Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Victorious Secret

The Witcher 3 was downgraded from what was shown in 2013 - Now with PS4 Comparison video

Recommended Posts

I believe people here are getting confused between two different messages.

 

First, you cannot go shun business practices and then say "it is okay for <x> games". Doing this would land in selective reasoning for something which applies to all companies involved in development. A singular group cannot be praised as the "hero/herald of PC gaming" , as that is a manufactured term and does not exist in practice. They make games with THEIR interests in mind, not yours; this is business 101. If one developer or publisher has made particularly dim-witted decisions, the others are not automagically exempt from doing the same thing.

 

ON THE OTHER HAND...

 

If you cannot appreciate a game for what it is, a game, rather than some graphical eye candy, then you need to think over the reasons that you are into video gaming at all. Let me repeat here, this is video games we are talking about, not a specification competitor, not interactive pornography, and certainly not gloat material. Do not get me wrong; we can appreciate the progress of visual and engine technology up to today, but there is a practical limit where, to be cruelly blunt, you are no longer a gamer and fall into the line of either a fanboy or an elitist.


Read the community standards; it's like a guide on how to not be a moron.

Gerdauf's Law: Each and every human being, without exception, is the direct carbon copy of the types of people that he/she bitterly opposes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the game has been downgraded (the game isn't out, and an unnamed source on the Internet is as trustworthy as "my uncle works at Nintendo") I still think CDPR are good guys. Simply not infecting the game with God awful DRM is more than enough for me to give them the thumbs up. The game has gotten great reviews so hopefully the game will be good despite these alleged downgrades.

Since some people have mentioned Watch_Dogs, this is quite a bit different.

1) Watch_Dogs was completely broken to the point where it was barely playable. Hopefully this won't be the case with The Witcher 3.

 

2) The E3 effects were still in the game, and perfectly functional. All you had to do was flip a flag from off to on and it would work, and then Ubisoft patched it out. Even according to this anonymous source the effects were simply not finished and would therefore not work in the game without extra work put in. There is quite a big difference between "make a game then reduce the quality so that it looks more similar on all the platforms" and "make a game for all platforms and then increase the detail on one of them, but not increase it as much as it theoretically could with more time and money thrown at it".

 

But well on a serious note, the one thing that does bother me is that this game might not run well on AMD hardware at launch: I've been looking at the requirements and they recommend a 290 on the same league as the 770 on the Nvidia side. That screams completely unoptimized for AMD since the 290 is quite a bit ahead of the 770, but we'll see.


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is perfectly reasonable to be annoyed when a final product does not live up to expectations that were based upon information released by the developer themselves. Every screenshot, video and other piece of information CD Projekt Red have ever released about The Witcher 3 was an advertisement. I'm sure some people will disagree with that, but the ultimate aim every time was to get people talking about it, drive hype and, ultimately, sales of the product, which is advertising.

 

People may have preordered the game based upon that advertising a long time ago, others will be purchasing the game around now, based upon that previous advertising unaware that there is new information about the downgraded quality. People aren't simply annoyed that the game won't be as good as it could be, but that it doesn't look like it will be as good as they were led to believe it would be.

 

Honestly it's a case of false advertising, it's just not treated as a serious criminal offence because it is so easy for developers to claim that instead of trying to mislead consumers they were simply showing consumers what the product looks like so far whichmaynotberepresentativeofthefinalproduct. Developers know that consumers are influenced by pre-release information so they purposefully inflate expectations with no intention of doing the work and spending the money required to meet those expectations. The best part of all, they, and "sensible" gamers get to blame the annoyed customers for being deceived!

 

And to those who don't think graphics are that important and believe that the graphics downgrades don't matter so long as the game is still good. You should care simply because it's an immoral practice. The developer is knowingly trying to screw over customers, even if you personally aren't affected. Some people do care about the graphical fidelity, and the downgrade will impact their experience of the game. Simply because it is not important to you personally does not mean that it shouldn't be important to anybody else.

 

 

I would understand your argument better if the visual downgrades were significant.  If Geralt ended up looking like pic related it'd be one thing.

 

5934638734_b8138fe943_b.jpg

 

 

We're talking about the devs changing a few rendering effects that primarily effect background scenery.  

 

Do we even have any actual side by side comparisons of the same area in the retail product?  No one has posted any, and I haven't been paying attention to pre-release coverage.

 

 

 

 

 Also I really don't understand your outrage over the community's outrage. People expected a certain level of graphical fidelity and they won't be getting that, it's the same thing that happened with Watch_Dogs. Now people won't have trust in CDPR, which they shouldn't have had in the first place. This is a lesson that everyone needs to learn, don't pre-order, ever.

 

It just seems blown out of proportion to me.  If you know anything about the stuff they cut out you'd know how minor it is.  They replaced most of it with stuff that will more or less look the same, just with less performance demand.  

 

I agree though, people shouldn't preorder games.  


4K // R5 3600 // RTX2080Ti

Link to post
Share on other sites

They might end up releasing a patch when the game comes out to remedy all the PC downgrades. I think it's too early to suggest it's a downgrade for all platforms. Not trying to protect them or anything but they do have a good history so I think we should give them the benefit of the doubt and wait until official release. 


 (\__/)

 (='.'=)

(")_(")  GTX 1070 5820K 500GB Samsung EVO SSD 1TB WD Green 8GB of RAM Corsair 540 Air Black EVGA Supernova 750W Gold  Logitech G502 Fiio E10 Wharfedale Diamond 220 Yamaha A-S501 Lian Li Fan Controller NHD-15 KBTalking Keyboard

Link to post
Share on other sites

But well on a serious note, the one thing that does bother me is that this game might not run well on AMD hardware at launch: I've been looking at the requirements and they recommend a 290 on the same league as the 770 on the Nvidia side. That screams completely unoptimized for AMD since the 290 is quite a bit ahead of the 770, but we'll see.

I didn't play The Witcher 1 or 2 at launch but I have heard that both of them were pretty demanding when they came out, so I wouldn't be surprised if The Witcher 3 ended up being demanding as well. Also, isn't it a "The way it's meant to be played title"? That means that at the very least Nvidia have had more time/closer connections to Nvidia, which helps them tweak their drivers.

Let's just hope the most important parts of the won't be Nvidia exclusive. Like the boobs physics for example.

 

 

 

Wow so many comments were removed in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP

 

Like I said, I never planned on buying this for full price so I'm not mad in the slightest, but I still care. Also I really don't understand your outrage over the community's outrage. People expected a certain level of graphical fidelity and they won't be getting that, it's the same thing that happened with Watch_Dogs. Now people won't have trust in CDPR, which they shouldn't have had in the first place. This is a lesson that everyone needs to learn, don't pre-order, ever.

 

Trust goes out the window when a developer makes evasive statements on the graphical capabilities of the game a few months out from launch. If CDPR had straight up avoided showing and promising anything, or using inflated PC specs to power brutally inefficient code that required a beast of a PC; people would be less outraged. But CDPR showed off "in-game" content. They set that bar themselves. 

 

They failed to reach that bar because they didn't have resources and time to build a separate PC game, instead giving you a Console+ experience as opposed to the consoles getting a PC Lite experience; a big difference in methodology that I hope people understand. 

 

Then again, this is what people get for so blindly following a company and saying "oh they could never do wrong, oh its worth pre-ordering since its gonna be a great game". Hey, if those people can blow 60 bucks on a game before it even launches because they somehow can make the judgement that "its a good game", why can't people on the other side give the game crap based off far stronger and tangible information? The double standard that people used, especially with respect to this game, is amazing. 

 

Preordering is bad and people should feel bad BUT CDPR are good guys so they get my money. A million games preordered of what? Are people that impatient? Need it that badly? Its a digital game, you can chill can you not? Console gamers even have proper reviews with Digital Foundry releasing their video shortly; at least they have a valid reason to want the game "pre loaded" but PC users? why? 

 

We have no real reviews for the PC version. We have no metrics, no benchmarks, not a single port report. The game is digital. Its not going anywhere. You can wait 2-3 days after launch to make up your mind. Are people that pressed for time that they need the game ASAP? Its a game planning dozens and dozens of hours; does it matter when you start playing it?

Alas, I can't understand that mentality. I got burned by BF4 and have tried to avoid the hype and the pomp and the excitement, and for good reason. Even the most "trusted and friend of PC gaming" developers will screw up and screw you over.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares, the people who don't nitpick about graphics are going to have fun playing the game while the people who got their jimmies rustled over graphics are left behind complaining.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, let's sum up the important parts... they had a dx9 engine back in 2013 that looked breathtaking, but they also expected the consoles to be more powerful (like the xbox 360 and ps3 when they came out). Realizing that the consoles aren't as powerful, they had to change the engine and downgrade it a bit, so that the game could actually run on consoles (their first impressions about the consoles were actually, that they won't be able to run that game). As if those things did not happen before... There are some misinformation about the graphics, back in early 2015 several journalists of game magazines were invited to play the game for a several hours, and they were said, that the game has been running at high settings... and it looked much better than the console versions (a German magazine called "gamestar" has several videos regarding this topic):

 

the gameplay scenes start at 2:15 and we can clearly observe better graphics compared to the PS4 version (in my opinion, the ps4 runs at low-medium settings). 

 

Yes, the game does not look like advertised in 2013, but... they had to make sacrifices to make the game run on consoles, but it's not always about the graphics, what about the more than 100 hours of gameplay? What about the story and the realistic social problems it's using to create great atmosphere? 

 

I do have to admit, I'm of Slavic descent, and the game (actually both the first and the second game and the books) appeals to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I noticed a good thing in all this actually.

"we sequentially had to takeout/turn down a lot of features not just from our NVIDIA GameWorks pipeline but our normal game solution scripts as well(...)"

 

Does it mean, that Witcher 3 might actually run well on AMD cards? Cos than I don't mind downgrade that much. :D


Born to game, forced to work.  -_-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, let's sum up the important parts... they had a dx9 engine back in 2013 that looked breathtaking, but they also expected the consoles to be more powerful (like the xbox 360 and ps3 when they came out). Realizing that the consoles aren't as powerful, they had to change the engine and downgrade it a bit, so that the game could actually run on consoles (their first impressions about the consoles were actually, that they won't be able to run that game). As if those things did not happen before... There are some misinformation about the graphics, back in early 2015 several journalists of game magazines were invited to play the game for a several hours, and they were said, that the game has been running at high settings... and it looked much better than the console versions (a German magazine called "gamestar" has several videos regarding this topic):

 

the gameplay scenes start at 2:15 and we can clearly observe better graphics compared to the PS4 version (in my opinion, the ps4 runs at low-medium settings). 

 

Yes, the game does not look like advertised in 2013, but... they had to make sacrifices to make the game run on consoles, but it's not always about the graphics, what about the more than 100 hours of gameplay? What about the story and the realistic social problems it's using to create great atmosphere? 

 

I do have to admit, I'm of Slavic descent, and the game (actually both the first and the second game and the books) appeals to me.

Some pictures of the pc version:

 

http://www.sector.sk/files/novinky/2015-4-11-8-37-1/ukazal-prave-witcher-iii-vylep-image-9983.jpg

 

http://www.sector.sk/files/novinky/2015-4-13-17-51-47/4k-zabery-na-svet-noveho-zakli-image-750.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not worried about the graphiçs downgrade.

I mean if the game çomes out and the graphiçs are downgraded I will be pissed just on a matter of prinçiple , I hate when this happens and I wont be biased and exçuse this çompany just beçause they are good sports.

Now if on top of that the game has the "projeçt çars syndrome" , you know running at the same FPS on a 660 ti and a 290x.

I wont touçh it with a 30 foot pole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the game does not look like advertised in 2013, but... they had to make sacrifices to make the game run on consoles, but it's not always about the graphics, what about the more than 100 hours of gameplay? What about the story and the realistic social problems it's using to create great atmosphere? 

It's not always about graphics, except when CDPR had said from the beginning that they were going to make this game for PC first and downgrade accordingly.  Only to turn around last year and say that "there isn't much difference between the PC and console versions."  People feel burned because they were promised something they aren't getting.  Because now we know that like every developer before them, CDPR developed for the lowest denominator, it's insulting.  

 

We call ourselves PCMR as a semi-joke, but we ARE the master race. We invest the most money into the hardware that fuels our hobby.  And with that investment we expect more things other than just simple graphical prowess.  Larger more active worlds, smarter AI, better game and storytelling mechanics.  Instead we get horseshit from devs and publishers who just shit out the same stuff year after year.  When will it end????  We thought that CDPR, with their pedigree of the Witcher 2 could finally stick it to the man and make a true PC game that was ported down to consoles and not the other way around, and what do we get? A slap in the face? After pouring 100's of ice buckets over our heads.


AD2000x Review  Fitear To Go! 334 Review

Speakers - KEF LSX

Headphones - Sennheiser HD650, Kumitate Labs KL-Lakh

Link to post
Share on other sites

''you can't just explain it like this''

in other words:  '' microsoft and sony payed me to make the pc port less viable, to promote their consoles, and im stupid enough to accept their offers.  ''

 

 

how to be a bad game dev.

 

I don't think it's fair to say who got paid by who. We don't know any of that for a fact. We're just the audience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares, the people who don't nitpick about graphics are going to have fun playing the game while the people who got their jimmies rustled over graphics are left behind complaining.

people who think this are the same people who would defend rockstar if they had released the game like PS4 to PC, but rockstar were clever weren't they, they tricked me into believing those screenshots are from PC , but nope, they had something better for PC, now when ubisoft did the same thing with Watch dogs, did people come out and say "who cares about graphics" ? that's hypocrisy 101, you don't get to choose who gets a pass and who don't. 


 

Spoiler
Spoiler

Intel i7 4790K (4.0 GHz) | MSI Z97-GAMING 5 | Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1866 2x8GB | Asus GeForce GTX 780 Ti DirectCU II OC | Samsung 840 Pro Series 256GB | Corsair RM 850W | Corsair H90 94.0 CFM | Logitech® Wireless Combo MK330 | Cooler Master HAF XM | Dell S2240L 60Hz 21.5 IPS | 

PCPartPicker 

Link to post
Share on other sites

:'(


Desktop - Corsair 300r i7 4770k H100i MSI 780ti 16GB Vengeance Pro 2400mhz Crucial MX100 512gb Samsung Evo 250gb 2 TB WD Green, AOC Q2770PQU 1440p 27" monitor Laptop 1 Alienware M18x Red - 18.4" 1080p i7 3610qm CF 7970m samsung evo 250gb, raid 0 2x 500gb harddrive, killer nic n1103, 8gb ram, Nebula Red Laptop 2 Clevo W110er - 11.6" 768p, i5 3230m, 650m GT 2gb, OCZ vertex 4 256gb,  4gb ram, Laptop 3 M11x Celeron SU7300 + 512mb 335m, 8gb Ram Server: Fractal Define Mini, MSI Z78-G43, Intel G3220, 8GB Corsair Vengeance, 4x 3tb WD Reds in Raid 10, iPad 4 32gb, iPhone 6 128gb Space Grey, Sony A7

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not worried about the graphiçs downgrade.

I mean if the game çomes out and the graphiçs are downgraded I will be pissed just on a matter of prinçiple , I hate when this happens and I wont be biased and exçuse this çompany just beçause they are good sports.

Now if on top of that the game has the "projeçt çars syndrome" , you know running at the same FPS on a 660 ti and a 290x.

I wont touçh it with a 30 foot pole.

Arma Syndrome*


CPU: Intel I7 4790k @ 4.6Ghz 1.255v | GPU: Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 980 Ti | Display: Acer XB270HU bprz | RAM: 16GB (4x4GB) Gskill Ripjaws X 1866MHz | CPU Cooler: H80i | Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 5 | SSD: Mushkin 120GB + Sandisk 480GB | HDD: WD Blue 1TB | Case: Enthoo Pro |PSU: Seaconic M12II EVO 850w | OS: Windows 10 64-Bit | Mouse: Logitech RGB G502 | Keyboard: Thermaltake Poseidon Z (Brown Switches) | 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not always about graphics, except when CDPR had said from the beginning that they were going to make this game for PC first and downgrade accordingly.  Only to turn around last year and say that "there isn't much difference between the PC and console versions."  People feel burned because they were promised something they aren't getting.  Because now we know that like every developer before them, CDPR developed for the lowest denominator, it's insulting.  

 

We call ourselves PCMR as a semi-joke, but we ARE the master race. We invest the most money into the hardware that fuels our hobby.  And with that investment we expect more things other than just simple graphical prowess.  Larger more active worlds, smarter AI, better game and storytelling mechanics.  Instead we get horseshit from devs and publishers who just shit out the same stuff year after year.  When will it end????  We thought that CDPR, with their pedigree of the Witcher 2 could finally stick it to the man and make a true PC game that was ported down to consoles and not the other way around, and what do we get? A slap in the face? After pouring 100's of ice buckets over our heads.

Well, the witcher 2 was one of the best RPGs ever made (regarding the story and the atmosphere, what the hell, even the graphics)... Well, they had to, the console market can not be ignored, because that's where the money is (or let's say a big chunk of the potential income). However... the witcher 3 is going to be one of the best RPGs in a long time and it will set several standards regarding story, atmosphere, and even quest design and gameplay... and it's my last big adventure with Geralt.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

people who think this are the same people who would defend rockstar if they had released the game like PS4 to PC, but rockstar were clever weren't they, they tricked me into believing those screenshots are from PC , but nope, they had something better for PC, now when ubisoft did the same thing with Watch dogs, did people come out and say "who cares about graphics" ? that's hypocrisy 101, you don't get to choose who gets a pass and who don't. 

 

Niçe sig mate .

I agree 100% thought. Ubisoft çan downgrade their games but oh çd projeçt red does it( if this is confirmed)  and its okay .

This is speçial treatment and shows double standards .

All çompanies çan mess up , even valve and they should be çalled out aççordingly

( My normal ç is broken on the keyboard ,:( )

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ubisoft çan downgrade their games but oh çd projeçt red does it( if this is confirmed)  and its okay .

This here. It's not about graphics, it's about principle. The end.


The ability to google properly is a skill of its own. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Niçe sig mate .

I agree 100% thought. Ubisoft çan downgrade their games but oh çd projeçt red does it( if this is confirmed)  and its okay .

This is speçial treatment and shows double standards .

All çompanies çan mess up , even valve and they should be çalled out aççordingly

( My normal ç is broken on the keyboard , :( )

 

This. We can't allow anybody to screw us over. Period.

Valve had a pass and they tried funny stuff with paid mods. The community tore them a new one and they went back on that one for now.

We shat on Ubisoft for their continuous crap and false advertisement. Same with EA and Activision and everyone before them.

 

Now "oh its CDPR, they are the good guys, they get a pass".

No. They do not deserve the pass.

I don't give a flying f*ck about the downgrade. But I do care about deceiving the consumers and the fanbase.

They are a company that wants money. They lied to have it. They deserve the shitstorm.

 

The downgrade IS real. Lets just wait for the real release to see what is the real extent of it.

 

 

Anyways...was really wondering why you were using ç, that is funny ^^

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trust goes out the window when a developer makes evasive statements on the graphical capabilities of the game a few months out from launch. If CDPR had straight up avoided showing and promising anything, or using inflated PC specs to power brutally inefficient code that required a beast of a PC; people would be less outraged. But CDPR showed off "in-game" content. They set that bar themselves. 

 

They failed to reach that bar because they didn't have resources and time to build a separate PC game, instead giving you a Console+ experience as opposed to the consoles getting a PC Lite experience; a big difference in methodology that I hope people understand. 

 

Then again, this is what people get for so blindly following a company and saying "oh they could never do wrong, oh its worth pre-ordering since its gonna be a great game". Hey, if those people can blow 60 bucks on a game before it even launches because they somehow can make the judgement that "its a good game", why can't people on the other side give the game crap based off far stronger and tangible information? The double standard that people used, especially with respect to this game, is amazing. 

 

Preordering is bad and people should feel bad BUT CDPR are good guys so they get my money. A million games preordered of what? Are people that impatient? Need it that badly? Its a digital game, you can chill can you not? Console gamers even have proper reviews with Digital Foundry releasing their video shortly; at least they have a valid reason to want the game "pre loaded" but PC users? why? 

 

We have no real reviews for the PC version. We have no metrics, no benchmarks, not a single port report. The game is digital. Its not going anywhere. You can wait 2-3 days after launch to make up your mind. Are people that pressed for time that they need the game ASAP? Its a game planning dozens and dozens of hours; does it matter when you start playing it?

Alas, I can't understand that mentality. I got burned by BF4 and have tried to avoid the hype and the pomp and the excitement, and for good reason. Even the most "trusted and friend of PC gaming" developers will screw up and screw you over.  

You know, I said it the other day. "yeah, if people could stop pre-ordering, that'd be great..."

Link to post
Share on other sites

But well on a serious note, the one thing that does bother me is that this game might not run well on AMD hardware at launch: I've been looking at the requirements and they recommend a 290 on the same league as the 770 on the Nvidia side. That screams completely unoptimized for AMD since the 290 is quite a bit ahead of the 770, but we'll see.

THAT is because it's a gameworks title, which is a continuing reason why I refuse to buy team green. It's artificially adding value to segregate the gaming community and is anti competitive to boot.


Daily Driver:

Case: Red Prodigy CPU: i5 3570K @ 4.3 GHZ GPU: Powercolor PCS+ 290x @1100 mhz MOBO: Asus P8Z77-I CPU Cooler: NZXT x40 RAM: 8GB 2133mhz AMD Gamer series Storage: A 1TB WD Blue, a 500GB WD Blue, a Samsung 840 EVO 250GB

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, I said it the other day. "yeah, if people could stop pre-ordering, that'd be great..."

And at the same time pre-orders hit 1M. If this turns out to be true, I hope people would learn something.


The ability to google properly is a skill of its own. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

THAT is because it's a gameworks title, which is a continuing reason why I refuse to buy team green. It's artificially adding value to segregate the gaming community and is anti competitive to boot.

 

Yeah that's what visual advances are all about, segregating the community!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×