The Witcher 3 logo header

The Witcher 3 HD Project – New Update Will Improve Toadstools, New Comparison Screenshots Released

Modder ‘Halk Hogan PL’ is currently working on updating The Witcher 3’s toadstools textures, and released some new comparison between his Texture project and the vanilla version of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. We are pretty sure that a lot won’t even notice these new textures, however the modder felt the need to improve – at least for now – these textures. Enjoy the comparison screenshots after the jump!

0c4ead8a00017b83569aa590a8fb1ac0002b1efd569aa588d29b5b90001c1366569aa597

25 thoughts on “The Witcher 3 HD Project – New Update Will Improve Toadstools, New Comparison Screenshots Released”

    1. If you’re calling it “trashworks” then why even bother using it? Just use on Gerald and you should be getting 60fps with mixed ultra, my GTX 970 does. Hairworks only takes 10fps now, more if you see more animals or monsters on screen because they all use hairworks if you set it to all.

        1. I get between 50/60FPS in Novigrad (80+FPS at the church at the top) and 70/80FPS everywhere with all in Ultra with an Asus Strix GTX970 with a FX8350 @4.2Ghz, 8GB RAM 1866mhz, and the game is installed in a SSD AMD R7 240GB. (Windows 10 Pro)

        1. if it sucks just cuz you cant acheive your desired framerate, sounds
          like thats more a problem on your end then the game. i dont remember any
          where the dev’s claiming you will get 60fps on any gpu/cpu setup.

        2. Yes you need a very top end GPU and CPU to max this game out for 60FPS, we always knew that right from when CDPR was showing the PhysX hair and their bullsh*t footage. The console version is very downgraded, NPCs are lower than the lowest PC setting. Some forest areas drop into the 40s for me just on high settings and has nothing to do with Hairworks.

        3. GTX 980Ti doesn’t drop below 60fps on highest settings (if hair works is off) even on 2560×1440 resolution, as long as you aren’t CPU limited.

          I do agree though that buying 600-700€ GPU just for one game is quite silly even if I may have done that sometimes.

        4. At the end of the day you still think the game sucks because YOU can’t max it out. If everyone on a 970 could max everything out then there would be no point for premium products. (Funny thing is the 980ti never drops below 60 with hairworks on @ 1080p)

        1. Nope, The console version is on a lower than low settings than the PC for NPCs and other setting match about medium settings.

          1. Ultimately, because it’s a console game, all GAMEPLAY RELEVANT features have to work on consoles. All the PC version does is increase some variables to increase draw distances and LOD in general. The entire game was still built with console performance in mind. All areas of the world were “optimized” for consoles. All shaders had to work on shoddy console GPUs etc.

    2. Lookey here, a foolosopher. Well, fool, your philosophy sucks. You didn’t even state your resolution pal. “A med-high card can’t max out a new game fully whaaaa” Then why the f would anyone want to buy a full high end card? If you could just max everything out with a 970? Didn’t really think this one out did yeh?

    3. I’m playing at 1920×1080 with a 970 and 3570k. The only time I’ve dropped below 60 fps was during the final Wild Hunt battle and the Olgierd duel. I have Hairworks off, all other settings are max except shadow quality and foliage view distance which are on high. What CPU do you have? Maybe that’s the weak link.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *