ログイン
|
言語
български (ブルガリア語)
čeština(チェコ語)
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Nederlands (オランダ語)
English (英語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Français (フランス語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Magyar(ハンガリー語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
한국어 (韓国語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português (ポルトガル語)
Português-Brasil (ブラジルポルトガル語)
Română(ルーマニア語)
Русский (ロシア語)
简体中文 (簡体字中国語)
Español (スペイン語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
繁體中文 (繁体字中国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
Steam の翻訳にご協力ください
You know what a real "downgrade" is though? Feature cuts, the kind of stuff that Watch_Dogs had (or didn't), features being rubbed all over our faces but being cut at the end without us knowing... And you know what is NOT a "downgrade"? less texture quality and the removal of the sharpening filter...
As far as I can see from the many review of the demo, most features are present and looks wonderful, I haven't seen words about the fur tech but let's be honest, it's out of our reach.
0/10, no creativity at all.
are you really that stupid? there's no need to download each video and compare it side to side, you can clearly see the differences on youtube.
Unless you're only going to be viewing the game through streaming.
I'm sad because they downgraded the quality, that's it. They promised that there would be no downgrades.
I'm planning to buy a 300€ gpu when the game comes out so yeah if i get it i'll be able to run it on ultra
It's just that I feel like gamers are lowering their expectations just because there's a graphical downgrade. It's sad, I agree, but remember that with the consoles in the way, they have to make sure that their games run as smooth as possible on the platforms that they chose.
With a 300€ GPU? I fear you migh be a bit short for running it on ultra.
i can get the gtx 970 for around that price and the r9 290 for less
The game don't even look bad, that the weird thing about these threads, not at all in fact when you consider the sheer size of the map, there is also the technology backing it (I hear the weather effects are partucularly stunning) as well as the exellent art design.
ofc the game still looks freaking awesome but that downgrade just pisses me off
That's what I was thinking about when i read your post, but I don't think a 970 is gonna run the game on ultra at 1080p.
the recommended specs for the gpu is the r9 290, the 970 is going to be enough
It's fricking Ubisoft's fault, I tell you. See what happens when they falsely advertise a game? It's bad juju!
Recommended != ultra. At least, not at 1080p.
"1. Are recommended requirements enough for Ultra? No, recommended specs are supposed to let you play on mid-high settings in 1920x1080(Full HD)"
from Q&A w/ devs.
Granted, that does not mention fps, but given the nature of the game -- Geralt is *not* a tanky character and will need to be nimble, and certain things like counters will be very timing dependent -- it will probably be important to maintain a consistent framerate and avoid choppiness that might throw off your timings. We don't really know how much more demanding the 'ultra' preset will be.