For the versions being compared, yes. If you believed what's coming out of Germany, PS4 version is indeed better (minus the odd scattering of extra foliage). And I don't mean just AO.
-
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 downgrade arguments in here and nowhere else
- Thread starter Jigolo
- Start date
- Status
For the versions being compared, yes. If you believed what's coming out of Germany, PS4 version is indeed better (minus the odd scattering of extra foliage). And I don't mean just AO.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Where in the video do you see an example of this? Curious, as I didn't notice it in the video. Though I was more focused on the apparent lack of HBAO+ at all in the video on PC..
I'm usually really sensitive and nitpicky to even really small details, but if you are someone that doesn't mind 30 fps (or almost can't tell the difference between 60 and 30), there are very few reasons to go with the PC version. I will go with PC version because of the framerate difference, but I can see someone prefering the PS4 version because of the couch-factor.
So the dream of better-than-what-we've-seen grass is dead? HBAO+ was supposed to save us, dammit! You failed us HBAO+!
I don't speak german, but do they really say that?!
My god, FXAA is worse than no AA at all imo. Geez.
Yes, they said there was only a toggle for AA and they believe it is probably FXAA because it doesn't really impact the framerate too much.
other way: does your pc run Dying light ? if the answer is yes also the answer to your question is yes
Sodding_Gamer
Member
Can't quite believe what I'm seeing. Genuinely shocked how close pc is to ps4. Even games like watch dogs and assassins Creed black flag had a lot more options for pc players to make the game look a fair bit better than its console counterparts.
The guy said it had merely any impact on the framerate, so he assumes it is indeed FXAA.
E: slowpoke
Damn.
Thankfully it should be tolerable as the game doesn't seem to have a lot of aliasing.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Indeed, from that comparison it looks pretty comparible.
However don't underestimate how much resolution can make a difference. Also youtube compression.
Playing games at 4K vs 1080p is a night and day difference in far off details, up close ones, aliasing, view distance etc.
It really has to be seen to be understood. I often swap between 1080p and 4K in my games, just to be wowed at how massive a difference in immersion and IQ it makes.
All that said, as a person who bought SLI 970's for this game and had to rebuild his rig over a catastrophic failure, all in hype for Wild Hunt. If I couldn't get the PC version, I would be very contented with my PS4 copy.
universalmind
Member
Man those comparisons. So disappointing.
Hey, at least we have AF, guys, right? right?
Gonna need the game on my system before I make exacting conclusions.
It's seems like the PC version is barebone. even Lords of the Fallen from smaller team than CDPR got a PC version twith more stuff than consoles.
it was excepted after the massive downgrade from 2013 version and then CDPR comments on the three version.
what bugs me is why the gaming media still didn't jump on this, Jim Sterling, Totalbiscuit and other sites ate Ubi for Watch Dog downgrade and the locked/hidden setting in the PC version (also Unity ParityGate)..but no one is talking about this which is in the same level of shady business like Watch Dog.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
Not yet. CDPR took the PC/Ps4 comparison by PC Games Hardware down(they asked them to) and said the PC version isn't final and apparantly not representative.
A mod in the Witcher 3 forum even said the PC version looks "pretty bad".
So either they went full retard or there is a patch coming improving things for the PC version quite a bit.
Very few outlets have the PC version, and if they do it would've been sent to them fairly recently as the initial batch of review copies were PS4 only. So if people are going to take them to task, they'll probably need more hands on time with it.
Dictator93
Member
Was that mod a CDPR employee?
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
I refer you to these posts.
Nice.
Could your more trained eyes tell us what seems to be the difference between these recent screens of grass
And these?
I am leaning towards it just being REALLY dependent on weather/ToD/Lighting how good/bad the foliage looks. Based on what the sun does to the grass in this screen.
I beleive it was a post by Marcin Momot if I remember correctly.
You've just convinced me to not buy a GTX 980 ($800 in my country). Thanks for saving me money.
Witchers make drugs better than Heisenberg. No reason he can't whip up a perfect Aloe Herbal conditioner.
Totalbiscuit is pretty biased when it comes to this as GOG.com is sponsoring his esports team.
Thanks for mentioning that game, last I checked it ran like shit on my CPU, seems the latest patch has improved framerate drastically
4k with downsampling would be nice, but there's no way my single 970 can handle that.
And 1440k downsampled to 1080 (which is my monitor resolution) looks worse than native 1080 to me. Not enough extra pixels to provide the amount of "AA" to make up for the added blurriness. Native resolution with a good AA algorithm looks better than anything up to 4k -> 1080 downsample imo.
Dictator93
Member
The later patches for that game removed the ability for it to scale as high as it did (aka, it got downgraded due to people being uninformed). It actually ran just fine on all non-AMD cpus.
Hrmm... this whole situation has my head buzzing. It is incredibly disappointing at this juncture.
1620p >> 1080p is actually a good downsample choice due to the numbering.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
Here is an interesting interview with a developer, at minute 3 he talks about shader changes and changes to the foliage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E
What Kaze2212 said.
Pretty sure he is part of CDPR and not just a mod in the forums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU9rlkCOk9E
What Kaze2212 said.
Pretty sure he is part of CDPR and not just a mod in the forums.
Literally lol'd at that.
Alrighty then... We shall wait and see how this unfolds. I expect nothing though >
I only find this that come close but i see a lot of nuclear explosions. It's fine, i guess
The diferent between low and ultra looks like a typical port from consoles.
Imp the Dimp
Member
I don't think I've ever seen a day 1 patch turn a game from looking "pretty bad" to amazing lol. Ridiculous.
Like i said on my previous post, i don't really pay attention to this things but is sad to see the gaming press is giving this people a free pass over the downgrade when ubisoft got ripped apart for watch dogs, to be honest im a bit frustated right now because i sold my 4gb 770 and got a 980 just for this game and seems that card i had before could have handle this easily , ahh well, we still have batman coming next month
, ahh well, we still have batman coming next monthHoly shit, what a dissapointment.
PC shows the better LOD and density, the rest is comparable, the shadows appear better on PS4.
Oh, lame that they removed options then. But I thought they fixed that too? I mean it didn't run like complete shit (that was hyperbole) you could easily lock it to a stable 30 while looking much better than the console versions even on an FX6300. But yeah, badly optimized for AMD cpus then ;P. This CPU has no trouble running BF4 at ultra, but that's thanks to Mantle I guess. DX12 can't come soon enough, I think it'll help push PC versions further away from console ports again.
Dictator93
Member
Of all the things I am seeing, Hairworks seems to be the best out of all this mumbo jumbo. WHat are you not liking about it?
Yeah, they removed the options.:/
It definitely could easily hit a flat 30 on anything, and even a flat 60 if you put down the distance scaler to about 60 or 50 (on intel).
I will try that, thanks.
Looks like frame rate and resolution are going to be the PC's only advantages here (hair too if you're Nvidia). Otherwise Ultra is essentially pretty much the same as the PS4. Even though I ordered the PS4 version, I still think this is poor show by CDP. PC's have a much higher theoretical performance difference, at least make some attempts to take advantage of that.
See the first video I quoted from my post. It is early on, I made a link at the appropriate place:
https://youtu.be/1fUGFmmikn4?t=91
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Looks like CDPR decided mid development to become a primarily console developer.
"Some things were sharp, too sharp" until they removed the sharpening filter hmm
The game has a custom temporal AA solution. At least on the consoles and according toggle on the ini file.
I find it hard to believe there would be so little aliasing with just fxaa (not to mention that also appears fairly temporally stable).
Dictator93
Member
WEll, let's not get carried away here and start being unspecific. The PS4 is actually using high according to CDPR (and it shows in the finer comparison). IT is just that Ultra isn't that much better than high.
cripterion
Member
No, they only said they have a dedicated team to make the pc version run at 60 fps, higher resolution and better draw distance.
Sanctuary
Member
"No, we didn't, we didn't downgrade. It's impossible to downgrade a game that didn't exist".
I can't believe he's actually trying this shit. He's also blaming optimization, when we know that's not why the PC version looks the way it does. That logically makes no sense. He's also talking about the initial trailer, when it's still clear there was a DOWNGRADE from 2014 to now.
In the interview that was posted 20+ pages back, they actually stated that they had two seperate teams developing the game at the same time (this was after they claimed having to build around the weakest system since they were using one team). I don't even know what the truth is here.
I don't really see the temporal AA look there though. But ok.
FXAA can have very little aliasing though, but at the cost of terrible blurriness.
No, they only said they have a dedicated team to make the pc version run at 60 fps, higher resolution and better draw distance.
haha ;P
Because for them this is old hat. They're used to seeing things change drastically (and sometimes at the last minute). They're only going to start commenting on finished versions.
ok i don't want to be a target for "hardcore gamer" but i must admit i'll play The Witcher 3 with the PAD / controller ot the couch but on my PC, or there is a law that prevent me from using my pc with pad?
Always for my idea of console: 350 games installed, Gamestop out of business, want to play i CLICK PLAY. The pc is always on, and on many games there are MODS, do you think that skyrim was still played if was without mods?
Anyway i have a PS4 and a WII U but i think i'll let them putrefy, maybe after FF x / X 2
Well, much like TressFX hair doesn't seem to lay down properly on surfaces, look at Roach's mane for example, it's hovering above his neck. It looks odd, that and how shiny and fine it looks, while sort of lacking density. Both techs from AMD and Nvidia are cool but they both need more time to mature I feel.
Was that because babbys cried they couldn't run the Ultra settings? That's so dumb, people have been gushing over Crysis' graphics for years because it was so future proofed in its graphics.
No, they only said they have a dedicated team to make the pc version run at 60 fps, higher resolution and better draw distance.
Will their separate team build PC rigs for everyone so they can hit 60 FPS? :lol
And yet people were celebrating when it was declared that a GTX 980 is all that would be required for 1080p60 on the Ultra preset. That was your first sign that they weren't pushing that hard on the top end.
I've prepared myself for minimum enhancements at Ultra (outside of Hairworks, etc) since that statement, so I'm not even really surprised if it nothing comes of this apparent final PC build.
Hairworks isn't NVIDIA exclusive, it'll probably just run a lot better on NVIDIA hardware.
I've prepared myself for minimum enhancements at Ultra (outside of Hairworks, etc) since that statement, so I'm not even really surprised if it nothing comes of this apparent final PC build.
Hairworks isn't NVIDIA exclusive, it'll probably just run a lot better on NVIDIA hardware.
The LOD and density are comparable too, a few extra clumps of grass are simply because the PC presets don't exactly match the PS4 settings 1:1. They are, for all intents and purposes, identical. Heck, IF I were to consider this as an authoritative source, I'd go to the extent of saying the PS4 version is better, since it actually has better AO indoors.
What are the differences between high and ultra? Because I'm not seeing them between PC ultra and PS4 lol. You get the odd bit of grass patch difference (not necessarily more grass, just different), sharper details on the rare object, but otherwise they look almost the same. I'd even say certain things look better on the PS4, such as the shadows, the grass etc. But I'd imagine that's more from the added contrast in the PS4 version.
This game very much appears to be one where parity was a consideration. Not expecting many differences between either of the platforms. Guess we'll have to see on the performance and resolution front.
- Status