By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - The Witcher 3 PC Ultra vs PS4 [almost no difference?]

sc94597 on 17 May 2015
Mr.Playstation said:
sc94597 said:


And? I was making a claim involving more than the video in the OP. There is barely a difference between the various predets of the Witcher 3 on PC so obviously there will also be very little difference between any preset and PS4 at 1080p.

Doesn't make a single difference the video was showing the game running Wither 3 on ultra and the PS4 was almost matching that. Maybe just maybe this is how the PC version should look on Ultra and it hasn't been downgraded in any way shape or form and the PS4 is able to match that

Or more likely than not - no. Again, I reliterate the PS4 version is comparable with medium settings and the reason why it looks similar to ultra settings is because there is barely a difference between medium and ultra. This tells us that the game isn't very scalable on PC and that is a development problem, not a hardware one.



Around the Network
OttoniBastos on 17 May 2015

...

Last edited by OttoniBastos - on 20 February 2023

GamechaserBE on 17 May 2015
Angelv577 said:
Two major differences that were spotted with my casual eyes. Grass density and the movement of the horse's hair. If you already have a new gen console, IMO it's not worth building a PC for this game unless you really care about 60fps.

Time goes so fast, last year it was all about the 1080p 60fps is 4the gamers #GreatnessAwaits.

Anyway best wait for digital foundy some users on neogaf are complaing about horrible frametrate for the PS4 version in some areas 

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=164286298&postcount=4353





teigaga on 17 May 2015

what I don't understand is what devs have to gain from downgrading the PC build of a game, which is what the assumption is right?

Also the PS4 versions look like what it should do, nothing more. Not taking anything away from the talent of the team or quality of the game but I recall people calling this the best looking game of the generation last year. Like many other titles so far this looks like a half leap and Dragon Age looks better in my opinion



Angelv577 on 17 May 2015
GamechaserBE said:
Angelv577 said:
Two major differences that were spotted with my casual eyes. Grass density and the movement of the horse's hair. If you already have a new gen console, IMO it's not worth building a PC for this game unless you really care about 60fps.

Time goes so fast, last year it was all about the 1080p 60fps is 4the gamers #GreatnessAwaits.

Anyway best wait for digital foundy some users on neogaf are complaing about horrible frametrate for the PS4 version in some areas 

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=164286298&postcount=4353

why you use me for what it was about before.  Are you using me to generalize?. For your information I would have chosen ps4 whether it was more powerful or not, otherwise, I wouldnt have chosen ps3 last gen when most port ran worse than 360 version.

 Yeah there is some complaining about ps4 frame rate but there is also a day 1 patch that will be available day one and as far as I'm concerned, the game hasn't released officially.



Around the Network
teigaga on 17 May 2015
OttoniBastos said:


Yeah but that needs to escalate well.If i buy $1000 machine i expect more graphical inprovments that LOD and AA.PC version should be like the teaser.

Imo they delayed the game in order to downgrade everything cause it wouldn't run on consoles.(aka "polishing")


Why wouldn't they just downgrade the console version, aka optimising?



GamechaserBE on 17 May 2015
Angelv577 said:
GamechaserBE said:

Time goes so fast, last year it was all about the 1080p 60fps is 4the gamers #GreatnessAwaits.

Anyway best wait for digital foundy some users on neogaf are complaing about horrible frametrate for the PS4 version in some areas 

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=164286298&postcount=4353

why you use me for what it was about before.  Are you using me to generalize?. For your information I would have chosen ps4 whether it was more powerful or not, otherwise, I wouldnt have chosen ps3 last gen when most port ran worse than 360 version.

 Yeah there is some complaining about ps4 frame rate but there is also a day 1 patch that will be available day one and as far as I'm concerned, the game hasn't released officially.

Yes I am using you because I am attracted to your avatar.

Honestly the part about the 60 FPS was more a thought of my mind and was not meant to be offensive, I honestly enjoy that the exaggeration of 60 FPS love last year is almost dead this year because I don't care about FPS that much myself . (Except with the  (Ocolus) rift because under 75FPS it makes me sick).



OttoniBastos on 17 May 2015

...

Last edited by OttoniBastos - on 20 February 2023

Angelv577 on 17 May 2015
GamechaserBE said:
Angelv577 said:

why you use me for what it was about before.  Are you using me to generalize?. For your information I would have chosen ps4 whether it was more powerful or not, otherwise, I wouldnt have chosen ps3 last gen when most port ran worse than 360 version.

 Yeah there is some complaining about ps4 frame rate but there is also a day 1 patch that will be available day one and as far as I'm concerned, the game hasn't released officially.

Yes I am using you because I am attracted to your avatar.

Honestly the part about the 60 FPS was more a thought of my mind and was not meant to be offensive, I honestly enjoy that the exaggeration of 60 FPS love last year is almost dead this year because I don't care about FPS that much myself . (Except with the  (Ocolus) rift because under 75FPS it makes me sick).

At this point, I think most console only owners come to realize that if you want prettier graphics, 30fps would be the standard.  If you want 60fps then build a PC.  I dont mind 30fps tbn. Most of the games that I have played have been 30fps.



vivster on 17 May 2015
Mr.Playstation said:

Yet Pc gamers still want to debate that a PC build can be cheaper. A Pc has it's advantages ( and lots of them ) but price isn't one if you REALLY want the best graphical experiances.

You're confusing "PC gamers" with "morons". No one in their right mind says that. There is no hardware that beats the price/performance ratio of consoles. Because no one except the big 2 is stupid enough to sell hardware at a loss. Not to mention that even if you have the same specs as a console on PC, games will have the worse performance.

This whole price debate is ridiculous. Best price/performance ratio does not make one product inherently superior over the other. Features decide which product is the right one for an individual person.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.