Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
hhhhojeihsug

Changes between pre-alpha footage and released

20 posts in this topic

Everyone knows that Witcher 3 has a graphical downgrade after released. Besides that I found this during my gameplay. The devs just changed the photo of The Ladies.  I don't know why they do that since it has nothing to do with the performance. And you will know what I am talking about after you see those photos.

post-33634-0-21047600-1432477077_thumb.jpg

post-33634-0-14337200-1432477083_thumb.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This explains it! Amazing game everyone shoulf stop complaining about the downgrade..

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-05-19-cd-projekt-red-tackles-the-witcher-3-graphics-downgrade-issue-head-on

I don't own the game, but if you have a promise of the game being something and it isn't, you have all rights to complain about it, no matter how good it is (since it could then be better).

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The downgrade is barely noticeable. The people who are comparing this to Watch_Dogs are out of their minds.

 

 

The most recent gameplay trailers before release did not lie to you. The trailer people keep mentioning is what, 3 years old now? its a 3 damn years old trailer of PC footage that had some slightly better effect and maybe a bit more detail [mostly in terms of fire], the game is out now and it looks absolutely gorgeous, one of the best looking games out there and we still have people complaining about a graphical downgrade.

 

IIRC their patching in PC settings so it can be brought up to the same standard, too. Its just bloody dumb all around.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're missing the big picture here in the OP.  The nudity.  It's gone. :(

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, every single game that releases on PC and a console at the same time pretty much always uses PC footage unless otherwise stated. It's only been happening for how many years now?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The downgrade is not as bad as some games like Watch Dogs so meh, it would be cool if devs actually used pc capabilities and made the pc version actually look the same as the pre-release advertisement but nope, pc is not worth the effort so they don't bother.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, according to CDPR. The three years old trailer showed us was under development, that was a single stage. They just show one area, so they can pour all the performance in it. With the content increased, even high-end pc couldn't deal with that. Just like Marsipan said, everyone should look that article.

Well, most people find out the graphical difference between too pictures. Another difference is the content, just like PleaseHoldOn said

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The downgrade is not as bad as some games like Watch Dogs so meh, it would be cool if devs actually used pc capabilities and made the pc version actually look the same as the pre-release advertisement but nope, pc is not worth the effort so they don't bother.

Parity would be too much if they just decided to go completely nuts with PC and only PC, way more work too since they'd have to treat the PC version a completely different game than the console version.

 

CDPR are not the kind of developer to just shaft their customers. I strongly believe this slight downgrade was for a damn good reason.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think people would learn by now: when you see a pre-release trailer, it's often coming from a computer, not in-game footage from the console. If people would come to understand this and learn to temper their expectations, we'd have less of these complaints. Also, I even said nearly this exact same thing months ago when someone posted a pre-release trailer for The Witcher and everyone was like "Don't care, Hype Train WOOWOO!"

That's the funny part. I guarantee 99% of gamers if you plopped them in front of a TV and asked 'what is the framerate and graphical output of this game" they couldnt tell you (I know I couldn't) but if they read on a website that a game isn't native 1080P then they will freak out.

 

I think we're missing the big picture here in the OP.  The nudity.  It's gone. :(

You're on the Internet, I think you will survive

 

5qJBLT4.jpg

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I am not complaining about the graphical downgrade. I own a 7 years old desktop, I need to play games with all fx off and set resolution to 800*600. And not even mention that is a x32 computer. I love the quality on ps4, and not trolling about pc master race or something.

Most of you guys just misunderstood what I am talking about.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How recent is the picture with the nudity removed? probably the ME version that me and other folk got before release.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the funny part. I guarantee 99% of gamers if you plopped them in front of a TV and asked 'what is the framerate and graphical output of this game" they couldnt tell you (I know I couldn't) 

60 fps compared to 30 fps for me is night and day unless its a turn based rpg or something like that, since I switch often  between pc and consoles whenever I play a game at 30 fps it takes me a good 2 hours to get used to it since I am so used to 60.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sucks that this had to happen but not nearly as bad as Watch Dogs. But mind-blowing graphics does NOT make a game. FFVII's blocky characters were a bit shitty even for its time yet the game is the most popular in the entire series (and rightly so). 'Black' on the PS2 looked amazing but after the explosive first mission the game slowed to a snail's pace and was highly repetitive. The Witcher III from what I've seen still looks great and I very much look forward to getting it once I procure a PS4 for myself.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the funny part. I guarantee 99% of gamers if you plopped them in front of a TV and asked 'what is the framerate and graphical output of this game" they couldnt tell you (I know I couldn't) but if they read on a website that a game isn't native 1080P then they will freak out.

 

 

I should really get started on donating to the American Foundation for the Blind

Edited by Ramonachan
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should really get started on donating to the American Foundation for the Blind

 

 

60 fps compared to 30 fps for me is night and day unless its a turn based rpg or something like that, since I switch often  between pc and consoles whenever I play a game at 30 fps it takes me a good 2 hours to get used to it since I am so used to 60.

Which is why I said 99% and not 100% trust me the average gamer out there cannot tell the difference. I have worked in the games industry or in a retail environment dealing with gaming for almost 15 years and the average customer has no idea. Your average customer still thinks that they can buy Mario on X360...and if you think I am joking this happened 3 times in one day before Christmas.

 

So why should companies pour tons of resources into a game when the majority of people out there can't tell the difference.  Most people see the trailer and it looks awesome and then they play the game 6 months to a year later and it still looks awesome.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why I said 99% and not 100% trust me the average gamer out there cannot tell the difference. I have worked in the games industry or in a retail environment dealing with gaming for almost 15 years and the average customer has no idea. Your average customer still thinks that they can buy Mario on X360...and if you think I am joking this happened 3 times in one day before Christmas.

 

So why should companies pour tons of resources into a game when the majority of people out there can't tell the difference.  Most people see the trailer and it looks awesome and then they play the game 6 months to a year later and it still looks awesome.

This

 

People seem to think forum members on a gaming website, are indicative of the average gamer, the fact even people on these forums sometimes say they can't tell the difference, should give you a clue that most people can't tell a difference.

 

PC players harping on about 200FPS are even more niche. The most important thing for console gamers is a stable frame rate, this is the reason people have said the Xboone version runs worse despite at times having a higher frame rate.

 

Devs will target everything towards the people putting money down on their games, they even stated that console market allowed this game to be released and be as big as they wanted it to be.

Edited by Superbuu3
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think people would learn by now: when you see a pre-release trailer, it's often coming from a computer, not in-game footage from the console. If people would come to understand this and learn to temper their expectations, we'd have less of these complaints. Also, I even said nearly this exact same thing months ago when someone posted a pre-release trailer for The Witcher and everyone was like "Don't care, Hype Train WOOWOO!"

 

Yup, exactly. CD Projekt Red said it themselves that the debut trailer was the direction they were trying to go for three years ago, but due to hardware limitations they had to downgrade a bit.

 

But today we still have people get super excited over CG trailers and get pissed off when the actual gameplay doesn't even come close. No one to blame but themselves when it comes to hype.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't own the game, but if you have a promise of the game being something and it isn't, you have all rights to complain about it, no matter how good it is (since it could then be better).

Hey Yuri, sorry for late reply. Yes totally, you have all the rights to complain. But they never lied about it, they've shown the downgrade since that Alpha. It was Pre Alpha, even though they didn't feel good about it they did it for the games sake.

If the game would've looked like it did, there wouldn't be the game we got promised. The world wouldn't be as big and the framerate would be horrible. Im not defending a downgrade, but they have been very open about it; saying sorry. And honestly, from Pre Alpha it happens quite a lot.

Yes they could've waited with the showing of that demo, to prevent this from happening. They even said so themself in the interview if you read about it.

If this promise hadn't been broken, a few other would have. :)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.