By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fps_d0minat0r on 17 May 2015
Edit Thread
TheJimbo1234 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
daredevil.shark said:


Nope. None has paid to make inferior version. Reality is CDPR is still a small studio; not EA / Ubisoft big. They lack manpower to pull those graphics. Plus what I read from neogaf CDPR had to basically make two versions or two games if they wanted those visuals for PC. Since console versions makes good cash they choose the easy way.


So they lied to the consumer with false PR demos. 

That is still terrible and I won't support a studio who just lie.

Also, th Witcher 2 had great graphics for the time (albeit a power hungry engine) so why the change? Oh right, all they want is more money from a bigger market rather than delivering a quality product. Well this liitle studio is certainly acting like the big ones with such a dire attitude.

Yeah that makes sense.... to spend more time optimising the game for the market that they are getting the most money from... X1/PS4/Mid-range PC's.

What are you complaining about? That they didnt spend the time making the entire game look like the original trailer for the minority of gamers who would have been able to run it like that? why would they do that? Their jobs and future games are not reliant on the approval of the minority.

When did downgrading = optimising?

Optimising would be to give PC users the actual high end versio they showed last summer and consoles the current version. Also a mid range PC will run this game at an easy 60fps 1080p so what you mean is low end pcs. This is why I complain - the majority of pc owners are getting stuck with low end games for yet another generation and it is due to lazy developers who don't know what option settings are in a game engine. Hell, the new consoles were even made to make porting to PCs easy and allow for option boosts. There is no excuse nowadays for a bad pc port.

There is a myth out there that anything that looks great must run on some multi $1000 dollar machine. That is simply wrong. A very good gpu only costs about £120 now (a gpu at least x2 more powerful tahn the ps4), and a very high end gpu costs £220. So in short, a cheap pc will run rings around any game at 1080p and has done so for years. 

After what you said about low and mid range PC's, you have even less of a reason to complain.

If they are getting a better product than the gamers who will be generating more revenue (consoles), then theres no question of a bad port.

I may be wrong, but I believe the PC version was the lead platform.

Back to the point, the downgrade issue was about the trailer they initially showed and yes, it would require a $1000+ PC to run it like that, so im glad they didnt bother with that for the minority who need to justify how much they paid for their PC, and instead cared more about the consoles and low/mid range PC's.