What do you think?. This option seems like it's going to be quite popular within the next year or so, when an array of developers will be pushing the 360 (and PS3) to their limits with demanding game engines that are memory rich.

The latest 360 build looks OK, but I don't think that's going to enough with this game, I think console gamers will naturally want some of the notable eye candy we PC gamers get to revel in currently. As someone who would like to see the series thrive, It would be a shame if the game doesn't make console gamers wow in wonder at how beautifully crafted the game world is.

Do you think the fact the PC game is DX9 will have any positive impact on the graphics of the console version?

I don't think they're going to be able to communicate that game's beauty through consoles the way that they can on the PC. Those consoles are built on technology from before the Witcher 2's engine was even being built. That said, the game was created with consoles in mind. It scales pretty well.

The fact that it's a DX9 game softens the contrast, I think, because they aren't doing the tessellation, etc that we see in some of the DX11 games. It could be a lot worse when you consider the fact that Crysis 2 in DX11 is extremely pronounced in its superiority over the DX9 console versions.

Possibly, but I think most likely it will just have worse visuals.

@Contro said:

Do you think the fact the PC game is DX9 will have any positive impact on the graphics of the console version?

There's a ton of games that are DX9 on PC and console yet still look far better on PC. This really isn't anything to do with what DirectX version is being used, I think The Witcher 2 is the best looking game out and that includes Battlefield 3 and Metro 2033 which are DX11 showcase titles.

Lower res textures, 25-30 FPS, longer load times, reduced draw distances and possibly pop-in, it'll be fine for a console release since most games are like this on those platforms. If I only owned a console I'd just be happy to be playing the game because it's fantastic, but at the same time I'm extremely glad I got to play it on PC silky smooth @ ultra.

i'm just fucking happy i will be able to play this game, it still looks great. And if i would try and run it on my macbook pro (yeye, i have a mbpro cause of educational reasons, and i'm more of a console gamer anyways) it would probably blow up.

Consoles don't have the memory to handle high res textures, so no.

@Sooty said:

@Contro said:

Do you think the fact the PC game is DX9 will have any positive impact on the graphics of the console version?

There's a ton of games that are DX9 on PC and console yet still look far better on PC. This really isn't anything to do with what DirectX version is being used, I think The Witcher 2 is the best looking game out and that includes Battlefield 3 and Metro 2033 which are DX11 showcase titles.

Lower res textures, 25-30 FPS, longer load times, reduced draw distances and possibly pop-in, it'll be fine for a console release since most games are like this on those platforms. If I only owned a console I'd just be happy to be playing the game because it's fantastic, but at the same time I'm extremely glad I got to play it on PC silky smooth @ ultra.

It's also missing SSAO so the lighting won't look anywhere near as good as it does on PC. The game will still look awesome.

@mosdl said:

Consoles don't have the memory to handle high res textures, so no.

So, why did BF3 include them? There might be a BF3 equivalent thing, as W2 is on two discs as well.

@AlexW00d said:

@mosdl said:

Consoles don't have the memory to handle high res textures, so no.

So, why did BF3 include them? There might be a BF3 equivalent thing, as W2 is on two discs as well.

I should have said it can't handle the high res textures the PC version uses. The 360 BF3 high res textures were just the normal textures - non harddisk 360s got lower res textures I believe, while the high res ones had to be installed.

@Demoskinos said:

@AlexW00d Witcher 2 is on 2 discs because it's freaking massive. The PC version clocks in at 14GB if I remember right and that's before the new content.

It's 17GB actually, and that's pre-2.0. The PC version of BF3 is 15GB too. My point is, maybe they'll have an install thing on disc so to help alleviate load times and pop-in, which is what the BF3 install did too.

@mosdl said:

@AlexW00d said:

@mosdl said:

Consoles don't have the memory to handle high res textures, so no.

So, why did BF3 include them? There might be a BF3 equivalent thing, as W2 is on two discs as well.

I should have said it can't handle the high res textures the PC version uses. The 360 BF3 high res textures were just the normal textures - non harddisk 360s got lower res textures I believe, while the high res ones had to be installed.

Yeah, my doubts are high the 360 could handle hi-res textures for the Witcher.

@BrockNRolla said:

@mosdl said:

@AlexW00d said:

@mosdl said:

Consoles don't have the memory to handle high res textures, so no.

So, why did BF3 include them? There might be a BF3 equivalent thing, as W2 is on two discs as well.

I should have said it can't handle the high res textures the PC version uses. The 360 BF3 high res textures were just the normal textures - non harddisk 360s got lower res textures I believe, while the high res ones had to be installed.

Yeah, my doubts are high the 360 could handle hi-res textures for the Witcher.

There is no way, as the 360 (and the PS3) don't have enough ram or vram to handle them. But since the consoles only render in 720p, the loss in texture resolution isn't that bad.