KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt is finally out and was greeted with plenty of critical acclaim. However, it appears that some PC gamers have been unsatisfied with the level of graphical fidelity in the game and claim that the PC version has been downgraded compared to footage previously shown.
CD Projekt Red has addressed these concerns in an interview with Eurogamer, with studio co-founder, Marcin Iwinski, denying that the two console versions of the game held the PC version back: “If the consoles are not involved there is no Witcher 3 as it is. We can lay it out that simply. We just cannot afford it, because consoles allow us to go higher in terms of the possible or achievable sales; have a higher budget for the game, and invest it all into developing this huge, gigantic world.”
“Developing only for the PC: yes, probably we could get more in terms of graphics as there would be nothing else – they would be so focused, like if we would develop only on Xbox One or PlayStation 4. But then we cannot afford such a game.”
A lot of PC gamers have been pointing towards specific trade show footage of The Witcher 3, which was shown off as far back as 2013. However, Iwinski explained that these bits of gameplay were taken from a ‘vertical slice' of the game, which are much smaller chunks compared to the final product and therefore, easier to push further as far as graphics are concerned. Additionally, after the initial 2013 VGX gameplay reveal, the rendering engine for the game was changed entirely.
Ultimately, it seems that CD Projekt Red chose to prioritize performance and gameplay over graphical fidelity. If you read the full interview, the developer admits to killing off certain systems and making plenty of technical changes over the course of development.
You can read the full interview, HERE.
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: When Watch Dogs had its graphical elements downgraded, Ubisoft failed to supply us with information on the technical decisions behind those changes during development. In addition, when Watch Dogs came out, it still ran poorly on PC hardware. However, the situation appears to be very different with CD Projekt Red, the studio had admitted to the graphics looking different and it has provided technical reasons for that. A lot of things can happen over the course of a game's development but ultimately, it seems that CD Projekt Red delivered the best final product it possibly could.
ahaha… its so horrible that you cant trust Game Developers anymore, and prepare yourselfs because E3 is near.. the place where devs sell lies 🙂 after watch dogs and now witcher 3, my games pre-orders are not happening lol 😉
So they DID admit that consoles were the reason the PC version was held back, jsut not for the reason everyone thought
Preordering games in general is just stupid these days. Granted the witcher 3 is an amazing game, still no game should be preordered
indeed, its a practice that i lost i got Watch Dogs 😀 that and believing E3 stuff XD
i’ve pre-oredered once, and im never doing it again, thank you want dogs
they could have delayed the game for a year just like Rockstar did.. so Console Peasants can Enjoy flaming PC gamers till it last.
the thing I find the funniest is that PC gamers (of which I am one) were singing the praises of CDPR because they were “totally and 100% all about PC” when in reality they are all about the money just like Sony and Microsoft and Activision and every other big studio are all about the money.
I have read articles about how CDPR were likened to white knights for the PC cause etc but in reality they are more for consoles than for PC’s. Given the choice between only producing games for PC or only producing games for Console platforms, they would absolutely choose the Consoles as they will earn them more money than PC sales would (yes I know PC is the most lucrative platform of the big three but if you add PS$ + Xbone sale together they will eclipse the pc by quite some margin).
Just don’t forget that this company is exactly that, a company, which sole purpose is to make money.
Luckily they happen to make good games too 🙂
Once a cash factory is established, there’s no need to be a white knight any more.
I still have no idea why people don’t understand that pre rendered, in game, early development footage, that is supposed to show the capabilites of an engine, is not used as the graphical peak in the retail version of the game. Watchdogs showed off actual in game footage which was proof, and with the guy who unlocked the graphical enhancement file, that Ubisoft did downgrade their game graphics. The Witcher 3 is a beautiful game as is. If the Witcher 3 does get a good modding community, then it will probably get many ENB’s that can make your game look like the footage shown at E3 2013, or even better.
lets not forget Aliens Colonial marines either, as this is also the same situation……..
And as for pre-orders, I also never pre-order as in this day and age games never really work correctly for the first week or so or untill that huge day-one patch anyway.
Agreed to the fullest of lenghts 🙂
The game is still absolutely gorgeous.
They had over 200 people working on it for 3 years. Even at 40k salary that is 24 million dollars before you get a return, and that’s just ballpark!
A handful of companies have shut down, in part, to not having the spare cash around to fund a game with so long until a return profit.
If they aren’t happy with the product they didn’t/don’t have to buy it. Bunch of babies behind screens in their mom’s basement sheltered from the real world imo.
STFU and play the damn game. Back in my day Lara Croft had Polygon Titties, Spyro was really Polygono, And Crash was HD awesomeness. These games had what REAL gamers wanted. GAMEPLAY!!! What in the name of Zues is everyone going on about with graphics now? In order to have a good game you need graphics that can set your PC ablaze and not actual story line. I MEAN WERE FUCKING TALKING ABOUT A STORY DRIVEN GAME HERE! And bitching about graphics? Two things. One, First off in order to bitch about graphics you BETTER have the rig to do that. I am talking enough juice to 4k this shit at 300fps, THEN YOU BITCH. But we all know there are some punks out there that are trying to run this shit on max everything with a GTX670 and going “20 frames? THIS IS BULLSHIT!”. Two, sit down and think to yourself “Do I want a bombin story with hours of my life to be sucked into, or do I want to watch this water for the next 2 hours to see if there is an animation loop?”. With all that said, REAL gamers and I rest our case.
Reason is so difficult to find these days
But did the demo’s of lara croft show super high quality graphics only to then be replaced with cone shaped boobs?
Have you seen the Witcher 3 on Ultra settings? They may have adjusted certain elements of the game to focus on gameplay, but the graphics still blow anything that has been released recently out of the water. its a GORGEOUS game.
Don’t forget no DRM. Oh yeah, the free DLC program too. (And back in my day it was great when the Commodore PET went from a black and white screen to a black and green.)
well gameplay really makes the game but on the other hand they had a gameplay preview back on 2013 E3 that makes this game stand out in terms of graphics, then they released it with a toned down graphics just for console users to play this game. I know that console users give them the financial aid they needed to create this game but there’s no need to tone down the graphics for PC users too.
I’m heavily against your tone on the importance of graphics vs the importance of gameplay. The reality is, whether you like it or not, that both are just as important as each other. Graphics and decent FPS heavily contributes to elements of immersion to the game while gameplay and mechanics ensure that the game works and like it or not without one a game can’t really be considered good. Your arguments using old-timey games when graphics were limited to only thousands of polygons is invalid. The truth is that that was the limit and utmost greatest of graphical capability at the time, if you wanted a real argument find a game that was still stuck in 2D when 3D was just becoming mainstream. How can you enjoy a Story with 5-10FPS? how can you respect the attention to detail that severely defines a character or environment? You are diminishing more than 50% of game industries workforce that focuses visual elements and optimization, while ignoring the main issue that has been outlined by other replies to your comment.
Typically a publisher handles the funding of companies and workforce salaries until the game releases so they’re the ones with their asses on the line (which is why they have the right to limit the game of what it can be through risk factor). Larger developers usually have in-house publishers such as Ubisoft, Microsoft and EA but if they don’t then going bust due to lack of funding is purely their fault for not adopting an effective method of Software Engineering or finding a publisher. And then there’s crowdsourcing, but lets not get into that fuckery :L
☛☛☛ $73.. per-hr @mi35//
,,,
➨➨➨http://TeamViewerNews.com/dream/zone…
Nevertheless the game is still very demanding on Uber settings if you play on PC. I got Titan X and I must say the graphics are great as they are now. This game will have long support in terms of patches and expansions so I believe graphics will be boosted for PC players in time.
He is just a troll, his PC probably can’t even run Watchdogs
ive got SLI 980s mate. and i can prove it. i see your troll accusations and raise you facts.
wait…. i misinterpreted your comment. ignore mine lol
Dude chill. Not everyone values the same aspects of a game you do. That doesn’t make them wrong.
If they don’t like the graphics then they can choose to not buy it. No need to rant.
Well put
You had a PET that is a piece of history. It must have been so different then. We’re they all uppercase like the Apple ][+?