Welcome Stranger to OCC!Login | Register

Three Videos Totaling 45 Minutes Showcase The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

Category: Gaming
Posted: 04:00PM
Author:


While new screenshots for The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt have been popping up quite often as of late, videos of the upcoming title from CD Projekt RED are becoming bountiful as well. Gopher has successfully uploaded 45 minutes of gameplay from The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt that showcases that various environments and elements of the video game title. The first part, which is roughly 13 minutes long, displays the outside world with some intriguing game dynamics. The second part, which is roughly 17 minutes long, offers insight into the various abilities of the witcher, along with some in-game menus. The third and final part, which is right around 15 minutes in length, dives deep into the story of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.

For anyone who dislikes spoilers, please do not watch the following videos that are available in 1080p, 60FPS.

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt launches on May 19 for the PC, PlayStation 4, and Xbox One.

Source: WCCFtech



Register as a member to subscribe comments.
WarWeeny on May 05, 2015 04:34
Such a shame the graphics have taken a massive hit. Guess CDPR didn't want a next "Crysis" lol.
bp9801 on May 05, 2015 05:07

Such a shame the graphics have taken a massive hit. Guess CDPR didn't want a next "Crysis" lol.

 

Yeah, such a shameTruly it is.

WarWeeny on May 05, 2015 06:57
Are you seriously comparing witcher 1 to 3? lol. Obviously i meant the difference between the first footage and the actual footage. the witcher 3 looks like dragonage inquisition now instead of the mindblowing "witcher 3" that was showcased 2 years ago.
bp9801 on May 05, 2015 07:39

Are you seriously comparing witcher 1 to 3? lol. Obviously i meant the difference between the first footage and the actual footage. the witcher 3 looks like dragonage inquisition now instead of the mindblowing "witcher 3" that was showcased 2 years ago.

 

You're right, there is a difference. Big difference.

Nyt on May 05, 2015 08:00

I don't know what the big fuss is over downgrades.

 

Yes, it has been "downgraded" if you compared the current build with the trailers from previous years. Here's a album that shows the changes : http://imgur.com/a/8I1He

But if it still looked like the Witcher 3 of a couple years back then the chances are only people with Titan X SLI would be able to run it.

We saw how Unity was given such a bad name for being too demanding even though it did look amazing.

Most of the people screaming downgrade are people that can barely run Witcher 3 in its current state at 1080p and get 30FPS, let alone the Witcher 3 of a couple years ago.

 

Also, I don't see a problem with Witcher 3 looking like Dragon Age Inquisition. Both are open world games built for new gen and one has a much bigger budget and a much bigger team working on it, yet they both look pretty good.

 

I'm more interested in the story, quests, characters and adventures.

bp9801 on May 05, 2015 08:21

I don't know what the big fuss is over downgrades.

 

Yes, it has been "downgraded" if you compared the current build with the trailers from previous years. Here's a album that shows the changes : http://imgur.com/a/8I1He

But if it still looked like the Witcher 3 of a couple years back then the chances are only people with Titan X SLI would be able to run it.

We saw how Unity was given such a bad name for being too demanding even though it did look amazing.

Most of the people screaming downgrade are people that can barely run Witcher 3 in its current state at 1080p and get 30FPS, let alone the Witcher 3 of a couple years ago.

 

Also, I don't see a problem with Witcher 3 looking like Dragon Age Inquisition. Both are open world games built for new gen and one has a much bigger budget and a much bigger team working on it, yet they both look pretty good.

 

I'm more interested in the story, quests, characters and adventures.

 

Precisely. This is what the minimum and recommended is for Witcher 3. Pretty reasonable and something most people can manage. Plus you can snag a copy of the game (and Batman: Arkham Knight) if you pick up a new GeForce GTX 970 or 980, or with a GTX 960 (just no Batman).

 

And really, comparing Witcher 3 to DA:I in terms of graphics is quite favorable, imo. DA:I can look truly awesome, with many moments and areas that are simply impressive. But, it is not a true open-world, which Witcher 3 is. There are no loading screens in Witcher 3 outside of fast travel (does include heading to the archipelago by boat), death, and loading into the game the first time. Getting that level of detail in a game without having a loading screen every 20 seconds is impressive.

 

Graphics are for people to squawk about when there's no substance to the game. Who cares how pretty the game looks if there's nothing to hold my attention other than, "but look at the individual blades of grass that each react to my moving through them!"

 

Give me substance over graphics any day. I want to play a game that I'll remember for a long time, not some glorified tech demo that's no different from XYZ FPS on the shelf next to it outside of the graphics.

WarWeeny on May 05, 2015 08:23
If people want to compare the actual differences, then put the right images in there instead of different time of day, weather conditions, locations, or even the same game lol. There is plenty of 2013 footage that looks cgi like, and then you have the final build that does look nothing alike.
WarWeeny on May 05, 2015 08:42
And yes, i am aware that graphics aren't everything etc., it is just that when you show a game and claim it looks like that, but then it turns out it is not even half of what you showed, people can be critical for that. I understand the game has no loading screens and whatnot, but the terrible pop-in of shaders, AO, characters, and vegetation is a thing that breaks immersion quite a bit, i rather have a loading screen or 2 to prevent this.
bp9801 on May 05, 2015 15:53

After looking back at the gameplay trailer from 2013 and comparing it to this one from nearly a month ago, I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. There is zero difference between the two in terms of visuals.

WarWeeny on May 06, 2015 07:21
It may not be really apparent when you look at it, but the details are definitely missing in the newer builds compared to the 2013 video. Take he part with the griffon, even though it has a different tod, the textures, vegetation, and and particles all look superior. The boat doesn't leave a trail anymore, as it did in the 2013 build. These are just two of the many downgrades, and if you all count them up, it is quite a lot. Hence "big downgrade".
bp9801 on May 06, 2015 08:02

It may not be really apparent when you look at it, but the details are definitely missing in the newer builds compared to the 2013 video. Take he part with the griffon, even though it has a different tod, the textures, vegetation, and and particles all look superior. The boat doesn't leave a trail anymore, as it did in the 2013 build. These are just two of the many downgrades, and if you all count them up, it is quite a lot. Hence "big downgrade".

 

So don't buy it if all you're going to be focusing on are how it is so downgraded.

 

There is still a wake behind the boat in the 2015 footage; it just isn't as white due to speed.

 

Oh, and tell me the particles in Igni look better in the March part compared to May: http://www.gfycat.com/UncommonScaredIberiannase

WarWeeny on May 06, 2015 08:39
Why do people always say: "if you think it is so downgraded in graphics, don't buy it", that statement is so stupid, it is just dumb to say that. The May particles of igni do look better, as it should, but as a whole, it is only something minor. I am still going to get the game, i just stated that it was a shame of the graphical downgrade, that is all... If people cannot see that, then that is their blessing. It still looks good, but not 2013 good, simple.

This news has comment postings disabled because it is now archived.

© 2001-2017 Overclockers Club ® Privacy Policy
Elapsed: 0.0280821323   (xlweb1)