The Witcher 3 'downgraded' - Does it matter?

MWEB GameZone writes: "Does it matter if CD Project Red downgraded The Witcher 3? It will matter if the final product shows a distinct difference between what they revealed over the past few months - NOT when compared to what they revealed almost two years ago at E3.

Changes to quality, gameplay and visuals are inevitable. On the other hand, doesn't game developers have a responsibility to portray the most realistic version of a game? Should gamers wise up and stop buying the hype?

[CongoKyle]

Maybe they're terrified after all these failed launches in the past year. I can see it now. Release a downgraded games (runs perfectly from launch) and patch it in a month or so increasing everything once again.

Smart move? Maybe.

[HoldenZA]

Have to agree with you. Rather downgrade now and the update with patches to be sure it runs smoothly.

[ironfist92]

People like you is why half assed games are allowed to be sold day 1

People give crap to Ubisoft all day long among other developers for the bait-and-switch tactis of downgraded games, why should another developer be let off the hook?

Unless you're okay with being labelled a hypocrite, it does matter, and its not okay.

[mikeslemonade]

Lazy devs

[uth11]

If they were lazy, they wouldn't bother downgrading.. That takes work. They'd release it as is , even if it runs like crap

[Bubiii]

Yes, it matters.

[700p]

Whether its downgraded or not...does it matter? I swear everyone always wants to nitpick on every game released nowadays lol

[showtimefolks]

it matters because i have way too much respect for cd-red project. They are one of the few developers who actually look out for gamers

don't get me wrong the wicther 3 is a must buy and looks amazing but we would have bought the game without all the crap,

I hate the fact on conan they had a xbox one box and a controller, isn't that false advertisement?

But i feel like this trend is only starting, things will get way worst. every year we will get new trailers that show an stunning game only for it to look nothing like that years later

[HanCilliers]

I'm also upset about he Conan thing. As you've said, CDPR is one of the few devs that showed that they respect their customers. So yeah, Witcher 3 really doesn't need all this crap.

[Thunder_G0d_Bane]

Stop with all this nonsense. Witcher hasnt been downgraded. Accept that the consoles cannot achieve PC visual fidelity in an Open world game.

What you were originally shown was PC footage. The reality is that the consoles were never gonna achieve that.

I have a PS4 and x1 but its only for the exclusives cause im aware that the multiplats will perform and look better on my PC gaming rig.

[sevilha82]

http://giphy.com/gifs/editi...

i only wich that i could afford myself a beast rig to play the game in the platform that this masterpiece deserves,even thou i will destroy hundreds of hours in the ps4 playing it

[on_line_forever]

iam so so angry just look at this picture and you will see how much they downgraded the game

http://i.minus.com/ilo8ZEuf...

[DesVader]

As long as they deliver their normal kick-ass gameplay, no matter...

[q8kik]

Kickass gameplay from previous Witcher games?

lol I hope not. Gameplay was the only lacking thing about the old games.

[HanCilliers]

I hated the gamplay in previous Witcher games, really hope Witcher 3 will be different.

[ZombieDreddZA]

Still looks fantastic to me.

[Ricegum]

Yep, downgrade or not. Definitely picking this up. People really do get way too sensitive about this downgrade stuff haha.

Lol @ Haru

Jesus man, you're one of those people I'm talking about. If your going to whinge so much then don't buy it.

[OB1Biker]

The gaming community on the internet :/
Ask any gamer in real life they ll tell you they want the game to look good when they play it (if they buy it)... they dont care what people thought it would look like years ago.
Its the same thing with the fanboy wars ; nothing to do with the real world.

[methegreatone]

It's still a pity if it was downgraded. It looks great, but not amazing.

Given that TW2 was, in many ways, the best looking game when it came out, this is kind of sad.

I mean, we saw a build that looked incredible.
Why not preserve those options for PC players. Why not give us the option for higher res grass, more foliage etc etc. ?

The whole "we want the same experience across all platforms" thing is retarded. PC is about options, so give PC players those options. Future proof the game.

I mean, ffs, console players are going to enjoy it regardless of whether or not the PC has better visuals.

[HanCilliers]

Let's see what the final build looks like before we say it's been downgraded for sure.

[Bubiii]

Looks good, but not as good as we were led to believe.

[HanCilliers]

Led to believe from what exactly? The E3 reveal 2 years ago?

[SonZeRo]

How many people actually have PC's that can handle this game on Ultra? As article states the E3 show is almost always done on the best available PC's and or pre-rendered, so i would normally expect a bit of a downgrade, they can always release HD texture packs if need be.

[methegreatone]

So what ? Let people run it at high. The Witcher 2 was insane on requirements. Did that stop people without beastly PCs from enjoying it ?

Nope.

All it did was future proof it, and add to the experience when we can play it now maxed out.

PC is about options. Why not give us those options.

The downgrade here is, whatever said and done, because it was developed alongside consoles. Which is totally fine. I understand why that's the best way of doing things. I'm not angry or anything. Just a tad bit disappointed. Still my most anticipated game of all time.

It's only common sense though.
Remember TW2 was made PC first and actually looked better than pre release footage. If TW3 was made the same way, I can guarantee you it would look much better.

[Articuno76]

The console angle makes no sense to me. There's no reason they couldn't have kept the original assets, even if they were only for use on the PC version. I'm not buying any tin-foil hat conspiracies that they did this so console owners would feel better about themselves or something - please, only realistic theories that are grounded in reality.

If they downgraded it, it was likely because their initial target was too ambitious for them from a sheer art asset creation perspective rather than a technical one.

[SonZeRo]

Agreed, Its just people expect to see ultra level graphics when their PC's can hardly scrape a high, I'm all for games having huge ultra graphics specification needs, but then people need to understand that you won't get the uber shiny graphics if their pc can't handle it.

[Sillicur]

As long as the gameplay is good and the story is as awesome as the other witcher games, it doesnt matter!

[ironfist92]

So then youre okay with other developers doing that as well, especially Ubisoft with Watch Dogs and Assassin's Creed? Or are you a hypocrite?

[die_fiend]

If you think this was downgraded for an evil purpose you're a moron. This is running as best as possible on each platform. There isn't a huge conspiracy that says all devs want their games to have bad graphics, if anything looks worse than previously, it's because it's running on different hardware. It will look as good as possible on the consoles and looks incredible on an amazing PC.

[methegreatone]

no one is saying they are evil. What people are saying, however, is when you develop one version across all platforms with the philosophy of "we want it to look more or less the same on all platforms", visuals will take a hit. It's only common sense.

"if anything looks worse than previously, it's because it's running on different hardware"

The game looks worse in certain aspects. Better hardware isn't going to change the fact that the grass looks... kind of bad now. It isn't going to change the fact geometry has been removed. It isn't going to change the fact that there simply isn't as much detail and density as we saw earlier. The draw distance being much lower and fixed.

"There isn't a huge conspiracy that says all devs want their games to have bad graphics"

You're right. There isn't. It's only logical though, that when you develop for consoles at the same time, the way they are with TW3, visuals are going to take a hit.

I'm not an angry elitist whining or anything. The game still is one of the best looking games out there, and my most anticipated game ever.
Maybe I'm a little disappointed, yes, but more than anything I'm just trying to make a logical argument.

Think of it this way. If TW3 was being developed like TW2. PC first, then console versions. I can guarantee there would be no downgrade.
Remember TW2 ? It actually came out looking BETTER than all that pre release stuff. No downgrade necessary at all.

Sure, it was taxing on hardware, but so what ? Did that stop people with lower specs from enjoying it ? No, just run it on lower settings. Still one of the best RPGs ever. Besides, why not give PC users the options for crazy graphic features ? PC is about options.

[Articuno76]

" You're right. There isn't. It's only logical though, that when you develop for consoles at the same time, the way they are with TW3, visuals [on the PC version] are going to take a hit."

That isn't logical in the slightest and I see absolutely no reason why the console involvement would affect the PC version the way it has (purportedly). Affect the console versions sure, but if you believe parity had a role in this then you are going to need something more substantial.

To my knowledge the only reason PC games of late look similar to console releases is because they simply aren't made with the PC in mind in the first place. More of an afterthought.

That's not the case with The Witcher 3.

[uth11]

so many gamers are convinced these developers are out to screw them over in every way possible it seems...

[BigBosss]

It was never downgraded to begin with, man people need to get their facts right. If anything, the delay made better improvements towards the game. So overall game looks fantastic across all 3 machines and cannot wait to pick it up and play it May 19th

[slappy508]

Not really. In my opinion, its NOT one of those downgrades where the game is significantly different to what was shown as trailers. Besides, they've been pretty open by showing gameplay updates on a regular basis. As long as the gameplay is kickass and the performance good then I can understand slight 'downgrades'

[uth11]

yeah but as usual the armchair devs on these sites know more about game development than actual game developers..

[Haru]

It's okay we all got used to get scr*wd over by the developers, this isn't the first nor last game that's getting downgraded, acording to gaming websites and journalist we should all stop complaing and accept the fact that we all got lied to by developers and just smile and buy their game anyways , there is also the blind fanboys that will never admit that their favorite game was downgraded even when it's pretty obvious

[Articuno76]

Things in development change. The devs aren't lying to you. The circumstances change, hence the product changes. You've been kept abreast of development with regular, representative snapshots of the game as of that point in development.

So let me ask you: why have you held the devs to their initial reveal and not the dozens of ongoing bits of information they've put out there?

Like the article says, you should be feeling lied to if the pre-launch run-up isn't indicative of the final product or the quality of the product is covered up. You can't hold a dev to a render from years ago - there might be entire areas, enemies and mechanics shown that don't make the cut, let alone graphics.

- And that's normal. It's not a modern trend. The only difference is people have internet access now and longer memories.

Now. Find me a screen from or footage from this month that looks nothing like the final product. THEN you'll have a point.

[--bienio--]

Day One on My Pc!! Preordered it and Im not regret!!! It's going to be fantastic adventure:) plus Im can have bet with anyone Cd-Project Red will realise patch upgrading graphics just watch and let's don't forget about moders!! Anyway 10/10 definitely.

[antikbaka]

Of course it doesn't matter ! I absolutely love when developers lie to me about every possible aspect, just like any other gamer!

[Meltic]

for me it is falsely made of them to downgrade the game so much. And ive compared the Pictures with every detail. The game looks good ofc but the foliage and the textures and even the fire smoke doesent look as good as the e3 2013 or 2014 video and screenshots. I understand if you must sacrifice some textures and distance scaling to have a smooth FPS but at least be honest about it so we can understand... the game now looks more cartoon than Before.

And its good for us players to grumble/complain on the devs if the game looks downgraded so in the future they will not downgrade so much.

[Roccetarius]

You're right, it does look like they removed the dark feeling of the game, and replaced it with a more cartoon-like feeling instead. It's not even nearly as impressive atmosphere-wise anymore.

They were one of the good guy devs before, but with the less PC friendly interface with Witcher 2, and now this mess with Witcher 3 has made that take a hit.

[Meltic]

I asked game designer on Twitter and he said '' we are sorry that you Think the witcher 3 is downgraded beacuse of early gameplay leaks , but with all my heart and soul we the team promise pure graphic Power thats even prettier now than 2013-2014 on PC''

So we can only hope ps4 and Xbox one is more cartoon look and the PC have a more darker and better look. Still CD Project is a good Company !

[wheresmymonkey]

Of all the devs to piss and whinge at about the quality of a release CD Projeckt are the wrong target. these guys go out of their way to make sure each of their games is as good as it can be on every platfrom they release it on.

[RedDeadLB]

You know why it doesn't matter? Because CDProjekt RED is a respected development team. Because they're always upfront, they don't try to screw over customers and most of all the quality of games is top notch.

I have tons of respect for them and I don't even like The Witcher.

[Artemidorus]

This is why I no longer take first viewings seriously. They downgrade and give us 'day one patches'when realased.

We are now paying full price for a beta game and we allow it because we demand it as quick as we can.

[mogwaii]

Yes it matters and everyone should be annoyed at these companies for pulling this crap.

[schmoe]

Its PC, so it should be scale-able so that the user has the option to scale it according to resources available. IMHO

[Manubiggs]

NO

[kraenk12]

The game looks better than almost any other game I have ever seen and people still complain. I can't believe this is what my hobby gaming has come too. The internet media are to blame entirely. Shameful to the max!

[1nsomniac]

I think when a developer publicly issues a statement claiming "There is absolutely, 100%, no downgrade" then it matters!

Nobody's claiming it still doesn't look awesome but when advertising a product that you intend to sell to those people you are advertising to. Then lying about an aspects quality is absolutely wrong, unquestionably!

Don't get me wrong It's the only pre-order of a game I've made in about 2 years. I'm getting it day 1 because I'm confident it'll be a great game. I'll never give them a free pass though for lying no matter how great a developer they are (..and this is why I only have 2 bubbles).

[Roccetarius]

Indeed, no matter the developer, giving them a free pass is a no-no. They'll just use that against you with the next game as well.

I'm afraid the same thing will be happening with Cyberpunk 2077.

[Stapleface]

To a developer and anyone who knows how to use the English language, trading off assets to improve another area isn't downgrading, it's a trade off. If you are going to ignore the upgrades you are shooting down your own argument by leaving out important and relevant information to suit your conclusion of "downgrade".

[1nsomniac]

The issue with your conclusion is there is absolutely no visual public proof of any trade off's that have been made, in fact very much the opposite. So unfortunately no matter how clever your comment might of been it instantly gets ignored as blind fanboy-ism by people that want facts.

Your statement seems to be a direct contradiction to the point you are trying to make.

If you are downgrading one department to improve another. That still very much is a downgrade in that department. I'm not entirely sure where you learnt the English language but I was born here 31 years ago & it certainly isn't the English language I learnt..

From the physical evidence that we have seen; that has been advertised & what's currently available. If you can provide anything that shows improvements in new builds over older advertised builds. That would certainly at least provide some depth to us "ignoring" these upgrades over the evident downgrades. Which we can clearly see have been made to graphic fidelity, animations & art style.

http://i.minus.com/ilo8ZEuf...

[Jayszen]

It matters because we now need some honesty from developers as all the their antics in in recent games like Watchdogs, Evolve, Destiny, Driveclub, MCC Collection and Assassin's Creed Unity has shown a real disrespect of gamers and has affected how gamers now perceive some devs.

I will no longer pre-order unless it is a game by From or Naughty Dog and all my friends are now the same. The primary determinant of whether a game will be successful is the quality of gameplay first and foremost and so there is no real need to lie about how a game will look when the focus really should be on the fun factor. Instead we are enticed by really lovely looking games that sadly never look as good when released. The only game that has come close in the last year as to how it looked when compared with the initial demos was The Order and we all know divided the gaming community was on that one.

Companies like Ubisoft and EA have ruined their reputations for short term gains and it is just not worth it as most gamers would rather just have a game that delivers what it promises. This is why Bloodborne has been so successful.

[Stapleface]

I bet your one of those people who are OK with all of the dlc in TLOU, but denounced everyone else for it. Your still backing a developer that took out part of their game to sell it as dlc later on. But CD trades off some assets to improve others because they have to now work with console hardware, (their first time during development mind you) but they are the bad guys.

[Jayszen]

I actually was not at all happy about the DLC in TLOU and I am not one of "those" people. This was a discussion about downgrades and my reply was pertinent to the subject matter - no more, no less.

I was also making general comments about devs and did not make one specific comment about CD nor do I think they are the bad guys. They have not consistently misled gamers in the manner I think UBI and EA have in the past. I was merely commenting that in my opinion the issue of downgrades matter and my answer is specific to that.

[Roccetarius]

CDPR used to be one of the developers i expected more from, but now it's not so much anymore. They're pretty much like the other developers currently, but that's also partly because it's on static machines that can't handle the game, not to mention developing it for 3 things at the same time.

I still respect their DRM free approach and such, but how Witcher 3 has been handled since reveal is dissapointing.

[GrmpyolGamer]

I think it stems from the Devs trying to meet everyones lofty expectations and then realizing it cant be done. I say that as gamers we should just enjoy games for what they are and the devs should just make he best games they can and show them to us as they are. All they achieve by downgrading stuff is adding fuel to the hate that seems to exist inside the gaming industry right now

[bananaboats]

in 8 days it wont, cause just like watch dogs, I'll buy the game and will still enjoy the hell out of it.

[Stapleface]

So if a game gets "downgraded" in one area but improved in others, is it still a downgrade or a trade off? I know the answer by definition but I also know people here come to a conclusion and you could beat them in the face with the truth and they still wouldn't see it.

[ShaunF58]

Yes It matters!

[Whirlwind_Fanfare_08]

No. Move on!;-)