Kingdom Come: Deliverance, the difference between PC and consoles widens

They all suffer from something. PC might look good but performance on higher settings is terrible even on beefy cards. Consoles, well I hope the upgraded versions get a patch or something. They don't look too good.

PC: 4K

Xbox One X: 1440p

PS4 Pro: 1080p

The textures appear to be of a much lower resolution on consoles. Understandable for PS4 Pro but there is no reason the X1X shouldn't have the same textures as PC on top settings. A patch might come later for that though. Aside from that the differences are pretty dramatic. That's a compressed youtube video so the quality isn't quite up there but the differences are easily visible still.

Xpotato's "True 4K" strikes again!

The game is rough around the edges but it looks fine overall to me on the X, more importantly I am actually enjoying the story and played it most of the night. Not worried about a few low res textures. Hopefully gets better later, but its good enough for now for me

Widens... as does the price!

Heard the game is good and has a great atmosphere but apparently it's a glitchfest. Which is kinda funny because it gets a lot of flack for bugs but Skyrim still manages to get perfect scores.

It has dated ass graphics so it's clear the dev's being shit.

I'm playing on the Pro and i'm simply loving this game. The story and characters are much better than i expected, the game is super deep and the world is huge and beautiful!

To be honest, this has to be the most impressive world design i have ever experienced! There are simply no invisible walls, you can enter every house, castle, building, door. Nothing is there for no reason. And before you say TES games have been doing that for ages, the difference is that KCD has zero loadings between in and out doors, city walls, etc. Navigation is 100% seamless, which is perfect for fans of exploration like me.

@PAL360: Probably why performance takes a huge hit too. I’ll sit this one out till they fix the performance and glitches.

That sounds great! I'm excited for this game, I'll definitely buy it, but probably wait until more bugs are sorted out.

I got this today and even though i choose my own graphic option i looked in GeForce experience and wow optimal settings is set so low. I have a 1080gtx I76700k 4.5ghz and optimal setting according to GeForce is 4 up from performance. That's bad.

I watched a couple trailers/videos yesterday after seeing that bumped thread, and only THEN discovered it's a CryEngine game. CE games run like shit on my laptop (Lichdom: Battlemage has issues even on min settings), yet I can max out Doom 2016 on Ultra at 720p with 40-50 fps. Disappointing, but I doubt it looks awful at low settings. I'm still interested in playing it. Not too often a game like this comes along.

@PAL360: someone was posting in the other thread that it was full of load screens - were they just bullshitting to crap on it?

It does have loading screens every time you die, load a game and during some conversations and cutscenes.

I meant when it comes to navigation, though. You can go anywhere, from the middle of a forest to the interior of a church inside a huge walled city without a single loading. You can see interiors through windows, raining outside when you are indoors, etc. To me that adds alot of immersion.

The Witcher 3 already did this seamless navigation very well, but in this game you can explore every building interior, not just a few key ones.

The load screens for conversations just about disappear when playing on an SSD.

I moved my game over to an SSD in order to improve streaming during exploration (and man does this game reward exploration!) and found out that as a side effect, most of the conversation loads are just a fade to black and conversation starts.

That said, even WITH the performance problems, this game is amazing.

Coming from such a small studio, i can look past the performance and mitigate them by tweaking some control panel settings.

If Bethesda gets a pass, surely a small studio deserves one.

All that hardware and looks mediocre compared to horizon even on a base PS4.

What i hate about PC, cards are never maxed out.

@navyguy21: I agree. An SSD is in my future plans, but one with a good size is so damn expensive!

Also, too bad it sucked review wise.

If you are planning on upgrading, you could go with an SSHD. They still hold a 256 mb cache or something like that, and have plenty of headroom for gaming. Although, you do have to load each game in individually so it does have some hiccuping at first.

Game is awesome. Combat can be brutal, though; you really have to master blocking to even stand a chance against some enemies.

Some near max settings shots at 2560 x 1080. I don't have the LoD or foliage distance sliders all the way up; they are a little more than halfway. Everything else is on ultra.

But according to that other thread if it's not X resolution/60fps it doesn't count. :P

Really doesn't look that impressive on any platform. It seems the project was a bit to ambitious for the dev team. Shitty ports on both consoles and its a jank fest on every platform.

Developer can't code.

@PAL360: Really? Because multiple reviews specifically mention invisible walls in abundance.

You mean my integrated graphics card pumps out 4k? Amazing.

No one cares about your shitty PC.

Is that suppose to be impressive?

Shit graphics + Bugs + scored worse than flippin Knack

Or is it that the CryEngine is whack?

How can it be shitty when this thread specifically stated that the difference between consoles and PC widens and shows 4k as PC resolution.

Cringus Maximus. He also says "consoles", but you're not going to pretend to be stupid enough to assume he means an Atari 2600.

Doesn't matter when less than 100 people will actually buy the game, lol.

Oh, you no read this section of the OP?

PC: 4K

Xbox One X: 1440p

PS4 Pro: 1080p

Don't blame me for you not reading or being stupid. :)

It topped the steam charts. Seems to be doing fairly well. 5th place with over 60K concurrent players.

If the OP goes back and edits the post to say "PC **(and by PC I mean the most obvious context to any reasonable person, not the "potato" that some petty fanboy is going to use for the sake of arguing semantics)

Then you would have no point. That's how robust your position is.

Arguing the definition of a "PC" was probably the first tactic ever employed in this forum. It was as cringe inducing then as it is now.

Very minor stuff.

Who is arguing about the definition of PC? Seems like you have a problem with the fact that PCs come in all shapes, sizes and configurations. Don't get triggered because PC offers options. I guess if someone makes a claim that the Xbox runs games in 4K with HDR it would be an accurate statement in your view. :)

I'm not going to wag my finger and say "You said XBOX, not XBOX One X. You lose." You're being petty. Get over it.

Last I check you lost it with my simple statement that my integrated graphics card can run games at 4k based on the OP. Seems like you need to get over it, while I continue to game on my "potato" running games at 4k (according to the OP).

The OP didn't say that. Your failure to apply any sort of reasoning lead you to that understanding. Talk about a clown show.

Jerking off to pixels. Nice.

so much for that "un compromised" 4k performance

game is still shite tho

@Juub1990: I only encountered 1 big glitch, I fell through the floor.....so I loaded the map screen, and went back to gameplay and it was fine after. Also, one of the voice actors repeated the same line twice in a row in a cutscene, I remember thinking if I had imagined it or maybe it was part of the story(maybe he had a stutter or something)....probably a bug.

But although I only played it a few hours, my initial feel is that it has less glitches than I remember in a game like Fallout LV or Skyrim at launch. So far the game mechanics feel less complex as well, it's more a cinematic game and that is fine, that's what I was looking for.

Bringing up potato or budget PC's is deflection unless the OP specifically mentions them or it's a pricing thread. Just like the reviews and analysis of the sites we use do. The OP is correct to state this is better on PC, as is Digital Foundry in over 95% of their comparisons.

Your argument would only hold weight if the thread specifically discussed budget PCs or pricing, in which case we recently had one of those and a budget PC did beat out the X1X. Take your posts there.

Well according to PC Gamers it’s compromised on a GTX 1080 Ti too

Yes, you typically pay more for the superior product. This practice has been common in human culture for several centuries.

You've just run out of ammo these days huh?

Solid 2/10

what are your laptop specs?

probably a bit of both

I have a PC and according to the OP, PC runs at 4k and better than consoles. :)

With PC not having a standard configuration the inclusion of the specs should be standard practice. Stating just PC is exceptionally vague and relays no useful information. :)

I can say the same about this response. I look forward to your "I must reply to Pedro because his words hurts me" response.

This is a gaming forum, we discuss gaming PCs. Rarely ever is a budget or potato PC the standard. Much like in many game reviews.

This game, like a significant majority of video games, is better played on PC.

You guys keep feeding Pedro. You deserve to be trolled by him.