CD Projekt Red: PC is most powerful platform "but that might change"

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]SOFTWARE RENDERING=PLUG AND PLAY HARDWARE=INSTALL BUGGY ASS DRIVERS nameless12345

Software rendering would be relevant if games used ray-tracing or voxels.

But almost all games today use polygons and for those hardware (GPU) acceleration is better.

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]

There exist an EDIT button in the dropdown menu in the right corner of every post. USE IT.
A lot of threads are bloated with your garbage. Stop it.

freedomfreak

How do you get the black layout?faizan_faizan

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]

There exist an EDIT button in the dropdown menu in the right corner of every post. USE IT.
A lot of threads are bloated with your garbage. Stop it.

faizan_faizan

Top right near your username. The two little a icons.

Never once seen a video game that's not compatible with a cpu for software rendering.

Seen plenty of games not compatible with video cards like crysis 3 and my 8600 gts.

Translation:

PS4 gonna be more powerful than average gaming PCs, therefore we shall optimize Witcher 3 to it and then scale it down to most gaming PCs and offer some minor extra tweaks to the small minority of owners of more powrful gaming PCs.

Noone should be surprised by this really, every console generation started like this.

If you want to spend 500$ to make game better than software that should be your choice and it should be your choice you dont need a goddamn video card to play it.

epicgames was gonna switch to software rendering when intel was making  larrabee cpu but they cancelled it dumbasses.

They sound pretty stupid in that article. The PC I am building now is more powerful that any console coming out .AmazonTreeBoa

mind me asking how much your spending on it?

if intel didnt cancel their 32 core larrabee cpu we wouldnt even need goddamn graphics cards.

if intel didnt cancel their 32 core larrabee cpu we wouldnt even need goddamn graphics cards.

nextgenjoke

Hahahaha.  I can build a PC right now that would destroy the next gen consoles. 

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]SOFTWARE RENDERING=PLUG AND PLAY HARDWARE=INSTALL BUGGY ASS DRIVERS nextgenjoke

Software rendering would be relevant if games used ray-tracing or voxels.

But almost all games today use polygons and for those hardware (GPU) acceleration is better.

I'm not sure you quite understand what a gap is there between modern GPUs and modern CPUs.

Let's just say modern CPUs are about 30-times less effective at rendering graphics on their own than a dedicated GPU is.

To task the CPU to do everything you would need a heck of a CPU and those aren't affordable/don't exist on the consumer market yet.

Infact, the CPU is less and less relevant and modern GPUs can be easily tasked with a lot of tasks that a CPU would otherwise do. (i.e. "GPGPU")

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]

if intel didnt cancel their 32 core larrabee cpu we wouldnt even need goddamn graphics cards.

freedomfreak

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]

if intel didnt cancel their 32 core larrabee cpu we wouldnt even need goddamn graphics cards.

nextgenjoke

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"]How do you get the black layout?freedomfreak

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] Have you bought the latest Tomb Raider?DragonfireXZ95

Its kinda sad CD Projekt  have said this after the good PC ports they been releasing. Now they go and speak nonsence.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]

if intel didnt cancel their 32 core larrabee cpu we wouldnt even need goddamn graphics cards.

nextgenjoke

modern games are no more advanced than quake 2 actually lol,biggest graphics evolution from programmable pixel shaders.

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="nextgenjoke"] I cant play it probley 8600 gts it'a not compatible lol like crysis 3. Never ran into compatibility issues with software rendering look ps3's cell processor risc cpu  runs quake 2 software mode designed for x86 processors just fine.nextgenjoke

replace pixel shaders with something that's more friendly with cpu.

Developers are too lazy to employ cpu rendering techniques and hardware rendering techniques in their game.

pixel shaders technique was not born on cpu it's born on gpu it's a video card graphics technique  so that's why you just dont use them on a cpu doing software rendering.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="faizan_faizan"]How do you get the black layout?faizan_faizan

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="faizan_faizan"]How do you get the black layout?faizan_faizan

once you go black...

If they took the pixel shader crap out of crysis you could run it easily with a cpu.

PEECEE is dead GDDR5 for life.

Developers are too lazy to employ cpu rendering techniques and hardware rendering techniques in their game.

nextgenjoke

A lot of these same "lazy" developers also made the MS-DOS games you so like. I think they know better than you what's better or not.

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]

Developers are too lazy to employ cpu rendering techniques and hardware rendering techniques in their game.

jun_aka_pekto

A lot of these same "lazy" developers also made the MS-DOS games you so like. I think they know better than you what's better or not.

everyone called doom3 a flop and rage sucked lol.

rip idsoftware sorry video cards killed your company.

Actually, he said The PC was the lead platform for Witcher 2 because it was the most powerful, but that might change in the future, - Meaning, the lead platform is for their games not the power of the system. CDPR arent dumb like the console kids on this forum who thing that a console will be able to beat ever evolving hardare. 

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"][QUOTE="freedomfreak"] [spoiler] [/spoiler] Zaibach

once you go black...

crytek too busy exploiting every graphics card technique known to man and forgot about the gameplay.

everyone called doom3 a flop and rage sucked lol.

 

rip idsoftware sorry video cards killed your company.

nextgenjoke

Graphics cards killed the company that was the most responsible for pushing them to the consumers?

That's funny though crysis 3 doesnt support tesselation because graphics cards cant even handle their own techniques with playable framerates lmao.

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]

everyone called doom3 a flop and rage sucked lol.

 

rip idsoftware sorry video cards killed your company.

nameless12345

Graphics cards killed the company that was the most responsible for pushing them to the consumers?

eh, he doesn't give any hard evidence or facts or anything. Just mere speculation on his part and it sounds like PR crap to me to get everyone hyped for TW3 across all platforms. 

I would love if it were true cos then we would all have the same game and no compromises but PC will always have stronger hardware year in year out than a fixed system. He just sounds like he's pandering here

seanmcloughlin

quake 1=1996

quake 2=1997

quake 3=1999

Video cards caused them to take longer to create games and suckier games.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"]

everyone called doom3 a flop and rage sucked lol.

 

rip idsoftware sorry video cards killed your company.

nextgenjoke

Graphics cards killed the company that was the most responsible for pushing them to the consumers?

No it's not.

Q3 had amazing graphics when it came out and set the graphics standards for a few years. (untill Unreal Engine 2 came out)

Quake II engine was popular also but soon got dethroned by Unreal Engine.

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

 

Graphics cards killed the company that was the most responsible for pushing them to the consumers?

nameless12345

No it's not.

Q3 had amazing graphics when it came out and set the graphics standards for a few years. (untill Unreal Engine 2 came out)

Quake II engine was popular also but soon got dethroned by Unreal Engine.

Video cards are the reason there was 2 year gap between quake 2 and quake 3 and they created a much inferior game.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"] quake 3 is a lazily built game compared to quake 2.nextgenjoke

No it's not.

Q3 had amazing graphics when it came out and set the graphics standards for a few years. (untill Unreal Engine 2 came out)

Quake II engine was popular also but soon got dethroned by Unreal Engine.

Q3 focused on the multi-player and it's also the best MP Quake game, imo.

Q1 & QII had a average SP mode thrown in there but it's not worth bragging about.

Games like Unreal and Half-Life had far better single-player than the Quake games, imo.

[QUOTE="nextgenjoke"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

 

No it's not.

Q3 had amazing graphics when it came out and set the graphics standards for a few years. (untill Unreal Engine 2 came out)

Quake II engine was popular also but soon got dethroned by Unreal Engine.

nameless12345

Q3 focused on the multi-player and it's also the best MP Quake game, imo.

Q1 & QII had a average SP mode thrown in there but it's not worth bragging about.

Games like Unreal and Half-Life had far better single-player than the Quake games, imo.