Its clear to everyone that consoles provide the most money. I can forgive them for wanting to make some cash off a very large and expensive game.
The people who are bitching about graphics clearly have nothing better to do. It looks perfect to me.
The graphics are fine what the fuck is this guy on? Also it sucks AMD users have to wait til next week for gpu drivers because of Nvidia GameWorks.
[QUOTE=Aide;47775210]The graphics are fine what the fuck is this guy on? Also it sucks AMD users have to wait til next week for gpu drivers because of Nvidia GameWorks.[/QUOTE]
dunno the whole video reeked of sarcasm to me
[QUOTE=Aide;47775210]The graphics are fine what the fuck is this guy on? Also it sucks AMD users have to wait til next week for gpu drivers because of Nvidia GameWorks.[/QUOTE]
"These graphics don't look as good as the trailer I saw in 2003"
yeah what is this guy on
That video was pure sarcasm
This video wasn't sarcasm he is right the Witcher 3 sucks
Still doesn't excuse the fact that the old VGX version was indeed playable on PC. Just add an additional launch mode with a disclaimer "this might be buggy because data streaming & you're loading lots of HD assets blah blah not good performance but good visuals" and it'd be fine.
I still love this game to death and I can't talk shit because I run the game at 25fps on ultra low but dude.
[QUOTE=MrHeadHopper;47775459]Still doesn't excuse the fact that the old VGX version was indeed playable on PC. Just add an additional launch mode with a disclaimer "this might be buggy because data streaming & you're loading lots of HD assets blah blah not good performance but good visuals" and it'd be fine.
I still love this game to death and I can't talk shit because I run the game at 25fps on ultra low but dude.[/QUOTE]
They'd need to make the assets for the rest of the game then since they stopped making it that way partway through development.
[QUOTE=Another Hater;47775421]This video wasn't sarcasm he is right the Witcher 3 sucks[/QUOTE]
oh my god silent hills 1 and 2 suck so much becuz of da graphics :v:
why would i play that when i can play my average generic copy and paste FPS Game :v:
Its completely valid to be mad that a company lied about a downgrade multiple times only to come out after release confirming their was indeed a downgrade.
the game is great and it still looks good but that doesn't excuse the fact that they did lie about the game's graphics with the promo material.
i don't know why so many people are willing to just turn a blind eye to bullshit practices like this that are quickly becoming a standard in the industry
[QUOTE=TheWhiteFox1;47779664]the game is great and it still looks good but that doesn't excuse the fact that they did lie about the game's graphics with the promo material.
i don't know why so many people are willing to just turn a blind eye to bullshit practices like this that are quickly becoming a standard in the industry[/QUOTE]
"it's okay if cd projekt red does it."
[QUOTE=TheWhiteFox1;47779664]the game is great and it still looks good but that doesn't excuse the fact that they did lie about the game's graphics with the promo material.
i don't know why so many people are willing to just turn a blind eye to bullshit practices like this that are quickly becoming a standard in the industry[/QUOTE]
Especially considering the ungodly amounts of shit Ubi got for it last year with Watch Dogs.
Indeed, it's upsetting that people are now making fun of those who criticise gameplay trailers that lie about the graphics of the final product.
[QUOTE=TheWhiteFox1;47779664]the game is great and it still looks good but that doesn't excuse the fact that they did lie about the game's graphics with the promo material.
i don't know why so many people are willing to just turn a blind eye to bullshit practices like this that are quickly becoming a standard in the industry[/QUOTE]
ignorance is bliss
The game still looks good, dont get me wrong, but to play devil's advocate, there WAS a downgrade. If it were any other game by any other company, people would be demanding heads roll.
I love how there's so many people dickriding CPR so hard that they can't even tell that this is satire.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;47779692]Especially considering the ungodly amounts of shit Ubi got for it last year with Watch Dogs.[/QUOTE]
Considering Watch Dogs ran about as efficient as a PC-class Hummer I think it should be fairly safe to differentiate.
The Witcher 3 is unplayable for me at the moment.
Unplayable in the sense that it keeps on crashing every five minutes.
[QUOTE=TheWhiteFox1;47779664]the game is great and it still looks good but that doesn't excuse the fact that they did lie about the game's graphics with the promo material.
i don't know why so many people are willing to just turn a blind eye to bullshit practices like this that are quickly becoming a standard in the industry[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;47779692]Especially considering the ungodly amounts of shit Ubi got for it last year with Watch Dogs.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Yummy Pie;47779678]"it's okay if cd projekt red does it."[/QUOTE]
this will give you a better idea
[video=youtube;Kq_vX9ScEds]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_vX9ScEds[/video]
the difference is that CPR actually had a fair and good excuse and ubisoft's watchdogs [U]had the graphics settings in the game fully working[/U] all by changing .ini settings
while the witcher 3 had them actually ripped out during developement due to consoles causing them to down grade and the game not fully working right. Remember, you have to optimize the game so that millions of people can play it.
watch dogs was massively buggy mess, and the witcher 3 is actually stable and has actual content
the reason people will turn a blind eye is because only an idiot would buy a game only for graphics, and only an idiot would decline a game for the same reason.
Ubisoft basically said the modders "Heavily modified the entire game" when all they did was change .ini settings and it ran better than the release settings. It would not surprise me if they were planning to release DLC that unlocked these ini settings at all.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;47779692]Especially considering the ungodly amounts of shit Ubi got for it last year with Watch Dogs.[/QUOTE]
Watch Dogs was deliberately downgraded on the PC version though, which was the main problem people had. Even after a little digging you could turn on all the features the consoles couldn't handle.
Imo the graphical downgrade is less of a problem, but when you look at how core elements like inventory management and everything tied around it work much less intuitive, and many things worked objectively better and more effective in the previous game (better and more filtering and sorting options, better UI), it is hard not to say that the PC version definetely suffered from the console release.
[QUOTE=TheWhiteFox1;47779664]the game is great and it still looks good but that doesn't excuse the fact that they did lie about the game's graphics with the promo material.
i don't know why so many people are willing to just turn a blind eye to bullshit practices like this that are quickly becoming a standard in the industry[/QUOTE]
They admitted that the earlier iteration of the engine didn't function well in open environments, the promos they showed were not open worlds, they were small parts.
Christ it's the ignorance of people like you not understanding the development process of games and totally ripping into a studio with legit reasons for doing something that drive me up the fucking wall.
Things change, for better, or for worse and are controlled by so many variables, they made it quite clear that they overestimated the power of the engine and had to cut the fidelity to actually make the game playable.
Graphics are not the be all and end all of games, would you have been happy if they stuck with the older engine and brought out a version of the Witcher 3 that stuttered horendously at an unplayable framerate but looked as good as it did in the promos? I don't think so.
They tried, they failed, they comprised, that's how shit works in "the industry."
Well, let's be honest. It has to be made to fit on consoles, therefor, it's going to be taking shortcuts and compromises. And that's the way it is
A damn shame
Look at the bright side, they're at least addressing it with a patch, and you can always Ini tweak. You can already increase grass to beyond what the game lets you to a point that it makes SLi'd Titan X's play at 20 FPS, and visually it doesn't look all that different than the Ultra setting
[QUOTE=J!NX;47780200]
Ubisoft basically said the modders "Heavily modified the entire game" when all they did was change .ini settings and it ran better than the release settings. It would not surprise me if they were planning to release DLC that unlocked these ini settings at all.[/QUOTE]
On that note, I'm sure I saw an interview somewhere where the creative lead said that they were preparing a patch for Witcher 3 on PC that allowed editing of .ini files to increase foliage density and draw distance beyond the settings currently available in-game.
At least they acknowledged the downgrade instead of basically denying it like Ubisoft did, and even more unlike Ubisoft they're actually giving PC Gamers the options to push it past the recommended limits they put in place. You have to hand it to them for that at least.
[QUOTE=Wickerman123;47780665]On that note, I'm sure I saw an interview somewhere where the creative lead said that they were preparing a patch for Witcher 3 on PC that allowed editing of .ini files to increase foliage density and draw distance beyond the settings currently available in-game.
At least they acknowledged the downgrade instead of basically denying it like Ubisoft did, and even more unlike Ubisoft they're actually giving PC Gamers the options to push it past the recommended limits they put in place. You have to hand it to them for that at least.[/QUOTE]
that and at least they actually put effort into the game, so it's not like it's that bad of a loss
People are talking about it like they just switched the shit off like Ubisoft did, failing to even realise that the promos were a totally different iteration of the engine that straight up couldn't handle the expansive environments at that fidelity.
It's totally unfair to call them out as lying about the graphics, everything happens for a reason when it comes to games design, with the exception being Ubisoft and their blatant disregard of PC Gamers as 'pirates and cockroaches.' People can be legitimately angry at Ubisoft because they are actually open about their hate for PC Gamers (well, some members of the company at least) but for some reason people are using Ubisoft as a catalyst in their own self entitlement to illegitimately criticize other studios - which is fucking ridiculous.
The combat makes it unplayable.
[QUOTE=Wickerman123;47780705]People are talking about it like they just switched the shit off like Ubisoft did, failing to even realise that the promos were a totally different iteration of the engine that straight up couldn't handle the expansive environments at that fidelity.
[B]It's totally unfair to call them out as lying about the graphics[/B], everything happens for a reason when it comes to games design, with the exception being Ubisoft and their blatant disregard of PC Gamers as 'pirates and cockroaches.' People can be legitimately angry at Ubisoft because they are actually open about their hate for PC Gamers (well, some members of the company at least) but for some reason people are using Ubisoft as a catalyst in their own self entitlement to illegitimately criticize other studios - which is fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
They actually said a few months back that [URL="http://wccftech.com/the-witcher-3-graphical-downgrade-final-version-pc/"]"There will be no downgrade."[/URL] Obviously things came up and they had to make changes. You can argue semantics and claim it wasn't a lie, but they still said one thing and did another.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
