The Witcher 3 on Wii U?

#41Devil_wings00Posted 2/5/2013 4:16:00 AM
VanderZoo posted...
Devil_wings00 posted...
I don't mean to be a jerk but CDPR usually pushes the graphical limit with there games (seriously look up screen shots of witcher 2 maxed on PC) and if the wii u turns out to be the least graphically impressive machine (most likely) I can seriously see them not bothering.

I just hope that CDPR doesn't "consolify" the game like other games that have started on PC then later moved to consoles. I hope this remains a PC first then downscale to console kind of affair and not the reverse. I'd hate to open the options menu on witcher 3 to see nothing but a resolution slider. Just hope they don't forget where they came from. Then again they haven't been gobbled up by EA or another publisher yet so it should all be fine.


Ahh, the witcher 2 was already 'consolfied', it ran natively with a controller, and it was ported with an upgraded engine to the 360, and look how much better it was in just about every way other than creative things like story over the original witcher.

Stop with those "i hope consoles don't ruin it" nonsense, it's a myth. CDPR had to roughly double the size of the development team to make the witcher 3, whose to say they would even bother to attempt that if there weren't consoles there to provide the much needed extra sales?

And are you forgetting that this is running on next gen consoles? Which are going to be comparable to high end PC's? If anything is going to hold the game back, it's medium range PC's.


Yes the controller was available from the start and the 360 was always in mind but it was a PC first title (thus why it came out over a year before the 360 title or close to a year). Nothing was compromised for the PC version and the scalability and future tech in witcher 2 was staggering (seriously SLI/Crossfire set-ups from this gen can barely manage 60fps with uber-sampling on). Also the entire witcher franchise has sold 4 million copies and only 600,000 copies were of the 360 version of witcher 2 so it was hardly the money maker. Also all extra content and additions that came with the 360 version were free for PC users via a patch. Besides new content the only real change to the engine was they changed the 360 pad controls a bit...hardly a major difference, besides that the game was identical.

Yes console games CAN ruin PC games. Crysis 1 pushed the boundaries of PC tech back in the day and was a much more expansive and open game but because the second game was designed with consoles in mind the PC version was seriously hampered. The game itself is a much shorter more linear experience then the first game was. The first game still looks and plays better then the second game which is a joke, the game went backwards.

So yes I do worry that a once great game could be destroyed on the PC because the consoles were the first thing on the dev teams mind and PC port is an afterthought. I don't worry to much when it comes to CDPR they are a great company but it's not a myth that PC versions of games get worse off when they make the jump to consoles.
---
3570k @ 1.260v - 4.6Ghz, GTX 580 @ 980/2106, ASUS Sabertooth z77, 8GB G.Skill Sniper 1600MHZ, Intel 335 SSD (boot).
#42Devil_wings00Posted 2/5/2013 4:27:05 AM
VanderZoo posted...
Devil_wings00 posted...
VanderZoo posted...
FlyinTonite posted...
Calling any console "top of the line," is facepalm worthy imo.


That statement is face palm worthy, the next gen PS and Xbox have already been confirmed to be comparable to high end PC's. For the first few years, there will be more powerful consoles out there than medium PC's.


lol no just no Considering almost all the recent rumors point to APU's which are NOT top of the line. They are second from the bottom of the line. That's horses*** PR BS at it's absolute finest. They say that because they know those who don't bother to look into the finer details will believe it. These consoles will not be 500-700 dollar, sold at a big loss, monsters like the PS3/360 were. Those days are gone.


Wrong, it wasn't PR, it's rumoured specs from many different developers who have leaked it. And the 360 was only $400 and it was pumping out better looking games than the PC in its first year, that's what started the whole "pc gaming is dying", because people were looking at the 360 and saying "who needs a pc when a $00 console can do this?".

PS3 was $600, not because of its power, but because of cell and blu-ray. A very powerful, $400 console seems very likely.


Again APU's are not top of the line...whatever article you read that said that doesn't know what they are talking about. At best with the right ram set up and OC you can get performance similar to a GTX 460/550 out of an APU. Top of the line GPU's are 400-500 bucks alone right now, how on earth is a 400 dollar machine going to match that kind of performance? Also top of the line PC's are thousands of dollars and generally feature dual GPU's. So ya how on earth are sony/MS going to manage to stick something with that horse power into a ps4/720 for 400 bucks? They aren't. I'm not saying the new consoles aren't going to be decent but saying "top of the line" is nuts when no rumors have reported any such thing (at least none of the recent ones talking about the dev kits). At best with good optimization we are talking mid range PC equivalent...then the 8000/700 series GPU's will come out and then the 9000/800 the next year and the consoles will be rendered completely obsolete within a year of release, assuming they are released at the end of this year. It's a pointless argument about a battle the consoles can never win as far as tech goes.
---
3570k @ 1.260v - 4.6Ghz, GTX 580 @ 980/2106, ASUS Sabertooth z77, 8GB G.Skill Sniper 1600MHZ, Intel 335 SSD (boot).
#43VanderZoo(Topic Creator)Posted 2/5/2013 4:37:46 AM
Devil_wings00 posted...
VanderZoo posted...
Devil_wings00 posted...
I don't mean to be a jerk but CDPR usually pushes the graphical limit with there games (seriously look up screen shots of witcher 2 maxed on PC) and if the wii u turns out to be the least graphically impressive machine (most likely) I can seriously see them not bothering.

I just hope that CDPR doesn't "consolify" the game like other games that have started on PC then later moved to consoles. I hope this remains a PC first then downscale to console kind of affair and not the reverse. I'd hate to open the options menu on witcher 3 to see nothing but a resolution slider. Just hope they don't forget where they came from. Then again they haven't been gobbled up by EA or another publisher yet so it should all be fine.


Ahh, the witcher 2 was already 'consolfied', it ran natively with a controller, and it was ported with an upgraded engine to the 360, and look how much better it was in just about every way other than creative things like story over the original witcher.

Stop with those "i hope consoles don't ruin it" nonsense, it's a myth. CDPR had to roughly double the size of the development team to make the witcher 3, whose to say they would even bother to attempt that if there weren't consoles there to provide the much needed extra sales?

And are you forgetting that this is running on next gen consoles? Which are going to be comparable to high end PC's? If anything is going to hold the game back, it's medium range PC's.


Yes the controller was available from the start and the 360 was always in mind but it was a PC first title (thus why it came out over a year before the 360 title or close to a year). Nothing was compromised for the PC version and the scalability and future tech in witcher 2 was staggering (seriously SLI/Crossfire set-ups from this gen can barely manage 60fps with uber-sampling on). Also the entire witcher franchise has sold 4 million copies and only 600,000 copies were of the 360 version of witcher 2 so it was hardly the money maker. Also all extra content and additions that came with the 360 version were free for PC users via a patch. Besides new content the only real change to the engine was they changed the 360 pad controls a bit...hardly a major difference, besides that the game was identical.

Yes console games CAN ruin PC games. Crysis 1 pushed the boundaries of PC tech back in the day and was a much more expansive and open game but because the second game was designed with consoles in mind the PC version was seriously hampered. The game itself is a much shorter more linear experience then the first game was. The first game still looks and plays better then the second game which is a joke, the game went backwards.

So yes I do worry that a once great game could be destroyed on the PC because the consoles were the first thing on the dev teams mind and PC port is an afterthought. I don't worry to much when it comes to CDPR they are a great company but it's not a myth that PC versions of games get worse off when they make the jump to consoles.


I'm not going to go back and forth here, all I'll say is your Crysis example is incorrect, because Crysis 1 was late ported to consoles as well.
---
necro00 - So she sounded really cute, and I saved her from dying a bunch of times, I messaged and talked to her for a few mins and she then blocked me wtf
#44OtakuGameraPosted 2/5/2013 4:38:56 AM(edited)
they said :top of the line "consoles" which is completely correct, why you suddenly had to compare to PC is puzzling
---
PSVita no games? http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/620272-playstation-vita/64767381
http://www.atlus.com/res/p4g_faithful_reviews_1.jpg
#45EnVy_CaLiBeRPosted 2/5/2013 4:46:05 AM
Devil_wings00 posted...
VanderZoo posted...
Devil_wings00 posted...
VanderZoo posted...
FlyinTonite posted...
Calling any console "top of the line," is facepalm worthy imo.


That statement is face palm worthy, the next gen PS and Xbox have already been confirmed to be comparable to high end PC's. For the first few years, there will be more powerful consoles out there than medium PC's.


lol no just no Considering almost all the recent rumors point to APU's which are NOT top of the line. They are second from the bottom of the line. That's horses*** PR BS at it's absolute finest. They say that because they know those who don't bother to look into the finer details will believe it. These consoles will not be 500-700 dollar, sold at a big loss, monsters like the PS3/360 were. Those days are gone.


Wrong, it wasn't PR, it's rumoured specs from many different developers who have leaked it. And the 360 was only $400 and it was pumping out better looking games than the PC in its first year, that's what started the whole "pc gaming is dying", because people were looking at the 360 and saying "who needs a pc when a $00 console can do this?".

PS3 was $600, not because of its power, but because of cell and blu-ray. A very powerful, $400 console seems very likely.


Again APU's are not top of the line...whatever article you read that said that doesn't know what they are talking about. At best with the right ram set up and OC you can get performance similar to a GTX 460/550 out of an APU. Top of the line GPU's are 400-500 bucks alone right now, how on earth is a 400 dollar machine going to match that kind of performance? Also top of the line PC's are thousands of dollars and generally feature dual GPU's. So ya how on earth are sony/MS going to manage to stick something with that horse power into a ps4/720 for 400 bucks? They aren't. I'm not saying the new consoles aren't going to be decent but saying "top of the line" is nuts when no rumors have reported any such thing (at least none of the recent ones talking about the dev kits). At best with good optimization we are talking mid range PC equivalent...then the 8000/700 series GPU's will come out and then the 9000/800 the next year and the consoles will be rendered completely obsolete within a year of release, assuming they are released at the end of this year. It's a pointless argument about a battle the consoles can never win as far as tech goes.


This. People that believe that the next PS and Xbox are going to be as powerful as high end PCs are delusional especially if they expect the consoles to be under $500.
---
(NNID/PSN): EnVy_CaLiBeR (GT): EnVyXCaLIBeR (3DS): 2895-6776-7223
Ravens! 2012-2013 Superbowl Champions!
#46OtakuGameraPosted 2/5/2013 4:49:31 AM
This. People that believe that the next PS and Xbox are going to be as powerful as high end PCs are delusional especially if they expect the consoles to be under $500.

except they're not, 500$ GPU dont make a PC high end, even a 200-300$ GPU can be considered high end. and those prices are retail price, the actual production cost much less, especially the 500$ kind where they're sold at a premium.
---
PSVita no games? http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/620272-playstation-vita/64767381
http://www.atlus.com/res/p4g_faithful_reviews_1.jpg
#47Darkside_ShadowPosted 2/5/2013 4:54:19 AM
Let's make this simple. The Witcher 3 would come to the WiiU if enough people would buy the console.

.
#48CrysianiaPosted 2/5/2013 5:03:05 AM
Witchers another series that shouldnt be played on anything except PC anyway.
---
PSN - Sacred_Darksoul
#49FenderMasterPosted 2/5/2013 6:40:49 AM
Virus66 posted...
Hungtotheover posted...
It says on the bottom right of the picture that its for next gen.


Considering the Wii U is technically 7th gen I doubt the devs want to make it.


No, it is technically 8th gen... considering it is a successor to a 7th gen console. The very definition of a generation says as much.


technically an 8th gen console, with a 7th gen GPU and a 6th gen CPU and not capable of running 8th gen multiformat games. Still 8th gen though... technically...
---
http://www.jvp-boston.org
#50BeastLeeAdamsPosted 2/5/2013 6:48:07 AM
Crysiania posted...
Witchers another series that shouldnt be played on anything except PC anyway.


Why?
---
I think everyone in the gaming world weather you are a Nintendrone, Sony Pony, Xbot or part of the Master Race can agree that Patcher should be fired.