Support NeoGAF

DarkLordMalik · May 21, 2015

The way the handled this is absolutely pathetic.

They probably lost some of their fans, but it doesn't matter for them. They made bank on the game by targeting mainly the PS4 and Xbox One as their primary platform. When it was initially announced that PC is not going to be the primary platform, I was sure that they won't be able to match the target footage. Still, a clarification would have been nice, but they had to dance around the questions regarding downgrade, only to admit it all up once the game is out.

I feel bad for those who invested in PC hardware to play a version of W3 which doesn't even exist.

Skyzard · May 21, 2015

jorgejjvr said:
People really care about at what the grass looks like?

This isn't mirrors edge, you play in forests and farms. Quite a lot of vegetation about.

BigTnaples · May 21, 2015

jorgejjvr said:
People really care about at what the grass looks like?

Considering grass is probably the thing you see absolutely most in a 100-200+ hour game.

Well yes.

Speaking of which. I am trying to decide which make foliage look better more often, SSAO or HBAO+.

I know HBAO+ is the better tech, and often it does look better in TW3. However, many times, SSAO gives grass a "darkness" and a "depth" you don't see with the HBAO+ as often.

Anyone know why this is? Andy?

Cave Johnson · May 21, 2015

DarkLordMalik said:
The way the handled this is absolutely pathetic.

They probably lost some of their fans, but it doesn't matter for them. They made bank on the game by targeting mainly the PS4 and Xbox One as their primary platform. When it was initially announced that PC is not going to be the primary platform, I was sure that they won't be able to match the target footage. Still, a clarification would have been nice, but they had to dance around the questions regarding downgrade, only to admit it all up once the game is out.

I feel bad for those who invested in PC hardware to play a version of W3 which doesn't even exist.

I believe you are overestimating sales for this game. 1.5 million guaranteed preorders may mean something last generation; but at this scale they're going to need to secure more than that for any similar ambitious titles in the future. Losing sales - no matter how small - is not something you take for granted especially if your budget going to scale up.

viveks86 · May 21, 2015

BigTnaples said:
Considering grass is probably the thing you see absolutely most in a 100-200+ hour game.

Well yes.

Speaking of which. I am trying to decide which make foliage look better more often, SSAO or HBAO+.

I know HBAO+ is the better tech, and often it does look better in TW3. However, many times, SSAO gives grass a "darkness" and a "depth" you don't see with the HBAO+ as often.

Anyone know why this is? Andy?

Denser the grass, more chance that it gets captured by the AO algorithm. Also higher the resolution, better the AO. In general, HBAO+ wins hands down. Do u have any 1:1 shots to compare?

Velurian · May 21, 2015

I bet at some point there is going to be petition: "CDPR please release the GOTY edition with a graphics upgrade we were advertised in the first trailers"

I feel it is a shame that they made the versions visually similar. Could have just made as good as possible versions for all platforms...

BigTnaples · May 21, 2015

viveks86 said:
Denser the grass, more chance that it gets captured by the AO algorithm. Also higher the resolution, better the AO. In general, HBAO+ wins hands down. Do u have any 1:1 shots to compare?

I unfortunate have not been taking screens. (Usually just use steam, and haven't linked the overlay to WH yet.)

But if I stand in a field of grass, playing at 4K Resolution and turn SSAO on the grass looks like this, with "darkness" under it.

And if I enable HBAO+ in the same scene...
I get grass that looks more like this.

But the difference is not always that stark depending on the lighting. It's odd.

Sorry for the bad comparison. I am packing for a flight.

DOWN · May 21, 2015

BigTnaples said:
Considering grass is probably the thing you see absolutely most in a 100-200+ hour game.

Well yes.

Speaking of which. I am trying to decide which make foliage look better more often, SSAO or HBAO+.

I know HBAO+ is the better tech, and often it does look better in TW3. However, many times, SSAO gives grass a "darkness" and a "depth" you don't see with the HBAO+ as often.

Anyone know why this is? Andy?

I said this in another thread and got shot down by the defensive folk who advocate the game's graphical glory. HBAO+ seemed to often look almost as light as just plain shutting it off in the comparisons posted.

cripterion · May 21, 2015

Sorry I didn't follow this thread so much since release but has this been posted?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...he-witcher-3-graphics-downgrade-issue-head-on

"If you're looking at the development process," Iwinski begins, "we do a certain build for a tradeshow and you pack it, it works, it looks amazing. And you are extremely far away from completing the game. Then you put it in the open-world, regardless of the platform, and it's like 'oh shit, it doesn't really work'. We've already showed it, now we have to make it work. And then we try to make it work on a huge scale. This is the nature of games development."

It was captured PC footage, not pre-rendered, Badowski confirms, but a lot had to change. "I cannot argue - if people see changes, we cannot argue," Adam Badowski says, "but there are complex technical reasons behind it.
"Maybe it was our bad decision to change the rendering system," he mulls, "because the rendering system after VGX was changed." There were two possible rendering systems but one won out because it looked nicer across the whole world, in daytime and at night. The other would have required lots of dynamic lighting "and with such a huge world simply didn't work".

It's a similar story for environments, and their texture sizes and incidental objects. It was a trade-off between keeping that aspect of them or their unique, handmade design. And the team chose the latter. The data-streaming system couldn't handle everything while Geralt galloped around.

The billowing smoke and roaring fire from the trailer? "It's a global system and it will kill PC because transparencies - without DirectX 12 it does't work good in every game." So he killed it for the greater good, and he focused on making sure the 5000 doors in Novigrad worked instead.

Fucking finally. Was this so hard? I'm dumbfounded that they couldn't think of saying this outright instead of coming up with bullshit PR every single time people questioned the game's visuals.

EDIT : Nevermind seen it's been already discussed. But holy hell, they really need to rething their communication towards the pc community instead of taking people for morons. Also when people claiming they've been honest, remember that even in recent trailers they continued to use/promote the VGX graphics. They knew what they were doing.

RageWaffles · May 21, 2015

I don't know why you all are complaining. I think the game looks great.

Everything popped in a couple seconds later. (PS4 version)

Alienous · May 21, 2015

AmyS said:
Just woke up, hadn't read anything since early yesterday morning.

CDPR's Marcin Iwinski said:
Maybe we shouldn't have shown that [trailer], I don't know, but we didn't know that it wasn't going to work, so it's not a lie or a bad will - that's why we didn't comment actively. We don't agree there is a downgrade but it's our opinion, and gamers' feeling can be different. If they made their purchasing decision based on the 2013 materials, I'm deeply sorry for that, and we are discussing how we can make it up to them because that's not fair.

This is what they should have done. It's weak but it seems honest.

The fact that they showed features in that early trailer that, by their own admission, were untenable in the grand scheme of the open world game they wanted to create is a problem. If you promise a 'Hail Mary' and fail to deliver you are still at fault. So their talk on the "billowing smoke ... [would] kill PCs because of transparencies" is something that should have been known and not shown. The rendering system not working at all times of day is a bit more of a forgiveable offence.

What they don't just admit is that the 2013 was an unattainable target that they portrayed as representative of the actual game, and I think that's the last and final step for them in being honest. They need to just say that, plain and simple, rather that alluding to it. Instead it's 'This system wouldn't work, and this one wouldn't work always'. All that actually needs to be said is that the 2013 version wasn't achievable for the Witcher 3, and if weren't aware while developing it at the time they should have known.

Cave Johnson · May 21, 2015

cripterion said:
Sorry I didn't follow this thread so much since release but has this been posted?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...he-witcher-3-graphics-downgrade-issue-head-on

Fucking finally. Was this so hard? I'm dumbfounded that they couldn't think of saying this outright instead of coming up with bullshit PR every single time people questioned the game's visuals.

EDIT : Nevermind seen it's been already discussed. But holy hell, they really need to rething their communication towards the pc community instead of taking people for morons. Also when people claiming they've been honest, remember that even in recent trailers they continued to use/promote the VGX graphics. They knew what they were doing.

It's a fine example of being deflective and not owning up to their promise. I wonder, why they have no problem speaking about his now post-release rather than address it way back. If they claim hey did not saw issue to it then hey're being hypocrites opening up right now. They KNEW what they they were doing when showcased the VGX trailer, but by using the "changes & development" excuse, they literally poisoned of what is due-process of game development into a PR sentiment spin. Disgusting.

And even if had good intentions behind it, that interview clearly shows that they have no solid planning. From the size of the world to the amount of funding needed to make this game. It is all the symptoms of a developer treading the AAA ground: Aiming too high beyond the studio capabilities. We've seen this all before, fail to make the high budget requirements, crunch, delays only will drive them off to bankruptcy. This game was neither properly thought out or prepared, PR or otherwise.

leng jai · May 21, 2015

Do we have any pre-release shots of lightning, because it looks woeful in the final product.

viveks86 · May 21, 2015

At least the aerial views are still intact. Will compare with those famous Novigrad flyover shots when I get there. I'm guessing the engine cutbacks would be similar to that wheatfield comparison I made earlier - lack of volumetric smoke/particle effects and brightly lit mountains

BigTnaples said:
I unfortunate have not been taking screens. (Usually just use steam, and haven't linked the overlay to WH yet.)

But if I stand in a field of grass, playing at 4K Resolution and turn SSAO on the grass looks like this, with "darkness" under it.

And if I enable HBAO+ in the same scene...
I get grass that looks more like this.

But the difference is not always that stark depending on the lighting. It's odd.

Sorry for the bad comparison. I am packing for a flight.

Hmm... No idea when or why that happens. Will test and post here when I come across grass patches that don't have coverage

Wiktor · May 21, 2015

The sad thing is..this is still a great and pretty game. The only reason for all the shitstorm and negativity is because the devs weren't honest. If they would year ago came out and simply said "sorry, consoles can't handle it and we can't afford to do it just for PC, we won't be able to reach the first trailer" there would be some complains...sure, but there would be nowhere near as much of them and they wouldn't be as heated. And most of all, they would't happen right around the game's launch.

I sometimes wonder..do publishers have some research that states overestimating visuals early on is worth the negativity near the premiere for not delivering?

Dmax3901 · May 21, 2015

viveks86 said:
At least the aerial views are still intact. Will compare with those famous Novigrad flyover shots when I get there. I'm guessing the engine cutbacks would be similar to that wheatfield comparison I made earlier - lack of volumetric smoke/particle effects and brightly lit mountains

Hmm... No idea when or why that happens. Will test and post here when I come across grass patches that don't have coverage

Really cool, looking forward to more.

Steez · May 21, 2015

DarkLordMalik said:
I feel bad for those who invested in PC hardware to play a version of W3 which doesn't even exist.

I don't. Stop pre-ordering games and investing in hardware two years ahead of release. It's moronic.

Imp the Dimp · May 21, 2015

Well it's not even an argument at this point more so than a fact, is it? Rename the thread.

fastballspecial · May 21, 2015

So many people bitching about a version of a game that doesn't exist. My mind is blown.

Edit: Also, I'm dying to know how many of you care about your actual grass in your front or backyard as much as you do the grass in The Witcher.

Vuze · May 21, 2015

I still don't get how people can claim this is the most graphically impressive game ever to them? Sure, it's a pretty game in motion but come on...

Zakalwe · May 21, 2015

AmyS said:
Just woke up, hadn't read anything since early yesterday morning.

All sounds perfectly reasonable to me. I will never understand why people get so worked up about this.

Yes, perhaps they should be upfront about it, but that wouldn't change why it had to happen. We'd still be where we are now in terms of the product we have in our hands.

GoonerTRON · May 21, 2015

Vuze said:
I still don't get how people can claim this is the most graphically impressive game ever to them? Sure, it's a pretty game in motion but come on...

The amount of objects on screen is very impressive, the day/night and weather effects are all top notch. So far I can't think of a better looking game, though I did just upgrade my PC for the first time since Skyrim.

Zakalwe · May 21, 2015

Vuze said:
I still don't get how people can claim this is the most graphically impressive game ever to them? Sure, it's a pretty game in motion but come on...

The level of detail is incredible. The atmosphere as you roam the wilderness and the weather cycles is as good as I've ever seen.

I have no issue with the claim. It's easily one of the best at the very least.

DOWN · May 21, 2015

Zakalwe said:
The level of detail is incredible. The atmosphere as you roam the wilderness and the weather cycles is as good as I've ever seen.

I have no issue with the claim. It's easily one of the best at the very least.

But then you are talking about systems and not graphics. The assets, lighting, and a number of the effects are clearly below other games. Character models are great but the world is quite average graphically. Vanilla W3 is not a graphical beast by any means.

And frankly, in my hours so far, it's not more detailed than GTA V if you want to get into unique details placed in the world outside of graphics. Hell, there's a whole website showing the real life counterparts to hundreds of buildings in GTA V that they modified and redesigned in the game world.

Sijil · May 21, 2015

I get people are upset with the downgrade and it's their right to complain but it boggles my mind calling the game downright ugly, sheesh... To me it's the best looking open world game out there. differing tastes I guess.

Alienous · May 21, 2015

fastballspecial said:
So many people bitching about a version of a game that doesn't exist. My mind is blown.

Edit: Also, I'm dying to know how many of you care about your actual grass in your front or backyard as much as you do the grass in The Witcher.

Get out?

Zakalwe · May 21, 2015

DOWN said:
But then you are talking about systems and not graphics. The assets, lighting, and a number of the effects are clearly below other games. Character models are great but the world is quite average graphically. Vanilla W3 is not a graphical beast by any means.

And frankly, in my hours so far, it's not more detailed than GTA V if you want to get into unique details placed in the world outside of graphics. Hell, there's a whole website showing the real life counterparts to hundreds of buildings in GTA V that they modified and redesigned in the game world.

I've compared both at highest settings on my system and while they both look great TW3 impresses me more. Perhaps it's the art style edging it, but regardless when we're talking this level of visual quality there's really not much in it.

alexandros · May 21, 2015

There is an interesting contrast in today's gaming market. While smaller developers are more comfortable than ever in showing their games at a very early development stage and even making them available for purchase through Early Access, triple-A developers and big publishers go out of their way to mislead the audience through vertical slices, 'in-engine' footage, bullshots and other such nonsense.

Burger · May 21, 2015

Everyone's a fucking game developer these days.

This thread is an embarassment.

elelunicy · May 21, 2015

Vuze said:
I still don't get how people can claim this is the most graphically impressive game ever to them?

Depending on what you are looking for graphically. I can see someone who likes sceneries like dense forests, huge plains, etc. with crazy draw distance prefer this game's visuals over other games. For things like cities and interiors, it really isn't all that graphically impressive.

I just took some screenshots in Novigrad (downsampled from 5160x2160 and maxed out in-game), and it really doesn't stack up well against AC:U's Paris.

Rodin · May 21, 2015

elelunicy said:
Depending on what you are looking for graphically. I can see someone who likes sceneries like dense forests, huge plains, etc. with crazy draw distance prefer this game's visuals over other games. For things like cities and interiors, it really isn't all that graphically impressive.

I just took some screenshots in Novigrad (downsampled from 5160x2160 and maxed out in-game), and it really doesn't stack up well against AC:U's Paris.

CUT

Yep, Unity is better tech wise. But artstyle helps TW3 a lot, i think it holds up pretty well.

Anyway, can someone remove the horrid youtube low quality pic from the comparison in this gif? http://gifyu.com/images/Comp4.gif
I would like to see a quick, direct comparison between the trailer and the actual game tweaked, without passing through that ugly (and useless) screen.

GoonerTRON · May 21, 2015

^^^ AC Unity Pics.

Damn is that maxed out on a PC.

viveks86 · May 21, 2015

Rodin said:
Yep, Unity is better tech wise. But artstyle helps TW3 a lot, i think it holds up pretty well.

Anyway, can someone remove the horrid youtube low quality pic from the comparison in this gif? http://gifyu.com/images/Comp4.gif
I would like to see a quick, direct comparison between the trailer and the actual game tweaked, without passing through that ugly (and useless) screen.

Here's a direct comparison from the source

woen · May 21, 2015

Renekton said:
I guess that answers the question.

So far only Star Citizen has this luxury.

There was no mystery, it was pretty obvious from the beginning.

Chobel · May 21, 2015

elelunicy said:
Depending on what you are looking for graphically. I can see someone who likes sceneries like dense forests, huge plains, etc. with crazy draw distance prefer this game's visuals over other games. For things like cities and interiors, it really isn't all that graphically impressive.

I just took some screenshots in Novigrad (downsampled from 5160x2160 and maxed out in-game), and it really doesn't stack up well against AC:U's Paris.

Damn! AC:U graphically blows TW3 out of the fucking water.
---------------------------------

Again, where's SaberEdge?

bigol · May 21, 2015

That comparison (AC vs Witcher) is useless to me. They have completely different lighting conditions maybe even different times of day.

The sky in Witcher is always kind of covered by clouds so the light seems to be a lot less evident and more dim compared to AC.

Totobeni · May 21, 2015

GravityMan said:
"Work in Progress" may have been fine for the E3 2014 video, but clearer language would have been needed for the 2013 video. Also, when something is declared as "in-game" and NOT a tech demo...people generally expect that the final product will look like that, or very close to it.

I think could've done that if they wanted, but they clearly wanted to fool people from the start.

They labelled 2013 trailers as both "in game" and "gameplay debut"

and they are still like with no correction.

then when Anaxymenes exposed them and their lies with the downgrade, they also didn't come honest but kept going on their false advertising train saying in interview to sites and people that there is no downgrade, and this behavior and them insisting of no downgrade going lasted till the game got out. They got a long time to make to clear it to people but they didn't bother but instead say "rumors" and "no downgrade"

so yeah I think deceiving was part of the plan. it was their intention to mislead people into believing in that bullshit vertical slice.

Sijil said:
I get people are upset with the downgrade and it's their right to complain but it boggles my mind calling the game downright ugly, sheesh... To me it's the best looking open world game out there. differing tastes I guess.

It's ugly when compared to 2013 footage (aka pre-downgrade)

Rodin · May 21, 2015

viveks86 said:
Here's a direct comparison from the source

Oh, thanks! Still think that the original trailer looks vastly better (obviously), but the actual in game+tweaks looks fantastic regardless. I have no complaints for how the game looks

dragn · May 21, 2015

i dont even care about the 2013 footage anymore, but what about the 30min gameplay from last year?

sgs2008 · May 21, 2015

viveks86 said:
Still work in progress but here goes:

Hey Viveks do your grass ini tweaks reduce grass variety whilst increasing density ?

bargeparty · May 21, 2015

elelunicy said:
Depending on what you are looking for graphically. I can see someone who likes sceneries like dense forests, huge plains, etc. with crazy draw distance prefer this game's visuals over other games. For things like cities and interiors, it really isn't all that graphically impressive.

I just took some screenshots in Novigrad (downsampled from 5160x2160 and maxed out in-game), and it really doesn't stack up well against AC:U's Paris.

Is it fair to compare though? Aren't they different art styles?

GeoGonzo · May 21, 2015

I think both eurogamer and CD Projekt came out well after that interview: Eurogamer asks tough questions (as any press should do) and the studio representatives deliver what feels like understandable, honest answers. I agree with those who say that should they have done this a few weeks/months ago we wouldn't have any controversy here.

Anyway, I'm personally ready to let this thing go now. Hopefully they'll handle this better in the future.

-edit-

bargeparty said:
Is it fair to compare though? Aren't they different art styles?

More importantly, Unity has baked-in lightning, which is why it looks so amazingly good. It's not a very fair comparison, no.

The only fair and relevant comparisons for this thread are those between pre-release videos and final gameplay, and that has been done enough and to the point that pretty much everyone can see the difference.

tuxfool · May 21, 2015

dragn said:
i dont even care about the 2013 footage anymore, but what about the 30min gameplay from last year?

So far it looks pretty similar.

jim2point0 · May 21, 2015

bargeparty said:
Is it fair to compare though? Aren't they different art styles?

Who cares if they're different art styles? It's the lighting and density of the city that makes Unity such a damn good looking game.

That said, they achieved that with pre-baked global illumination, and therefore they need different lighting assets for each time of day. So there's really only 4 different times of day, and each one requires a loading screen to change to.

The day when we can have a Witcher 3 scale game with Unity's lighting will be glorious. But I think we're a ways away from that still...

bargeparty · May 21, 2015

jim2point0 said:
Who cares if they're different art styles? It's the lighting and density of the city that makes Unity such a damn good looking game.

That said, they achieved that with pre-baked global illumination, and therefore they need different lighting assets for each time of day. So there's really only 4 different times of day, and each one requires a loading screen to change to.

The day when we can have a Witcher 3 scale game with Unity's lighting will be glorious. But I think we're a ways away from that still...

I think Unity is doing a little more than lighting, but I don't know enough to say.

If you want to talk about lighting, then most of his Witcher 3 shots are with dark skies, overcast and rain clouds. Not bright daylight, sunset, sundown, high noon, etc, etc.

tuxfool · May 21, 2015

jim2point0 said:
Who cares if they're different art styles? It's the lighting and density of the city that makes Unity such a damn good looking game.

That said, they achieved that with pre-baked global illumination, and therefore they need different lighting assets for each time of day. So there's really only 4 different times of day, and each one requires a loading screen to change to.

The day when we can have a Witcher 3 scale game with Unity's lighting will be glorious. But I think we're a ways away from that still...

I also would be interested in a comparison to the lighting system with similar capabilities such as GTA5.

Every time somebody compares an open world to a tight linear game you will get a lot of posts stating that the comparison is unfair and then such comparisons do not persist. I don't see why lighting is any different.

amstradcpc · May 21, 2015

bigol said:
That comparison (AC vs Witcher) is useless to me. They have completely different lighting conditions maybe even different times of day.

The sky in Witcher is always kind of covered by clouds so the light seems to be a lot less evident and more dim compared to AC.

AC Unity PBR lighting is very very good (I like it also a lot in Infamous SS). It gives objects and characters a sense of solidity in the world(wood seems wood, iron seems iron and lighting affects them as it should). I thought The Witcher 3 would have PBR also, but it seems it´s missing in the final game(not in the old trailers).

jim2point0 · May 21, 2015

amstradcpc said:
AC Unity PBR lighting is very very good (I like it also a lot in Infamous SS). It gives objects and characters a sense solidity in the world(wood seems wood, iron seems iron and lighting affects them as it should). I thought The Witcher 3 would have PBR also, but it seems it´s missing in the actual game(not in the old trailers), right?.

If The Witcher 3 has PBR, then it's severely underutilized. It's obvious in games like The Order 1886, Ryse, and Unity. But in Witcher 3... not so much. Armor tends to look great, especially in the right lighting. But someone in the high-res screenshot thread did comment that the chainmail looks a bit like plastic, and sometimes I see that too.

sti4thewin · May 21, 2015

The comparison between unity is hard tho. witcher 3 weather and day/night lighting ia so impressive to me. Plus unity is a shit game

icecold1983 · May 21, 2015

jim2point0 said:
If The Witcher 3 has PBR, then it's severely underutilized. It's obvious in games like The Order 1886, Ryse, and Unity. But in Witcher 3... not so much. Armor tends to look great, especially in the right lighting. But someone in the high-res screenshot thread did comment that the chainmail looks a bit like plastic, and sometimes I see that too.

according to the devs witcher uses a fully pbr pipeline but it certainly doesnt seem like it. ive seen close up shots where certain materials on geralts armor/clothes appear to utilize it but ive not seen anything in the environments that look physically accurate. Skin is also extremely bad and looks like gen 7

Support NeoGAF

Witcher 3 downgrade arguments in here and nowhere else

Member

Banned

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account

Member

Member

Member

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

An blind dancing ho

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Similar threads