevent you trying something near impossible.
> I got a 20+ quest at lvl 6 for instance.
> I also failed a lvl9 quest at lvl5 because i simply got overrun and the person i needed to protect died.
> 
> I assume there will be a mod that makes it toggleble or straight up removes it.
> Already mods are popping up on nexus.
> There is 1 choice that WILL have a big effect on a certain sidequest.
> Hell i am not even sure how you would do that sidquest at all if you did something else then i did in Witcher 2.


I'll probably won't see it because as someone who finished Witcher 2 couple of times along with the first one, i simply can't tolerate this garbage anymore. Fighting mechanics alone is a garbage. Risen 3 probably have better fighting system than this. Parry doesn't work, hard attack doesn't work, signs don't work (even when stamina is at full), targeting is a mess, character jumps one enemy to another which makes him hard to defend himself...

I'll either wait for patches like i waited for BF4 (then never played it again mind you), or it'll stay in my library to remind me that i should never pre-order.

It's still surprising that i was expecting W3 turn out something superior to DA:I, sad to see that it's complete opposite.


----------



## sugalumps

The combat is alot better than the witcher 2s atleast, it was not good enough for me to make it through the full game in witcher 2. The witcher 3 world though is worth bearing the combat.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alvarez*
> 
> I'll probably won't see it because as someone who finished Witcher 2 couple of times along with the first one, i simply can't tolerate this garbage anymore. Fighting mechanics alone is a garbage. Risen 3 probably have better fighting system than this. Parry doesn't work, hard attack doesn't work, signs don't work (even when stamina is at full), targeting is a mess, character jumps one enemy to another which makes him hard to defend himself...
> 
> I'll either wait for patches like i waited for BF4 (then never played it again mind you), or it'll stay in my library to remind me that i should never pre-order.
> 
> It's still surprising that i was expecting W3 turn out something superior to DA:I, sad to see that it's complete opposite.


No offense, but the combat works fine. Maybe you just need to learn it right?
I have zero problems with any of the things you mention.


----------



## ExoticallyPure

Honestly the game isn't that great.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ExoticallyPure*
> 
> Honestly the game isn't that great.


Honestly the game is amazing.


----------



## deadwidesmile

Moral of the story if you like it: Yay Witcher 3 is awesome.
If you don't: not your cup of tea fit xyz.

Honestly, why argue when it's completely preference oriented. Hope for the best, expect the mediocre. That's been my motto for awhile with games.


----------



## majin662

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadwidesmile*
> 
> Moral of the story if you like it: Yay Witcher 3 is awesome.
> If you don't: not your cup of tea fit xyz.
> 
> Honestly, why argue when it's completely preference oriented. Hope for the best, expect the mediocre. That's been my motto for awhile with games.


It is funny to see even the most objective or well nature person get completely subjective when it's something they like. So far I'm finishing out the tutorial area and there are some things I love. (wild wolves playing in packs, rolling around on their backs for fun, hunting hares) and some things I can definitely see myself getting raged over since I'm already getting agitated with it. ( the jumping sucks. he don't know if he wants to grab this ledge or jump halfway up and roll off of it, can make it up here, but this little tiny ledge just barely to my shoulders, NOPE. Also the painted ledges to let me know "hey grab here" I'm over that as a game mechanic.)

My biggest gripe, and I think murlocke was it or maybe bigmack (I'd have to go look) touched on it. It feels almost as if I'm punished for exploration right now. I've had to load up a save 2 different times now because I picked a herb before I was supposed to and failed a quest and it's associated quests. And then I found a place of power right next to the nest and BOOM more quests failed. That needs work imo, pronto. It's bull that I have to "free roam" but only in this certain order or I'm failing quests and not only that but locked out of the associated side quests. Come on now.

Overall, this game is already fantastic and I am loving the life of it, the characters, the atmosphere, the writing, all the details, and call me forgetful but I'm not even caring about the graphics anymore. I'm just letting myself get sucked in. BUT. This game is not perfect and it's not just a case of any little detail someone points out is "something wrong on your end fella"

Maybe it's rose colored glasses but their are some obvious flaws that stand out. Hopefully they get worked on cause even just in my short time I'd say this is easily an 8.5 or 9/10 I wouldn't say 10 yet, but I'm reserving my right to have my mind changed

edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alvarez*
> 
> Good, you'll be happy to know that your save will mean next to nothing


haha. I thought it was at least 4 main decisions that altered it. To what degree I don't know and didn't want to find out, but yeah, I read that overall it's not a huge deal.


----------



## Superplush

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *majin662*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> It is funny to see even the most objective or well nature person get completely subjective when it's something they like. So far I'm finishing out the tutorial area and there are some things I love. (wild wolves playing in packs, rolling around on their backs for fun, hunting hares) and some things I can definitely see myself getting raged over since I'm already getting agitated with it. ( the jumping sucks. he don't know if he wants to grab this ledge or jump halfway up and roll off of it, can make it up here, but this little tiny ledge just barely to my shoulders, NOPE. Also the painted ledges to let me know "hey grab here" I'm over that as a game mechanic.)
> 
> My biggest gripe, and I think murlocke was it or maybe bigmack (I'd have to go look) touched on it. It feels almost as if I'm punished for exploration right now. I've had to load up a save 2 different times now because I picked a herb before I was supposed to and failed a quest and it's associated quests. And then I found a place of power right next to the nest and BOOM more quests failed. That needs work imo, pronto. It's bull that I have to "free roam" but only in this certain order or I'm failing quests and not only that but locked out of the associated side quests. Come on now.
> 
> Overall, this game is already fantastic and I am loving the life of it, the characters, the atmosphere, the writing, all the details, and call me forgetful but I'm not even caring about the graphics anymore. I'm just letting myself get sucked in. BUT. This game is not perfect and it's not just a case of any little detail someone points out is "something wrong on your end fella"
> 
> Maybe it's rose colored glasses but their are some obvious flaws that stand out. Hopefully they get worked on cause even just in my short time I'd say this is easily an 8.5 or 9/10 I wouldn't say 10 yet, but I'm reserving my right to have my mind changed
> 
> edit:
> haha. I thought it was at least 4 main decisions that altered it. To what degree I don't know and didn't want to find out, but yeah, I read that overall it's not a huge deal.


Completely agree, although I'm dissappointed with the downgrade I was more annoyed with CDPR lying to us all about there not being any downgrade. I do enjoy the game and the roaming aspect, just wish it was bigger....

... I guess that's TW3 for me, for every good point there is a bad. It's not "OMG SUPER AWESOME" but it's not "I hate this game and it's stupid" right now the thing that's grinding my gears is the menu swapping and confirmation windows for confirmation windows to do with crafting and breaking up items. I'll enjoy the game and I'm sure I'll love it to bits ( I really want to get to the coast and go sailing! ) but I'm sure I'll have gripes along the way.


----------



## deadwidesmile

I think one of the easier things CDPR could have done is give the Pc release far better menus lol.


----------



## fashric

Ye the inventory menus certainly need some work in regards to the amount of clicks required but I'm sure they will address it in due time. The game itself is excellent feels a lot more like The Witcher rather than TW2 which for me is fantastic as I wasnt too keen on number 2.


----------



## Assirra

Honestly i just learned the keybinds for all the different menus and now i am zipping through them without any problem.
Mouse and keyboard master race


----------



## mutatedknutz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> 
> 
> it is a sad way when company's out straight recommend a titan x, i really don't know what to think if they just plain mad or thinking pc gamers have all deep pockets or just plain stupid
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/Corsair?fref=ts


Actually according to the post corsair says that if user wants to play at 60fps 1080p at ultra settings, then get the following specification PC.
So they are not wrong, i feel only titan X can handle it well at 60fps with HW on.
So its nothing wrong
But yes CDPR shouldve optimised their game more.
Well the game loads and exits very fast, doesnt have long load times, Can change the in game video settings with out restarting game or going back to main menu. Thats really good








Plus ive maxed out everything except shadow and foilage on high. Never dips below 30fps(Have got it locked to 30).
The atmosphere of the game is amazing, looks really well.
Just waiting for new amd graphics driver







(and even for the new 300series














)


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadwidesmile*
> 
> I think one of the easier things CDPR could have done is give the Pc release far better menus lol. I feel like a @hole every time I want to go into inventory.


It's called using a controller. So much faster.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It's called using a controller. So much faster.


I bet i will be faster navigating the menus with mouse and hotkeys then you will be with controller tough. No need to ever go back to that main menu, can just zip around and go to whatever menu i please instantly.


----------



## BigMack70

Am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with the menus? I don't understand why everyone thinks they're so poor. My only complaints are that there's not an instant hotkey for going to the world map and there's no good sort functionality for the inventory, but those aren't huge issues.


----------



## majin662

Sorting would be amazing. Other than that I dont mind the menus at all


----------



## Gunderman456

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *majin662*
> 
> It is funny to see even the most objective or well nature person get completely subjective when it's something they like. So far I'm finishing out the tutorial area and there are some things I love. (wild wolves playing in packs, rolling around on their backs for fun, hunting hares) and some things I can definitely see myself getting raged over since I'm already getting agitated with it. ( the jumping sucks. he don't know if he wants to grab this ledge or jump halfway up and roll off of it, can make it up here, but this little tiny ledge just barely to my shoulders, NOPE. Also the painted ledges to let me know "hey grab here" I'm over that as a game mechanic.)
> 
> My biggest gripe, and I think murlocke was it or maybe bigmack (I'd have to go look) touched on it. It feels almost as if I'm punished for exploration right now. I've had to load up a save 2 different times now because I picked a herb before I was supposed to and failed a quest and it's associated quests. And then I found a place of power right next to the nest and BOOM more quests failed. That needs work imo, pronto. It's bull that I have to "free roam" but only in this certain order or I'm failing quests and not only that but locked out of the associated side quests. Come on now.
> 
> Overall, this game is already fantastic and I am loving the life of it, the characters, the atmosphere, the writing, all the details, and call me forgetful but I'm not even caring about the graphics anymore. I'm just letting myself get sucked in. BUT. This game is not perfect and it's not just a case of any little detail someone points out is "something wrong on your end fella"
> 
> Maybe it's rose colored glasses but their are some obvious flaws that stand out. Hopefully they get worked on cause even just in my short time I'd say this is easily an 8.5 or 9/10 I wouldn't say 10 yet, but I'm reserving my right to have my mind changed
> 
> edit:
> haha. I thought it was at least 4 main decisions that altered it. To what degree I don't know and didn't want to find out, but yeah, I read that overall it's not a huge deal.


As I keep playing, I'm still finding things that should be elementary for "open world" gaming.

I touched on your concers in my post earlier today that I'm updating as I go on page 63 of this thread. Game does feel linear and you certainly get punished for not sticking to the script.


----------



## majin662

Wow.just got to no mans land. This might take awhile lol. Pray for me ya'lll im going in


----------



## SkyNetSTI

Just tried this overhyped title(imo for first 5mins) and couldn't find anything graphically unique or new or wow that could make this title so hardware demanding... pure unoptimization to me...
will install latest driver to run sli and play some more, maybe then will catch any dose of this "hype"...


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SkyNetSTI*
> 
> Just tried this overhyped title(imo for first 5mins) and couldn't find anything graphically unique or new or wow that could make this title so hardware demanding... pure unoptimization to me...
> will install latest driver to run sli and play some more, maybe then will catch any dose of this "hype"...


So what you did was not even finish the tutorial for a over hundred hour game and you can't see the hype?
Do i need to point out how stupid that sounds?


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> So what you did was not even finish the tutorial for a over hundred hour game and you can't see the hype?
> Do i need to point out how stupid that sounds?


Welcome to OCN, where graphics > gameplay/story/everything else and trailers > games.


----------



## SkyNetSTI

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> So what you did was not even finish the tutorial for a over hundred hour game and you can't see the hype?
> Do i need to point out how stupid that sounds?


ok, maybe I am rushing about gameplay experience hype, so lets put it on a side for now...
and focus on graphics side hype - 30 fps 60 fps titanXsli - ??? - are we playing the same game?








it does look good, but nothing special at all! we had seen titles which looks better and runs smoother...
it's all marketing - make unoptimized crooked game and we will push our new $$$$ revolutionary GFC to run it


----------



## Tideman

Finding the game pretty entertaining (didn't expect to like it at all).

I was impressed with the visuals in some parts of White Orchard but ever since getting to the more open area (Velen), something seems really 'off'.. The colours seem different there.. and it's really damn hard to ignore. Not sure if I'm imagining it?


----------



## Evanlet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SkyNetSTI*
> 
> ok, maybe I am rushing about gameplay experience hype, so lets put it on a side for now...
> and focus on graphics side hype - 30 fps 60 fps titanXsli - ??? - are we playing the same game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it does look good, but nothing special at all! we had seen titles which looks better and runs smoother...
> it's all marketing - make unoptimized crooked game and we will push our new $$$$ revolutionary GFC to run it


You're right. Graphics aren't anything special.

I implore you to look past that though, all the attention to detail (story-wise), the amazing side quests and decisions you make which have an actual impact on the game... I can't see any other RPG that could hold a candle to Witcher 3 in these aspects.

I went into the W3 thinking it would be trashy and that DA:I would remain #1 on my list, hah, destroyed that game in every aspect.

Edit: Check out the atmosphere, the graphics leave much to be desired as everyone has said, but are passable as DIYDeath mentioned. Fact that AA doesn't work with Crossfire doesn't really help but still, atmosphere feels good:


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tideman*
> 
> Finding the game pretty entertaining (didn't expect to like it at all).
> 
> I was impressed with the visuals in some parts of White Orchard but ever since getting to the more open area (Velen), something seems really 'off'.. The colours seem different there.. and it's really damn hard to ignore. Not sure if I'm imagining it?


I dunno... I thought the swamps in Velen looked amazing. Very atmospheric as well as well done technically IMO.

And I think the game is optimized just fine at least for Maxwell... 60fps avg on my sig rig at 4k with everything maxed out except the postprocessing AA which I turned off because it costs a ~10% performance hit and I didn't really notice it improving image quality at all.


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Evanlet*
> 
> You're right. Graphics aren't anything special.
> 
> I implore you to look past that though, all the attention to detail (story-wise), the amazing side quests and decisions you make which have an actual impact on the game... I can't see any other RPG that could hold a candle to Witcher 3 in these aspects.
> 
> I went into the W3 thinking it would be trashy and that DA:I would remain #1 on my list, hah, destroyed that game in every aspect.


Yeah, TW3 imo looks slightly worse than GTA V. That's not a bad thing, it's still a great looking game so I really don't think people should hold TW3 not looking as good as modded SKyrim on a $5000 computer against TW3. WHat matetrs about the graphics is that they're passable enough that you forget the game isn't the best looking game out there pretty fast.

The only thing that I can think of that had as mush impact through your situations and a lot of decent story building was the entire mass effect series combined. That's how big the scope of TW3 is imo.


----------



## BigMack70

Modded skyrim does not look as good as this game when put in motion... screenshots, sure, but that's it (modded Skyrim screenshots can be made to look better than pretty much anything else on PC). GTA has some things that look quite a bit better than TW3 (e.g. weather effects) and then some that look quite a bit worse (e.g. characters).


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> Modded skyrim does not look as good as this game when put in motion... screenshots, sure, but that's it (modded Skyrim screenshots can be made to look better than pretty much anything else on PC). GTA has some things that look quite a bit better than TW3 (e.g. weather effects) and then some that look quite a bit worse (e.g. characters).


You've never seen a well modded Skyrim then. TW3 has lot of things it does better than modded Skyrim. Graphics is definitely, definitely not one of them. For example, look at Skyrim's water with an ENB installed then look at TW3's water. Not only does TW3s water look worse but it doesn't even have water displacement.

I will give TW3 points for animations though, they're a hell of a lot better than Skyrim's animations, mods included.


----------



## deadwidesmile

There is a sort button?


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadwidesmile*
> 
> There is a sort button?


Well there is 1 for the mouse and keyboard which is F.
However when i just tried it with my gamepad the button prompt vanished and tried every button so either i am looking over something or its not for gamepad (at least not on PC)


----------



## majin662

Havent even done first part of story in Velen. So much running around. So much to do. I love that excited feeling too finding a relic weapon either randomly or part of a quest. I definitely prefer the loot upgrade path of 3 over 2


----------



## Baasha

This game is a lot of fun - the performance is quite abysmal at 5K but I think the drivers are partly to blame (although other games work great with it).

Anyway, the graphics is good but it's not jaw-dropping like we were led to believe. The ambiance, on the other hand, is superb. The swaying trees along with the brilliant lighting makes for a truly immersive experience.

The Witcher 3 in 5K w/ all settings maxed out:


----------



## esp42089

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunderman456*
> 
> I really enjoyed you're comments. At least you took the time to actually read and respond.
> 
> I'm old school when it comes to RPG and unfortunately where we find ourselves now has been years in the making. Many younger people here can't appreciate where we've come from and what we've lost.
> 
> While you can't really blame the Devs, as PC gaming had gradually moved from niche to a wider audience in parallel with consoles, simplification has been the name of the game to reach as many people as possible. Game budgets go up but it seems quality keeps going down in an attempt to make as much money as possible. Thinking and the genuine satisfaction for reaching milestones are simply being eroded from PC gaming.
> 
> In the end, they should included the best graphics possible and let the people and their hardware decide how far to push them.
> 
> You are right about the issue not just being about graphics though, but in this day and age, you have to feel for the old school PC gamer. Witcher 3 maintains that trend and does PC gamers no favor.


Did you ever play the original Zelda on NES? Now there was a rpg with a sadistic streak. Without the community, one person would have a heckuva time figuring out what to do in that game. ZERO hand holding.

Anymore, after a long day at work, I enjoy turning difficulty to easy and just taking a cruise through the story that a game presents. I don't want a challenge; I want a cool story and an interesting visual presentation.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> This game is a lot of fun - the performance is quite abysmal at 5K but I think the drivers are partly to blame (although other games work great with it).
> 
> Anyway, the graphics is good but it's not jaw-dropping like we were led to believe. The ambiance, on the other hand, is superb. The swaying trees along with the brilliant lighting makes for a truly immersive experience.
> 
> The Witcher 3 in 5K w/ all settings maxed out:


I think they made the game too bright and light instead of dull and dark.


----------



## majin662

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I think they made the game too bright and light instead of dull and dark.


Its kind of growing on me the lighting. Only gripe I have in that respect is the stupid lens effects. Im not a camera lens developers. I dont get water on my screen or dust. Too much tomb raider and battlefield influence


----------



## sugalumps

In the second area it actualy looks like the dark theme setting we were shown, I think it's because there is a weather system in place and they never really shown that before so we never saw the bright "day time" setting that makes things look really bright. Soon as I stepped into the second area I was like this is more like it.


----------



## TheBlindDeafMute

Higher quality textures and tesselation would make me happier. The lighting you can always tweak that to get it where you want, but textures and tesselation are a different story. Also, the foliage is extremely very very crap. Let's hope nexus begins the mod rush to fix this game. I agree story and gameplay are very good. But I expected much better in terms of visuals. In all honesty I think the w2 looks better overall.

Edit. Forgot to mention the wind. Please tell me why his hair blows about just as much indoors as outdoors?


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SkyNetSTI*
> 
> ok, maybe I am rushing about gameplay experience hype, so lets put it on a side for now...
> and focus on graphics side hype - 30 fps 60 fps titanXsli - ??? - are we playing the same game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it does look good, but nothing special at all! we had seen titles which looks better and runs smoother...
> it's all marketing - make unoptimized crooked game and we will push our new $$$$ revolutionary GFC to run it


Oh please, this is one of the most optimized games i've seen in some time. Only uses 2 - 2.5GB VRAM at 1440p, barely cracks 3GB at 4K; huge open world with less loading than games like skyrim. The graphics are astounding even after the downgrade, with character detail and sheer number of effects only equaled by a number of games i can count on one hand; and they're all non open world games too! (not to mention they don't look "special or run smoother" either.

And the performance is nowhere near what you're saying. I'm running TITAN X SLI with all max settings including Hairworks, HBAO+ etc.. and i'm getting absolutely perfect SLI scaling 98%+ on both cards, and i'm getting 85fps average in the area i'm in now, never dipping below 75...again at 1440p max settings, that's FAR above the 60fps 1080p estimates you and other people are putting out.

I'm starting to wonder if you guys know about the 1.03 patch? You know, the one that gives all kinds of new post processing, graphic options, optimizations, config .ini edits etc..? Either that or SLI isn't working right in those cases or something. No offense, but your post is a load of *overclock.net censorship*


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DIYDeath*
> 
> You've never seen a well modded Skyrim then. TW3 has lot of things it does better than modded Skyrim. Graphics is definitely, definitely not one of them. For example, look at Skyrim's water with an ENB installed then look at TW3's water. Not only does TW3s water look worse but it doesn't even have water displacement.
> 
> I will give TW3 points for animations though, they're a hell of a lot better than Skyrim's animations, mods included.


Apparently you haven't played Skyrim in a while then, as even with insane mods it's not the best looking in-game graphics in the world, only in pictures mostly. You'd also notice that Characters, (the main thing the witcher 3 gets so right graphic-wise) are FAR better than any skyrim mod i've seen. No matter how many fancy celebrity mock-up face mods you put on with hair/eyebrow/makeup/skin texture/body etc.. mods and 4K normal maps and armor textures etc.. it still doesn't look quite as detailed and natural as the faces in TW3.

While Skyrim modded all to hell with full on ENB + weather enhancer + parallax mapping + DoF + massive SSAO/8 x MSAA/Bloom/dynamic lighting/AF etc.. etc.. etc.. will definitely have better looking environments, it's only in photographs that it gains any "significant" graphical advantage over the witcher 3. And TW3 is actually exactly the opposite, no photo does it justice; after seeing all the photograph comparisons of the downgrade i thought the same that it wasn't too special. But after playing it on an ROG Swift monitor i was pretty impressed with the graphics. People aren't looking at the whole picture, they're just looking at how pretty the leaves or whatever look and saying the graphics suck compared to how demanding the game is, but what they aren't realizing is how many things are going on all at once on the screen in a huge open world game. There's so many effects and objects on screen at once; trees, buildings, individually rendered specks on every stone/block/hair etc.. all kinds of effects active at once. The water definitely isn't as good but water is the witcher 3's worst subject essentially. It does 90% of other things far better than it does water.


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I think they made the game too bright and light instead of dull and dark.


Bro throw some SweetFX on it dawg









No but seriously it helps a ton. I have some screens from the moment i started the game to now and the default color tone is just awful. I will say the darkness can be a little much at times, find myself using cat a lot more in the caves but i enjoy it more than the default color scheme/tone. Took the last one from the "Sword of Destiny" Trailer. To my eyes at least the color for the SweetFX profiles favors the way the game was shown before with that dark tone than the release.


----------



## Wishmaker

Does SweetFx help me get used to the shoddy movement and controls?


----------



## mutatedknutz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> Does SweetFx help me get used to the shoddy movement and controls?


Yes may be itll make you forget







but trust me sweetfx looks really good both at night and day


----------



## majin662

Just a heads up. Not sure if anyone else has had this happen yet but I can no longer save manually. Its a bug on xbox one but im having it happen as we speak on pc. Cant save. And it breaks all other quests. Cant turn in. Quest givers dont acknowledge you either. Couldn't pick up quests. Be careful.

Edit. Had to back completely out of game and reload. Seems to have done it for now. Will update. Watch your saves folks. Thankfully I save often but if you dont you may want to to avoid losing progress


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> Does SweetFx help me get used to the shoddy movement and controls?


If that was the case it'd be a gamechanger lol


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> Does SweetFx help me get used to the shoddy movement and controls?


What shoddy movement and controls?


----------



## mutatedknutz

Did any one else have trouble killing the golem and niktrail? or is it just me?
Just got out of the cave, took me some time killing these two


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> What shoddy movement and controls?


he probably means the game feeling "floaty". Feels the same to me. Geralt makes 2 steps but he covers more distance than 2 steps normally would. Kind of like his feet are not connected to the ground. Hard to explain, but if you have played games with outstanding animations and perfect movement (like MGS GZ) you probably know what I mean.


----------



## Murlocke

v1.04 just released.

Yet more performance improvements.

EDIT: Also resets textures to low, like the previous patch.


----------



## Falknir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> What shoddy movement and controls?


The lock-on mechanic is temperamental. During boss fights it can take multiple attempts to get a lock-on and at random will lose the lock-on. While engaging multiple opponents will cause the lock-on system to start juggling between making it difficult to effectively defend or evade. In the end, I just stopped using the lock-on system. Then there are the issues with sluggish player character and (the far worse) horse locomotion that ends up getting stuck-in areas with odd/sharp collision meshes. For example, got stuck on a roughly one-foot abrupt down-slope in a random clearing, that took me over ten-seconds to get out of thanks to the sluggish horse locomotion. Thankfully, the wolves attacking me got confused how to circumnavigate a few standing trees and did not end up insta-gibbing me on horseback.

Some of the controls binds seem a bit unreliable, like heavy attack, and sometimes object interaction is a chore depending on placement and environment.

The issues are tolerable, just annoying.


----------



## majin662

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falknir*
> 
> Then there are the issues with sluggish player character and (the far worse) horse locomotion that ends up getting stuck-in areas with odd/sharp collision meshes. For example, got stuck on a roughly one-foot abrupt down-slope in a random clearing, that took me over ten-seconds to get out of thanks to the sluggish horse locomotion. Thankfully, the wolves attacking me got confused how to circumnavigate a few standing trees and did not end up insta-gibbing me on horseback.


I've seen alot of that. Between that and the a.I. combat and pathing can get weird. I've seen some instances of great a.I. and other cases where drowners engage (and im not talking guarded treasure) and then just stop and run in circles 2 feet in front of me. Same with nekkers bandits...anybody really. When it happens its laughable at best.

I've stopped using the horse unless target is 700+ meters or so. Cause he stops or gets stuck super easy. Other than him I've seen stuck mid air dogs and a guard stuck in a bridge.

Small things really but funny when you see them. Hope they can fix the a.I.though cause that happens enough to be an issue


----------



## rcoolb2002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mutatedknutz*
> 
> Did any one else have trouble killing the golem and niktrail? or is it just me?
> Just got out of the cave, took me some time killing these two


I dont want to talk about it!







Wasted all my food fighting the golem... man its rough beating those other things with no healing!


----------



## WorldExclusive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mel0ns*
> 
> ..... without consoles, the game wouldnt exist, period.


I highly doubt we would be missing anything if it didn't exist. PC gamers have massive backlogs of games we bought 2-3 years ago and still don't have the time to play them. Game devs think people just want the game to be released, so here ya go...a game, and here's 10 patches over two years and it's still not fixed. But it's now time to buy the next installment, and we promise, this version will be better.

I'm not apart of the "just release the game" crowd.


----------



## Moragg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WorldExclusive*
> 
> I highly doubt we would be missing anything if it didn't exist. PC gamers have massive backlogs of games we bought 2-3 years ago and still don't have the time to play them. Game devs think people just want the game to be released, so here ya go...a game, and here's 10 patches over two years and it's still not fixed. But it's now time to buy the next installment, and we promise, this version will be better.
> 
> I'm not apart of the "just release the game" crowd.


I'm playing through TW1 and my first step was to overhaul the game with mods like FCR and RotWW. i.e. complete rebalance, better difficulty scaling, revamped UI. That's ignoring texture mods and a bunch of other fixes.

I'm half tempted to do the same for TW3 - wait 3 years, after the final patch and inevitable "special edition", then mod it into the 10/10 game it has the potential to be.

From what /r/witcher says the world is wonderful, but interface, difficulty scaling, and end-game content are sorely lacking. Also, Gwent is more important than the main storyline.


----------



## Orthello

What difficulty are you guys playing on ? .. i'm on that one sword and story i think it is, i think its too easy ... i mean i feel its almost like cheating when i meditate for an hr and all potions are refilled .

I think i'll make it harder .. just worried i'll be chasing herbs all the time then ...


----------



## DIYDeath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> What difficulty are you guys playing on ? .. i'm on that one sword and story i think it is, i think its too easy ... i mean i feel its almost like cheating when i meditate for an hr and all potions are refilled .
> 
> I think i'll make it harder .. just worried i'll be chasing herbs all the time then ...


You can choose not to spam potions as well.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DIYDeath*
> 
> You can choose not to spam potions as well.


Well i want to enjoy the game so i'll use potions to help but i feel its a tad too easy having them replenish with 1 hr meditation. I'm not a combat purist but i don't want a free ride in the game either.


----------



## Murlocke

72 hours in, level 19, made sure to wrap everything up possible in Velen/Novigrad and just stepped foot on Skellige Isles for the first time. Here goes another 70 hours.









Longest game i've ever played.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> What difficulty are you guys playing on ? .. i'm on that one sword and story i think it is, i think its too easy ... i mean i feel its almost like cheating when i meditate for an hr and all potions are refilled .
> 
> I think i'll make it harder .. just worried i'll be chasing herbs all the time then ...


Almost every review said to play on Blood and Bones. The game quickly becomes smashing fast attacks if you don't, and auto heal on mediation takes out so much from the game. Many people even recommend Death March now, you get pretty strong with optimal builds (not hard because you can respec).

You don't ever have to gather herbs really. You create bombs/potion/oils once and never have to make them again. It uses certain items to replenish them every time you mediate. Oils are infinite.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> Well i want to enjoy the game so i'll use potions to help but i feel its a tad too easy having them replenish with 1 hr meditation. I'm not a combat purist but i don't want a free ride in the game either.


If you spam potions, on top of mediating a lot, you will run out of alcohol well before the game is over. It uses a single one to replenish all potions, whether that be 1 or 20. So try to avoid drinking a single potion between mediating - use food in those cases.


----------



## Orthello

Ok so i think i understand it now, Hard alcohol is that in the inventory so i can monitor the stock level re the potions ? i don't remember seeing it , it could be there.

Can you get more hard alcohol or does it get limited later ?

I'm getting it now , it will auto make bombs/potions/oils , you say oils are infinite - they use no supplies ?

I'll up the difficultly to blood and bone tonight and go from there i think , its too easy right now. Thanks for help Murlocke !


----------



## BBZZHH

You can craft and buy Alchohest, I'm fairly sure its theoretically an infinite supply


----------



## Blackops_2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WorldExclusive*
> 
> I highly doubt we would be missing anything if it didn't exist. PC gamers have massive backlogs of games we bought 2-3 years ago and still don't have the time to play them. Game devs think people just want the game to be released, so here ya go...a game, and here's 10 patches over two years and it's still not fixed. But it's now time to buy the next installment, and we promise, this version will be better.
> 
> I'm not apart of the "just release the game" crowd.


Hear hear!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> 72 hours in, level 19, made sure to wrap everything up possible in Velen/Novigrad and just stepped foot on Skellige Isles for the first time. Here goes another 70 hours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Longest game i've ever played.
> Almost every review said to play on Blood and Bones. The game quickly becomes smashing fast attacks if you don't, and auto heal on mediation takes out so much from the game. Many people even recommend Death March now, you get pretty strong with optimal builds (not hard because you can respec).
> 
> You don't ever have to gather herbs really. You create bombs/potion/oils once and never have to make them again. It uses certain items to replenish them every time you mediate. Oils are infinite.
> If you spam potions, on top of mediating a lot, you will run out of alcohol well before the game is over. It uses a single one to replenish all potions, whether that be 1 or 20. So try to avoid drinking a single potion between mediating - use food in those cases.


Just made it to skellige at lvl 12 but on Lamberts quest. Going back to finish Novigrad and Velen. I think it will be the longest single player/story based RPG i've ever played and committed to. I have 30hrs in already. I have to say it's phenomenal I haven't been this invested in an RPG, leveling, and gear since Guild Wars (the original). Really just adore the Witcher Universe. It's the closest thing there is to a Game Of Thrones Video game.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Murlocke*
> 
> 72 hours in, level 19, made sure to wrap everything up possible in Velen/Novigrad and just stepped foot on Skellige Isles for the first time. Here goes another 70 hours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Longest game i've ever played.
> Almost every review said to play on Blood and Bones. The game quickly becomes smashing fast attacks if you don't, and auto heal on mediation takes out so much from the game. Many people even recommend Death March now, you get pretty strong with optimal builds (not hard because you can respec).
> 
> You don't ever have to gather herbs really. You create bombs/potion/oils once and never have to make them again. It uses certain items to replenish them every time you mediate. Oils are infinite.
> If you spam potions, on top of mediating a lot, you will run out of alcohol well before the game is over. It uses a single one to replenish all potions, whether that be 1 or 20. So try to avoid drinking a single potion between mediating - use food in those cases.


It's huge. I'm level 13 and 49 hours in, like you I'm not touching the isle till done in Novigrad etc. Also playing on Blood and Bones as my friend suggested it and glad I did, the game isn't _easy_ but it's not particularly difficult once leveled up either. Focusing on armour crafting at the moment.


----------



## Evanlet

Just now finished the game...
Post-game depression setting in, it was that good. There is plenty to do after you've finished, but the feel of anything you do being meaningful in any way is gone, which is upsetting.

Around the 130 hour mark and level 37.


----------



## XKaan

Level 12 \ 20 hours in - running around Novigrad doing quests and focusing on getting better equipment. I just crafted the Grifin armor, which was a nice step up from the dlc armor.

I plan on leveling up to 16 then heading off the Skellege.

Loving this game - it's amazing. It just sucks when you get a diagram for a sick piece of armor or sword, but realize you can't equip it until you are level 4 or higher..lol

I estimate I'll have 100 hours into this game before I near the end, and that's ok by me!


----------



## azanimefan

meh. this isn't "huge" i'm pretty sure DAI had larger zones (if you measured the time to get from one corner to the other) there are a countless number of sidequests to do, but none of them really have a purpose to the plot or even a reward for doing it other then the map icon changing from white to grey, and while i had genuine complaints about the relevance of many of the sidequests in DAI, atleast those felt like actual game tasks that someone put some time into creating, most of the sidequests in TW3 feel like incidental lazy work some programmer didn't even feel required to write text for.

basically busy work. It's pretty easy to add hundreds of "quests" to a game if you just basically call a monster spawnpoint and chest a "quest"

My problem with all these busy work sidequests is they clutter the map up making finding TRUE quests with rewards hard to find, as many ??? on the map don't even spawn real rewards.

i did the first area completely, after that the number of sidequests got stupid so i just do them if they're on the way to my next main quest or journal sidequest. it's a lot better then roaming the countryside looking for ??? to work on. sure i don't hit all the ??? but really most of them are pointless busywork with junk rewards anyway.


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> meh. this isn't "huge" there are a countless number of sidequests to do, but none of them really have a purpose to the plot or even a reward for doing it other then the map icon changing from white to grey.
> 
> basically busy work. It's pretty easy to add hundreds of "quests" to a game if you just basically call a monster spawnpoint and chest a "quest"
> 
> My problem with all these busy work sidequests is they clutter the map up making finding TRUE quests with rewards hard to find, as many ??? on the map don't even spawn real rewards.
> 
> i did the first area completely, after that the number of sidequests got stupid so i just do them if they're on the way to my next main quest or journal sidequest. it's a lot better then roaming the countryside looking for ??? to work on. sure i don't hit all the ??? but really most of them are pointless busywork with junk rewards anyway.


The first area is simply tutorial. The side quests in the game have actual relevant storylines for the most part. Some of the exploration and contracts are kind of along the lines of filler, but even then they okay into the main quest a lot of the time.

Side quests are broken down into 3 categories. Side quests, contracts and treasure hunts.


----------



## kurei

Here are my thoughts on the game.

Graphics downgrade from E3 is obvious. CDPR need to tell us why it is.
Graphics are still brilliant and the low VRAM usage endears the game to me for well written code.
Map and quest marker mechanics could be better. I should have the option of seeing more than one active quest marker on the world map. I hate it when I realize that i've passed through a point 4 times where i was supposed to do something but since i was tracking another quest there was no indication that something can be done here.
DLC should have been free as promised but I wouldn't mind paying for good DLC once i've finished the main game.
Story seems very interesting and the combat system rework has done wonders for improving combat.
Inventory management could use a sort feature.
Clearer written instruction on gwent should be available somewhere. I also wouldn't mind some lore on gwent. Its absolutely brilliant now that i've gotten the hang of it.
An option or some spells to adjust weather wouldn't be too bad either. Sometimes the trees and foliage are shaking to unrealistically, breaking immersion.

Other than that, CDPR has once again given us a game worthy of being called a masterpiece. Even if they were dishonest with their buyers at E3 , they have still maintained a degree of honesty towards their product in content and Quality control, which is much more than what can be said for a lot of other studios


----------



## daviejams

Anyone else just love traveling between locations on your horse ? The sunsets are actually beautiful , Witcher 3 is possibly the best looking game of all time. Not far away anyway , makes me wonder about all the talk of a downgrade. Who cares when the game looks as good as it does ?

I can play everything at ultra on a single 290x and 2500k , I set the frame rate to 30 though as it was jumping between 30-60 and annoying me


----------



## sterob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mel0ns*
> 
> without consoles, the game wouldnt exist, period.


If you are referring to the CD Pr interview with Eurogamer, the whole context actually meant that if the game was release exclusively for PC, witcher 3 will not look like this downgraded. It was corporate double speak to avoid angry console mob while answering those questions.

CD Pr took money from selling Witcher 1 and 2 on PC to make Witcher 3, and they raise to fame this day is all thanks to PC. So console have no whatsoever role in helping creating witcher 3 as today


----------



## daviejams

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sterob*
> 
> If you are referring to the CD Pr interview with Eurogamer, the whole context actually meant that if the game was release exclusively for PC, witcher 3 will not look like this downgraded. It was corporate double speak to avoid angry console mob while answering those questions.
> 
> CD Pr took money from selling Witcher 1 and 2 on PC to make Witcher 3, and they raise to fame this day is all thanks to PC. So console have no whatsoever role in helping creating witcher 3 as today


They would not have had the budget to make Witcher 3 as it is without the consoles.


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JTHMfreak*
> 
> Why are people comparing this to skyrim? Skyrim had insane amounts of loading, plus it needs mods to look fantastic.
> W3 maybe different from what we were shown, but still looks gorgeous off the bat.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> Everyone who flooded the internet complaining about CDPR and The Witcher 3 over the past couple weeks should be ashamed of themselves. The graphics are great - as good as anything else that is open world. And this is the best RPG I've played in a very long time, easily superior to The Witcher 2 in every respect - and TW2 was already very good.


Yeah I stopped complaining after beating the prolouge. The gameplay in this game is really fun and is better in everyway than Witcher 2. If they really couldn't give us the visuals without sacrfising the open world and all the overall enhancements, then I'm completely fine with it. Best game I ever played.

I wanted to beat W2 but got frustrated with the map system and how linear the world is (invisible walls).
Gonna be hard for me to get back into W2 after the materpiece I just played W3
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> meh. this isn't "huge" i'm pretty sure DAI had larger zones (if you measured the time to get from one corner to the other) there are a countless number of sidequests to do, but none of them really have a purpose to the plot or even a reward for doing it other then the map icon changing from white to grey, and while i had genuine complaints about the relevance of many of the sidequests in DAI, atleast those felt like actual game tasks that someone put some time into creating, most of the sidequests in TW3 feel like incidental lazy work some programmer didn't even feel required to write text for.
> 
> basically busy work. It's pretty easy to add hundreds of "quests" to a game if you just basically call a monster spawnpoint and chest a "quest"
> 
> My problem with all these busy work sidequests is they clutter the map up making finding TRUE quests with rewards hard to find, as many ??? on the map don't even spawn real rewards.
> 
> i did the first area completely, after that the number of sidequests got stupid so i just do them if they're on the way to my next main quest or journal sidequest. it's a lot better then roaming the countryside looking for ??? to work on. sure i don't hit all the ??? but really most of them are pointless busywork with junk rewards anyway.


Once you move past the tutorial, there are several side quests, (actually some in the tutorial as well) that tie in to the end of the game and how the outcome is. If you skimp, you prbly won't get the happy ending you wanted


----------



## TK421

Is there a patch or user made patch to fix this?


----------



## edo101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *daviejams*
> 
> Anyone else just love traveling between locations on your horse ? The sunsets are actually beautiful , Witcher 3 is possibly the best looking game of all time. Not far away anyway , makes me wonder about all the talk of a downgrade. Who cares when the game looks as good as it does ?
> 
> I can play everything at ultra on a single 290x and 2500k , I set the frame rate to 30 though as it was jumping between 30-60 and annoying me


Yeah I love horseback and running into bandits and killing them on horseback. The momemtum of your horse and the swing give you a very satisfying brutal finish


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *edo101*
> 
> Yeah I stopped complaining after beating the prolouge. The gameplay in this game is really fun and is better in everyway than Witcher 2. If they really couldn't give us the visuals without sacrfising the open world and all the overall enhancements, then I'm completely fine with it. Best game I ever played.
> 
> I wanted to beat W2 but got frustrated with the map system and how linear the world is (invisible walls).
> Gonna be hard for me to get back into W2 after the materpiece I just played W3
> Once you move past the tutorial, there are several side quests, (actually some in the tutorial as well) that tie in to the end of the game and how the outcome is. If you skimp, you prbly won't get the happy ending you wanted


I am well into the game, dozens and dozens of hours into the game, long past the tutorial.

I just spent another 12 hours on it yesterday.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad game. but the side quests are often just lazy work. I am not really talking about the side quests in your journal (well many of those are busy work too), some of those journal side quests have relevance for the plot. i'm talking about the horde of bounties, ??? marks on the map, and the endless horde of lootable containers filled with junk located at those spots. If combat weren't so enjoyable, i probably would have stopped playing this a long time ago.


----------



## Assirra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> I am well into the game, dozens and dozens of hours into the game, long past the tutorial.
> 
> I just spent another 12 hours on it yesterday.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad game. but the side quests are often just lazy work. I am not really talking about the side quests in your journal (well many of those are busy work too), some of those journal side quests have relevance for the plot. i'm talking about the horde of bounties, ??? marks on the map, and the endless horde of lootable containers filled with junk located at those spots. If combat weren't so enjoyable, i probably would have stopped playing this a long time ago.


Those are not side quests. Those are random "hey do stuff here" like every open world game has.
You cannot call those side quests and then use them as argument that the side quests are bad.


----------



## Evanlet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Assirra*
> 
> Those are not side quests. Those are random "hey do stuff here" like every open world game has.
> You cannot call those side quests and then use them as argument that the side quests are bad.


That's true. They're just content fillers.


----------

