Please understand...
too soon man
Please understand...
I don't think you have to be polite when you pay someone sixty dollars for them to fuck up your game and make it worse in the middle of the night.
I understand the outrage, especially for Xbox One owners.
This sounds truly ridiculous written down like that.His thing is that CDPR is popular among PC gamers. So he's having a ball of time bashing them(calling them the joke of the generation even...), as he knows if he can knock down what he perceives as an important PC gaming developer, it makes console gaming better looking. He spends a vast amount of his time on this board trying to make PC gaming as a platform look bad in order to big up the PS4 and console gaming.
You hit the nail on the head, its quite possible that the architecture differences forces the developers to use more quality control because they have to change more things to get it running properly.And you'd think it should be easier to get competent products out because of the PC-like architecture, but NOOOOOO....
The way I see it, the more things change the more they will stay the same (for some at least). Capcom has been on a downward spiral, their portjobs have been woeful at best with cheap $5 budget projects for their remasters, and then, I'm mostly seeing PC devs struggling with consoles the most. I really thought it would be easier for them.
When TLOU Remastered was running below 30fps just a month or two before it released and it's released to a stable 60fps with several enhancements, it gives me perspective. GOW 3 runs at a stable 60fps also, these games are much more complicated to make run from PS3 code, yet they are the best remasters. Then we see remasters like Payday 2 that falls to 19fps on the PS4 ported from the PC version where the lower end PC hardware, less capable than PS4 runs it at 60fps. Then we have an even blander looking prototype collection that runs at 30fps with dips on consoles, again much easier to make the conversion to these consoles from PC. My goodness, if the PS4 was a Cell 2 with 4 PPE's and 32 SPU's, I really don't want to envision the state of some of these ports then.
Make the console easier to develop for.... says the devs... we still get garbage. The only devs who are not developing garbage are those who have always been stellar on more exotic hardware.
I thought some people said they saw performance improvements in the ps4, what is this now?
Aside from the addition of the same v-sync used for ps4 to the xb1 version. I could see that being a possibility, because the game has constantly varying wind speeds, constantly different weather conditions etc affecting the world.I wonder if the measured differences are really significant. In an open world game like TW3, it must be extremely hard (if not impossible) to measure the exact same sequences without program support for that. It might be that the patch simply didn't affect performance one way or the other. In any case, between this and the delays it's not a particularly favorable showing for CDPR.
This sounds truly ridiculous written down like that.
The sad thing is that it is in fact exactly what is going on.
Aside from the addition of the same v-sync used for ps4 to the xb1 version. I could see that being a possibility, because the game has constantly varying wind speeds, constantly different weather conditions etc affecting the world.
Oof. Can we call a moratorium on that phrase for awhile?Please understand...
This sounds truly ridiculous written down like that.
The sad thing is that it is in fact exactly what is going on.
Why would they do that to the X1 version? Makes no damn sense.
Well like with ACU, W3 was in development before the consoles had even close to finalized specs. And it's the start of the gen so everyone is super ambitious with what they wanna pull off because they technically can without completely unplayable levels of performance for extended periods of time, that being the 10fps range. And it's not just effects they're also doing stuff like npcs with schedules, more crowd stations, wild life, etc. even worse all of these things have much more detail than last gen to make them feel like actual places. So when the games don't well run 100% of the time it can be disappointing, but at the same time I can understand why. And it's not like things won't be improved as the gen goes on.Its a cazy time we live in where a game has varying wind and weather conditions, lots of special graphical effects and then drops to 20 FPS.
What the hell is wrong with developer priorities these days.
Its like they are targeting high end PC's and dont give a rats about console.
And you'd think it should be easier to get competent products out because of the PC-like architecture, but NOOOOOO....
The way I see it, the more things change the more they will stay the same (for some at least). Capcom has been on a downward spiral, their portjobs have been woeful at best with cheap $5 budget projects for their remasters, and then, I'm mostly seeing PC devs struggling with consoles the most. I really thought it would be easier for them.
When TLOU Remastered was running below 30fps just a month or two before it released and it's released to a stable 60fps with several enhancements, it gives me perspective. GOW 3 runs at a stable 60fps also, these games are much more complicated to make run from PS3 code, yet they are the best remasters. Then we see remasters like Payday 2 that falls to 19fps on the PS4 ported from the PC version where the lower end PC hardware, less capable than PS4 runs it at 60fps. Then we have an even blander looking prototype collection that runs at 30fps with dips on consoles, again much easier to make the conversion to these consoles from PC. My goodness, if the PS4 was a Cell 2 with 4 PPE's and 32 SPU's, I really don't want to envision the state of some of these ports then.
Make the console easier to develop for.... says the devs... we still get garbage. The only devs who are not developing garbage are those who have always been stellar on more exotic hardware.
Should have believed Obi Wan... only a Sith deals in absolutes....
Thanks, one thing I've realized having been on several forums over the years, is that persons who are quick to call persons fanboys are the embodiment of the word themselves. I pay little attention to such posts, especially those who take jabs because it's never about the topic at hand anyway. I like to keep on topic and discuss the issue, people who want to make things all about fanboyism and insults are really not fooling anybody. When one becomes highly sentimental and personal because they believe their ego was quashed by a dissenting opinion, it puts things into perspective.Exactly. I have to say a big thanks for your educated posts. Ignore those guys calling you a fanboy or something, your only agenda here is against those devs and publishers not trying to do a good job and you are so right.
This isn't an hardware problem, at all.
I'm not upset, but for all things I've pointed out, with the load times in general, texture loads and texture quality, inconsistent effects and below low settings.... Witcher 3 is very disappointing in light of that. I know the biggest issue is the framerate, but to me there's much more wrong with Witcher 3 on a technical basis on consoles. Like most of the other games I've highlighted as bad ports, W3 is yet another game that runs with worse assets on the PS4 where a weaker PC system has a better texture preset, faster load times of those textures and after deaths sequences, no effects below low, no inconsisitent Ao and Shadows and of course better filtering. There have been too many cases where such ports exists and we should not be seeing such efforts anymore.I get why you're upset and I honestly sympathize. I think many of us held out hope that the three platforms' common architecture would lead to smoother porting across all versions and that hasn't been the case so far. In fact it may have gotten worse since consoles have received some shockingly bad ports since the start of the generation.
My only objection is that Witcher 3 doesn't deserve to be considered as one of them. I find the framerate of the console versions completely unacceptable and it absolutely needs to be adressed, but many other people don't have a problem with it and there are a lot of other examples of console games that ran like crap and are still considered classics. The Witcher 3 is a massive, visually impressive game that does indeed run poorly on consoles. I like that you care so much about performance but you probably know you are in the minority among your fellow console gamers.
None of these games that were bad ports were shown to be cpu bound, look at the CPU resources used on any of the titles I mentioned on an i3/750ti combo or a slightly better rig. It's been proven time and time again that the CPU has not been the problem with parity multiplats or worse performing multiplats on PS4. GTA5, UNITY, BORDERLANDS (gained double digit performance boosts in instances), the PS4 CPU was not upgraded for the patch. The i3 is better than the PS4 CPU, why is it not pushing higher frames with 40 A.I cars in Project Cars, not only are we talking the AI of these cars, but all the physics being calculated in tandem as well. Comparing the consoles to each other and the i3, I have not seen one instance where the CPU was the limiting factor in getting the PS4 at a better framerate in light of it's specs.The CPU on both consoles suck really bad though. You cannot just compare a gpu that is roughly the same power and call it a day. The CPU plays a big part and that is one of the big issues both consoles have.
Well it should be, but I always say, if a man complains of doing quadratic equations by the most thorough (hardest and longest) method, would he still not complain and try shortcuts when you show him the shortest and simplest method? It's his nature tbh,,,,,. I've realized that programming could become as easy as running any code through some genius compiler that gives you 1080p 60fps with the best assets per hardware spec and some dev would still mess that up. Things have certainly gotten much easier from the cell heyday, so it's very sad that we're having several similar conversations across so many bad ports, just so many......too many....Its easier to port games to the consoles we are often told.......sometimes I wonder if thats ALL they are doing. Maybe thats unfair but its how I see it sometimes when other devs spit and polish down to how bags of rice deform....
Ps4 optimisation....lol
I'm assuming you mean more quality control on the PS3 side, that would be a yes, but you would think that you shouldn't be a heavy breather over people's shoulders this gen, since development is more like an open book exam, relative to early cell development, but boy were they wrong assuming that, the results from certain third parties on even simple remasters are just sad......You hit the nail on the head, its quite possible that the architecture differences forces the developers to use more quality control because they have to change more things to get it running properly.
Did the Xbone version suffer from screen tearing?
I think you're vastly overestimating what the console is capable of if you think that it this game should be running not only better effects but also ultra textures.Witcher 3 should run on PS4 with similar load times as the PC, better texture loads and after-death loads, ultra textures, no below-lows, better quality and consistent AO and Shadows and better filtering at 30fps, if it did that, everyone's perspective on CDPR would be different. .
Did the Xbone version suffer from screen tearing?
Damn shame CDRP hasn't been able to lock up either version to 30fps after all these patches.
A cursory glance suggests the visual settings remain the same between the two, up to and including foliage and shadow LODs.
Not as far as I know. I don't remember DF mentioning it, nor do I remember seeing it happening in the DF framerate videos.
Very strange...
And you'd think it should be easier to get competent products out because of the PC-like architecture, but NOOOOOO....
The way I see it, the more things change the more they will stay the same (for some at least). Capcom has been on a downward spiral, their portjobs have been woeful at best with cheap $5 budget projects for their remasters, and then, I'm mostly seeing PC devs struggling with consoles the most. I really thought it would be easier for them.
When TLOU Remastered was running below 30fps just a month or two before it released and it's released to a stable 60fps with several enhancements, it gives me perspective. GOW 3 runs at a stable 60fps also, these games are much more complicated to make run from PS3 code, yet they are the best remasters. Then we see remasters like Payday 2 that falls to 19fps on the PS4 ported from the PC version where the lower end PC hardware, less capable than PS4 runs it at 60fps. Then we have an even blander looking prototype collection that runs at 30fps with dips on consoles, again much easier to make the conversion to these consoles from PC. My goodness, if the PS4 was a Cell 2 with 4 PPE's and 32 SPU's, I really don't want to envision the state of some of these ports then.
Make the console easier to develop for.... says the devs... we still get garbage. The only devs who are not developing garbage are those who have always been stellar on more exotic hardware.
I don't think ultra textures are a stretch when GPU's with 2GB VRAM can do it. Granted the memory set up on PC is vastly different to these current gen consoles, but I think it should be possible.I think you're vastly overestimating what the console is capable of if you think that it this game should be running not only better effects but also ultra textures.
Yeah I'm going to just have to battle through the BS I guess and give up on a perfect experience.I'm holding this game off more and more and the more I play after a patch the more I see there's no point lol
Isn't this the same frame rate that GTA V ran at on XB360/PS3 much of the time? Didn't seem to hurt sales/awards/impressions.
Most people, sane or not, don't care about framerate as much as neogaf.
When TLOU Remastered was running below 30fps just a month or two before it released and it's released to a stable 60fps with several enhancements, it gives me perspective.
I wonder if the measured differences are really significant. In an open world game like TW3, it must be extremely hard (if not impossible) to measure the exact same sequences without program support for that.
It runs with 60 FPS and some graphical downgrades or 30 FPS without these downgrades.
It runs with 60 FPS and some graphical downgrades or 30 FPS without these downgrades.
The current-gen is showing to be more complicated for third parties than I thought.
One step forward and two steps back.
And you'd think it should be easier to get competent products out because of the PC-like architecture, but NOOOOOO....
The way I see it, the more things change the more they will stay the same (for some at least). Capcom has been on a downward spiral, their portjobs have been woeful at best with cheap $5 budget projects for their remasters, and then, I'm mostly seeing PC devs struggling with consoles the most. I really thought it would be easier for them.
When TLOU Remastered was running below 30fps just a month or two before it released and it's released to a stable 60fps with several enhancements, it gives me perspective. GOW 3 runs at a stable 60fps also, these games are much more complicated to make run from PS3 code, yet they are the best remasters. Then we see remasters like Payday 2 that falls to 19fps on the PS4 ported from the PC version where the lower end PC hardware, less capable than PS4 runs it at 60fps. Then we have an even blander looking prototype collection that runs at 30fps with dips on consoles, again much easier to make the conversion to these consoles from PC. My goodness, if the PS4 was a Cell 2 with 4 PPE's and 32 SPU's, I really don't want to envision the state of some of these ports then.
Make the console easier to develop for.... says the devs... we still get garbage. The only devs who are not developing garbage are those who have always been stellar on more exotic hardware.
Keep in mind Sony and MS reserved 3 GB of RAM for the OS (a baffingly large amount, honestly). I'd love for both companies to release a GB or more. Dunno about Xone OS but FreeBSD should not need 3 GB of memory, unless Sony is doing some terrible practices.I don't think ultra textures are a stretch when GPU's with 2GB VRAM can do it. Granted the memory set up on PC is vastly different to these current gen consoles, but I think it should be possible.
IINM Witcher 3 "ultra" does nothing but increase space for texture streamingI think you're vastly overestimating what the console is capable of if you think that it this game should be running not only better effects but also ultra textures.
Is this patch actually over 7GB on the PC!? That's what it seems GOG Galaxy is trying to download.
I just can't imagine it happening and having a positive effect on performance, I mean i'm sure that the must've tried at some point to see how ultra runs.I don't think ultra textures are a stretch when GPU's with 2GB VRAM can do it. Granted the memory set up on PC is vastly different to these current gen consoles, but I think it should be possible.
Yes but with better shadows and other effects as well?IINM Witcher 3 "ultra" does nothing but increase space for texture streaming
Consoles always reserve way more mem than needed in case they need it down the line. Plus this gen they need mem for share, voice commands, streaming, etc.Keep in mind Sony and MS reserved 3 GB of RAM for the OS (a baffingly large amount, honestly). I'd love for both companies to release a GB or more. Dunno about Xone OS but FreeBSD should not need 3 GB of memory, unless Sony is doing some terrible practices.
Yes but with better shadows and other effects as well?
I think you're vastly overestimating what the console is capable of if you think that it this game should be running not only better effects but also ultra textures.