- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Witcher 3 Gameplay
Posted on 5/17/15 at 11:58 am to Mr Gardoki
Posted on 5/17/15 at 11:58 am to Mr Gardoki
Why? It looks like a blast.
I'm hyping it way too much in my own head though. I see the dragon fighting and the large areas and keep thinking Skyrim.
I'm hyping it way too much in my own head though. I see the dragon fighting and the large areas and keep thinking Skyrim.
Posted on 5/17/15 at 12:04 pm to hawgfaninc
someone needs to start the official release thread yo
Posted on 5/17/15 at 12:06 pm to hawgfaninc
i will, but im sure people will be butthurt and say that this should be it
Posted on 5/17/15 at 1:36 pm to hawgfaninc
I was considering pulling an all-nighter tomorrow night with this game and taking a vacation day. But then I was handed a short-turnaround project Friday afternoon with basically no breathing room. If I'm lucky, I'll actually get to play for about 2 hours tomorrow.
The PC community is pissed because the graphics were "downgraded." In other words, the PC community isn't getting some mega-super enhanced graphics version that somehow magically runs at 60fps 1080p with maxed settings on $100 video cards.
PC community has just become accustomed to the PC/last-gen console graphics disparity. They also seem to forget that this game was unveiled nearly a year before the XB1/PS4 were released, before we even knew the specs of those consoles. Ultimately, the devs needed the game to run on the console hardware. Imagine how downgraded the graphics would look if they were aiming for 60fps on those consoles. On the other hand, if the graphics were enhanced across the board for PC (or had stayed the same since the early 2013 unveiling), people would be bitching about higher hardware requirements, because I bet a lot of the people who are mad about the graphics downgrade haven't upgraded their GPUs since the XB1/PS4 were released. Can't win with those people. The alternative is the Ubisoft treatment, where the game has mediocre graphics and runs like shite.
Nvidia's chart is pretty promising:
Every setting/hardware config listed in that chart apparently guarantees a minimum of 40fps in the most graphically intense areas. If true, it means a $300 video card with 4GB of vram can run it at high settings at 1440P or max it out at 1080P, which is exactly where it needs to be. We shouldn't ignore the fact that at equivalent settings, a gpu that can push 1440P at 60fps is doing over 5 times the work of the xbox one at 900p/30fps and over 3.5x the PS4 (1080/30fps).
It looks like I will be able to run it at 1440P with all the eye candy, or pare it back a little for 4K DSR.
The PC community is pissed because the graphics were "downgraded." In other words, the PC community isn't getting some mega-super enhanced graphics version that somehow magically runs at 60fps 1080p with maxed settings on $100 video cards.
PC community has just become accustomed to the PC/last-gen console graphics disparity. They also seem to forget that this game was unveiled nearly a year before the XB1/PS4 were released, before we even knew the specs of those consoles. Ultimately, the devs needed the game to run on the console hardware. Imagine how downgraded the graphics would look if they were aiming for 60fps on those consoles. On the other hand, if the graphics were enhanced across the board for PC (or had stayed the same since the early 2013 unveiling), people would be bitching about higher hardware requirements, because I bet a lot of the people who are mad about the graphics downgrade haven't upgraded their GPUs since the XB1/PS4 were released. Can't win with those people. The alternative is the Ubisoft treatment, where the game has mediocre graphics and runs like shite.
Nvidia's chart is pretty promising:
Every setting/hardware config listed in that chart apparently guarantees a minimum of 40fps in the most graphically intense areas. If true, it means a $300 video card with 4GB of vram can run it at high settings at 1440P or max it out at 1080P, which is exactly where it needs to be. We shouldn't ignore the fact that at equivalent settings, a gpu that can push 1440P at 60fps is doing over 5 times the work of the xbox one at 900p/30fps and over 3.5x the PS4 (1080/30fps).
It looks like I will be able to run it at 1440P with all the eye candy, or pare it back a little for 4K DSR.
Posted on 5/17/15 at 1:53 pm to ILikeLSUToo
Alright I'm getting this, this thread has me hyped.
Posted on 5/17/15 at 2:12 pm to ILikeLSUToo
quote:
The PC community is pissed because the graphics were "downgraded." In other words, the PC community isn't getting some mega-super enhanced graphics version that somehow magically runs at 60fps 1080p with maxed settings on $100 video cards.
what a bunch of whiny bitches
Posted on 5/17/15 at 2:47 pm to Jcorye1
Nothing like Skyrim. Way better
Posted on 5/17/15 at 2:52 pm to Carson123987
quote:
Nothing like Skyrim. Way better
I preferred Skyrim to Witcher 2 because I didn't like the controls and combat in Witcher 2. Also, since I'd just played a lot of Skyrim before starting Witcher 2, the lack of openness was frustrating (invisible walls, and the pre-rendered animations to walk through doors, step down and climb small ledges, and climb ladders). Seems like the third one addresses those frustrations, though.
Posted on 5/17/15 at 8:25 pm to ILikeLSUToo
Haven't played either previous wit her games, but am intrigued. Just watched that 5 min video, which was basically as confusing as all get up, to someone who hasn't followed this. Last game played was bloodborne and absolutely loved it. Didn't care for dragon age ori ins though, returned it. Should I give this a go or no.
Posted on 5/17/15 at 9:08 pm to luvdatigahs
Big Go. It's gonna be epic
Posted on 5/17/15 at 9:12 pm to luvdatigahs
quote:
Last game played was bloodborne and absolutely loved it. Didn't care for dragon age ori ins though, returned it. Should I give this a go or no.
well witcher 3 has the carson seal of approval, so...
Posted on 5/17/15 at 9:48 pm to ILikeLSUToo
I thought the combat in aitcher 2 was miles beyond the shitty Skyrim combat
Posted on 5/17/15 at 10:14 pm to Carson123987
With or without the combat patch?
Posted on 5/18/15 at 10:37 am to ILikeLSUToo
Looking at the benchmarks so far tells me that with a 770 I might as well just get it on PS4.
Posted on 5/18/15 at 12:04 pm to Mr Gardoki
That german benchmark posted on Reddit a few hours ago? They tested on Ultra settings. We should all know by now that the jump from Medium to High to Ultra can be nearly exponential in terms of texture sizes alone. Of course a 2GB card is going to crap out at Ultra. Plus, there are tons of individual settings you can tweak, some more resource-intensive than others, rather than applying a broad quality setting across all of it. The benchmark is still showing only a few fps away from PS4 performance, but with settings that the consoles will not be able to match, period.
I suspect you'd still be better off with the PC version. Yeah, you'll have to lower settings, but they won't be lower than PS4. Your card is vram-challenged, but even with console optimizations (in this case, I think the main differences will be AO, AA, draw distance, and textures), the PS4 is still GPU-challenged by comparison. I'm betting your 770 will look as good as PS4 but with a higher frame rate. That's what I'd aim for.
I suspect you'd still be better off with the PC version. Yeah, you'll have to lower settings, but they won't be lower than PS4. Your card is vram-challenged, but even with console optimizations (in this case, I think the main differences will be AO, AA, draw distance, and textures), the PS4 is still GPU-challenged by comparison. I'm betting your 770 will look as good as PS4 but with a higher frame rate. That's what I'd aim for.
Posted on 5/18/15 at 12:07 pm to ILikeLSUToo
I wish I got it on PC, but I preordered it months ago on PS4 and they don't do refunds plus I had a $15 credit so it only cost me $38. Oh wells.
I'll just torrent it on PC down the road.
I'll just torrent it on PC down the road.
Posted on 5/18/15 at 12:53 pm to ILikeLSUToo
But at that point the visual difference is very minimal. Anytime it's close I just assume play it on console.
Posted on 5/18/15 at 1:01 pm to Mr Gardoki
The more gameplay i watch, the more hyped i get. How the frick did i go this long not knowing about all of this?
Posted on 5/18/15 at 1:06 pm to Henry Jones Jr
It's a damn good question. Here is a little something to consider, look up "Cyberpunk 2077", the next title CD will be working on now that Witcher 3 is out
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News