Support NeoGAF

[paperspace]

Even by the Steam census, over 50% of users have integrated gpus and dual core cpus. Those specs are inferior to consoles, no? Blaming consoles is a bit petty. Pull your head out of the sand/your ass and have a dose of reality. This is also disregarding operating systems entirely, which further segments the pc platform.

The statistics aren't on your side, mister. You can't just make up numbers based on two variables. If there is any hardware to blame - it's the consoles. Do you really think it's relevant to blame the people with Intel 4000HD + Dual Core, who aren't even the targeted market for this game?

You mean, "High" in presets? So Ultra should look even better?

Yes, that's that they said when they released those screens.

edit: correction - it's a mixture of high and ultra. we don't know if ultra is "max" yet.

https://twitter.com/Marcin360/status/578571883634917377

 

[PLASTICA-MAN]

All versions will receive a day one patch. The PS4 day one patch will fix framerate issues. We don't know the know the full content of the patches so let's hope many things we worried about could be fixed.

 

[viveks86]

You mean, "High" in presets? So Ultra should look even better?

Just to be clear, those were a "mix of High & Ultra". We don't really know which side of the scale it leaned towards. But yes, Ultra should be slightly better at the very least.

 

[red36]

When will people like you learn that multiplatform AAA titles sell Significantly more on consoles. Gaming is ultimately a business, not philanthropy for the minority of pc enthusiasts.

Even by the Steam census, over 50% of users have integrated gpus and dual core cpus. Those specs are inferior to consoles, no? Blaming consoles is a bit petty. Pull your head out of the sand/your ass and have a dose of reality. This is also disregarding operating systems entirely, which further segments the pc platform.

W2 was funded by profits form W1, a PC only title. In fact the attempt to get W1 on consoles nearly shot the entire company into the ground.

Consoles represent a great chance at profits, but are also a great risk. One cannot say whether or not they could have developed W3 to be just as ambitious and make it PC only and still yielded comparative profits.

 

[Kaze2212]

That's High, in 4K.

Those are "just" the high settings?

Well that makes me wonder what their definition of "Ultra" is, when the ini files contain the highest setting as "Uber". Maybe they never showed off the Uber setting up until now and they were just calling high settings + some extra nvidia stuff etc. "Ultra"?

I think by Ultra they probably referring to their Uber setting, but I wonder what the game at Ultra will look like in the highest quality possible, the YouTube videos really might just kill some details.

 

[tuxfool]

Wait so they are saying that Ubersampling will come out for Witcher 3 at some point in the future to make it look even better? Any idea what effects / etc. this would be? Any date of when it will be available?

Ubersampling isn't special anymore. It is merely supersampling, and the only reason why it has a reputation is that it wasn't common for games to include such settings back then.

 

[lightchris]

Kinda bothers me how much shit Ubisoft get with every new release regarding downgrades but Witcher 3 is completely ignored by the outrage. Then again, it does help to release an excellent game.

This thread got 68 pages in a few days and there were many discussions in different threads before that. I don't really see how that could count as being ignored.

That said, how about we wait for another few days so that we can finally do some proper comparisons that are not based on different places/different tod/potentially not ultra details/compressed youtube shots..? Only then we will know if and what has truly been downgraded. Almost everything so far is based on speculation.

 

[Raven77]

I'm very VERY glad I decided to hold off on building a new PC. If this almost brand new console generation really is going to continue to hold back PC games, I just don't see the point in dropping 1500 dollars for a few extra effects and higher resolution. 30 fps has never bothered me so playing at 60 fps would be nice but is not a huge draw for me.

Also, I'm an idiot, I thought Ubersampling added other effects as well. Thanks.

 

[Armadilo]

the worst excuse ever is when someone blames consoles, think about this. Until last week we finally got console footage shown because we have only seen PC footage either shown or being played. CD Projekt RED is popular because they are PC focused and PC gamers put them on a pedestal just for that. Did it ever occur that what they first showed was a Demo that was never going to be the final game ? The PC is good that you can play games from low to Ultra but why would they spend all that money that took to make that Demo into the entire game since it would not be worth it with game budgets since their probably were better things to focus on then making it pretty. Today you blame consoles the next day when consoles are nowhere to be seen you blame ....?

 

[viveks86]

Wait so they are saying that Ubersampling will come out for Witcher 3 at some point in the future to make it look even better? Any idea what effects / etc. this would be? Any date of when it will be available?

It's just supersampling as many have said. It is available as an option in the ini files. Chances are, you can enable at launch if you want by overriding the settings in the file. If your card is capable of ubersampling, you may very well be able to use the cards native downsampling features, which should perform better (I think)

 

[OrangeOak]

What really irks me is how they switched from "there is no downgrade" to "when you have the game in your hands, see if it's worth it." To me and many others, I'm sure we read this as: there's a downgrade, but play the game first to see if the downgrade matters that much.

What a massive disappointment since the visuals made me really excited to enjoy the game and they are trying to downplay that. Might as well use 2004 tier visuals if you really feel that way. Saying visuals have nothing to do with quality is a huge lie as it allows for massive immersion in the story they are telling.

Well I'm glad everyone else is talking about it outside of their forums since they are pretty much running damage control now and locking everything.

So in your opinion they downgraded visuals to the point where you can't enjoy game anymore?
I think what they meant is that sure there is downgrade but game still looks great.

 

[Dinky Dino]

This thread got 68 pages in a few days and there were many discussions in different threads before that. I don't really see how that could count as being ignored.

That said, how about we wait for another few days so that we can finally do some proper comparisons that are not based on different places/different tod/potentially not ultra details/compressed youtube shots..? Only then we will know if and what has truly been downgraded. Almost everything so far is based on speculation.

But you gotta admit it would be easy to dispel the downgrade talk from CDPR by posting ultra images..even one would do. Then you have the fact that they refuse to show ultra footage at all until release.

What kind of dev wouldn't show off their game to dispel bad downgrade talk and generate hype?

But the real kicker? That PR manager dodging the questions by saying "you will be able to find out for yourself if the game is up to your standards. We believe so."

Is anyone falling for this?

Then on top of this guy not giving us a direct answer, he has the nerve to say he'd rather us not focus on the downgrade: "To conclude we’d rather have you focus on the game and the fact that it’s going to be in your hand in a matter of days."

Please.

 

[Genio88]

That's Watch Dogs all over again, the assets they shown in the first demo/trailer were too much for consoles, so they had to remake them and use same assets for all the versions adding just few more effects, texture quality and better resolution on PC

 

[Dinky Dino]

So in your opinion they downgraded visuals to the point where you can't enjoy game anymore?
I think what they meant is that sure there is downgrade but game still looks great.

Downgraded visuals make me enjoy the game less but I can still enjoy it. My opinion is they should be honest instead of getting expectations up for something that doesn't exist. If they were honest I would drop the downgrade talk but they are looking real scummy at the moment by giving non answers to concerns about the visuals.

 

[mnannola]

the worst excuse ever is when someone blames consoles, think about this. Until last week we finally got console footage shown because we have only seen PC footage either shown or being played. CD Projekt RED is popular because they are PC focused and PC gamers put them on a pedestal just for that. Did it ever occur that what they first showed was a Demo that was never going to be the final game ? The PC is good that you can play games from low to Ultra but why would they spend all that money that took to make that Demo into the entire game since it would not be worth it with game budgets since their probably were better things to focus on then making it pretty. Today you blame consoles the next day when consoles are nowhere to be seen you blame ....?

Oh I'm blaming consoles. Why else would they have busted their ass to get the 2013 demo looking like that just to go back and gut it? Why would they spend time and money rewriting large portions of the renderer besides having to make it work on consoles?

 

[Zaru]

When will people like you learn that multiplatform AAA titles sell Significantly more on consoles. Gaming is ultimately a business, not philanthropy for the minority of pc enthusiasts.

Even by the Steam census, over 50% of users have integrated gpus and dual core cpus. Those specs are inferior to consoles, no? Blaming consoles is a bit petty. Pull your head out of the sand/your ass and have a dose of reality. This is also disregarding operating systems entirely, which further segments the pc platform.

You're correct about the multiplat sales, but that census is misleading. There's a much larger userbase on Steam than on current gen consoles (at the moment), and many of those play graphically undemanding games, sure. But by my quick estimation, over 30% of Steam users have graphics cards better than what the consoles have. Which should amount to tens of millions.

 

[red36]

the worst excuse ever is when someone blames consoles, think about this. Until last week we finally got console footage shown because we have only seen PC footage either shown or being played. CD Projekt RED is popular because they are PC focused and PC gamers put them on a pedestal just for that. Did it ever occur that what they first showed was a Demo that was never going to be the final game ? The PC is good that you can play games from low to Ultra but why would they spend all that money that took to make that Demo into the entire game since it would not be worth it with game budgets since their probably were better things to focus on then making it pretty. Today you blame consoles the next day when consoles are nowhere to be seen you blame ....?

I dont know if you saw this link.

http://whatifgaming.com/developer-i...-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why

 

[tuxfool]

But you gotta admit it would be easy to dispel the downgrade talk from CDPR by posting ultra images..even one would do. Then you have the fact that they refuse to show ultra footage at all until release.

What kind of dev wouldn't show off their game to dispel bad downgrade talk and generate hype?

But the real kicker? That PR manager dodging the questions by saying "you will be able to find out for yourself if the game is up to your standards. We believe so."

Is anyone falling for this?

Then on top of this guy not giving us a direct answer, he has the nerve to say he'd rather us not focus on the downgrade: "To conclude we’d rather have you focus on the game and the fact that it’s going to be in your hand in a matter of days."

Please.

You're certainly welcome to whine about it, I've bought the game anyway. The number of customers worried about the "downgrade" enough not to buy the game is fairly limited.

 

[publicpwnerer]

The statistics aren't on your side, mister. You can't just make up numbers based on two variables. Of course people can blame consoles - what should they blame instead? People who use Intel 4000HD + Dual Core, who aren't even the targeted market for this game?

I'm saying that there's more factors at play than just consoles. The PC enthusiast market is small, relatively. The rise of F2P, Indie, and competive online games (Dota, LoL, CSGO) etc are the dominant forces of the PC market. Couple that with the fact that the majority of PC users have under powered systems is why developers choose multiplatform rather than just develop exclusively for the PC.

The truth is, CDP chose profits over developing exclusively for PC. Yes...the game could've been a singleplayer Star Citizen with whoresons and swords, but it's not. You have CDP to blame for that, not people that own a console. I have all platforms, my rig is a 680 SLI, 3570K @ 4.2 and 16GB RAM. It's a little dated, but I'm by no means "defending" consoles, merely pointing out the reality.

CDP deserve all the flack they're getting, because marketing in AAA gaming today is very misleading and extremely dishonest...and a lot of people thought CDP were above that, or least expected them to be.

To turn around and say "I blame consoles" is absurd. It's like trying to argue a complex issue like crime/socio-economics by berating against a minority...it's far more intricate than that.

 

[tuxfool]

Oh I'm blaming consoles. Why else would they have busted their ass to get the 2013 demo looking like that just to go back and gut it? Why would they spend time and money rewriting large portions of the renderer besides having to make it work on consoles?

There certainly is precedent. Epic gutted their GI lighting solution in UE4 primarily because of the consoles. It was a bit of a beast to run on PC also, but they gutted it because it didn't scale downwards enough.

 

[viveks86]

To be honest, I don't really care if an actual downgrade happened, though I'm willing to spend an entire day doing the analysis at launch and sharing my findings here, because I'm really curious to know what has changed and what hasn't. But what I really care about is what was said just 3.5 months ago:

1) Was the Elder Blood trailer on PC?

2) Can the scenes in the VGX/SoD trailers be replicated in their graphical fidelity integrity on high end PCs when the game finally launches?

3) Before the game releases, are you going to put out gameplay footage - and not just cutscenes - on maxed out PCs on Ultra explicitly labelling it «PC footage on Ultra»?

Answering these would go a long way, I think.
Thanks in advance.

CDPR official response (Marcin)

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Not sure but that's a good idea and something we will definitely look into

Source: http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/32644-Obvious-Downgrade?p=1525774&viewfull=1#post1525774

That is a pretty definitive statement right there with no room for misinterpretation or subjective opinions. It wasn't a case of them not being aware of console limitations when they made the trailer 2 years ago. Also, SoD was less than 1 year ago. As I've maintained throughout this thread, I'm reserving judgment till the game is out, but seriously, there really isn't much wiggle room for CDPR. Just a few days to go!

 

[tuxfool]

You're correct about the multiplat sales, but that census is misleading. There's a much larger userbase on Steam than on current gen consoles (at the moment), and many of those play graphically undemanding games, sure. But by my quick estimation, over 30% of Steam users have graphics cards better than what the consoles have. Which should amount to tens of millions.

How many of those will play an RPG?

 

[Mandon]

Oh I'm blaming consoles. Why else would they have busted their ass to get the 2013 demo looking like that just to go back and gut it? Why would they spend time and money rewriting large portions of the renderer besides having to make it work on consoles?

Maybe because that build simply wasn't feasible for PCs or consoles? You have no idea what was going on at CDPR during development that led to that decision.

 

[tuxfool]

That is a pretty definitive statement right there with no room for misinterpretation or subjective opinions. It wasn't a case of them not being aware of console limitations when they made the trailer 2 years ago. Also, SoD was less than 1 year ago. As I've maintained throughout this thread, I'm reserving judgment till the game is out, but seriously, there really isn't much wiggle room for CDPR. Just a few days to go!

While they made these statements, the whole PR in regard to what was running what and where has been all over the place with this game. It has been a bit chaotic.

 

[Momentary]

It would be funny if they haven't shown ultra off the entire time to not misrepresent the game to console owners. Then we get the PC version and all that glory is still there.

 

[Genio88]

It would be funny if they haven't shown ultra off the entire time to not misrepresent the game to console owners. Then we get the PC version and all that glory is still there.

Keep on dreaming

 

[tuxfool]

It would be funny if they haven't shown ultra off the entire time to not misrepresent the game to console owners. Then we get the PC version and all that glory is still there.

If that were the case, there would be some serious egg on the face of a lot of posters in this thread.

 

[EatChildren]

I still don't buy the "we're hiding Ultra settings" bullshit, unless they mean ubersampling, which doesn't really count. I don't even care, because I think the game looks great, but it's a weird thing to say.

2) Can the scenes in the VGX/SoD trailers be replicated in their graphical fidelity integrity on high end PCs when the game finally launches? Yes

This is already false, I guess, since many of the scenes have changed in assets, location, and composition, aesthetically and technically. I'm fairly certain Hairworks is not used on fur coats, and if it is it isn't extensively, not to the degree as it appeared in the VGX trailer.

 

[Kaze2212]

That is a pretty definitive statement right there with no room for misinterpretation or subjective opinions. It wasn't a case of them not being aware of console limitations when they made the trailer 2 years ago. Also, SoD was less than 1 year ago. As I've maintained throughout this thread, I'm reserving judgment till the game is out, but seriously, there really isn't much wiggle room for CDPR. Just a few days to go!

Yep, there they said it will look like the SoD, when maxed out on PC. If they don't deliver all this flack they got will be warranted.

In the end I might be disappointed, but the game still looks very promising and the visuals are still nice.

 

[viveks86]

While they made these statements, the whole PR in regard to what was running what and where has been all over the place with this game. It has been a bit chaotic.

Yup. But at the end of the day, if a Titan X SLI downsampling the game from 4K with uber settings (and ini tweaks) doesn't replicate it, nothing can. All the vague messaging becomes irrelevant after such a clear and concise response. I'm holding CDPR to that and will join the rest in a backlash when there is incontrovertible evidence, which I will personally verify at launch. But I simply can't draw conclusions till then after a definitive statement like that. Those words have weight and should mean something

I still don't buy the "we're hiding Ultra settings" bullshit, unless they mean ubersampling, which doesn't really count. I don't even care, because I think the game looks great, but it's a weird thing to say.

This is already false, I guess, since many of the scenes have changed in assets, location, and composition, aesthetically and technically. I'm fairly certain Hairworks is not used on fur coats, and if it is it isn't extensively, not to the degree as it appeared in the VGX trailer.

I'll give them a pass on changes in art style. It shouldn't be difficult to verify fidelity and tech, however, which is really what downgrade debates should be about imo.

 

[BigTnaples]

This is already false, I guess, since many of the scenes have changed in assets, location, and composition, aesthetically and technically. I'm fairly certain Hairworks is not used on fur coats, and if it is it isn't extensively, not to the degree as it appeared in the VGX trailer.

I thought they said in the Nvidia behind the scenes trailer last month that they were using it on fur coats? I did find it odd that they stripped the NPC in the scene from the VGX trailer of his fur coat entirely. Hair Works or no Hairworks, it seemed an odd choice.

And I think Yennifers outfit utilizes hairworks, but it does look to use thinker more matted fur than the VGX trailer, which looked more like thousands of very short, but very straight and stiff strands.

The Yennefer armor seems to look more lifelike and natural, but the VGX hair looked technically more wow inducing.

 

[tuxfool]

Yup. But at the end of the day, if a Titan X SLI downsampling the game from 4K with uber settings (and ini tweaks) doesn't replicate it, nothing can. All the vague messaging becomes irrelevant after such a clear and concise response. I'm holding CDPR to that and will join the rest in a backlash when there is incontrovertible evidence, which I will personally verify at launch. But I simply can't draw conclusions till then after a definitive statement like that. Those words have weight and should mean something

Of course. This is something I've been saying, but instead people prefer their poorly thought out gif battles and YT comparisons.

That is a pretty definitive statement right there with no room for misinterpretation or subjective opinions. It wasn't a case of them not being aware of console limitations when they made the trailer 2 years ago. Also, SoD was less than 1 year ago. As I've maintained throughout this thread, I'm reserving judgment till the game is out, but seriously, there really isn't much wiggle room for CDPR. Just a few days to go!

Yeah. A cursory look suggests that it will look pretty close to SoD. But I'm also not going to crucify them for a change in a wall texture here or there.

I'll give them a pass on changes in art style. It shouldn't be difficult to verify fidelity and tech, however, which is really what downgrade debates should be about imo.

Unfortunately, not many see as you do, many people refuse to decouple the two things.

 

[red36]

Maybe because that build simply wasn't feasible for PCs or consoles? You have no idea what was going on at CDPR during development that led to that decision.

However it WAS according to this article

http://whatifgaming.com/developer-i...-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why

 

[PLASTICA-MAN]

I thought they said in the Nvidia behind the scenes trailer last month that they were using it on fur coats? I did find it odd that they stripped the NPC in the scene from the VGX trailer of his fur coat entirely. Hair Works or no Hairworks, it seemed an odd choice.

And I think Yennifers outfit utilizes hairworks, but it does look to use thinker more matted fur than the VGX trailer, which looked more like thousands of very short, but very straight and stiff strands.

The Yennefer armor seems to look more lifelike and natural, but the VGX hair looked technically more wow inducing.

HairWorks can work on anything looking like hair even on broom wicks and on sheeps' wool (like what you asked for in the other thread). It is up to devs to enable it or not and to what extent. Sadly Witcher 3 won't be using the latest HairWorks SDK which is still in beta and from what I heard it is more optimized and supports more types of hair.

 

[EatChildren]

I'll give them a pass on changes in art style. It shouldn't be difficult to verify fidelity and tech, however, which is really what downgrade debates should be about imo.

True that.

I thought they said in the Nvidia behind the scenes trailer last month that they were using it on fur coats? I did find it odd that they stripped the NPC in the scene from the VGX trailer of his fur coat entirely. Hair Works or no Hairworks, it seemed an odd choice.

And I think Yennifers outfit utilizes hairworks, but it does look to use thinker more matted fur than the VGX trailer, which looked more like thousands of very short, but very straight and stiff strands.

The Yennefer armor seems to look more lifelike and natural, but the VGX hair looked technically more wow inducing.

Huh, maybe it is. Looked like it was sampling at a high rate in the VGX trailer though, and the Hairworks seen so far hasn't looked as good to me. Fucked if I know *shrug*

 

[Soren01]

Is Hairworks very demanding? Why?

 

[UnrealEck]

Crysis 1 had downgrades from its first showing.

Crysis 2-3 as well.

The first game arguably had minor downgrades.
The 2nd and 3rd though? I'd need to be convinced.

 

[PLASTICA-MAN]

Is Hairworks very demanding? Why?

Very. It uses individual hair strands simulation reacting to physics and movement coupled with lighting models reacting to the lighting of the scene to look realistic from different angles. You will probably need an extra GPU to run the Nvidia GameWorks at ease.

 

[BigTnaples]

HairWorks can work on anything looking like hair even on broom wicks and on sheeps' wool (like what you asked for in the other thread). It is up to devs to enable it or not and to what extent. Sadly Witcher 3 won't be using the latest HairWorks SDK which is still in beta and from what I heard it is more optimized and supports more types of hair.

Well even without the latest type, it looks like it does a bang up job replicating a bunch of different hair/fur types in the Wild Hunt.

Bear Fur
Armor Fur
Geralts Hair
Horse Mane/tail
Griffin Hair
Red Headed beast hair
Wolf Fur

all look very distinct from one another and very natural. Very impressive stuff, and actually one of the main reasons I decided to go with the PC version.

The first game arguably had minor downgrades.
The 2nd and 3rd though? I'd need to be convinced.

The very first Crysis had some really impresive lighting effects that were not present in the final build.


Crysis 3 was supposed to have water that did this.

And the devs swore up and down that it was still in the game when questioned on the forums.

Crysis 2 needed a DX11 patch post launch to bring it back up to snuff.

 

[BigTnaples]

DP thought the thread was moving faster.

 

[PLASTICA-MAN]

Well even without the latest type, it looks like it does a bang up job replicating a bunch of different hair/fur types in the Wild Hunt.

Bear Fur
Armor Fur
Geralts Hair
Horse Mane/tail
Griffin Hair
Red Headed beast hair
Wolf Fur

all look very distinct from one another and very natural. Very impressive stuff, and actually one of the main reasons I decided to go with the PC version.

Yes, me too. I will wait to play the Ehanced Version (maybe) after getting a new laptop with a Pascal GPU next year (maybe).

 

[Dictator93]

Crysis 3 was supposed to have water that did this.

And the devs swore up and down that it was still in the game when questioned on the forums.

Crysis 2 needed a DX11 patch post launch to bring it back up to snuff.

Crysis 3 techncially does have that water (all CE games do), it is just that the way waves propogates is based upon the size of the water volume. The game just doesnt have small enough volumes for that kind of propagation to show that well.

 

[viveks86]

Unfortunately, not many see as you do, many people refuse to decouple the two things.

Agreed. It's the case of any convict. Not everyone cares about a fair trial. But that's ok. Everyone has a different mindset, prejudices and priorities. It's just important that no voice gets drowned out by a raging mob, which we often see in these debates.

 

[CyberPunked]

Like I said before, a downgrade does not make something a console port. That is just silly hyperbole.

Crysis 1 had downgrades from its first showing.

Crysis 2-3 as well.

Spore, Rage, BF3, Unreal Tournement 2004/3, etc. m

All these games had "downgrades" but calling them Xbox Ports is just asinine.

What downgrades did Crysis 1 have? Also considering EA took the console route with Crysis 2-3, I don't think it helps you're point mentioning that they were downgraded too..

 

[rashbeep]

What downgrades did Crysis 1 have? Also considering EA took the console route with Crysis 2-3, I don't think it helps you're point mentioning that they were downgraded too..

I remember the palm tree models being significantly lower quality than what was shown in the early alpha demos. Other than that not many differences I don't think, and funny enough most of the look of that early reveal video could be replicated ingame using a modded ToD setting.

 

[paperspace]

The PC enthusiast market is small, relatively. The rise of F2P, Indie, and competive online games (Dota, LoL, CSGO) etc are the dominant forces of the PC market. Couple that with the fact that the majority of PC users have under powered systems is why developers choose multiplatform rather than just develop exclusively for the PC.

Where are you getting these numbers from? Or are you just making this up?

Of course it makes sense to develop the game for consoles as well, especially considering they have the manpower to do so now. But they aren't going multiplatform because "the majority of PC users have under powered systems".

CDP deserve all the flack they're getting, because marketing in AAA gaming today is very misleading and extremely dishonest...and a lot of people thought CDP were above that, or least expected them to be.

To turn around and say "I blame consoles" is absurd. It's like trying to argue a complex issue like crime/socio-economics by berating against a minority...it's far more intricate than that.

I never said you shouldn't blame CDPR. I just said if there's any hardware to blame, it's the consoles.

 

[BigTnaples]

True that.



Huh, maybe it is. Looked like it was sampling at a high rate in the VGX trailer though, and the Hairworks seen so far hasn't looked as good to me. Fucked if I know *shrug*

Found that other video with HW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Frv80IjjsOw

Watch from around 33 minutes, and the user turns it off at around 35 minute mark.

I think the bear fur is shown pretty well in this video, despite being on a dead bear. (Moving fur and youtube compression don't play well)

Also the gif with the red haired beast from the Monsters trailer looks good as well.

Crysis 3 technically does have that water (all CE games do), it is just that the way waves propagates is based upon the size of the water volume. The game just doesnt have small enough volumes for that kind of propagation to show that well.

I remember the devs saying that exact thing. Is there a user map or something that shows this off? Seems odd there is no area in all of C3 that would show this effect off...

Instead we got this..

 

[Krappadizzle]

I'm saying that there's more factors at play than just consoles. The PC enthusiast market is small, relatively. The rise of F2P, Indie, and competive online games (Dota, LoL, CSGO) etc are the dominant forces of the PC market. Couple that with the fact that the majority of PC users have under powered systems is why developers choose multiplatform rather than just develop exclusively for the PC.

The truth is, CDP chose profits over developing exclusively for PC. Yes...the game could've been a singleplayer Star Citizen with whoresons and swords, but it's not. You have CDP to blame for that, not people that own a console. I have all platforms, my rig is a 680 SLI, 3570K @ 4.2 and 16GB RAM. It's a little dated, but I'm by no means "defending" consoles, merely pointing out the reality.

CDP deserve all the flack they're getting, because marketing in AAA gaming today is very misleading and extremely dishonest...and a lot of people thought CDP were above that, or least expected them to be.

To turn around and say "I blame consoles" is absurd. It's like trying to argue a complex issue like crime/socio-economics by berating against a minority...it's far more intricate than that.

I don't know why you keep making this statement. It's absolutely true that console's are to blame. By admittance of the devs themselves. It's a fact.

Their reasons for doing so point to it just being a smarter business move sure, but it is a fact that they graphics are worse on the PC as a direct result of the PS4/Xbone. There is no other way around it. Sure a large portion of Steam user's may have "less demanding" hardware than what is required. But that was never the target audience to begin with. That's like saying the PS3 isn't as strong as the PS4 and the Witcher 3 will suffer on the PS4 because of the PS3. It's not a part of the equation even if you want it to be.

 

[Mandon]

However it WAS according to this article

http://whatifgaming.com/developer-i...-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why

We don't even know if that article is legitimate or not.

 

[Desaan]

I wouldn't be surprised to see a 4k texture pack for the PC in the future or something similar, they've obviously had and used higher resolution assets, whilst the visual downgrade isn't as huge as some people are making out (hyperbole) at some point it clearly did happen.