The Witcher 3 To Look Same on All 3 Platforms

[exar333]

I see a real danger here for PC gaming. The cost of entry is simply becoming too high for the incremental increase in quality vs console. I dont really plan to purchase any next gen games in the foreseeable future. I wanted to play DA:I, and managed to struggle through on my current rig, but there is no new game on the horizon that is worth a 200.00 plus gpu upgrade because of the outlandish vram requirements. I guess the console devs were right when they said a console was going to be the equivalent of a top end PC. What they did not say was that it was because the PC ports would be poorly optimized pieces of crap, not that the consoles would be that great.

And actually, after playing DA:I, I went back and started playing the Dragonborn expansion to Skyrim. My two thoughts were:

1. Wow these graphics are not as great as they seemed at the time, but the game sure runs a lot better, and
2. No matter, this game is still a lot more fun than DA:I was. I could use stealth, archery, magic, healing (thank god), and my enchanted 2 handed glass sword, all with one character.

Sort of an off topic rant, I guess, but the point is, there is a lot more to gameplay than good graphics, and DA:I, while a good game, didnt break ground in any area *except* graphics. In fact, in some ways it was a regression. I guess my point is overall I think all we have seen from next gen PC console ports is somewhat better graphics at a huge increase in system requirements.

GPU requirements are definitely up, but a good CPU from 4-5 years ago (i7 920, etc) is still plenty to max out most GPUs on almost all games. That helps quite a bit.

Grab a newer boot-drive SSD, throw a couple of your main-playing titles on there and get a new GPU every-other-year. Problem solved.

Its actually not too bad...

 

[sweenish]

http://www.pcgamer.com/cd-projekt-explains-why-the-witcher-3-has-16-hours-of-sex-scene-mo-cap-data/

I wouldn't say CD Projekt is PC centric anymore, the Witcher 2 was (and is) consolized and 3 is just continuing the trend. I remember the collectors edition of 1 had detailed dev diaries and more stuff explaining the game, No 2 had way less. The series should have remained PC exclusive.

Also putting stuff on consoles doesn't equate to not being PC-centric.

Using a controller does not equate to not being PC-centric.

They made a ton of adjustments based on sane user feedback when they put out the director's cut. I guarantee they're going to apply what they learned there into this game.

I can also almost guarantee that there will be an eventual director's cut.

I mean, if they were PC only, they'd have gone bankrupt a long time ago. PC "gamers," in my limited experience here and other gaming sites I visit, are toxic. Just straight up toxic. Not just PC gamers, gamers as a whole. Gamergate proves that easily enough.

That isn't saying I haven't met some great people through games, I have. But look at this thread. Everyone's going ballistic off some cherry-picked lines posted to reddit. None of those people throwing fits have bothered to read the interview for themselves. No one has talked about trying to reach out for clarification. It was just pitchforks and moaning.

CD Projekt Red has not wronged me in any way. Witcher 2 was too much for my machine when it launched. Everyone seems to be forgetting that it also had beefy specs. And they were warranted. But it's happening again, and now it's not warranted? What changed? In my eyes, they are a stand-up company, and I'm willing to give them the benefit and actually wait for real hands-on impressions instead of demanding blood over a translated interview that wasn't even read by any of the moaners.

Because if they read the interview, they'd get a better grasp of what was really being said, instead of reading a couple lines out of context with their hater lenses on.

 

[VashHT]

I don't think you can say they'd be bankrupt if they stuck to PC only, their first game was PC only and witcher 2 was a PC exclusive for a long time. If the PC market wasn't enough to sustain them then they would probably already be gone by now.

 

[bystander36]

Using a controller does not equate to not being PC-centric.

I don't think most would agree with this, at least for most genres. RPG's on the PC have always been mouse driven. Changing them to controllers takes away the feel most PC gamers expect. The primary differences between consoles and PC's is the use of a Mouse and keyboard, and customized hardware.

That doesn't mean a controller option is a bad thing, but most PC gamers will take objection to not taking advantage of the mouse.

 

[Carfax83]

I don't think you can say they'd be bankrupt if they stuck to PC only, their first game was PC only and witcher 2 was a PC exclusive for a long time. If the PC market wasn't enough to sustain them then they would probably already be gone by now.

Thanks for making this point and saving me the time of doing so.

You're right, that CDPR is where it is today because of PC, and not consoles. The Witcher games have always sold well on PC, and Witcher 2 which was their first console game for the 360 didn't sell even 1/4 of the amount of copies that the PC version did..

I can almost guarantee that Witcher 3 will sell the most copies on PC as well..

 

[exar333]

Thanks for making this point and saving me the time of doing so.

You're right, that CDPR is where it is today because of PC, and not consoles. The Witcher games have always sold well on PC, and Witcher 2 which was their first console game for the 360 didn't sell even 1/4 of the amount of copies that the PC version did..

I can almost guarantee that Witcher 3 will sell the most copies on PC as well..

Great point.

Also, they are more of a 'throwback' dev like what we saw in 90s and 2000's. Their 'Enhanced Edition' update was available for free (not a micro-transaction) for early-adopters, rather than punishing them like other companies do today.

I will be very disappointed if they drop their focus on PC and look to consoles. Looks what happened to Crytek when they did that....How are they faring now vs. after the first Crysis?

 

[gothamhunter]

I don't think most would agree with this, at least for most genres. RPG's on the PC have always been mouse driven. Changing them to controllers takes away the feel most PC gamers expect. The primary differences between consoles and PC's is the use of a Mouse and keyboard, and customized hardware.

That doesn't mean a controller option is a bad thing, but most PC gamers will take objection to not taking advantage of the mouse.

OLDER RPG's that have a more mouse-centric driven menu, like BG and IWD. Newer RPG's are almost all based around controller controls.

 

[sweenish]

I don't think you can say they'd be bankrupt if they stuck to PC only, their first game was PC only and witcher 2 was a PC exclusive for a long time. If the PC market wasn't enough to sustain them then they would probably already be gone by now.

Thanks for making this point and saving me the time of doing so.

You're right, that CDPR is where it is today because of PC, and not consoles. The Witcher games have always sold well on PC, and Witcher 2 which was their first console game for the 360 didn't sell even 1/4 of the amount of copies that the PC version did..

I can almost guarantee that Witcher 3 will sell the most copies on PC as well..

Both of you are completely ignoring the fact that they are primarily funded by gog.com. Given the massive gap between Witcher games, do you really think that those games alone are funding them, and are/were enough to keep them going?

That's naive at best, ignorant at worst.

Great point.

Also, they are more of a 'throwback' dev like what we saw in 90s and 2000's. Their 'Enhanced Edition' update was available for free (not a micro-transaction) for early-adopters, rather than punishing them like other companies do today.

I will be very disappointed if they drop their focus on PC and look to consoles. Looks what happened to Crytek when they did that....How are they faring now vs. after the first Crysis?

You started great, but then assumed like everyone else that they are going to pull a massive 180 out of nowhere, completely ignoring the history you just stated.

They are a stand up company, always have been as long as I've known them. I see no reason to doubt them right now, especially over out-of-context quotes.

 

[bystander36]

OLDER RPG's that have a more mouse-centric driven menu, like BG and IWD. Newer RPG's are almost all based around controller controls.

Unfortunately true, and PC gamers are starting to get annoyed by it. I can see action RPG's are run pretty well by controller, but not the more traditional RPG.

 

[sweenish]

Divinity and Wasteland 2 are still very much kb/m rpg's. I can almost guarantee Tides will be as well. Not all ARPG's lend themselves to the controller, Diablo 3 being a good example for me. I don't care much at all for the controller when I tried it on consoles.

DA:I is one of those games where I use controller. It's possible that if the tactical view didn't suck, that I'd use kb/m there. TW2 is one I could use kb/m on, but controller felt more natural being a little more action oriented and third person.

 

[smackababy]

Unfortunately true, and PC gamers are starting to get annoyed by it. I can see action RPG's are run pretty well by controller, but not the more traditional RPG.

Which is dumb. As games get better, PCs more powerful, and gameplay more complex, mouse and keyboard driven RPGs just don't make sense in the market. Unless it is first person, there is little advantage outside of things like menus. In the days of 2D isometric RPGs, it made sense to be point and click. That really isn't the case anymore.

Sure, there are always going to be games designed around that (Dota, Starcraft, Diablo, etc), but for the most part, games are transitioning to a full 3D environment and outside of FPS, it is awkward to control a character in third person.

 

[Spjut]

Folks are a bit hard on the consoles.
Releasing for both the PC, PS4 and Xbox One lets them target a much bigger userbase than if TW3 was a PC exclusive. For all what we know, the game could be less high-end than now if it was just a PC game.

I know The Witcher 2 was regarded as a great looking game when it was released, but did it really do anything special? It was released in 2011, had the 8800GT as a minimum requirement, yet still only supported DX9

 

[bystander36]

Divinity and Wasteland 2 are still very much kb/m rpg's. I can almost guarantee Tides will be as well. Not all ARPG's lend themselves to the controller, Diablo 3 being a good example for me. I don't care much at all for the controller when I tried it on consoles.

DA:I is one of those games where I use controller. It's possible that if the tactical view didn't suck, that I'd use kb/m there. TW2 is one I could use kb/m on, but controller felt more natural being a little more action oriented and third person.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say? Yes, there are a few games which work well with a mouse, as they should. That doesn't change the fact that many devs are rapidly abandoning the mouse.

It isn't simply a matter of a particular game working well with a controller or not with a mouse. It is the reality that when they design the game, they do so with the intent to make it controller friendly, which usually means their design decisions lead them away from anything a controller can't do well. That usually means the game avoids what a mouse does well.

 

[bystander36]

Which is dumb. As games get better, PCs more powerful, and gameplay more complex, mouse and keyboard driven RPGs just don't make sense in the market. Unless it is first person, there is little advantage outside of things like menus. In the days of 2D isometric RPGs, it made sense to be point and click. That really isn't the case anymore.

Sure, there are always going to be games designed around that (Dota, Starcraft, Diablo, etc), but for the most part, games are transitioning to a full 3D environment and outside of FPS, it is awkward to control a character in third person.

Are you saying DA: Origins is not a good game? Are you saying that Starcraft games aren't good? What about FPS games and the like?

I don't think anyone would say DA: Inquisition was better than DA: Origins, yet one is a controller centric game, and the other is a mouse driven game (or at least it is best that way).

It is simply a matter of dev's designing the games for a controller, which in turn, avoids the advantages of the mouse. It also means genres that don't work well with a controller, either get changed, or killed off.

 

[sweenish]

broke forum crap

 

[sweenish]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say? Yes, there are a few games which work well with a mouse, as they should. That doesn't change the fact that many devs are rapidly abandoning the mouse.

It isn't simply a matter of a particular game working well with a controller or not with a mouse. It is the reality that when they design the game, they do so with the intent to make it controller friendly, which usually means their design decisions lead them away from anything a controller can't do well. That usually means the game avoids what a mouse does well.

What a mouse does well is scroll. DA:I didn't hurt that at all. It was lousy keybindings.

I provided modern, well-selling RPG examples to counter your over-generalization.

PC gaming is going through an interesting period right now. Consoles are similarly built enough that a unified code base is not a thing. This is fantastic for developers, as it lessens the amount of work they have to do and nearly trivializes a PC port.

The problem is many devs believe it completely trivializes the port. There are plenty of examples where that is the case, and it's NOT just in the last year.

I don't disagree that there are bad ports. But it's not new. It's existed forever.

If anything, PC gaming is going through a bit of a renaissance at the same time as these growing pains. Grim Fandango Remastered, for crying out loud. System Shock available for sale again. Classic beloved franchises like Divinity, BG, and freaking Planescape getting sequels. A really well established indie scene that's never existed before a few years ago.

PC gaming is better than it ever has been. Part of that is that PC gamers are truly passionate. But if they continue to act like the butt-hurt whiners that are making themselves so prevalent lately, the gamers will send themselves right back into the dark ages of awful DRM (yes, it was worse in the past than it is now) and no ports at all.

 

[bystander36]

What a mouse does well is scroll. DA:I didn't hurt that at all. It was lousy keybindings.

I provided modern, well-selling RPG examples to counter your over-generalization.

Let's stop here. DA:I did a LOT more than just mess up key bindings. Did you play DA: Origins and DA: Inquisition? If that is take away, I can't believe you if you say you did (at least not on the PC). The whole game was vastly different in design.

And I have not said "every" modern game has changed. I have said that "many" have changed direction to consoles.

 

[chimaxi83]

http://www.pcgamer.com/cd-projekt-explains-why-the-witcher-3-has-16-hours-of-sex-scene-mo-cap-data/

SOLD! :awe:

I wouldn't say CD Projekt is PC centric anymore, the Witcher 2 was (and is) consolized and 3 is just continuing the trend. I remember the collectors edition of 1 had detailed dev diaries and more stuff explaining the game, No 2 had way less. The series should have remained PC exclusive.

Can you explain what you mean by TW2 was, and is, consolized? Thanks.

 

[exar333]

Both of you are completely ignoring the fact that they are primarily funded by gog.com. Given the massive gap between Witcher games, do you really think that those games alone are funding them, and are/were enough to keep them going?

That's naive at best, ignorant at worst.



You started great, but then assumed like everyone else that they are going to pull a massive 180 out of nowhere, completely ignoring the history you just stated.

They are a stand up company, always have been as long as I've known them. I see no reason to doubt them right now, especially over out-of-context quotes.

I think you are the one who 'assumed'.

Never did I say they will do this...I simply stated I would be disappointed IF they did this. If the game looks the same on all platforms (which in and of itself sounds a bit sketchy) then I would say this is true.

Hopefully this is all FUD, but I think it is not crazy for people to be a little paranoid with how much we are seeing this happening recently.

I am definitely appreciative of how CD Projeckt has approached PC titles and hope they continue to do just that.

 

[BSim500]

Using a controller does not equate to not being PC-centric.

Giving the option to use one doesn't, but neglecting to optimize K+M input during development due to play-testing exclusively on a controller or outsourcing the K+M code to a sub-party who do a poor job with a 'quick & dirty' controller emulator certainly does make the PC version look like a cheap after-thought rather than being "development centric" to anything regardless of how much "code-base sharing" or "lead platform" PR statements are made. As does leaving in "designed for 10ft view distance" HUD's with no reasonable attempt at scaling for those typically viewing at 2ft. These things aren't collectively called "consolization" for nothing. Not saying that W3 will suffer from them, but I think most long-term gamers know exactly who the "primary target audience" are from the overall feel of the game in general.

PC "gamers," in my limited experience here and other gaming sites I visit, are toxic. Just straight up toxic. Not just PC gamers, gamers as a whole. Gamergate proves that easily enough.

I think a lot of this is wildly exaggerated based on a highly vocal minority of attention seekers in certain forums. Being annoyed at UI compromises or sluggish mouse input then being told the "cure" is "buy a controller" doesn't automatically make you a "hater" or "toxic", since not everyone finds controllers comfortable to use, and it's a valid ergonomic grievance. Sure some others get carried away and start making threats (usually over politics) but they're a minority. I think a lot of this stuff falls under the logical fallacy called "Spotlight" - a highly vocal minority do the same thing & get the same media attention over & over again, and eventually the whole community gets smeared with blanket "gamers are x" based on prior disproportionate negative media coverage. There's right and wrong on both sides of "GamerGate" including the over-compensated instinct to pigeonhole then ridicule tens of millions of people on the back of the actions of a few inside a single shared hobby.

As for developers attitude towards PC gamers attitude towards developers - which came first - Chicken or Egg? It's interesting how developers like Larian or Klei who actively talk to their communities, ask them what they want in future games & patches, etc, seem to have nowhere near the amount of problems with "hostile haters" compared to modern AAA devs like Ubisoft or EA who simply talk at people (often by PR personnel attempting damage control of the latest "released in a half broken state" AAA game, etc), then act surprised at the backlash when the end product doesn't match the prior manufactured over-hype. Devs may moan about about the modern instinctively cynical attitude of PC gamers (predicting a bad game unless they hear good contrary news), and yet what disillusioned them enough to be like that in the first place?... A lot of this "angry backlash" stuff has a far more specific target & cause (publishers / developers who consistently whip their fan-base up into a frenzy with massive over-hype and then release a string of broken / badly ported / excessively DRM'd / overly-consolized PC games resulting in all that hype energy being turned against the devs) than just "PC gamers spontaneously started hating all games devs for no reason"... :hmm:

"But look at this thread. Everyone's going ballistic"... "people throwing fits"... "hater lenses"... "toxic"... "butthurt"... "pitch forks"...

Calm down. "Everyone" isn't "going ballistic" or "toxic". And I'm pretty sure no-one is experiencing epileptic seizures over this subject - that's just a cheap way of putting someone's contrary opinion down with "appeal to ridicule" smear tactics. Personally I have zero issues if a game can't do 60fps on Ultra as I'd just turn it down to High or Medium. I don't know why some people are reluctant to run on anything less than Ultra then complain about performance when there's often little perceivable visual difference of Ultra vs High even in static screenshots let alone actual gameplay. I do have issues with sh*tty mouse input though as it's one thing that makes or breaks a game for me as I personally find controllers uncomfortable to use for more than 15-20mins. I'm not guessing either way whether Witcher 3 PC version will have problems as I don't know (though earlier Witcher versions did have some mouse issues as a quick Google search will reveal so it's hardly unreasonable to bring the subject up).

I agree that CDPR are one of the more positive games devs and deserve success, and hopefully Witcher 3 will be a great game (along with future titles likes Cyberpunk 2077). Some people may make doom & gloom predictions that hopefully will be proven wrong, but merely discussing technical issues before release doesn't make you a "foaming at the mouth hater". In fact, it's pretty much the whole point of having a gaming discussion forum...

 

[SLU Aequitas]

Complete faith in CD Projeckt based on their established track record. Happily pre-ordered on day one and will be keeping it that way.

404: Cause for alarm not found.

 

[darkewaffle]

This is so awesome.

 

[VashHT]

Both of you are completely ignoring the fact that they are primarily funded by gog.com. Given the massive gap between Witcher games, do you really think that those games alone are funding them, and are/were enough to keep them going?

That's naive at best, ignorant at worst.

Uh last time I checked gog only sells PC games, if anything that just helps prove your own point wrong. Not sure how the fact that they make money off of a PC game only website proves they would be bankrupt without consoles...

 

[sweenish]

Because you said the the Witcher games alone were funding enough.

It's true that gog.com is a distributor of PC games. But they're making money distributing, not on development and their own sales.

Nor did I say they would be bankrupt without consoles.

Or do you think Valve would still be in business right now without Steam? Your claim was that those two games alone were obviously enough for them on PC. I said they're not.

And BSim, you make a lot of good points, and they sound decent. But did you read the first pages of this very thread? Sheer idiocy. And you are correct that no one was toxic in the strictest sense, but that's more owing to the fact that the PC Gaming mod(s) does a decent job of making sure that isn't tolerated on this board.

Gamergate is a vocal minority, I have no problem admitting that. But just looking at the discussion about it on this very board does nothing but make me angry. Aside from nigh everyone's inability to form a coherent argument, at no point was it shut down early enough. Discussion on the fairness of death and rape threats is a non-starter, but that thread didn't get shut down until after at least three pages of name-calling and circle-jerking. It was a mess.

As vocal as they may be, the majority should have no problems shutting them down or at the least making it known that gamers as a whole aren't that. But there's been a colossal failure in that regard.

But back on track, I appreciate you calling out my own logical missteps in overgeneralizing the posters in this thread. It wasn't everyone. It's just something I've seen so many times before that it just irks me.

I'm glad we're at least in agreement with regards to our feelings concerning CD Projekt Red.

The thing is, nobody's actually discussing technical issues. That's been a main point of mine that no one's really addressed. I traced the reddit post to the article and ran it through google translate. The reddit post cherry picked lines that look bad out of context. No one has addressed that. There is no technical discussion going on, really.

People in the first page mostly decided to immediately jump on the hate wagon, sight unseen. That's a massive problem. Most of them have at least stopped posting their drivel, so that's a positive.

 

[escrow4]

Can you explain what you mean by TW2 was, and is, consolized? Thanks.

The tiny boxed in levels, the lack of Acts compared to No 1, the horrific UI before it was fixed, the game was built with consoles in mind. CD Projekt has sold out they should have remained PC only. And to those who mentioned a controller, if I wanted a controller I'd buy a console and I wouldn't be using a $150 mechanical keyboard.