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?]

method114 on 18 May 2015

People are saying this site has the day 1 patch installed and it makes things better. It's in German so I can't verify.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/indexb2.cfm?id=125693



Around the Network
sc94597 on 18 May 2015
spemanig said:
How's the PC frame rate, though?

No difference? Mmm.

The game seems to run decently on high 1080p with a lower-midranged gaming  PC with older generation hardware (third generation i3 + GTX 660.) He was averagin 40 fps, and I'm sure if he locked the framerate there wouldn't be many < 30fps drops as CPU cycles wouldn't waste on > 40 fps. For reference, one can build a PC (+ keyboard/mouse/os) for $550 with a comparable CPU + GPU which will give about 10-15% performance gains over what is seen in this video (newer generation.) 



Chazore on 18 May 2015
sc94597 said:
I'm interested if we'll have a "Crysis" this generation. By that, I mean, a PC exclusive which shows the graphical ability of PC's without the limitations of consoles.

Hopefully, just hopefully that will be Star Citizen , provided CR doesn't  want to betray his hardcore fan following and budget that made his game what it is and going for PS4, imo it looks beautiful, it's not my kind of jam but I really appreciate what he's doing with the power, money and technology at his disposal and all thanks to his fans money without publishers/corps controlling/funding his game.

I'd really love to have more than 1 "Crysis"  type game over the enxt 5-7 years, would be awesome if we had more that stayed exclusive to show what they can do and not cater to lower end, people need to upgrade their hardware and stop staying in 2009/10 in the end anyway.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

dangerguy on 18 May 2015

Wow, that horse hair! I'm totally buying a new gaming PC for that hair. Any recommendations?



Solid-Stark on 18 May 2015

It's hard to tell a difference on youtube. I thought so when I saw comparison of Dark Souls 2 on PS3 and PS4. But when I loaded up the game, difference was significant.



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

Around the Network
Turkish on 18 May 2015
Locknuts said:
curl-6 said:

Yeah, I don't think they were alone in that, it seems many devs expected PS4/Xbone to be stronger.

Well, that's it then I guess. Consoles held back PC confirmed.

True.....what a weak generation. Gen 7 was far better for PC gamers. A rig that could honestly outperform a 360 back in 2005-2007 would have cost a small fortune. Now a $600 PC can destroy a PS4.

And Gen 8 is better for consoles. Not having to deal with RRoDs, huge losses, expensive and overheating systems etc. So in other words console manufacturers got smarter. Why should they satisfy the needs of PC users? Why is there no PC exclusive that look a generation ahead?



Turkish on 18 May 2015
HoloDust said:

2013 was a tough time for CD Projekt RED simply because we were trying to create an entire bulk of the game on the older DirectX 9 renderer that we had in place for The Witcher 2. Most of the assets were created during the time we were creating our DX11 solution render pipeline to bring the next-generation experience to everyone. A lot of the footage including the debut gameplay trailer was done when the consoles were not even out and we only had an idea of the specifications of the system. This landed itself into problem territory when we realized the next-generation systems could not simply meet our graphical output to the desirable level of quality that we needed. There were several options: build three different builds or consolidate to the nearest denominator, which is what we did. We took the specifications of the lowest performing throughput system which I don’t care to mention here at all to avoid that discussion, and worked our way up from there. As almost a 250 man team, we sequentially had to take out/turn down a lot of features not just from our NVIDIA GameWorks pipeline but our normal game solution scripts as well – these include the following:

  • Level of horizon detail (essentially the draw distance had to be completely tuned down to tax the consoles less)

  • Volume based translucency

  • Ambient occlusion and foliage density / tree count

  • Flexible water simulation / tessellation  we resorted to a (script texture effect similar to most games than physical based simulation)

  • Ground/building tessellation

  • Forward lit soft particles (this is the fire, smoke, fog that you would encounter while going through thick terrain into open space)

  • Real-time reflections in the water are completely off and replaced with a cheaper render solution estimator (this is a primary reason blood splatter was also removed from water)

We just did not have the manpower, budget or the console power to produce the vision we intended before the consoles were released to create a more visually stunning game of higher fidelity like 2013 assets. The PCs themselves had more than enough power to achieve this vision, almost certainly. But working on the game across 3 platforms did not make it feasible to keep features included that could potentially break the game as we kept building around it. All the 2013 trailers were actually in-game footage (not prerendered or vertical slices) but essentially just not an entirely finished world running on a high-end PC at the time.

 

http://whatifgaming.com/developer-insider-the-witcher-3-was-downgraded-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why


This sounds disingenuous. He's leaving out the majority of pc users who don't have a high end PC. It was not just consoles holding their game back. Look at Steam hw survey: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

The majority of people have 1GB or less VRAM in their gpu's. They had to consider everyone when making the game, they needed everyone's money. It was disingenious to show the early graphics off on a high end system when they knew only a minority would be able to run it like that.  But no, it's easier to blame "lolconsulz" now.



Chazore on 18 May 2015
Turkish said:

And Gen 8 is better for consoles. Not having to deal with RRoDs, huge losses, expensive and overheating systems etc. So in other words console manufacturers got smarter. Why should they satisfy the needs of PC users? Why is there no PC exclusive that look a generation ahead?

What's with you and your intense grudge/hatred towards the PC as a platform and PC gamers anyway?, I've always wondered this because everyime I ask people they instantly fall back on "why do you hate consoles?", just in case you, I actually don't since I plan on getting a Wii U first and XB1 later.

We also have Star Citizen which is PC exclusive and so far is showing a lot thanks to fan funding their entire game, that's looking a lot far ahead than Witcher 3 ever will.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Hynad on 18 May 2015
Turkish said:
HoloDust said:

2013 was a tough time for CD Projekt RED simply because we were trying to create an entire bulk of the game on the older DirectX 9 renderer that we had in place for The Witcher 2. Most of the assets were created during the time we were creating our DX11 solution render pipeline to bring the next-generation experience to everyone. A lot of the footage including the debut gameplay trailer was done when the consoles were not even out and we only had an idea of the specifications of the system. This landed itself into problem territory when we realized the next-generation systems could not simply meet our graphical output to the desirable level of quality that we needed. There were several options: build three different builds or consolidate to the nearest denominator, which is what we did. We took the specifications of the lowest performing throughput system which I don’t care to mention here at all to avoid that discussion, and worked our way up from there. As almost a 250 man team, we sequentially had to take out/turn down a lot of features not just from our NVIDIA GameWorks pipeline but our normal game solution scripts as well – these include the following:

  • Level of horizon detail (essentially the draw distance had to be completely tuned down to tax the consoles less)

  • Volume based translucency

  • Ambient occlusion and foliage density / tree count

  • Flexible water simulation / tessellation  we resorted to a (script texture effect similar to most games than physical based simulation)

  • Ground/building tessellation

  • Forward lit soft particles (this is the fire, smoke, fog that you would encounter while going through thick terrain into open space)

  • Real-time reflections in the water are completely off and replaced with a cheaper render solution estimator (this is a primary reason blood splatter was also removed from water)

We just did not have the manpower, budget or the console power to produce the vision we intended before the consoles were released to create a more visually stunning game of higher fidelity like 2013 assets. The PCs themselves had more than enough power to achieve this vision, almost certainly. But working on the game across 3 platforms did not make it feasible to keep features included that could potentially break the game as we kept building around it. All the 2013 trailers were actually in-game footage (not prerendered or vertical slices) but essentially just not an entirely finished world running on a high-end PC at the time.

 

http://whatifgaming.com/developer-insider-the-witcher-3-was-downgraded-from-2013-list-of-all-features-taken-out-why


This sounds disingenuous. He's leaving out the majority of pc users who don't have a high end PC. It was not just consoles holding their game back. Look at Steam hw survey: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

The majority of people have 1GB or less VRAM in their gpu's. They had to consider everyone when making the game, they needed everyone's money. It was disingenious to show the early graphics off on a high end system when they knew only a minority would be able to run it like that.  But no, it's easier to blame "lolconsulz" now.


You're the one being disingeuous. Trying to spin it to make the console's limited power to be less of a problem. You're clearly dismissing this part to push that spin of yours:
"But working on the game across 3 platforms did not make it feasible to keep features included that could potentially break the game as we kept building around it. "



Turkish on 18 May 2015
Chazore said:
Turkish said:
 

And Gen 8 is better for consoles. Not having to deal with RRoDs, huge losses, expensive and overheating systems etc. So in other words console manufacturers got smarter. Why should they satisfy the needs of PC users? Why is there no PC exclusive that look a generation ahead?

What's with you and your intense grudge/hatred towards the PC as a platform and PC gamers anyway?, I've always wondered this because everyime I ask people they instantly fall back on "why do you hate consoles?", just in case you, I actually don't since I plan on getting a Wii U first and XB1 later.

We also have Star Citizen which is PC exclusive and so far is showing a lot thanks to fan funding their entire game, that's looking a lot far ahead than Witcher 3 ever will.

The hell? How did you come to that ridiculous conclusion by reading that comment, did u actually read it? There's nothing that constitute "hatred" towards whatsoever.

Star Citizen is a special case like you said, though it's worth nothing they get funded by asking 100s(and 1000s for some) of $ for virtual ships. It's basically the biggest pay 2 win game ever. I'm excited for it as well.

Also I'm just wondering, with all the "lolconsuhz" stuff, why there is no PC exclusive that look so much better. I mean there is no consoles holding them back.