I can only imagine the thread if Half Life 3 were revealed and then a couple years later suffers a big graphics downgrade like this.
A downgrade is a downgrade. No matter the developer.
-
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
I can only imagine the thread if Half Life 3 were revealed and then a couple years later suffers a big graphics downgrade like this.
A downgrade is a downgrade. No matter the developer.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
I agree 100% with this.
The developer should also be honest and not say there isn't a downgrade. Either don't answer or just explain what has changed. Don't lie.
Pop
Member
That looks stunning! o_0
Mmm. Good lawd.
LostMyNarbles
Member
I don't know this gameplay preview from last year looks a lot better than the current build.
https://youtu.be/N4ony2r0QFs?t=8m44s
That too. Most of these screenshots have little to no comparative rigour in any sense of the word. Not in image quality, not in metadata, not in scene.
or, much more likely, they were running on outrageous hardware. i dev on a pc with quad titan x video cards, as an example.
MagnoSauce
Member
On top of this, the whole "we're leaving ultra as a surprise on release" thing was such a thinly veiled and transparent attempt at avoiding claims of a downgrade because it could just be defended with "b-but we haven't seen the ultra settings!". It comes off as really deceptive and it was often painted as CDPR magnanimously giving the PC crowd a cute surprise.
Early Witcher 3 footage used copious amounts of sharpening filter and had a very desaturated look, it's hard to compare. The comparison by Lunar15 is evidence of that.
And holy shit, that first image comparison in the OP is disingenuous as shit.
Even the sharpening filter couldn't save that first screenshot.
And holy shit, that first image comparison in the OP is disingenuous as shit.
I do want to talk about what I mean by "not everything" getting downgraded. I've been saying the game's been scaled down graphically for some time, but there has been some impressive stuff. Also, not every old screenshot looked great:
2013:
There's also some beautiful stuff from current footage, if you know where to look:
May 2015:
The plants on the ground don't look super hot, but there's so much going on here that it looks brilliant. The monster's hair (with hairworks) and the forest are lovely.
Even the sharpening filter couldn't save that first screenshot.
JigglesBunny
Banned
Joke post?
Joke post.
This is either a joke or the dumbest post I have ever seen on GAF.
shadowsdarknes
Member
So unless CDPR is as bad as EA and UBI and everyone else, it sounds like these downgrades are a system issue and perhaps not deliberately misleading.
Unless the assets were deliberately downgraded to work on consoles, I don't see why these changes would have to take place.
Unless the assets were deliberately downgraded to work on consoles, I don't see why these changes would have to take place.
Funny how this thread only has six pages. If this were a Ubisoft game we'd be at 20+ right now. Anyways, the graphics downgrade isn't too important to me. Game still looks good. I'm much more concerned with the gameplay. Witcher 1 and 2 had some pretty bad combat, so unless they have massively improved it in Witcher 3 that's why I won't buy the game, not the graphics downgrade.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
The same thing happened with Unity when Ubi was accused
falsely
And it should be called out every time. Because that is deceptive marketing.
And what's wrong with leaving those settings in game, just like Crytek did in 2007 with Crysis? You needed a god-tier machine to max that out back then, but they didn't remove the higher end visual stuff.
1st Course
Member
The lighting is so good in that 2013-2014 trailer.
2015 footage lighting looks pretty meh in comparison.
2015 footage lighting looks pretty meh in comparison.
This thread has been downgraded too, compare the 28th January 2015 to this thread and there's clearly a downgrade in the cracks.
Very much so.
Pop
Member
Can't compare mods, this is retail.
RoyalLaFlame
Banned
What... the fuck?
Downgrades always suck but still looking forward to the game. To be honest, I never expected it to look that good.
maybe you should really do that, the thread didnt look like the majority of people were defending cdpr
Jigolo
Member
Apoleptica
Banned
Looking back at the footage shown in 2013 I honestly can't believe I actually expected the game to look that spectacular. I'm not surprised at all by the downgrade seeing as that initial footage is almost CGI movie quality.
We're already at 6 pages in less than a half hour, so I think you'll get your wish.
As for combat, no idea what to expect. I think it will be similar to 2, but they did hire the guy who made the combat rebalance mod.
vpance
Member
Yep. And when it rained at night it looked great.
This however is on an entirely different level.
Yeah super bummed I pre ordered the CE within 40 minutes of it going live on Amazon... not.
thelastcrusader
Banned
Good times. Downressed game looked vasoliney as hell.
And I agree if it was downgraded then CD deserves hell.
Nah. The game looks amazing and I expect to be quite pleased.
Why wouldn't it? PS4 is more powerful than almost all PCs. It has been this way since the PS2 era, which is why Saddam imported PS2s to launch missiles and not PCs.
His Majesty
Banned
So far they have done nothing to stab their customers in the back and have been really consumer friendly...so yeah. Of course this does not exempt them from criticism, but I find it REALLY silly people are using a one-minute long trailer from 2013 to shit on the hours and hours of footage that have been released in 2014 and 2015. You have known for a very long time how the game will look, don't pretend that CDProjekt has misled you.
lol I remember that.
Now its constantly touted as one of the most beautiful games around.
Amazing, lol!
whatevermort
Member
This is so fucking ridiculous. Things change during development. These people owe you NOTHING. Mother of god, watching people react this way is just sad.
They should make their ultra-settings, in-house build running on Titans look just as good and run just as well on my single GTX 970 and / or $400 console.
Otherwise, lazy fucking devs.
Poor little Ubisoft as well, i guess.
i don't understand why you would make your decision about buying Witcher 3 depend upon the gameplay, when neither of its prequels had amazing gameplay to begin with (i don't think Witcher 2 was bad though)
At this point the story and world of Witcher 3 is enough to make this an instant buy for me.
For their general treatment of fans for starters, but also because this game (graphics aside for the moment) looks like it's going to be huge, and immensely fun. Watch Dogs was always a GTA clone, and ended up not even living up to that in the end.
Witcher 3 looks incredible, I'm gonna wait til I play the game myself, but the downgrade isn't as severe imo.
Also if we find a 'witcher 3 e3 mode' once it comes out, then maybe we can talk.
For graphics functions that generate from a seeded value, they likely are. That's what sliders are. Not everything is the product of a mathematical function, however. Typically, when you create any sort of asset for a game, you start off with the highest quality object you can then dial it back till it runs on older hardware.
Unfortunately for stuff like textures or models or even entire objects like volumentric smoke, this might mean it becomes unfeasible to ship those with your product. People already bitch about 30 gb downloads, how would they feel if the game was even bigger when the majority of people wouldn't be able to use most of that stuff in the first place?
- Status