-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DF: Witcher 3 patch 1.07 negatively impacts framerate, up to 8fps lower on XB1
- Thread starter chadskin
- Start date
Kenzodielocke
Banned
Man, 7.5GB. I thought that really make the game considerably better performance wise but yesterday, the movement felt better but the performance was the same. Now I've been confirmed bei DF.
Vire
Member
I don't think the main quests are particularly well written though.
Literally almost every single main quest plot line revolves around me doing some long and drawn out favor for someone in order for them to tell me the location of a person. This really isn't an exaggeration and it's really not this way in other games... take for instance, something like Mass Effect 3 - I'm uniting an entire AI species or I'm saving the Krogran race from extinction. I feel like I am accomplishing something meaningful and worthwhile.
Sure the game is significantly shorter, but I'd prefer that in all honestly. Just give me all killer no filler. Then you add the massive performance issues on top of it and I just really have not had all that much fun with this game unfortunately.
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on what is causing the performance issues.
Either way, that would go down *really* badly as well.
So stop playing? There's no law that says you have like this just cuz so many others do.
Conkerkid11
Member
This isn't even a thing that can happen on PC.
I don't think dropping the resolution will affect the performance in this situation.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I'm sayin!
GameAddict411
Member
I gave that as an example, I replied to the poster who said that they can't do anything about the performance issues, but they can. That was my point.
After all I heard about that goat quest, I was prepared for the worst. Now that I survived the it, I can only wonder what GAF was on about. I agree that it's probably the worst quest in the game.. But it only lasted for five minutes and it was pretty funny.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
When I tested it out yesterday on Xbox One it felt a little less smooth, but I thought that maybe I just wasnt used to it after playing a bunch of 60fps games.
They enabled double buffering vsync on X1. It now locks to 20fps in the swamps. Parity with PS4!
When CDPR said the patch would fix performance issues, I assumed that largely meant ditching vsync in favour of triple buffering so dips below 30fps wouldn't result in a jump down to 20fps.
D
Deleted member 325805
Unconfirmed Member
Speak for yourself, I wouldn't be able to enjoy Witcher 3 at 20fps, luckily I bought it on PC.
Fbh
Member
Lol so Xbox 1 now has the full Ps4 crookback bog experience? wtf CDPR?!?!
I have to say, from my test yesterday I still feel like Novigrad got a framerate boost during the night on Ps4. The framerate would drop significantly when you walked past torches and fires and it's not longer as notorious now.
Still, what a dissapointment. The game itself is amazing but I think this is their last game I will buy during the launch window (unless I own a gaming PC by the time their next game arrives).
I think the framerate issues on consoles suck.
But every thread about The Witcher 3 is so filled with Hyperbole.
From my experience it only locks to 20fps in crookback bog. It's not like the ENTIRE game runs at 20 fps. You play a couple of main story missions there and you can do a few sidequests there but that's it. Compared to all the content in the game and all the places you visit, crookback bog is but a small fraction of the game.
Does it suck that performance is terrible in that location? yeah of course. But it doesn't mean the whole damn game plays like that
I have to say, from my test yesterday I still feel like Novigrad got a framerate boost during the night on Ps4. The framerate would drop significantly when you walked past torches and fires and it's not longer as notorious now.
Still, what a dissapointment. The game itself is amazing but I think this is their last game I will buy during the launch window (unless I own a gaming PC by the time their next game arrives).
I think the framerate issues on consoles suck.
But every thread about The Witcher 3 is so filled with Hyperbole.
From my experience it only locks to 20fps in crookback bog. It's not like the ENTIRE game runs at 20 fps. You play a couple of main story missions there and you can do a few sidequests there but that's it. Compared to all the content in the game and all the places you visit, crookback bog is but a small fraction of the game.
Does it suck that performance is terrible in that location? yeah of course. But it doesn't mean the whole damn game plays like that
Danlord
Member
That is dependent on the performance being bottlenecked by the GPU, it could be CPU related that's affecting performance, and given PS4 has a more capable GPU and is still being affected as heavily, it seems to be more related to CPU based operations and perhaps general poor optimisation in some code, especially if they're using some middleware that they don't have full source access to optimise with.
I haven't played this game in the last 6 weeks because I've been waiting for bug and performance fixes. I guess I can wait a bit longer, but we're approaching the busy Fall season, and there's real danger that I'll just stop giving a shit in the face of all the new, other must-play games.
Don't give them any more ideas...what they've done is already bad enough.
Backfoggen
Banned
People said that about every single previous patch as well, it's placebo.
I'd say its people like you who doesn't buy a game because it's not perfectly polished on Day 1 that have the most patience. That's not a criticism, but I think many of us are willing to look past some jank if the game offers enough of an upside, which this game clearly does for a lot of people.
In fact, I'd say that a good portion of my favourite games of all-time have some manner of performance issues, bugs, jank, etc.
Not to say that my way is the right way, but I do feel bad for you if your standards are *that* high that you cant enjoy a game unless it's a tightly polished experience. Definitely rules out many of the more ambitious games out there.
DieEnteWurzel
Member
hidden preorder bonus!
You should sell the game. Not even joking, you're not going to like it.
I think you're wrong about the writing though. The dialogue is lovely even in the most minor of sidequests.
The Witcher series (including the books) isn't really about epic save the world bullshit. This RPS piece about TW1 explains it well.
WickedLaharl
Member
So they fucking lied about improving framerate on PS4. I'm not shocked or anything but it is disappointing that CDPR were dishonest about it.
I won't be buying anymore of their games new that's for sure.
I won't be buying anymore of their games new that's for sure.
Daffy Duck
Member
A GB for every fps it removes?
Come on, it was one Dev. Its not like they put out a PR statement claiming to have fixed it. People make mistakes, blaming the whole company for it is dumb.
kraspkibble
Permabanned.
I already finished the game on PC but want to get it on PS4 as well. However, I absolutely refuse to buy it if they can't manage a stable 30fps.
It matters if you're playing the game, or looking at the game.
Vire
Member
I don't care if it's about saving the world or whatnot, that wasn't my point. My point was that I wish the main quest revolved around something more than me helping a person so that they can tell me where Yennifer or Ciri is.
It takes place in a gritty, realistic fantasy world not that dissimilar from the Game of Thrones universe, why not have similar levels of political intrigue, double crossing and whatnot play into the main story? Give me different quest objectives and goals to strive for.
I'm just trying to understand why the game is so beloved and was given near perfect scores from all different publications. The point of these posts wasn't to tear the game down, I just wish I loved it the same way as everyone else. I'm genuinely confused.
They are really keen on that double buffer at CDPR.
What you did there, it was seen. By me.
i have a lot of respect for CDPJRED but does anyone else feel that they just give the answer that everyone wants to hear and then hopes the team can pull it off,
like i've no doubt it'll be sorted soon enough, just seems to be fix one thing break another. ah well i'll wait for 1.8
like i've no doubt it'll be sorted soon enough, just seems to be fix one thing break another. ah well i'll wait for 1.8
Primethius
Banned
At the very least, I agree with you in regards to the last half of the game completely, where I felt like quest design took a steep dive. Act 3 in particular was a bore to go through, with it's various fetch quests and what felt like filler just to pad the game's main quest length.
As for the X1 double v-sync... I'm not even sure what to say. It's kind of amazing how they managed to ruin another version with FPS problems that didn't exist before.
Well, it still ended up being one of the greatest games I have ever played. I'm good, thanks.
Your tastes and preferences just don't gel with what TW3 does well, obviously. No need to sit here and act like you're worried about it. Just straight up say you think it sucks and you don't like it. That's a fair enough opinion, man. Nothing to be confused about.
Personally, I don't really care that much about the story, so any shortcoming it may or may not have don't really affect me. I just enjoy the gameplay. Quite a lot.
You're very much in the minority here, I'd say.
Your comparisons to Mass Effect very much lead me to believe you prefer RPGs where the central hero is some kind of Jesus character and where the world revolves around you the PC. The Witcher series was never about grand events. The grand events sometimes happen but that isn't what the story is about.
Should have believed Obi Wan... only a Sith deals in absolutes....
He's probably telling the truth. Version 1.7 could very well fix the framerate. It's just going to take some time considering we just got 1.07
That's game development PR in a nutshell, I think.
Not to mention they made it public that it only needed a small day one patch, and i've played 300+ hours without that many major issues.
This is what happen when multiplatform means downporting from PC.
The other way recently happened with Arkham Knight on PC.
Downporting your game to a platform while not taking seriously how you should do it is a bad practice in our industry. It began to happen last gen when multiplatform development became the norm in order to ease the heat on ballooning dev costs. They see a big potential market on other platforms and decide to go for it while they haven't the internal resources to do so. That is Skyrim PS3 all over again.
I hate this so much, there wasn't such problems (and patching didn't even exist) earlier when PS2 dominated the market.
The other way recently happened with Arkham Knight on PC.
Downporting your game to a platform while not taking seriously how you should do it is a bad practice in our industry. It began to happen last gen when multiplatform development became the norm in order to ease the heat on ballooning dev costs. They see a big potential market on other platforms and decide to go for it while they haven't the internal resources to do so. That is Skyrim PS3 all over again.
I hate this so much, there wasn't such problems (and patching didn't even exist) earlier when PS2 dominated the market.
ldcommando
Banned
better cinematic experience
longdi
Banned
I dont understand but why?
I thought getting stable 30fps at the expense of lesser vegetation and bling shaders, will be a good thing?
Glitchesarecool
Member
Yes it is a good thing, but it hurts because those platforms should have been treated better.
dr_rus
Member
If you're playing the game on PC with vsync double buffered then you're doing it wrong.
The difference between 20 and 28 is rather staggering.
Pretty sure they have the resources. It's not a small team(though not 1000 people Ubisoft size, either).
But maybe their full vision just isn't achievable with the current console hardware? It's a huge, ambitious game, after all. Was bound to never be technically perfect, but perhaps there are just bottlenecks they run into in certain scenarios that cant be overcome through throwing more money and manpower at it?
Saying they didn't take the PS4/XB1 versions seriously is probably not fair.
I mean, I suppose you're arguing that developers should stop developing with PC as lead platform?
EDIT: Actually I think I remember you from previous posts that were pretty clearly anti-PC....