AZ Greg
Member
I never said the thread didn't have a point I was merely stating a fact.
A fact that adds no value to the purpose of the thread.
I never said the thread didn't have a point I was merely stating a fact.
yeah that's why I expected the xbone version to turn out superior, but I don't understand. Is the graphics vs framerate a trade off between the two versions, or is the unlocked framerate on xbone (despite being sometimes higher) work against it?Frame rate drops 40-20fps in different moments. That's what DF face off said. So...not sure what's exactly it's better on xbone version. It's just uncapped.
I never said the thread didn't have a point I was merely stating a fact.
Thanks for the details, the shots look great. At which points did you experience the framedrops?
Yea, aside from character models, the game isn't really much of a looker, on my PS4 at least. Somewhat disappointing, especially considering the super long load times, and the poor performance (was fighting a boss yesterday that dipped to single digits). The way it looks you'd think it'd run at least at a constant 30.
Nice one, only if you did read, you would realize that I said HBAO and not the NVIDIA coined HBAO+. You do realize that there are many versions of HBAO right?
What about the seamless, massive, detail rich open world? The game looks pretty great when you consider what you're getting here.
And will it address the stuttering?When is that 600 fixes patch coming?
When is that 600 fixes patch coming?
ummm.... uh oh. Good about the font size though.
Unless there's another 600 fixes patch I missed.
Ok?
The knowledge that it is a big open world doesn't make it prettier to look at.
And I wouldn't exactly say it is seamless.
It's also riddled with bugs and performance issues.
I'm not saying it's ugly or horrid to look at, but it doesn't look great either.
It's that you said it was disappointing, which to me suggested you weren't considering the other aspects too merely comparing it to the visuals of other recent games.
And it is seamless within each massive open section.
Considering what the devs have achieved in terms of scope, I couldn't call the visuals disappointing. In fact, I'd say they were impressive considering what they have achieved overall.
I really don't understand these threads. Is there any doubt that an i7, 980 and 16GB of ram is going to outperform either console?
You really think the great majority of people are playing this on the PC at comparable or greater settings than the PS4 at 60FPS. . .I got some swamp land in Crookback Bog I'd like to sell ya.
It's that you said it was disappointing, which to me suggested you weren't considering the other aspects too merely comparing it to the visuals of other recent games.
And it is seamless within each massive open section.
Considering what the devs have achieved in terms of scope, I couldn't call the visuals disappointing. In fact, I'd say they were impressive considering what they have achieved overall.
Looks like an awful job for how the game looks on consoles. I miss the original style of the art. Not impressive for me.
People keep trying to tell me these are some of the best graphics, but this is my PS4:
Pine needles all but disappear into blurred textures at just a couple dozen feet away on the left bush.
Weren't quite a few people skeptical of the 750 ti + i3 being capable of matching PS4 in this game?
That xbone pic looks blurry.
Weren't quite a few people skeptical of the 750 ti + i3 being capable of matching PS4 in this game?
That PS4 pic looks like a cardboard diorama. I wonder how much of that is due to AO.
This games looks good on all the platforms in the end really. One has much better textures and clarity. Game is the same.
People can't say they think it looks good on each platform? I won't say it's the best looking game on any one platform but I think it looks good.I don't see how anyone can look at this and say that while actually believing it. The game is clearly different on each platform.
My shots of what the internet tells me is the blurry Vaseline smeared sub (full) HD'ness that is the Xbox One version of The Witcher 3.
Yup, looks fine. Lacking a bit of crispness, but nothing terrible.People can't say they think it looks good on each platform? I won't say it's the best looking game on any one platform but I think it looks good.
Behold! My shots of what the internet tells me is blurry Vaseline smeared sub (full) HD'ness. The Xbox One version of The Witcher 3.
Yea, you need to check your monitor's settings man. Hope nothing is terribly wrong, but something is definitely not right.^Tad confused:
Are those actual x1 shots or did someone black crush the image for a joke and that's what you meant?
Nearly half of the last image is 100% black.
Is that the console screenshot compression?
^Tad confused:
Are those actual x1 shots or did someone black crush the image for a joke and that's what you meant?
Nearly half of the last image is 100% black.
Is that the console screenshot compression?
I personally think it looks great
Yea, you need to check your monitor's settings man. Hope nothing is terribly wrong, but something is definitely not right.
Version 43.0.2357.65 m
Google Chrome is up to date.
Yes, yes it is. What's your point?"Looks good" is relative and subjective.
Haha, glad that's all it is.Holy shit, opened it up in firefox and it's totally different to how it looks in chrome.
Thanks for the headsup.
^Tad confused:
Are those actual x1 shots or did someone black crush the image for a joke and that's what you meant?
Nearly half of the last image is 100% black.
Is that the console screenshot compression?
Holy shit, opened it up in firefox and it's totally different to how it looks in chrome.
Thanks for the headsup.
I didn't believe you at first but now I do. That's bizzare. I wouldn't ever post the picture on the left lol, and if I had a game that did produce that picture I would burn it.Holy shit, opened it up in firefox and it's totally different to how it looks in chrome.
Thanks for the headsup.
-latest chrome, latest nvidia drivers :S
Past a certain point, particular game isn't very CPU-sensitive on PC (as illustrated in Durante's analysis), so I'm not sure these differences have much to do with CPU.Mh ok, this time I'm the weird one because I think it's looks rather meh on PC as well.
At least on screenshots.
Mostly because to me the artstyle looks so... I don't know, cartoony? cheap? Maybe it's the color palette from the shots I've seen like the one in the OP.
I'm sure it pulls off awesome stuff for an open world game but also on a technical level it doesn't strike as particularly amazing/more next gen looking compared to some other open world games. Though I guess the most comparable would Dragon Age and it probably beats that. Although there I like the art style more.
Anyway, seems the main difference that will persistent this gen is that consoles will turn off everything after 50 m to save resources. Would have more CPU power helped here or is that purely GPU-based?
Because system wars is far more entertaining /jkOne thing I'm surprised isn't getting discussed much is how good the AA method CDPR used is. Anyone know exactly what it is? It has excellent coverage without adding blur. IQ is damn good at 1080p on PS4.
One thing I'm surprised isn't getting discussed much is how good the AA method CDPR used is. Anyone know exactly what it is? It has excellent coverage without adding blur. IQ is damn good at 1080p on PS4.
But Mark Cerny told us!
Man is disappointing consoles are getting performance this poor, is almost like if both MS & Sony went into this gen not really wanting to
Both went in not wanting to lose hundreds of dollars per consoles sold when there's so much uncertainty in the industry. That said, Sony's strategy was much more gaming-centric and they were willing to take more risks hardware-wise than MS. They got very lucky with the GDDR5 situation. Both could have definitely invested more in the GPU, but MS was truly short-sighted going with a GPU that was considered a low-end budget card as far back as 2012.
The most ridiculous assumption they made was assuming people wouldn't care if the system didn't run most big games at 1080p, the native res of most displays. Had they actually wanted to build a 1080p capable machine, they would not have ignored AMD's own GPU spec recommendation for 1080p. They were too focused on having a 8 gbs of RAM for all their non-game media features and were unwilling to risk the cost of GDDR5, so they had to use a crappy memory solution that's slower AND ate up a good chunk of space on their APU, resulting in a weak GPU.
What in the actual fuck were they thinking.