Prior to its release, Kingdom Come: Deliverance amazed a lot of gamers with its visuals. However, it appears that the final version has been noticeably downgraded compared to its beta build that was available to all Kickstarter backers.
Shazoo’s member ‘design3d‘ has shared the following images, showcasing the visual differences between the beta and the vanilla versions of Kingdom Come Deliverance. Design3d claimed that these screenshots are from the same place with the same weather, and both versions were running on Ultra High settings.
As we can see, the lighting has taken a significant hit. This isn’t something new as we’ve heard other Kickstarter backers claiming the very same thing; that the beta looked better than the final version. The downside on this, however, is that the beta also ran significantly slower than the final build.
Surprisingly enough, the vegetation assets have also been replaced. Vegetation density has also been decreased, however, the most crucial change here (that can be immediately noticed even if these images are from different places) is, as we said, the lighting. In all three screenshots, we can easily notice the sun direction so we can safely compare them and the beta looks, without a doubt, way better than the final version.
In fact, we’ve played the game and we cannot find any place similar to our header image. That image was taken from the game’s beta build and we’d welcome if someone could pinpoint its exact location on a map so we can have a proper comparison. However, for its majority, Kingdom Come: Deliverance does not look as breathtaking as this screenshot. And contrary to other games (for which the developers have been using bullshots), this one was captured by a backer, meaning that the game looked like this.
The fact that the game has been downgraded does not mean that it does not look great. Kingdom Come: Deliverance is easily one of the best looking games to date. However, it does not provide those next-gen visuals that were showcased back in its beta days.
Kudos to our reader ‘Nine’ for informing us!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
Can PC gaming for the love of GOD go back to the Witcher 2 Enhanced Edition Days… You know… When Ultra settings meant something 😀
I actually want to see gaming jumping up from 1080p muddy res textures to either 2-4 res ones, and not just upressed textures (which seems to be the laziest route most end up taking).
Only “Crysis” was highly unoptimized and still is to this day on modern hardware… I was just giving a example of a game that was built for PC with more then just visuals in mind.
GPU wise crysis 1 was very optimised, game looked and run better than many more demanding games years later. I could not max it out on Q6600 + 8800ultra at 720p 30+ fps (although game was playable for me back then), but few years later my 3770k + GTX 680 could max it out at 1080p 70-80 fps. The only problem was CPU thread limitation, crysis 1 and crysis warhead maxed out just single thread, so there are some CPU limited places in these games. For example train level in warhead, or tank battle in crysis 1 can dip below 60fps on my 3770K, but most of the time game run above 60 fps. CPU multithread was added in crysis 2, and because of that reason crysis 2 run faster than crysis 1 (at least on my old PC 3770K + GTX 680). I still havent played crysis games since I bought 1080ti, but because 680 run these games already great I’m not expecting problems on 1080ti even at 4K
The developers themselves back in 2011 said it was not
If crytek would remaster crysis 1 today game would run much better with good multicore support, but back in 2007 they have done amazing job. Not so long time ago I have played ark survival and IMHO even this new game looks worse and it’s also much more demanding compared to crysis 1. Crysis 1 was demanding, but only because that game delivered revolution in graphic quality.
Well of course because Crysis 1 was made in the dual core era and would run better just by using a DX11 renderer.
So was Witcher 2.
“Only “Crysis” was highly unoptimized and still is to this day on modern hardware…”
True, but Crysis Warhead is.
I think games are just starting to get to the point that they look so good that settings don’t have such large differences. Even the Witcher 2 that you mentioned, doesn’t look that much different from high and ultra.
games are already at that point. Aside from shadows I can’t see a difference between ultra and high without squinting my eyes.
Blame the devs, not “PC gaming.”
I blame the PC peasants with 970s, 1060s, 1070s etc. 😉
SLI support is crucial, even if you have dual GTX 1080s.
pc pirates pirated the sht out of crysis
Maybe one day you’ll get over it, seems like a mental illness for you.
You mean The Witcher 2 v1.3, when the configuration tool actually knew how to configure the configuration file.
Tried the game, apart from polished graphics and some good animation, it’s nothing special, or maybe it’s just i don’t see the point of an non-fantasy, medieval rpg.
Also it’s good they downgraded it, it’s hard to run as it is, and i have a 1060, in 1080p at high preset, with disabled motion blur, sometimes i dip below 30fps, it’s pretty bad tbh.
Nothing special? What other games like this are there?
You know what is nothing special? Witcher 3. That is by the book openworld-RPG. Which is something that Assasin Creed Origins made very apparent. It’s honed to perfection but it have no soul.
The Witcher franchise got progressively worse, more generic and Westernized as it went on. I still think the best Witcher game is the original 2007 game.
The problem is Witcher 1 was the best game story wise. But it was unplayable. Witcher 3 is far, far, far better than the 1st game in terms of playability and graphics and technology, but it’s a terribly generic borefest of nonsense and rinse repeat quests, fetching, doing the same thing over and over and over, and merchant boxes.
All three of them are subpar.
I WAS talking about Witcher 3 thou 😀 I don’t really see how is AC:O is all that different.
Loved first two Witcher games but third one, again it was honed to perfection but I simply did not enjoy it that much.
I understand that vast majority people see statement like this as blasphemy of course. It’s purely how I feel about it. I can’t say exactly why cause game is not in any way worse.
Well actually, probably it’s because of combat. People were saying how first Witcher had bad combat but I enjoyed it MUCH more. Loved switching stances and rhytmic button pressing.
Ditto. Combat in The Witcher 1 actually had something unique going for it while TW2 and TW3 settled for pathetic fast attack spam.
Unique? No. Good? No. Combat was boring and terrible in Witcher 1 and based entirely on click timing and changing stances constantly. It was like jedi knight if jedi knight was bad.
You’re being rather generous in having classified The Witcher III as a RPG. It’s clearly more of an arcade adventure with limited scale RPG elements. Also, if we’re nitpicking, then it isn’t truly openworld either.
YO! What is this? 😀 I thought I will get flanked by ton of hateful comments about how my opinion sucks but…there seems to be quite lot of people that feel same way about it? Nice to know. With how praised this game is on internet I often rather just don’t speak about it.
Indeed. The DSOG membership typically holds to higher standards than the norm. We, along with those who follow the likes of Worthabuy and Jim Sterling, tend to notice and also remember when games publishers have conducted themselves poorly and/or are given an easy ride by the mainstream games media that in part depends of the triple-A industry for advertising income and thus their employment.
That’s because Witcher 3 isn’t a good game, and this is one of the few places where the people who admit the truth aren’t immediately dogpiled.
Never said there’s something better, and for all i care/know the witcher 3 might even be the worst game on earth. That’s not my point i’m just saying that for the time i played it i really didn’t find anything special about it, some stuff is polished, some other isn’t, but i’m sure about a thing, that’s not a 50€ game, but then again which is nowadays…
Virtually every game gets downgraded when it launched.
DOOM got and upgrade when it launched
nah. they just added a sharpening filter. barely an “upgrade”
He;s referring to how they changed the yellow uriney tones to be more vibrant.
More vibrant picture=/=Graphics upgrade
What do you expect when all the consoles are using the low preset, can’t have the PC outshine them to much now can we. And theyr’e using the low preset because you can reproduce the the horrible texture quality streaming in near distance, doesn’t do that on medium.
All consoles
https://i.imgur.com/azub5gE.jpg
PC lowest preset
https://i.imgur.com/2QlJVNT.jpg
There are already mods that fix this
I saw Digital Foundry’s video analysis showing how poor this game looks on all consoles including Microsoft’s ‘True 4K, 60Hz, no compromises’ console that’s, er, outputting 1440p at 20-31fps, frequent stuttering, massively downgraded texture filtering, hideous texture pop-in and abysmal loading times.
These results arnt surprising, developer didnt optimise their game on all platforms. 1080ti dips to 20fps at 1440p, and even at 1080p (40 fps dips), so no wonder xbox run that game even worse.
Never seen it drop into the 20s on my GTX 1070/i5 8600K, mostly 40FPS at 1440p/ultra with drops into the low 30s sometimes in big villages and some houses. The issues is the Lighting quality and shader quality when you go into some houses or big villages, the voxel-based global illumination is very demanding on ultra high, it occudes the lighting nicer and proper. The Xbox1X isn’t even running medium according to the texture streaming issues, it’s probably custom low.
You haven’t played then. It’s dropped to 17 a couple of times on my 6700k/1080.
I don’t deny some people might have drops that low, it’s just that I’ve never seen it drop that low. Maybe I should sit through the game again watching Afterburner just because of ignorant comments like yours.
If you don’t have FPS counter somewhere on your screen, then, I find it hard to believe you’re actually running a game. I also highly doubt you’d have to sit through the game “again” because you didn’t sit through it once yet. If you did, get a life and get a job, you fraud liar.
Oh really?. look up my reply to “LuckyNumber8” and see my screenshot, also look at my history and you’ll see my own screenshots of the game, see you look like an idiot and a f*cking m*ron now don’t you.
Zoomed in on the PC screenshot to match the console screenshot’s zoom, conclusion:
* Textures look the same
* Trees are very slightly less detailed on the PC screenshot
This is just par the course with games that try to focus on realistic looking visuals.
I love the Metro series, but as good as some scenes and areas look, there are other parts of the game which look ugly as sin.
I noticed the downgrades in KCD when I saw the differences between ultra and low settings.
You get what you back for.
Consoles cannot into ultra graphics. It’s like Crysis vs. its two considerably uglier sequels.
To be fair, Crysis 3 foliage and particle effects look far, far, far better. But overall yes. And blackfire’s mod still looks better than almost any game.
I have the witcher 3 downgrade flashbacks.
Well it’s not as drastic as The Witcher 3 was but Witcher 3 need the next-gen graphics to camouflage its’ children’s plot and generic gameplay.
what a noob troll
CDPR fanboy detected.
Hopefully these guys won’t be misrepresenting their game by advertising it with pre-downgrade screenshots on digital storefronts for months after release like the holier than thou CD Projekt Red did with The Witcher III.
And hopefully they don’t pull the smarmy route and pull a “hur durp, consoles sold better than PC, downgrade was justified” article.
I’m still laughing at how it took them circa 6 months to fix the frame-rate for the PS4 version. It originally had double buffered v-sync so any drop below the targeted frame-rate (which was frequent) would see it nosedive to a capped 20fps. Jesus wept!
(When I say ‘fix the frame-rate’ I of course mean relative to lowly console standards, i.e. 30fps)
Amazing game nonetheless. Attention to detai is breathtaking. And it looks great, could’ve looked even better, yes, it but wouldn’t run good on 90% of hardware. I don’t think such a small studio as Warhorse wanted to limit their audience based on the power of their rig.
Yee but I mean…why not give it as an option?
Since now game looks pretty good no matter what preset you use really.
Agreed. We can just hope they’ll patch it in with one of the future updates to further futureproof this marvellous game. I’m all for options, the more options the better!
Because people would turn everything to Ultra and then claim “poor optimization” because the FPS would tank. Many simply don’t understand that “demanding” and “bad optimization” isn’t the same thing.
^pretty much this.
I guess GPU vendors should cut down on their marketing then, by not claiming their latest, most expensive cards cannot run a game on ultra.
That is true! Oh god I hate this new generation of PC gamers. They buy highend PC and feel entitled (I don’t like to use this word but this is one case I feel like it’s good fit) to run every single game maxed out. If not then game have poor optimalization in their eyes and they will make damn sure to tell everyone about it.
“I hate this new generation of PC gamers. They buy highend PC and feel
entitled… to run every single game maxed out”
Expect such teething troubles during this period whereby many former console-only gamers are waking up to how great and user-friendly gaming on PC is relative to the old days.
well tbf if I spend 4k USD on a PC. I would expect every game to be maxed out. Optimization nowadays though on games is garbage. Especially with the “Ultra Settings” where there is almost no difference(except shadows) and it tanks the FPS. So think first before laying down 4k USD.
Just use the advanced graphics settings to get a balance between high and ultra.
It’s a shame, because I feel like the longer this goes on, the more we should just outright ban the use of high end hardware, since it’s clearly being wasted in number of ways, that it basically nears to becoming a scam.
“but wouldn’t run good on 90% of hardware.”
That’s why you have options, not everyone needs/requires to be able to play it on the Ultra settings.
Sadly, the world of trailers is different from the actuality.
Contrary to popular belief, optimization doesn’t come free.
Exactly, that is what optimization really means = Downgrade :/
Good optimizing is where you redo the back-end for to achieve a more efficient version of the original end result. Bad optimizing is where you replace stuff with worse stuff without redoing the back-end code (ie: You cripple the visuals because your code is inefficient, instead of making your code more efficient).
Downgrading graphics is not optimization. Optimization is when you make the game run better, not remove content.
And the hilarious thing is that BAD optimisation would make you think it was free. Seriously this game runs like garbage no matter what the platform Everyone got screwed in some way but then with Cryengine I expected nothing less.
console gamer?
You dont’t know what you are talking about.
Downgrade also know as “OPTIMIZATION” IS low level develepers slang.
Even after that quality drop stll runs like…
You’ll be sorely missed.
All the people with mining rigs can already download the lighting mod for this game
every game downgrade = fck consoles
Witcher 3 downgrade = yo its okay it still looks good.
says the fanboys, but most of from this site still upset about the downgrade (including me)
I wasn’t so much annoyed by TW3’s downgrade. What grated was the manner in which CD Projekt Red and their representatives continually obfuscated, borderline lied, wilfully misrepresented the truth, used weasel words when challenged in interviews and banned/censored people speaking out about it on their official forums.
Oh, and they also embarrassed themselves by trying to besmirch Green Man Gaming. There was also the sneaky change in GOG’s regional pricing policy just before pre-orders were being taken. Then there was the seemingly endless stream of pious/smug/holier than thou comments from them about not being like the grubby triple-A publishers and yet they were actually doing some pretty disgusting things.
If the likes of EA, Ubisoft, Square Enix, Warner Bros, Konami et al had conducted themselves as such then there’d have been outrage but CDPR all but got a free pass from the mainstream gaming sites and their legion of (then) very recent console gamer fanboy army.
Gotta preserve the “gaming media darlings/the last hope of gaming” image.
I half disliked the downgrade of Witcher 3, because it eventually led to CDPR trying to defend their stance on that downgrade by boasting about their consoles sales supposedly being far bigger than on PC.
Ever since then I’ve distanced myself from CDPR, and I will remain highly sceptical of their upcoming Cyberpunk game.
Do you also distance yourself from the Dark Souls games? The PC versions feature intentionally downgraded graphics to match what the console versions are capable of, just look at original marketing material for Dark Souls 2 and compare it to how the game actually looks for evidence.
I was never into the DS series, as those games are not my cup of tea.
They were also designed primarily with consoles in mind first, PC second to last.
And now they are gonna release Dark Souls remastered with that graphical fidelity it originally had. Smfh.
Dark Souls is the biggest pile of Garbage to hit PC. It might as well be an emulator. But it’s hard to challenge it since as so many gamers sucks the unoptimized version of From Softwares Diks so hard. When you compare the surge to dark souls you develop this anger in your gut, especially when you hear remember all the FanBoy excuses for dark souls. The Surge is 100x more optimized all Dark Souls games combined. And on yeah, Keyboard & Mouse is flawless in The Surge. So all that Garbage about, “It’s not meant to be played with KB+M”, The Surge Shows how much of a Garbage that BS statement is.
This is not about whether or not the surge is a good game (I don’t care, not my argument). This about how to probably optimize a game for a platform & not just phone it in. Dark Souls is a terrible PC Game, hyped by PC gamers that just wanna belong to the cool kids club. The, “Im playing dark souls too” club.
Eh, in The Surge the shadows cast by boxes, terrain, buildings, walls etc. is extremely bad on any setting except the highest. Any setting except the highest will result in the shadows becoming extremely blurred/faded as soon as they’re more than 3 feet away from your character.
But, but… “without consoles there would be no Witcher 3” – I think that would’ve been a blessing actually.
1.3 million sales in the first few weeks on PC and the TW3 is still selling well to this day, I find it hard to take CDPR seriously on that quote.
Me too but that’s the first line of defence that CDPR Cult witnesses resort to.
I hate how they make those pious/smug/holier than thou comments and everyone says they are the best un-currupted company ever!
What, the sellouts who downgraded the graphics for consoles? What, the sellouts who were paid off by Sony and Microsoft to give HDR support to Consoles but not give it to PC to keep it as ” exclusive content”.
Also note the lack of a full modding suite for the PC version when TW2 had such a thing. The modding community have of course still provided many great mods for TW3 but the restrictions are a pain.
They also didn’t bother to release an Enhanced Edition version of TW3 which, again, they did with TW2. It would be great, for example, if they’d released such a version that featured the many optimisations of the two expansion packs in the base game. They went on record as to state that such a thing won’t be happening because it’d take too much time to execute.
All those steps CDPR has taken makes their future with Cyberpunk 2077 look not as bright as some of their zealous fans would like to believe.
And considering the latest Glassdoor reviews about the corporate structure and overall work environment plus many talented developers who got on board just for CP2077 but were forced to work on TW3 and left soon after makes CDPR future look even bleaker.
Don’t forget the upcoming “journalists only” showcase at E3 2018, which really puts their newfound priorities into very clear focus in my opinion.
Yep. It seems like this showcase is solely for the purpose of preparing a sort of positive coverage early on which all the future hype and “news” will build upon.
As far as I’m concerned the damage is already done. CDPR’s PR department can say anything – after all a person is defined by his actions and not his words and the former don’t paint CDPR as the good guy for sure. Sadly most of their fans haven’t hit puberty yet which is why boobs on display screen is an instant GOTY.
Another 10/10 review rating for their next game from AngryJoe and softsoap interviews from the games media ‘journalists’ receiving the special treatment then!
Don’t forget IGNorant and Polytaku, the latter of which will most definitely go out of their way to praise any non-cisgender white male inclusions, even though I doubt CDPR will actually include anything specifically to virtue-signal (not that they care)…..
And Eurogamer and PC Gamer.
P.S. The increasingly deranged MrSquifler is trolling me at PC Gamer again, bless him! He’s evidently craving attention while busy playing the victim card as always so I’ll naturally not be taking the bait. What a loser!
It seems developers start with what they want the game to look like, show it as a vertical slice and then downgrade it because it can never look like that. The footage is probably all in-engine then downgraded to run and optimised. My guess is that they enable all the complex GI lighting and best quality everything, KCD has some Voxel-based GI options in the commands to make it look better, along with standard GI options and light bounce.
KCD has the following options for SVOTI and GI.
Low spec mode <—-default on
Use light probes <—-default off
Voxelizaion LOD ratio
Voxel pool resolution
Min node size
Update geometry <—defautl off
Active <—default off
Objects max view distance
“It seems developers start with what they want the game to look like, show it as a vertical slice and then downgrade it because it can never look like that.”
Sometimes it’s unachievable stuff that they showcase just for the sake of showcasing “cool footage” yes, but many times it does get purposefully downgraded “because platform parity.” Whether it’s the case here is debatable, but either way, both scenarios have happened, and are most likely to keep happening, regardless.
What, SVOTI is off by default in the full version of KCD?
It’s on, that’s probably the reason why Ultra High is so demanding, GI is off, you can check it yourself with r_svoti and play about with the commands to get higher quality. I found some docs on the cryengine website that explains some of the options and how to make it look a bit better. http://docs.cryengine dot com/display/SDKDOC2/Voxel-Based+Global+Illumination
Oh I see, thanks for looking into it. I’ve experimented a lot myself with the SVOTI when I played the beta. Came to the conclusion that implementation method 0,1,2 changed the way SVOTI worked, I couldn’t pick a favorite, because both looked good. Also, the reason why GI is turned off is because SVOTI replaces GI, pretty logical. I don’t know if useLightProbes makes things look better or not. But yeah, the Ultra preset it killing even the fastest computers lol, must be svoti doing it.
I think you’re right about GI replacement ,makes sense. Yep it is, the SVOTI is more dence around the villages and in houses, you can see how it occludes dark areas where their shouldn’t be light on ultra high, but a few settings down and the area looks flat. You can get better quality with some tweaks like the LowSpec 0, you can tweak based on that link as it explains what the options do and high or lower.
Not really. There was a quite an outrage from the PC gaming community when W3 was downgraded. People were more forgiving because W3 is simply an amazing game.
Except it isn’t even remotely amazing.
I wouldn’t say TW3 is amazing, the leveling system and gear really put me off, you find high level gear while exploring near the start of the game and can’t use it for a long, long time, you can go into any house and take things, NPCs don’t react, some of the bigger monsters are easier than the smaller monsters or packs of animals, most of the quests involve fighting monsters, doesn’t seem to be any consequences.
Also quests. Then add the extremely slow leveling, makes progression seem extremely grindy and slow.
Yes, the quest leveling is grindy, it really put me off because I found equipment that I couldn’t even use for ages, you can’t even use the witcher gear you find because it’s 10 levels above to use it.
cyberpunk will look amazing on pc..
…till they downgrade that
What else did Palantir show you?
you have no idea what are you talking about
yeah fck consoles for the PC version being downgraded, maybe think harder next time? also fck consoles for downgrades, yet the best looking games are console exclusive games? that makes sense, NOT
Console exclusives are not the best looking games, multiplats on the PC are and if those exclusives were on PC they would look much better, also 1080p/30 for reasons.
Seldom ever a stable 30fps at that!
Console-exclusive titles look better than multi-platform games on their specific console, because they’ve been developed specifically for that one console, they do not, however, look better than PC games, regardless.
If Uncharted 4 were also on PC, for example, instead of just the PS4, the PC version would by default look and run better than the PS4/Pro version. You cannot debate this, it is impossible.
Imagine if Naughty Dog were allowed to release Uncharted 4 on PC whereby the campaign mode, i.e. the main attraction, still had the same laughable 30fps frame-rate (slumping to an even more dire 25fps during scenes with heavy use of alpha effects) as Sony’s crappy AMD Jaguar-based consoles manage. They’d quite rightly be laughed out of town!
yeah just like Batman Arkham Knight, oh wait
You mean the original launch version that was so broken it was pulled from shelves, or the relaunch version, which looks considerably better than its console counterpart? You really should look into the relaunched PC version first, next time.
One of the surefire ways to identify an ignorant console peasant is that of them citing that one single game as though it’s a knock on the whole of PC gaming. They’re utterly clueless that it was patched a very long time ago and has long since been the definitive version of the game.
Meanwhile, on pretty much a daily basis we see ‘targeted 30fps’ trash with frame-pacing issues, screen-tearing and all manner of other visual downgrades arrive on his beloved console/s. Put another way, console-only gamers are routinely receiving subpar trash as a matter of cause while they have to cite the same no longer applicable example when trying to trashtalk PC. D’oh!
“or the relaunch version, which looks considerably better than its console counterpart?”
yeah i’m sure it looks so better, it’s not like Rocksteady, ever hear of them? developed the game on the ps4 and hired other devs to port it to pc, guess magical extra graphics appeared in the process of porting, huh didn’t know magic is real
Wow, you really have no idea how video game development works, do you?
You really should educate yourself a little next time first, it’ll spare you the humiliation of posting moronic arguments you can’t take back.
Ever notice how many of these console peasants are semi-literate like @ORION is? I can only presume they’re under ten years of age, are educationally deprived and/or are a bit simple.
You do understand you literally physically cannot develop a game on a console, right? Even if they had mouse/kb, they are not real computers. And they utterly lack the power or versatility or peripherals to serve the function.
And that the game was not developed “for” PS4 specifically but for x86 consoles?
Ignorant console peasant detected.
PC Gamer excited fro God Of War on PC detected, oh wait… man.. don’t worry you still have Red Dead Redemption 2 ohhh maaan not again
Ignorant console peasant status confirmed.
“don’t worry you still have Red Dead Redemption 2 ohhh maaan not again”
The delusional beliefs that RDR2 won’t eventually inevitably reach PC never cease to be a source of constant, endless entertainment from console peasants like yourself.
Seriously kid, Rockstar doesn’t make games to pander to console peasants, they make games to make money, and PC releases make money.
Based on how bad it runs. Thank god its downgraded lmao
I personally don’t see it being massively downgraded.
Imagine if they added this as an extra “Ultra + ” preset. Then it tanks FPS by 25 but barely adds any new detail.
Steam forums = “I bought a gtx 1080 and I cannot run this game max. This is absurd I want a refund”.
1080ti can dip to 40 fps at 1080p, while popular GTX 1060 even below 20fps in the same places. No wonder people want a refund
1060 on ultra and 1080p?
Its actually understandable for that card, since it is starting to phase.
I have a GTX1080 and I can run t his game max just fine.
Some of us bought GTX1080 brand new when it was the best card on the market. Before Nvidia predictably released the better card and screwed us all over. And now we can’t buy one because there aren’t any.
You must have been blindfolded when looking at the screenshots., Irregular John
Ouch. Those comparison screenshots are somewhat akin to the shock of seeing how plain vanilla Skyrim is after having played it with grass, tree, flora and lighting mods installed.
It’s Witcher 3 all over again, and quelle surprise, it also had consoles involved in it’s development cycle.
Except I’d be surprised if these guys conduct themselves with the same lack of integrity that we saw from CD Projekt Red.
We’ll see how that turns out over the next 5-8 months. If they don’t pull a CDPR, I’ll be surprised. If they pull a CDPR, I won’t be.
Here we go again, I have a feeling since the launch that graphics are not looking as much as good when they first show us at the beginning. curse of the consoles strike again.
I would rather have the option of better graphics that would cause me lower framerate than to not have the option at all. Let the users decide the best blend of image quality and frame rate for themselves.
A too demanding set of options would also be great for when newer, better hardware is released. Basically future proofing the game.
Nothing new here!
Thats a shame, looks like utter sh*t in comparison but if thats what has to happen then thats what has to happen.
Modders will probably bring it back to pre-sh*t standards later on.
I’m actually surprised you didn’t make an article on day 1 coz it was pretty obvious. Ever since the announcement of the console versions, the game gradually changed
This is what worries me when it comes to PC games. Whenever a console version is announced, the game has to be watered down in some way or another.
I know very well that some console folk like to argue the ever so popular “but they have to make sure it works on low end PC’s”. Except even some low end PC’s end up running the game better than the console, as well as it proving a point to some PC users, that maybe it’s time to stop clinging to older hw and simply upgrade.
We do need games that actually make use of higher end hw, and for lower end users to stop clinging all the time to the cheapest, most powerless of hw.
Also, options allow everyone to play at whatever performance level they want. Why compromise the visuals of your game when you can offer people the option to do that?
All I can think of, is both the need to not detract console game sales by making the PC version identical to the console version and… it’s straight up cheaper not having to worry about realistic lighting & shadows in environments, actual decent textures etc.
Since the day this game got its “Cryengine will be the engine used for this game” announcement from Crytek’s own blog, it was instantly dead to me and considered an huge unoptimised mess lol.
There are plenty of PS4 games that can stand up to this game visually with ease.
The beta forest scenes honestly look like a whole new level. I showed a number of friends and co-workers the images and they actually thought those were camera shots.
In terms of LOD and draw distance, no. Artistically perhaps, but technically, no.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/71fba449afa3639dee74cc493effaf085375784dc4efaeab4b352a4dba31abf2.png
-_-
Fun fact: DSO had a s*tty, rather clickbait title on the old article. Developers said that the PC version wont be limited by consoles, but they never said that the PC version will not get a graphical downgrade if needed(and looking at the performance of the 2016 Beta, the game needed it)
“and looking at the performance of the 2016 Beta, the game needed it”
Or the whiners could just get better hardware and stop b*tching. Everyone wants a new Crysis game, but when we get something even remotely resembling Crysis’ massive visual push, “downgrade was necessary, requirements were OP.”
Seriously? F*ck off with that sh*t, already. And if this is about ignorant turds moaning about how the game is unoptimised, then just shout them into oblivion for being ignorant turds and move on.
I have to call into question whether the game actually looked like that “beta” screenshot that “backer” claimed it looked like because videos of the beta on youtube a year ago don’t look nothing like it, so the claim the game looked like that in the first place I think is false. The Beta never looked like that screenshot.
DSOG reports news, don’t shot the messenger, DSOG didn’t make such claims, the devloper did, “According to Warhorse Studios”.
I wasn’t bashing DSOG. Not sure how you ended up with that conclusion.
The image can somewhat imply you were, I didn’t say you actually were bashing them. DSOG reporting one thing then reporting the opposite.
I don’t think Noble should be expected to account for every single person when posting. I think that this is more about assumptions and drawing conclusions by reading into a subtlety that didn’t exist.
Well, people see things in a different perspective that others, that image came across to me initally as a dig at DSOG’s reporting so it depends how you look at it. That’s what happens when you don’t add comments to images. not every one will see it the same.
As I said, I don’t think Noble can be expected to account for every person on the internet when putting something out there. Noble wasn’t being inappropriate and he shouldn’t have to censor himself or add disclaimers if that’s the case.
Well, you can stop talking rubbish now or learn to read better before you jump into defending someone for something that didn’t need defending.
You accused him of something that he didn’t do and over something harmless. Just refrain from jumping to conclusions about people and their motives over things that aren’t even remotely offensive.
Just asking for some CommonSense, courtesy, and respect.
I’m not again explaining myself to you or do I need to be dicated to by you, and I never claimed he or the image was “offensive”. Stop making things up, snowflake.
Your emotions never help. You are better served by calmly reading comments and to avoid engaging with people on the basis of your own estimations of a subtly that did not exist, leading to your accusation that Noble did something that he didn’t do.
Case in point. You took a single word from my previous reply and managed to attach it to a completely different arrangement to the one I used, and then resorted to name calling.
Again, stop defending someone who doesnt need defending, mind your own business and stop taking the moral high ground on behave of someone else.
Noble had already defended themselves. I canvassed Nobles position and provided feedback to you on the assumptions which lead you astray.
A pointless and futile attempt as it was, I’m sure you feel better about yourself doing it though, pat yourself on the back kiddo.
First no proper SLI support and now this…I’ll need to see: “50% off” in order to buy this game now.
imagine if they didn’t downgrade rofl.
Nothing a texture mod can’t fix, not really seeing a problem.
Though modding is always a good thing when it comes to gaming on PC. Having to mod a recently released game, to a state where it looks like it should have back from back in beta, is an issue for me.
I shouldn’t have to do the job that the devs should have been doing in the first place. Yeah modding is amazing and all, but the more we let this slide, the more we’ll just continue seeing devs getting lazier and lazier, to the point where modders will basically be doing all the work and paying the devs for it too.
You do realize putting something in and then taking it out fundamentally expends more effort than leaving it, right? That’s just basic logic.
It probably took them a day to write a program to degrade the textures and a couple days of idling while all the textures are processed by the program.
Shiny reflective wet surfaces? Just delete the stuff that causes it.
Lighting? Eh, the original DOOM did this pretty well, let’s just copy that approach.
no the weak pc that majority of pc gamers have is holding games back
Honestly, neither of these are true.
Both are true. Steam HW survey you’ve got like 40% of people using garbage laptops with intel hd.
I’m fairly certain no dev would target intel HD graphics.. I certainly wouldn’t.
I’m not saying they should but the reality is there are people gaming on shyte laptops.
Except the same thing is hapening with consoles, where are the games for the XB1X and PS4 Pro only, there are none, just higher resolution or settings.
The only game upgraded at the launch was GTA5
didnt they say at one point they were mad, they had to compromise for the consoles? they still wanted to make pc the better version, but publisher forced them to parity.
The thing that really irks me within this industry, is we only seem to always have one player in the entire industry, that likes to show up the rest of all the studios out there who conduct in console level parity plans.
Years ago it was Crytek with the first Crysis. They showed how good and demanding a game could be on PC, and it showed up the eventual console release in full. Now years later, we only have RSI with Star Citizen, another game that’s meant to be demanding and better looking than most console games out there, though it has no console version in the works at all.
It’s annoying me that hardly any dev out there wants to make a good looking game just for the PC, yet many devs are more than happy to make a semi decent looking game only for a single console system.
Crysis never came to consoles. You’re thinking of C2, which was a MUCH less monumental or demanding game than Crysis.
The answer is as people say though. Even though PC is factually the more profitable platform, they want to maximize profit by releasing on consoles and thus neutering the games.
https://marketplace(dot)xbox(dot)com/en-US/Product/Crysis/66acd000-77fe-1000-9115-d80245410968
“Crysis never came to consoles”
Again I reiterate, Crysis does not exist on console. That may say Crysis, but it’s not Crysis.
Its the same map. Same gameplay, albeit not as good as KBM. New engine.
And drastically worse graphics.
Crysis really doesn’t have amazing graphics. They may have been great at the time, but certainly not today.
You should probably revisit the game because the graphics are still better than 90% of games today.
I think you should revisit it because they really aren’t. Played it the other day.
What a stupid comment, it’s the same game with a level missing brought to the consoles using the CE3. You seem to have trouble admitting you’re wrong and spin it with propaganda.
And you say “one player” even though there are plenty of games out there that are exclusive to PC that you simply failed to mention because these games are nothing special to talk about on a technical level. And so it invalidates your “games would look incredible if they were only made on PC” argument” to bring these games up.
And the thing you are forgetting is that a game like Star Citizen also requires powerful hardware to run, no 10 year old GPUs and their architecture here like the ones that most other PC exclusive games support.
I was talking about devs that were designing games for PC with a focus on highly realistic visuals. So far it’s been Crytek back in the past and RSI.
Nothing has been invalidated here, because there are only two games that were made on visually advanced technical level. Saying “you’re invalidated” doesn’t actually invalidate what I was trying to say. You have to bring up a list of others games that were or are on the exact same level as Crysis 1 and Star Citizen, both in scope and design.
Yes, thank you for actually understanding that SC requires more than decent hardware to run it. The game should be designed around the latest hardware, rather than 5-10+ yr old hw.
Money which RSI acquired easily via crowdfunding.
Suits have always cared about making billions, why do you think EA pulled the “where’s your billion dollar IP” on their other sectors?.
Every game gets downgraded from its first draft. Not 1 game in history has ever kept its exact formula from the beginning of development to release. Not sure why its all of asudden important. Just an excuse to try and dog the new game.
Probably because it wouldn’t run worth a crap if they didn’t. The game already shreds 1080s and ti’s on Ultra (depending on where you are.)
I don’t remember the beta looking that nice and making me say wow.
While I do enjoy the Kingsom Come it is one of the best looking ugly games around. There are many times the game looks amazing and others it looks dismal.
I’m just curious why nothing looks as good as it could. Obviously Warhorse is new, but Crytek has always been an indie studio, and Ryse looked absolutely amazing. It’s still the best looking game to date , ever.
My only real beef , graphically, is that everything that matters happens in a cutscene, including the dialog. I guess Mass Effect and DA and KOTOR and Witcher have spoiled me but when you put black bars on pre-rendered cutscenes, for conversations, even with every little peasant, it kind of takes me out of the game.
In Skalitz alone there are places where the game easily cuts FPS in half during the daytime. Well, you know, before spoilers.
And the ironic thing is if the game was on PS4 only then the game would have been developed exclusively for GDDR5 architecture. You bring Xbone and even PC into the blender and then you have to factor in 14 year old ddr3 set ups.
God of War, Detroit Become Human, Spiderman, just 3 of what will be some of best looking games this year and ever and that is on just the standard PS4.
God of war has been downgraded. I am happy to provide the comparison. All of them are 3rd person single player games that will be dead and forgotten a week after release like sonys entire library ?
Meh…God of war has been downgraded. All of them are 3rd person single player games that will be dead and forgotten a week after release like sonys entire library. Regardless they will be playable on PC for those that care?
If you like those rubbish console games that put 30fps movie like experience over frame-rate and responsiness, they’re cattering to the Playsation audence and nothing more. Also, graphics tech gets better over the years, not the hardware.
I think you missunderstand what I’m saying, I didn’t claim I benchmarked the game, nor did I claim the game doesn’t drop to what you claimed it did. All the claimed was that I didn’t see drops like that, I my system isn’t thought systems they test, they’re don’t account for all PC systems.
What do you expect after a 4 year later release? The console version used CE3 which had a deferred pipline which is in most modern games now with post AA. Crysis on the PC didn’t have that and was using MSAA in CE2, the console release doesn’t even come close to the maxed out PC version, it only look near because of the CE3’s modern lighting system.
How can something “not come close” but “look near”?
As I explained, the newer lighting system and the new engine tech that runs the game 4 years later, plus the LOD and grass, foliage has been substantially cut down in the console version and there are no volumetic clouds.
I can give examples of tech running on newer games that couldn’t before because the tech is newer, one would be SVOTI in Kingdom Come Deliverance, it’s cheap enough now to run even on consoles.
What a d*ck move, especially considering how it is selling on Steam, its not even a week old yet and its almost at 400k copies sold and this ain’t including copies sold from other places such as GoG.
That is an absolute truth. Forests look naturalistic with huge foliage and tree variety not to mention landscape design, I mean it looks like it was handcrafted. The Witcher 3 with its stupid SpeedTree forests that look the same with the same tree height and generic open world design has nothing on KCD.
no significant loss the game is amazing and quite optimized.
lmfao
You’re not understanding. No Crysis is Crysis except Crysis (PC).
18 FPS is not exactly playable…
i’m very harsh on downgrades and whatnot, but the game is INSANELY demanding
i get solid 60 FPS on the witcher Ultra setting with Hairworks on Geralt only
but on KCD even on high settings i’m getting between 49-24 cinematic FPS
either the game is unoptimized, too demanding (cryengine afterall)
or a GTX 980TI Strix and a 6700K overclocked with water cooling isn’t enough for this game
(which i find hard to believe)
to be honest, i think it’s our fault
every game nowadays releases unoptimized, we are the beta testers
we pay full price to play an unpolished product
but that is the price of playing on release
if i had patiance and played like 6-8 months after release
we’ed also have Crossbows and Smithing (elements cut from the game due to time constraints)
it really sucks that i’m nearing completion after having to play with such $hite FPS
esp at sieges
So what if it was downgraded? Maybe they did so for better optimization and the game was in beta state which meant hey could add / alter or remvoe features. The game looks great anyway. Instead of debating the morals of this you should play the game and enjoy it if you are a fan; othwerwise, there’s no reason to comment.