shikamaru317 said:
Man, all the Witcher 3 downgrade talk recently makes me a little sick. I don't see how some people can see a downgrade between the E3 2014 build and the more recent PC preview builds, they look basically the same, a few minor differences. The only downgrade came between the VGX trailer in December 2013 and the E3 2014 trailer. However it wasn't a true downgrade because the footage in the VGX trailer wasn't from an actual playable build of the game, it was basically composed of target render set pieces, while the E3 footage came from an actual playable build of the game.
What I really don't get though is how there can be so many PC gamers who think their rigs could run Witcher 3 if it did have graphics matching the VGX trailer? It already takes a GTX 980 to play the game at ultra settings 1080p. The VGX trailer's graphics would have taken at least SLI 980's, Crossfire 290x's, or a Titan X to play at 1080p (let alone 1440p or 4k), and then we're talking about less than 2% of of the PC gaming demographic who actually have a system that powerful. So basically the "downgrade" affects less than 2% of PC players. CD Projekt can't afford to miss out on a ton of sales just to make a game that uses the full potential of a $2000 PC, or even a $1000 PC, because the vast majority of gamers have consoles or sub $600 gaming PC's. You can only scale a game but so much without building basically two different games, and CD Projekt funded Witcher 3 themselves, they had no financial backing from a big publisher.
|
Amen. I guess this is what happens when a few (2%) decide to spend a lot of money building a powerful gaming rig instead of enough specs to run the game. You have to justify your investments somehow even if they are the minority.
