• 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.

Witcher 3 PS4 patch 1.50 adds Pro support out now

onQ123

Member
Take a pic of the PC version running at 4k and compare them. Is it not as sharp? Then it's not native. Then you can figure out what technique they're using. It's really not like you can't tell the difference. It's pretty obvious.

The same thing could happen even if it was native
 

belvedere

Junior Butler
So the notoriously choppy bog area ran a tad slower on Pro than base, but in the majority of the other segments in the VGTech video, the Pro still held a more consistent framerate than base PS4.

Quite the contrast to what some were claiming here yesterday.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Take a pic of the PC version running at 4k and compare them. Is it not as sharp? Then it's not native. Then you can figure out what technique they're using. It's really not like you can't tell the difference. It's pretty obvious.

That's not necessarily true. Post process and anti aliasing (especially if low/medium grade FXAA is used) can make the image look much softer than the same image without any anti aliasing or MSAA etc.
 

KageMaru

Member
So the notoriously choppy bog area ran a tad slower on Pro than base, but in the majority of the other segments in the VGTech video, the Pro still held a more consistent framerate than base PS4.

Quite the contrast to what some were claiming here yesterday.

Outside of Novigrad, the base model ran just as well as the Pro. Shame since the performance used to be better than that in the base model. There were a few cut-scenes that ran worse on the Pro on top of the big area. Looks like it could be a bandwidth or fillrate issue as the Pro dips when alpha textures or effects are in use. Smoke, mist, water, and trees would all be examples of this and that's where we see the system drop a bit.
 

Blackthorn

"hello?" "this is vagina"
Interesting update from Digital Foundry:
[UPDATE: Ambient occlusion is actually enhanced and looks like Nvidia's HBAO). Initial tests also suggest that some of The Witcher 3's most challenging areas - such as Crookback Bog - actually run slower than base hardware, which in turn was a touch slower than the Pro running the old code under boost mode.
This is what I expected, as AO was still evident but not as heavy as the old, fairly ugly SSAO solution.
 

nOoblet16

Member
Same

This is a great example of why I think native 4k isn't a great pursuit on consoles. These techniques will only improve with time too.

Pretty much.
This is why anyone who says CBR is disgusting and cannot compare to the real thing, needs to understand that there are various implementations of CBR and developers are getting really good at mitigating the artifacting to a degree that it's almost not worth the performance impact to go native 4K.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Interesting update from Digital Foundry:

This is what I expected, as AO was still evident but not as heavy as the old, fairly ugly SSAO solution.

That's great, the Pro patch keeps on delivering.

+ Full 4K resolution via checker board rendering and down sampling enabled for 1080p TV owners
+ UI rendered at 4K so all text/markers look much sharper
+ HBAO over SSAO
+ Better texture filtering
+ Improved performance in CPU constrained areas over base PS4 like Novigrad

- A few more dropped frames in GPU constrained areas like the Crookback Bog
 

Tagyhag

Member
Interesting update from Digital Foundry:

This is what I expected, as AO was still evident but not as heavy as the old, fairly ugly SSAO solution.

Wow I didn't know you could do HBAO on an AMD GPU, that's super cool. Maybe they'll get more Nvidia features on the XOX.

I wish PhysX was used more, it's so great.

MTmKBNa.gif
 
Booted this up last night with the patch on a 1080p TV and it looked stellar.

Also, I personally can’t notice an occasional 1-2 frame drop; the game feels very, very smooth overall.
 

SkylineRKR

Member
It does look really good on Pro and my 55 KS9000. Not that its a quantum leap, but the image is way less soft than it was. This is already noticable on the title screen. It pops more. Text and UI is sharper for sure.

I really should go to Novigrad, lol.

I wonder whats in store for the One X version, HDR? Who knows. Though I kind of doubt that.
 

belvedere

Junior Butler
Sorry if this isn't the place for asking this, but how far am I from Novigrad?

I stopped playing after defeating the Griffon
 

FZW

Member
In case this was still a question, veteran users at beyond3d are confirming Witcher 3 is rendering at native 4K (3840x2160) on both vertical and horizontal access. No mention of dynamic res. Corroborating GAF user Karspankey's pixel count earlier.

Also, one user commented that CA has possibly been taken out entirely. Which is good.

Source

What? I read that it was 4k in still images and but half that during movement, which is typical of Checkerboard rendering.

here

btw i would be truly surprised if the X1X isn't doing 4K native if the performance of this patch is anything to go by.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
What? I read that it was 4k in still images and but half that during movement, which is typical of Checkerboard rendering.

here

Yeah, that has since been de-bunked. Digital Foundry put it as 4K via checker board rendering.
 

xion4360

Member
It's not clear that it's not "Native" because the method that people usually use to find out the native resolution of a game no longer work & now we have to look for signs/artifacts that let you know what rendering techniques are being used.

There doesn't seem to be much or any debate about whether or not its Native 4K. only about what techniques are being used, thats what what my statement was about.
 

mileS

Member
The low quality SSAO really stood out in the blood and wine expansion. Really happy to hear that improved.
 

Tagyhag

Member
While I'm not a fan of CA, they shouldn't just outright take it out but leave it as an option. There are those that do like it.
 
There's something wrong with your screenshots. The planks on the left look way more aliased in the Pro screenshot.

Just now scrolling through the thread and noticed that as well. What's going on there? It's actually hard to find improvements in the pro screenshot.

Other screenshots show better results. Weird.
 

onQ123

Member
There doesn't seem to be much or any debate about whether or not its Native 4K. only about what techniques are being used, thats what what my statement was about.

Actually it was debates about it being native 4K before the testing was done by experts
 

xion4360

Member
Actually it was debates about it being native 4K before the testing was done by experts

There was one guy that was getting 2160P pixel counts at times but not always, but no one was ever saying yeah this looks like native 4k. Ive been here since the patch came out.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
There was one guy that was getting 2160P pixel counts at times but not always, but no one was ever saying yeah this looks like native 4k. Ive been here since the patch came out.

To be fair, CBR does render the same amount of pixels as native 4K (from my limited knowledge), the more experienced pixel counters know the tell-tale signs of specific artifacting which comes with checker board rendering.
 

Rellik

Member
Being fair he's right, the texture quality and foliage is a mile behind PC. Seems that the original shot is a jpg rather than png so maybe a slightly unfair comparison. But there is clear night and day differences in the two, but then again there is also clear differences in the prices of the hardware running each shot.

Textures look pretty good on my PS4 m8...

thebitsujbn9.jpg
 

onQ123

Member
There was one guy that was getting 2160P pixel counts at times but not always, but no one was ever saying yeah this looks like native 4k. Ive been here since the patch came out.

There was a few people thinking it was native 4K

In case this was still a question, veteran users at beyond3d are confirming Witcher 3 is rendering at native 4K (3840x2160) on both vertical and horizontal access. No mention of dynamic res. Corroborating GAF user Karspankey's pixel count earlier.

Also, one user commented that CA has possibly been taken out entirely. Which is good.

Source



From this screen also, it's pretty clear that the resolution is full 4K. I just hope the framerate won't be tanking all over the place now.

https://a.uguu.se/GKBDMEjEMxzn_WhiteOrchard_1.png



Probably best to get an X if you are after that in every game. Surprised the pro can do 4K native on this game. Nice job CDPR!


Native 4k? What magic is this?


native 4K is really impressive, i didn't expect that for this game...XB1 is dynamic with dips down to 900p after all...i had gotten the sense that PS4 was just barely making it to 1080p, i guess that's not the case.
 
As some requested here's how the game looks at PS4 equivalent settings on PC at native 4K, plus one downsampled from 4K to 1080p. Also that previously posted pier PRO shot to compare.

Settings used:
Nvidia HairWorks: Off
Number of Background Characters: Low
Shadow Quality: Medium
Terrain Quality: Medium
Water Quality: High
Grass Density: Medium
Texture Quality: High
Foliage Visibility Range: High
Detail Level: Medium
Ambient Occlusion: SSAO
All post-process effects on, except vignetting & sharpen.

tw3-11-nativewuu1a.jpg


tw3-11-native-dssyuov.jpg


3-20kuwe.png


And two more at 4K as links:

http://abload.de/img/tw3ltu4a.jpg
http://abload.de/img/tw3-124uku.jpg
 

Ahasverus

Member
Yeah only the foliage textures seem to be sticking out. The rest of the game now holds up wonderfully to a similar priced PC.
 

DocSeuss

Member
this thread made me sad.
god please play it on PC

While the PC version is objectively the best... come on. Let's not do this. This is a thread about the PC version. It's as rude and pointless as entering a Quantum Break thread to talk about how you prefer Uncharted. It contributes nothing to the discussion at hand and is only pointless complaining. Why do it? What's the point? Who benefits from your post? Do you really think you're going to convince someone in this thread to go "oh, wow, yes, I should go play it on the PC! I can't believe I bought it on the PS4 and had plans to play it here! Silly me!"

No. Of course not. You're not changing anyone's minds, especially if you're gonna be rude. So let's not.
 

onQ123

Member
As some requested here's how the game looks at PS4 equivalent settings on PC at native 4K, plus one downsampled from 4K to 1080p. Also that previously posted pier PRO shot to compare.

Settings used:
Nvidia HairWorks: Off
Number of Background Characters: Low
Shadow Quality: Medium
Terrain Quality: Medium
Water Quality: High
Grass Density: Medium
Texture Quality: High
Foliage Visibility Range: High
Detail Level: Medium
Ambient Occlusion: SSAO
All post-process effects on, except vignetting


Now you're going to have to redo all your screen caps lol

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-heres-what-the-witcher-3-looks-like-on-ps4-pro

[UPDATE: Ambient occlusion is actually enhanced and looks like Nvidia's HBAO).
 

xion4360

Member
There was a few people thinking it was native 4K


Yes, but only because Karspankey stated getting a native 4K pixel count and that was after a few mixed results, and that one link from offsite. Before that it was all pretty much just guessing 1440p or 1800p, CB or geometry rendering stuff like that..

Right after those 2 statements suggesting the full 4K, NX gamer put out a video suggesting checkerboarding solution.. so yeah there was barely a debate.

still id say it was a rather short one considering the patch came out with no warning, most people werent even expecting 2160cb so it turned out well.
 

Planet

Member
The rest of the game now holds up wonderfully to a similar priced PC.
Similar priced PC? Where can I get a €300 PC that runs Witcher 3 in 4K (checkerboard would suffice if available) at 30 FPS in medium to high settings?

yes, I know I took the bait...
 
I hope more games games that are native 1080p on the base PS4 can hit 2160c in the future.

Makes some of the other developers "Pro patches" look downright embarrassing.

This is great work by CDPR. I wish I could buy the game to support them doing good work for a small niche but I've already got it on Steam and GOG.
 

Tagyhag

Member
Makes some of the other developers "Pro patches" look downright embarrassing.

This is great work by CDPR. I wish I could buy the game to support them doing good work for a small niche but I've already got it on Steam and GOG.

To be fair, CD took their time with this patch lol, people had been waiting for a while.

Heck, we might have not even gotten it if the XOX wasn't getting a patch.
 
To be fair, CD took their time with this patch lol, people had been waiting for a while.

Heck, we might have not even gotten it if the XOX wasn't getting a patch.

Still we see new PS4 releases like Dragons Dogma or FFXII HD that are games from old consoles that still can't even get close to the work done here by CDPR. Incompetent devs? Lazy devs? Who knows :)

I'd rather wait a while for a worthwhile patch than have half-assed Pro support.
 

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
Yes, but only because Karspankey stated getting a native 4K pixel count and that was after a few mixed results, and that one link from offsite. Before that it was all pretty much just guessing 1440p or 1800p, CB or geometry rendering stuff like that.
It is very obvious that the pixel grid on a PNG screen that was provided early in the thread aligns to a native 4K pixel grid. As it should, with full res checkerboard solution. Thing is, even if you zoom in, you can't really tell if something is using CB or not, unless you have captures when things are moving around the screen, and the screens provided seemed to be taken from mostly static scenes.
 

thelastword

Banned
I don't know how anyone does such a list without qualifying how they got to it...


In any case, DF seem to have issues identifying differences between platforms sometimes, especially AO. I still remember Need For Speed Rivals....but it's great that they could confirm that the AO is better here...


I also said shadows and filtering was better too and DF have confirmed better filtering at least....Sorry KageMaru.

Now, those performance issues need to be sorted out. I guess they still have sometime before the XBONEX patch goes live and we need a performance mode on PRO....I think this should be standard in every pro release by now... 4k mode + downsampling and 1080p 60fps/unlocked mode, everybody would be happy with that..
 

partime

Member
Off topic, but I picked it up again and got through the miscarried baby battle. It was a 6 and my current level's a 4.

After many attempted I've finally beat it, but while doing so I finally FELL IN LOVE with this game.

The hair-raising music in section was just ... I can't describe how cool it was. And seeing the baby wiggle while that guy carries it.

Game never clicked with me until this update,
 

Md Ray

Member
Wow I didn't know you could do HBAO on an AMD GPU, that's super cool. Maybe they'll get more Nvidia features on the XOX.

I wish PhysX was used more, it's so great.

MTmKBNa.gif

PhysX is used in Witcher 3 on PS4, XB1 and PC according to Nvidia. It's used for clothes and destruction effects. I believe it runs on the CPU on both consoles.

Interesting update from Digital Foundry:

This is what I expected, as AO was still evident but not as heavy as the old, fairly ugly SSAO solution.

Are they sure it's HBAO and not HBAO+?
 
Top Bottom