Support NeoGAF

[Bots are better than you]

Well false advertising ... to me, they advertise a great game, and it looks like i might be getting excactly that. Although i have to wait until tuesday next week when my CE arrives.

And about that "like it was intended" ... i don't know if the US/JPN publishers had any pressure on CDPR about a release window, if not, the game releasing the way it is, is what the developers intended.

And right now, some of you reduce the game to the graphics, that is like, if i might use that Michelangelo-reference, reducing to the shading he used in his works. But that reference doesn't work, since a game is more than the graphics.

Maybe these are just "good enough", i think the game looks great, even incredible when i think of the games' scope. Relying too much on one part of a game might result in a subpar game, and im thinking of The Order: 1886 in this case. For me, the gameplay was nothing more than barebones, while looking incredible good.

Wild Hunt looks to be a well polished package of graphics, gameplay and narration!

Edit: That post read like one of a PR agent lurking in forums ... i'm just super pumped for the game, seems that got lose with me!

 

[ironcreed]

I just wanted to pop back in and say that I am sorry for the guys on PC who are unhappy, but all I see is the most gorgeous and meticulously detailed open world I have ever seen. Based on reviews and all of the footage, it seems like it turned out pretty damn fantastic. Hope you guys still enjoy the game. As it looks like it is going to be one to remember.

 

[BigTnaples]

Volume Based translucency

Flexible water simulation

Forward Lit soft particles

foliage density

These are things that are clearly making a big difference between 2013 trailers and what we have now.

Yup. In fact, this may as well be my post quoted from a few pages back.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=163765063&postcount=3039

 

[red36]

Well false advertising ... to me, they advertise a great game, and it looks like i might be getting excactly that. Although i have to wait until tuesday next week when my CE arrives.

And about that "like it was intended" ... i don't know if the US/JPN publishers had any pressure on CDPR about a release window, if not, the game releasing the way it is, is what the developers intended.

And right now, some of you reduce the game to the graphics, that is like, if i might use that Michelangelo-reference, reducing to the shading he used in his works. But that reference doesn't work, since a game is more than the graphics.

Maybe these are just "good enough", i think the game looks great, even incredible when i think of the games' scope. Relying too much on one part of a game might result in a subpar game, and im thinking of The Order: 1886 in this case. For me, the gameplay was nothing more than barebones, while looking incredible good.

Wild Hunt looks to be a well polished package of graphics, gameplay and narration!

I have no doubt the gameplay, story and narration will be fantastic and this will be a fantastic game.

However the whatifgaming article clearly states that they had a projected intention for the game and it had to be curtailed. That's limiting a vision. "Good enough" in this case is still great. The game still looks good, and it still has the same great art direction. However "Good enough" is not "Good as we could make it".

To further the Michelangelo ref- a painting is more than just color v black and white. Just like a game, there are many aspects to a painting that are possible to equate to gameplay and story. Therefore the analogy still stands in that regard.

Yup. In fact, this may as well be my post quoted from a few pages back.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=163765063&postcount=3039

in that case I don't see how it follows that you might make the previously quoted statement.

 

[CyberPunked]

I just wanted to pop back in and say that I am sorry for the guys on PC who are unhappy, but all I see is the most gorgeous and meticulously detailed open world I have ever seen. Based on reviews and all of the footage, it seems like it turned out pretty damn fantastic. Hope you guys still enjoy the game. As it looks like it is going to be one to remember.

It's not that it looks bad. It's that it was downgrade on all platforms because of consoles.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

Great, so the weak consoles are holding back the PC version. Gotta love the dumbing down of gaming.

 

[BigTnaples]

in that case I don't see how it follows that you might make the previously quoted statement.

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.

 

[tuxfool]

Right, but it's not Witcher 4. Obviously I'm psyched for CP2077 but it's a completely different setting.

But it is *Licensed* IP

 

[ironcreed]

It's not that it looks bad. It's that it was downgrade on all platforms because of consoles.

According to the insider anyway. But even with such a downgrade, it is still hands down the most gorgeous and lovingly crafted open world game I have ever laid eyes on. Mission accomplished as far as I am concerned. The end result of years of work looks like it was quite a feat to pull off in order to get the game to such a level for us all to be able to enjoy. I'll just leave it at that and be on my way back to the hype threads.

 

[Fuz]

found this

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



already posted?

Side note on this: I've just been banned from their forums for pointing out this article.

Oof. C'mon, CDPR. This is getting ridiculous. After a certain point, "it's not the crime--it's the cover up" really rings true.

Link to your post?

It's been deleted. Ban reason was: Trolling.
But I wasn't trolling, I had a polite tone and just briefly pointed out that article and how they might not be the knight-in-shining armor developers that we used to think.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Side note on this: I've just been banned from their forums for pointing out this article.

Oof. C'mon, CDPR. This is getting ridiculous. After a certain point, "it's not the crime--it's the cover up" really rings true.

Link to your post?

 

[Micerider]

The fuss is that because of next gen consoles the game will never have the same powerful atmosphere it could have.

An extreme example is if Michelangelo only had black and white to paint the Sistine Chapel. Sure Michelangelo was going to make it look baller no matter what, but without color he would be hamstrung. If he later died before anyone could get him some color paints, that's it. History would never produce another Michelangelo.

Witcher 3 is the final Witcher title afaik. CDPR no longer needs to rely on a licensed IP after this, having achieved world wide fame. Therefore because of consoles people will never be able to experience the game as it was artistically intended.

Mods will likely never have the access to the engine necessary to add back in the missing elements.

Well, you could also say that without consoles, they might have never been able to fund such a game either. So I don't think they would have fared better "by default" by remaining PC only.

Your Michelangelo wouldn't have had Sistine Chapel without the Church to fund him either.

Now, here I am, hoping they can release a "enhanced version" later with upgrades that would be on par with what they initially aimed for.

 

[viveks86]

Using that view from my images above.

No config tweaks / no mod = 117fps
Config tweaks / no mod = 67fps
Config tweaks / mod = 47fps

i5 @ 4.3Ghz
GTX 970
8GB RAM

Sweet Baby Jesus

 

[Denton]

Oof. C'mon, CDPR. This is getting ridiculous. After a certain point, "it's not the crime--it's the cover up" really rings true.

Link to your post?

They have some very strict community moderators. They are not actual employees of CDP though.

 

[Totobeni]

Oh lord.

I'm just... I'm laughing at how ridiculous this PR is. Come on, are you fucking kidding me? Oh man. They're now at Ubisoft levels of bullshit. I viewed the Watch_Dogs stream, I was there when the devs gave a similar non-answer to a simple "is it downgraded?" query.

This shit has really gotta end. Please, for the love of GOD, stop showing your games so early. And if you need the hype preorders that badly, then your game costs too much anyway and the industry is due for an implosion. Sorry but the truth hurts.

Vertical slices need to go away. vertical slices like the ones we got for Dark Souls 2, Watch Dog and Witcher 3 are just the worst, it's just deceptive advertising and if a company don't ready to show their game but want hype from fans just put a cinematic CGI trailer like the old days (since fans/people will know it's not from the game/gameplay but still can be hyped for the premise).

 

[Kinthalis]

I don't understand why CDProject Red didn't do the same thign it did with Witcher 2... Create the game FOR PC's, with it's strengths in mind, release it, and THEN work on a console port.

They could use the money form the PC release to spend on optimizations and all the reworking of assets to fit the restricitons of those platforms, plus had some more money for marketing the console version, and then rake in more moeny from those platforms...

What happenned? Why dumb down the PC version instead?

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Great, so the weak consoles are holding back the PC version. Gotta love the dumbing down of gaming.

It's not that it looks bad. It's that it was downgrade on all platforms because of consoles.

If getting this game on console means we have to hear PC players whine for years, it's a shame they bothered. Totally not worth hearing. Should have built it for PC and given it to us via a port later so we don't have to put up with whiners.

 

[Pagusas]

I don't understand why CDProject Red didn't do the same thign it did with Witcher 2... Create the game FOR PC's, with it's strengths in mind, release it, and THEN work on a console port.

They could use the money form the PC release to spend on optimizations and all the reworking of assets to fit the restricitons of those platforms, plus had some more money for marketing the console version, and then rake in more moeny from those platforms...

What happenned? Why dumb down the PC version instead?

Because the console version of Witcher 2 probably sold gangbusters and made them realize the console market was a cash cow ready to be milked.

Its sad we'll never get to play the 2013 version, but maybe a few "enhanced editions" like they did with Witcher 1 and 2 will bring us closer to the look on PCs.

 

[Denton]

Because the console version of Witcher 2 probably sold gangbusters and made them realize the console market was a cash cow ready to be milked.

Its sad we'll never get to play the 2013 version, but maybe a few "enhanced editions" like they did with Witcher 1 and 2 will bring us closer to the look on PCs.

No, that is not the case. PC version is the moneymaker on Witcher 2.

The reason is simply because they wanted to serve all three audiences at the same time and felt they could make it. And they did, with some caveats.

 

[nOoblet16]

I don't understand why CDProject Red didn't do the same thign it did with Witcher 2... Create the game FOR PC's, with it's strengths in mind, release it, and THEN work on a console port.

They could use the money form the PC release to spend on optimizations and all the reworking of assets to fit the restricitons of those platforms, plus had some more money for marketing the console version, and then rake in more moeny from those platforms...

What happenned? Why dumb down the PC version instead?

They clearly say why, they lacked the budget,time and the manpower. If they had it then not only you'd have had that but even the console versions would have fared better as they would've made three separate versions for each platorms. With a delayed release they'd have lost quite the market..no doubt about that. They were confident about making it on all three but then realised that it would require as sacrifices.

Also, it goes back to the philosophy of not making the new consoles appear considerably weaker (because the image is a thing apparently according to them, when they say that not talking about downgrade affects the image)

 

[Kinthalis]

Because the console version of Witcher 2 probably sold gangbusters and made them realize the console market was a cash cow ready to be milked.

Its sad we'll never get to play the 2013 version, but maybe a few "enhanced editions" like they did with Witcher 1 and 2 will bring us closer to the look on PCs.

So they sold out. But even if so, I think going Witcher 2 on this would have been a solid choice to make. No need ot ignore he console market, it doesn't make sense to do that, just like ignoring the PC market doesn't make sense for most games, but it's somehting that worked for them before, and somehting that's likely to work for them again.

Also, pretty sure Witcher 2 sold just as well on PC as consoles, if not better.

 

[Jigolo]

If getting this game on console means we have to hear PC players whine for years, it's a shame they bothered. Totally not worth hearing. Should have built it for PC and given it to us via a port later so we don't have to put up with whiners.

Its the quick cop out excuse. Doesn't necessarily make it true but PC fans will preach like it is. (WD, DS2, Crysis, etc etc)

 

[Kinthalis]

They clearly say why, they lacked the budget,time and the manpower. If they had it then not only you'd have had that but even the console versions would have fared better as they would've made three separate versions for each platorms. With a delayed release they'd have lost quite the market..no doubt about that.

Also, it goes back to the philosophy of not making the new consoles appear considerably weaker (because the image is a thing apparently according to them, when they say that not talking about downgrade affects the image)

They said that's why they didn't have two different builds of the game at the same time. As a software developer, I cna tlel you I'd avoid that shit like the plague too. BUT, that's not what they did with Witcher 2, and that's what I'm tlkaing about specifically.

Build Witcher 3 for PC, get it out the door, THEN port the console version. Two different builds, but not in parallel. The money from the PC version would end up helping in making the console version the best it could be, HELL, it's probably WHY the Witcher 2 console verison turned out so damn good!

 

[Fuz]

No, that is not the case. PC version is the moneymaker on Witcher 2.

The reason is simply because they wanted to serve all three audiences at the same time and felt they could make it. And they did, with some caveats.

It's sad to think what this game could (and should) have been, though...

Build Witcher 3 for PC, get it out the door, THEN port the console version. Two different builds, but not in parallel. The money from the PC version would end up helping in making the console version the best it could be, HELL, it's probably WHY the Witcher 2 console verison turned out so damn good!

Agree.

They have some very strict community moderators. They are not actual employees of CDP though.

GAF mods are strict.
That's not strict, that's just plain censorship.

 

[Peterthumpa]

The game is going to look better than Xbox One 1080/60fps if you built a new rig for it.

I suppose this is the latest build from the PC version? If the game looks like this maxed, I'm pretty happy with the results.

 

[Kinthalis]

Its the quick cop out excuse. Doesn't necessarily make it true but PC fans will preach like it is. (WD, DS2, Crysis, etc etc)

The devs pretty much confirmed this... no?

 

[Jigolo]

The devs pretty much confirmed this... no?

Please link me

 

[Gumbie]

I don't understand why CDProject Red didn't do the same thign it did with Witcher 2... Create the game FOR PC's, with it's strengths in mind, release it, and THEN work on a console port.

They could use the money form the PC release to spend on optimizations and all the reworking of assets to fit the restricitons of those platforms, plus had some more money for marketing the console version, and then rake in more moeny from those platforms...

What happenned? Why dumb down the PC version instead?

Probably because they want to make money now. I mean hell the ps4 version is number #4 on video game best sellers on Amazon right now and we're still almost a week out from release.

 

[Kaze2212]

The devs pretty much confirmed this... no?

Some random site with some random statement from some random developer "confirmed" this. If this is true or not we don't know.

 

[Kinthalis]

Please link me

It's the insider artcile above. Though to be clear, I'm nto sure how reliable it is.

 

[Kinthalis]

Some random site with some random statement from some random developer "confirmed" this. If this is true or not we don't know.

Yeah see, I thought this was verified, but it looks like it could be true, but not necessarily.

However, given the evidence we have it's kind of hard not to find it at least plausible.

 

[Kaze2212]

Yeah see, I thought this was verified, but it looks like it could be true, but not necessarily.

However, given the evidence we have it's kind of hard not to find it at least plausible.

Yeah, it sounds plausible looking at all the screenshots and videos we have seen so far, but everyone could have made a statement like that.

 

[Kinthalis]

Probably because they want to make money now. I mean hell the ps4 version is number #4 on video game best sellers on Amazon right now and we're still almost a week out from release.

They would have made money NOW form the PC verison a lone too. And then money later from the console version - proably what would have been an even betetr console version than what we are getting in a week.

Like I said, it seems to have worked for Witcher 2. The worst that woudl happen is that they would encourage peopel to buy the PC verison instead. But the PC verison brings in more profit per sale than the console version... so I'm not seeing a bad side to that.

 

[Fuz]

Please link me

http://forums.cdprojektred.com/thre...-Adam-Badowski-translation?highlight=badowski

And how will the PC ultra compare to consoles?

You will be able to find some small differences like Nvidia Hairworks for example but they are very demanding graphically so you must have a strong machine. It’s not a political thing to say but in the future you will be able to turn on Ubersampling that killed the Witcher 2 at release and now it will do the same, so we don’t want to unlock it now. The game looks better but has absurd requirements.

Are all models and textures the same?

Yes, there’s only one version, without it we wouldn’t be able to deliver the game on time. We would have to strip it down, build and test separately on all 3 platforms which is infeasible. To we do it all on one foundation and then distribute it to all devices.

We manage the memory differently on platforms that have less of it. Less complex models are loaded, it all depends on what happens on the screen at given moment. To sum it up there are not many differences between PC, PS4 and Xbox One, they rather fix certain problems than change the configuration

 

[BigTnaples]

Yeah see, I thought this was verified, but it looks like it could be true, but not necessarily.

However, given the evidence we have it's kind of hard not to find it at least plausible.

Not even close to verified. Really anyone who had been following this thread and watched the Nvidia trailer/current footage could've concocted that story just as easily. It remains to be seen how that site vetted their source.

In any case, a downgrade is clear, but to what extent, we are still in the dark. In 5 days and some change we will have all the answers we seek. Or at least most.

 

[red36]

But it is *Licensed* IP

Is it? I know it's a copy from CP2020 but wasn't sure if that needed to be licensed. At any rate they are moving on from the Witcher and everything i have read seems to indicate they are burnt out on fantasy.

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.

I'm not going to try and be a stickler on that, console port or downgrade it doesn't make a difference to me. However before 2013 they made a game. after 2013 they made that game with a view to optimizing the entire game around console, then threw a few bones to the pc build. They mention in the link that they had a choice of multiple branches or consolidation. They went with consolidation with 1 console being the baseline.

Well, you could also say that without consoles, they might have never been able to fund such a game either. So I don't think they would have fared better "by default" by remaining PC only.

Your Michelangelo wouldn't have had Sistine Chapel without the Church to fund him either.

Now, here I am, hoping they can release a "enhanced version" later with upgrades that would be on par with what they initially aimed for.

Since we have no way of knowing their finances that statement cannot be tested. However it is likely that revamping their work to a console pipeline likely meant there was a cost (previous work had to be abandoned or rewritten).

What's clear however that the boost of funds from having a multiplatform release of w3 did not lead them to think that it would be worth it to invest in multiple branches of the game. What IS true is that the money from W1 funded W2 was a PC only title and look how great that looks. In fact their attempt to get W1 on the console represented a massive loss on CDPRs part and actually nearly sunk the entire company.

 

[Raven77]

http://forums.cdprojektred.com/thre...-Adam-Badowski-translation?highlight=badowski

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?

 

[tuxfool]

That's not strict, that's just plain censorship.

Please look up the definition of the word "censorship".

 

[Peterthumpa]

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?

I don't think that ubersampling is THAT important today, with DSR and similar technologies available. No fucks given.

 

[Kaze2212]

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 is just an expensive kind of anti-aliasing, so it won't add any effects to he game it will just make the image a lot cleaner.

 

[paperspace]

I suppose this is the latest build from the PC version? If the game looks like this maxed, I'm pretty happy with the results.

That's High, in 4K.

 

[EatChildren]

Ubersampling in TW2 was just super sampling, which these days you can control via your drivers anyway.

 

[privitsan02]

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.

Case in point, as long as the game is fantastic and exceeds expectations in general, Ubisoft probably wouldn't get so much flack. It is rather hypocritical of the gaming community though, but that's hardly anything new.

Best wishes.

 

[Gumbie]

They would have made money NOW form the PC verison a lone too. And then money later from the console version - proably what would have been an even betetr console version than what we are getting in a week.

I would think they're going to sale and make more money from the console versions than they would PC. At the end of the day it's a business and a money making business at that. Sure they could have separated them out like you said but I'm sure they've got a shit ton of money tied up in this game and want a return as soon as possible. Especially with all the delays its had.

 

[publicpwnerer]

It's not that it looks bad. It's that it was downgrade on all platforms because of consoles.

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.

 

[Dinky Dino]

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.

 

[Gumbie]

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.

Exactly. If I'm a developer and I see Sony's sold 22.5m consoles...I can't get my ps4 game out fast enough.

 

[Lunar15]

That supposed dev quote sounds about like what I expected. Damn shame.

Game still looks good though, and I'm more interested in the writing.

 

[viveks86]

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.

Case in point, as long as the game is fantastic and exceeds expectations in general, Ubisoft probably wouldn't get so much flack. It is rather hypocritical of the gaming community though, but that's hardly anything new.

Best wishes.

What are you talking about? Have you read this thread or followed any gaming forum? This has been a raging debate for the last 4 months at least. It was overwhelming other threads so much that the mods have made this the dedicated thread.

 

[Peterthumpa]

That's High, in 4K.

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