CD Projekt RED not afraid of post-launch graphical quality comparisons with The Witcher 3

GCO: "Games are often marketed at a higher visual quality than when they are released–Watch_Dogs being a perfect example one of these instances–however CD Projekt RED aren’t scared of post-launch graphical quality comparisons with The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Meltic1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

they shouldnt beacuse CD Projekt we trust and ubidowngrade we dont ...

starchild1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

I don't think they are worried about it because there hasn't been any downgrade. Some people are just jumping to faulty conclusions based on the fact that different areas and different times of day have been shown.

It's the same thing we saw happen with other games like Infamous Second Son, which turned out to be completely wrong.

Meltic1200d ago

Yes but admit that Watch dogs was truly a downgrade. Ubisoft claimed not, but later said that they had to..

Bathyj1200d ago

Im sure people will still pick it apart, find the same location from the trailer but it will be dusk, and raining, and claim that the light isnt as bright as the trailer, because thats what gamers have come to.

I could say the same about those people.

starchild1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )


Oh, I agree, Watch Dogs was definitely downgraded. Accurate comparisons have been made of the same areas under the same lighting conditions (or close enough) and there are clearly aspects of the visuals that have been changed or downgraded.

But with The Witcher 3 I still haven't seen a single good comparison that attempts to compare the same area, at the same time of day, and point out where things are missing or downgraded. In fact, I haven't seen anybody make a reasonable case for even one visual element being clearly downgraded or missing altogether.


Yeah, I'm sure they will. It's almost as if a lot of gamers are hoping for downgrades. It seems that with nearly each new big game there are claims of downgrades. Even though, more times than not, it turns out not to be true.

What's sad is that it doesn't matter how good the game actually looks and how well it matches up to the early footage people will likely find some small element that has been pared back and the mantra of "downgraded" will haunt the game from then on.

There are almost always going to be some elements that get changed or pared back, because this is simply how game development works. As development progresses and a game gets closer to release some elements are improved while others may be reduced. This is all part of balancing and fine tuning a game to look and run its best. But some gamers don't understand this and instead of focusing on what has been improved, they would rather throw all of their focus on what has been pared back. Never mind that the game may look and run better OVERALL than it did when it was first shown.

nowitzki20041200d ago


Thats true. We have been in this gen for a while where there is different lightings for different times of day, or if its cloudy/raining.

Real life is like that too if they look around. You can look out the window now and in about few hours and it will look completely different outside.

Not just that but few games are ever as good looking as the trailers.

If anyone said anything about second son they are completely wrong. That game is smooth as shi* and looks gorgeous at the same time.

Bathyj1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

Youre preaching to the choir Starchild.

Gamers are so damn spoilt these days. We have it so good but would rather focus on negative things than positive. I guess thats not just gamers, thats the whole world we live in, but the internet gave everyone voice and gamers seem to yell the loudest when most of us should probably just shut up.

Me I dont really complain about graphics because I had an Atari. I dont complain about load times because I had a Commodore 64 tape deck. And I dont complain for inconsistencies in detail shown 6 months prior to launch compared to a retail game because I know game makers are artists and game making is a process of refining and honing until they are happy with the over all quality of their product, not just one texture or one bush or a blade of grass.

I also think most devs are doing the best job they can, sometimes there are external pressures forcing their hand but they are still doing their best because they want people to appreciate the effort theyve put it, probably for long days over the course of 2 or 3 years.

But hey, if it was easy, we'd all be doing it.

If its dark and grey and miserable outside, its not going to be as visually appealing. No one wakes up to the rain and claims nature did a downgrade.

And sometimes thats deliberate to suit the mood or tone of the story in that exact moment. If they release a trailer thats all bright and colourful and then a year later they think, we dont want this to seem so cheery, the characters brother died in the last scene, thats an aesthetic choice, not a downgrade.

Check the Naughty Dog interview a little while ago about mood lighting, when Drake came out of the cave and it was all grim cos he found bodies in there, but them when he came out into the open it was bright because he was in the sun again, but it was also to instill a sense of hope in the character, that he was making progress. These are subtle and nuanced additions to game design, and game makers as well and movie makers do things like this all the time, its just we probably only notice it subconsciously but it still effects your perspective of the mood in the game.

starchild1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )


Really great comment. I fully agree with everything you said. I can also relate to that stuff about owning an Atari and a Commodore 64; I owned those platforms too. We really are living in a golden age of gaming overall. Sure, there are some bad things that we need to be wary of, but generally speaking there is so much to be positive about.


You make a good point about games seldom looking as good as their trailers. I think this is because trailers are basically a mix of all the best bits of a game (including cutscenes), edited to show the game in its best light. The actual games, on the other hand, contain both the better looking bits as well as the less-good-looking bits. This is especially true of massive open world games, given that it's nearly impossible to apply the same degree of polish and extreme attention to detail to every single square inch of the world. Some areas will inevitably look better than others.

Kumomeme1200d ago

actually there had been downgrade if you watch recent footage...
but we yet to see ultra setting for pc version as cd red projekt state it their stance

Roccetarius1200d ago

It was already mentioned in interviews that they had to do texture parity due to multi-platform. Otherwise it would've been impossible for them to release a game this large.

The community will have to fix those compromises for them.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1200d ago
nowitzki20041200d ago

I love Ubisoft games, but they are lazy. I wonder what their best games would be like in really good hands.

Kumomeme1200d ago

too much generic and repetitive together with recycle mechanics among their francise

these 'ubisoft game formula' not necessary suitable for all kind of games,beside itseems day after day they only targetted quantity over quality

their game sold millions,like casual games and get good rating despite of controversy of rating systems recently is one of reason ubisoft think the formula their kept is already the best...
downgrade,beautiful graphics just for pr demo,
and bug full game is kind of proved ubisoft doesnt care for gamers as long their got pocket full with money and reputation