Strangelove77
Member
Played like crap and too floaty, Gave it up pretty fast, The visuals was great, Horizon wipes the floor with it now though.
What a weird comparison. They're not even the same genre.
Played like crap and too floaty, Gave it up pretty fast, The visuals was great, Horizon wipes the floor with it now though.
Dude no one has said that, it's perfectly fine to like the mod. I think you are overreacting a little here.
I don't think that's true.
No, it's just annoying that the only talk about the mod becomes negative because people don't like the OP. Leave Halk out of this. His mod is amazing and everyone in the Witcher 3 community is thankful for his help and hard work.
To have some random people crapping on his mod because they see one comparison picture is inane beyond belief, and it's only being done because people don't like the topic. It makes it out like his mod is garbage or something, when it's the exact opposite. Halk has fixed a lot of what CD left undone.
While I don't agree with the OP at all, CD did in fact leave a lot of crappy textures in the game, and Halk has steadily been fixing all of them and improving other things like the water and stuff too.
To have some random people crapping on his mod because they see one comparison picture is inane beyond belief, and it's only being done because people don't like the topic. It makes it out like his mod is garbage or something, when it's the exact opposite. Halk has fixed a lot of what CD left undone.
There is some good work and some bad work. However, it is still plagued by the things that seem endemic to user created texture packs. It doesn't entirely blend with the art style of the game.
I'm not sure why you're letting opinions about re-texture mods ruin your day Most seemed to be just commenting on how often with such mods what's gained in fidelity can be lost in the original style or cohesion. It's cool there are some good ones out there. There's an on-going Resident Evil HD mod which balances the original vision pretty well that has been fun to keep track of.
Man, you've posted multiple, strongly worded posts that are many paragraphs long. It's hard not to interpret that as rage, especially when you keep doing it unprovoked and mostly repeating yourself.To prove this you would have to show me more than one or two photos. You simply took a photo that is over a half year old. Halk is NOT DONE with this texture pack. He is actively working. 4.6 was just released. That table is not a part of 4.6 It is from December, and he has made many enhancements since that.
I'm not sure where that table is or I would take a look to see if he blended the post yet. If you have suggestion feel free to drop by the nexus and give Halk a comment.
Almost all of the work he has done is fantastic. 90% or better. I would not call that plagued by a user's texture pack. I mean, you could not be any more hyperbolic with that gesture toward his pack.
https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/952/images/1021-6-1500576578.jpg
https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/952/images/1021-7-1500576578.jpg
Those vanilla textures are terrible. Halk's is amazing. Most of what he does, 90% or so, is amazing stuff that totally adds to the game. CD mostly just missed the little things, and he has filled in those holes about as well as any one person can do.
"I'm not sure why you're letting opinions about re-texture mods ruin your day Most seemed to be just commenting on how often with such mods what's gained in fidelity can be lost in the original style or cohesion. It's cool there are some good ones out there. There's an on-going Resident Evil HD mod which balances the original vision pretty well that has been fun to keep track of."
I'm definitely familiar with that. It's a great great mod. It's not ruining my day, but it sucks that Halk's mod is not being fairly represented on this site mostly due to a shitty OP.
To prove this you would have to show me more than one or two photos. You simply took a photo that is over a half year old. Halk is NOT DONE with this texture pack. He is actively working. 4.6 was just released. That table is not a part of 4.6 It is from December, and he has made many enhancements since that.
"Lets take the original normal maps, ramp up the contrast excessively and presto, looks great!"
Ditto (though not as egregious)
Colour temperatures don't match. The new wood is much more cold than the original.
Right there in his examples:
"Lets take the original normal maps, ramp up the contrast excessively and presto, looks great!"
No.
Ditto (though not as egregious)
Colour temperatures don't match. The new wood is much more cold than the original.
Then there are these examples:
http://i.imgur.com/Pt88Qpu.png
Makes a mess of the rock texture, the original though of a lower resolution looks much more like a weathered rock.
In the pursuit for more detail, the texture pack is fucking around with the art style of the game. Unless all the textures in the game are normalized to the new texture pack it looks wrong in places.
Halk's mod is clearly superior here and in many places..
This is the point. Inconsistency is the name of the game when it comes to user created texture packs. For as "bad" as the original work may be, these texture packs typically only magnify the inconsistency by not following the original art direction. They also add their own bullshit like ramping up normals to absurd degrees.
Neith, people have different aesthetic tastes, and your assessment of a texture mod is clearly not universally shared. Why are you so disturbed by people disagreeing with you?
Also, why in god's name would a stool have a large hole in it where your butt goes LOL? It makes no pragmatic sense whatsoever and no one would ever do that.
The water seems to be a bug..
Since this hole seems to confound you so, let me explain: It's a handle. When you're for example milking cows and go from one cow to another, it's useful to easily be able to carry the stool with one hand and the bucket with another.
How many posts should I make with pictures of stools that have holes in the seat in order to convince you that your opinion about its rarity or utility is not universally held or representative of fact?I mean okay, but it just seemed like a stool for sitting at that table.
How many posts should I make with pictures of stools that have holes in the seat in order to convince you that your opinion about its rarity or utility is not universally held or representative of fact?
Opinions are not facts. You can like a texture pack without it being objectively amazing or inarguably better or 90% perfect. You will never convince people to care as much about your opinion of a texture mod as you think it deserves. You might get people to find you unusually persistent enough to keep posting bait to see if you will continue posting long posts defending some rando's mod, but have at it.
Holy shit, how did i missed this NFS DF thread, pure gold
To prove this you would have to show me more than one or two photos. You simply took a photo that is over a half year old. Halk is NOT DONE with this texture pack. He is actively working. 4.6 was just released. That table is not a part of 4.6 It is from December, and he has made many enhancements since that.
I'm not sure where that table is or I would take a look to see if he blended the post yet. If you have suggestion feel free to drop by the nexus and give Halk a comment.
Almost all of the work he has done is fantastic. 90% or better. I would not call that plagued by a user's texture pack. I mean, you could not be any more hyperbolic with that gesture toward his pack.
https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/952/images/1021-6-1500576578.jpg
https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/952/images/1021-7-1500576578.jpg
Those vanilla textures are terrible. Halk's is amazing. Most of what he does, 90% or so, is amazing stuff that totally adds to the game. CD mostly just missed the little things, and he has filled in those holes about as well as any one person can do.
Halk is not a "rando". He has been in the mod scene for a decent bit. They even have links to his mod in Eurogamer.
Anyway, I have no idea what you mean by bait. I type like 150 words a minute. This isn't taking much of my time. All that I know is people are pretty hostile around here when you question why they are not constructively criticizing a mod. Seems some people have an agenda against PC mods or something IDK. I don't really care at all either. I'm pretty much over this thread. Have a nice day.
Number one, I never said it was rare. I don't have an opinion on the stool to be honest. I don't care if it is holed or not. I even said I liked the hole in the first post I made on the idea. It just seemed weird with that table. Your explanation seems fine.
Holy shit Neith, is the guy who made that texture pack a close friend of yours or something? You seem literally pissed that people don't universally love his work.
The hole in the stool being a common thing in real life medieval furniture, and you trying to spin it becuase you havent seen one and you think is uncomfortable takes the fucking cake lol. But please, coninue, all your posts are making me laugh a lot.
Agreed, but MGS5 is also running at like 3x the framerate of TW3 PS4 :x
It's one of my favourite games of all time, but it had some of the worst texture pop in I've seen since Mass Effect. I'd be looking at pixelated models of what are supposed to be buildings for like 5 or 6 seconds on the PS4 version.
Even at launch the game was no stalwart when it came to textures, it's not me just bringing that up now....I think the conversation about Witcher 3 and it's downgrades from the initial reveal stole quite a bit of the conversation then, especially how dialled down everything became including textures, which took the greatest hit along with lighting and foliage.Ah, so OP is judging the Witcher 3 against 2 games that came out after it...and for some reason MGSV...which makes no sense because it's a cross-gen game in obvious ways graphically.
Photogrammetry yields more believable detail on equivalent resolution textures, and without it MGSV would look even older than it still is. I mean look at any outdoor area in the game, the foliage density is significantly lower, and the asset variety/density in base areas with humanoids is on a whole other level below Witcher 3. Primal has similarly if not more impressive foliage in terms of fidelity, but nothing touches Novigrad as a graphical feat.
Horizon is an impressive looker, but their procedural generation techniques just seem like a next step when it comes to optimization that allowed them to do more fidelity wise on console hardware. Still weirded out why the animation on NPCs you talk to is so bad though.
Witcher 3 without mods still looks incredible in places that isn't just a result of good art direction, but some impressive fidelity with a crap ton of assets on screen at any one time...for a budget lower than plenty of other AAA games. Texture wise the game isn't below average vs. anything else I saw in 2015.
Are you projecting things into the conversation? Say one say the other, no one including me said Witcher 3 is shit or pure garbage. I have not even discussed what i think of the game, but this is not the thread for that discussion.Very typical of video game discussion these days. Some aspect of a game is only 99% perfect, and theoretically could be improved... the game is shit. Pure garbage.
Fantasy or not, many graphical features in Witcher 3 target realism, it's how we know what they are. Witcher 3 does not depict a cartoony artsle or CG look. Wood suppose to look like wood, steel like steel, grain like grain, Geralts beard like beard. Thatch suppose to look like thatch and grass like grass etc... It makes no sense to suggest it's the artsyle that's responsible for the simplified quality. The many low rez elements in the enviro, like; wood, roofs, ground, backgrounds, grain etc... is not an artsyle, it's a cost cutting measure so the games could run on low end systems and is a sacrifice to the overall graphical quality of the game.Yes some textures aren't perfect and is totally cool to improve a game, I never said it wasn't so I don't really know why you are bringing that up.
My point still stands, IMO this particular mod fucks the art a little, the new textures look too realistic and the color pallet feels wrong, W3 is supposed to look more like a fantasy world. But maybe it's just me.
Thank you....I bet you if CDPR improves textures for the XBONEX patch, some persons will appreciate it and it will become all the rage. I believe the hulk mods are quite good at improving the game and I rarely dabble into mods if at all.I'm playing Witcher 3 right now and I get where the OP is coming from, even with maxed out texture settings, some of the scenes have really messy backgrounds, e.g. character close ups in buildings. I get it, optimization through ressource management in a 2 year old game, but it creates a really jarring difference between good character textures and the muddy wall that's right behind him.
Luckily someone made a great effort to fix this in his spare time and the results so far are very satisfying.
I thought that was a known quantity, but clearly some people have other ideas or whatever else....The debate over how much things were downgraded from initial reveal did happen here on gaf and that conversation centered around textures, lighting and general detail...All of a sudden people will have you believe I'm taking bizarro pills...."Heh", well unless Dc's legends of tomorrow, manipulated the timeline and created an aberration on discussed strengths and weakneses of W3 at launch, I don't see how what I'm saying here is far fetched at all.witcher 3 foliage and environment materials are definitely rather weak
Heh, this has nothing to do with your fave game of the generation. It doesn't reduce your perception of the game and that's good, but these conversations can be had and is very valid. Of course, some people love for graphical quality to be great, so you can't just tell them "shut up and go play the best game of all time"...now can you? People value different things and have different opinions, strange isnt' it? Personally, I love a great balance on all aspects of a game, but if one aspect of a game suffers too much, especially when it comes to graphics I will notice it and take issue.Call me up when your fave is the game of the generation, better textures or not.
I think there are more than some dodgy textures here and there, but I think the proof is in the pudding now. wholistically, I dont want to go there, but like many others fail to do, I respect your opinion, perhaps we can have that conversation on the total composition of the graphics and final image when they patch this to XBONEX...Perhaps we can discuss how textures, foliage, animation, lod, lighting all come together and discuss how cohesive everything is...Looks glorious to me. Sure there are some dodgy textures here and there, but when considered holistically the game looks stunning. A wonderful sense of place.
It was not meant to be a joke, the poster has yet to show another shot of water to prove his point. In any case, I'm sure I have a few water shots of HZD, but I have no Exfat formatted storage at hand presently.lmao this got me
I do agree the stool with the hole seems okay, but it's not very pragmatic at all. No one would put a hole there in this day and age.
Wtf, are you trolling or just haven't seen much? Firstly Witcher isn't about this day and age, it's medieval fantasy world. Secondly, plenty of stools have holes in them even modern ones. It's easy to pick up when moving it. This is pretty much what we are seeing in that Witcher picture.Also, why in god's name would a stool have a large hole in it where your butt goes LOL? It makes no pragmatic sense whatsoever and no one would ever do that.
Fantasy or not, many graphical features in Witcher 3 target realism, it's how we know what they are. Witcher 3 does not depict a cartoony artsle or CG look. Wood suppose to look like wood, steel like steel, grain like grain, Geralts beard like beard. Thatch suppose to look like thatch and grass like grass etc...
It makes no sense to suggest it's the artsyle that's responsible for the simplified quality.
Bad JPG, full of compression, but the texturework still shows it's strength, there's depth to the textures and it's not all flat.....The water seems to be a bug....
I guess we may have a different set of eyes..Are you saying you can't see those low rez textures in the Witcher backgrounds and ground from the pics that poster used? Also, there's a difference between DOF and low rez textures...
its a thinly veiled HZD vs witcher 3 thread
I've actually got a stool like that at home. It makes a lot of pragmatic sense actually, it's super easy to pick-up and move around and you don't even notice the hole when you sit on it due to the way your own weight distributes itself across your bottom when you sit.Also, why in god's name would a stool have a large hole in it where your butt goes LOL? It makes no pragmatic sense whatsoever and no one would ever do that.
Also, why in god's name would a stool have a large hole in it where your butt goes LOL? It makes no pragmatic sense whatsoever and no one would ever do that.
Well that's understandable, you need to be a scientist to figure out what the hole is for!I remember the stools in my school science classrooms, they had holes in them ¯\_(ツ_/¯
thelastword is the worst poster on GAF.
Wtf, are you trolling or just haven't seen much? Firstly Witcher isn't about this day and age, it's medieval fantasy world. Secondly, plenty of stools have holes in them even modern ones. It's easy to pick up when moving it. This is pretty much what we are seeing in that Witcher picture.