Witcher 3 is 30FPS on consoles

30 fps was a given, I wonder about resolution though. PS4 should run it at 1080p with nearly max settings, aside from AA. most importantly, there better be no screen tear.

i stopped playing the Witcher 2 because I couldn't stand 40 frames per second. So..consoles...good luck with that.

As long as the frame rate is a solid 30 then I don't see what the problem is. Then again there are a ton of gamers out there these days that care more about resolution and frame rates then they do about the actual gameplay.

Targeting 60 woulda been entirely pointless for a console RPG.

Here is to hoping they design the combat around a controller, so its actually fun to play.

30FPS is fine... as long as it looks amazing!

it always go below though. =/

Why do console peasants always imply or think that frame rate is only relevant to camera panning or that camera panning in anything other than an FPS is not important? Oh yeah, because they're naive, technically uneducated gullible console gamers.

That and damage control. Example - '30 FPS is fine'. Boast about 60 FPS (which isn't even 60 FPS, example - Killzone and BF4) when it's relevant to giving your favourite console a favourable pro.

yet you wasted 100 dollars on an i7 when you could of had the same performance from an i5, atleast for gaming if thats all you do

Probably because its true.

If you think targeting 60fps in an RPG using a controller is an efficient use of system resources, i would refrain from insulting anyone.

Afterall the witcher devs are highly talented PC developers that make some of the best looking games on any platform.. and they seem to agree. If you think they are naive and technically uneducated, you better have some serious game development pedigree to back up those statements else look like an arse.

You just proved my point. Example - "using a controller".

Gives me less work to do.

For a game of this type 30 FPS is the right choice, at least on consoles. PC games should never be locked to a specific frame rate.

I don't care, as long as I can play it on my Next-Gen consoles, I'm happy.

It will? I see right here that it costs a lot more than $400. Closer to $800. Nice troll attempt though.

eh as long as I get to play it and it doesint chuged badly im fine.I wanted to play witcher 2 but lacked a 360.

Witcher 3 is 30FPS on consoles

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

Dat next gen cinematic feel.

Why bother with the 4960X when the 4930K will do everything and for £400 less....

Well that should be obviously, quick snaps of the camera are alot less common on controllers, and you can add acceleration to make it much less jarring at 30fps.

60fps would be the biggest waste of system resources imaginable.

lol wut?

what would reviews do when witcher 2 reviewed great?

30 fps shudnt matter much

Wow, the minute PS4 and Xbone can't do more than 30 FPS on a game, consolites are all "I don't need it, RPGs are good at 30 FPS". Wowzers

Meh I'll just get it on PC. Witcher 3 is a game that needs to be respected, if the option is available it should be played on PC.

That console optimization. Targeting 30fps because your console would either melt or the game will look Mario 64 if they went for 60.

next gen consoles = fail

Whats seems to be the confusion? RPGs are one of the least fps sensitive genres around as they are relatively slow paced and get little benefit from the reduced input lag.

devoting system resources to achieving 60fps in lieu of on screen asset quality, makes very little sense.

It will also be 720p on the x1 and 900 or 1080p on the PS4

It's the same game across all platforms regardless. Chances are the rig needed to play TW3 at the PS4 visuals and at 30FPS on PC is going to be pretty steep. I'm very happy to play the Console version, just as I was with Witcher 2.

You do realize that the Witcher series are action RPGs that all occur in real time and require dodging and such, right? They're not turn-based. So yes, the games do benefit greatly from 60fps, just like all games. It's complete myth that some games "don't need it;" every single genre (except maybe turn based strategy) is better at 60fps than at 30fps. The whole "only racing, fighting, and competitive FPS games should be at 60fps" mentality just comes from the fact that those are usually the only genres within the console realm that ever even bother aiming for 60fps.

Every game is better at 60fps. EVERY GAME.

I have one important question! Lems, ARE YOU READY FOR 30fps/720p announcement? Booyah

k want that redhead sex scenes at 60PFSu!!

TRISHç

And why do those games target it when others dont? Because those are the genres that benefit the most from it. Thats where the mentality comes from, professional game designers weighing the cost of 60fps and deeming it unnecessary.

Every game is not better at 60fps, because running at 60fps in real world scenarios demands tradeoffs.

The every game is better 60fps mentality only works in a world where every user has zero hardware limitations, a world that doesnt exist. Otherwise you might as well just conclude every game is better at 6000fps.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that exactly what the PC platform is. The creator of Star Citizen seems to agree with me. The only limits on PC is your wallet.

60FPS is not "unnecessary". The reason devs have to decide is because of the consoles limited hardware.... And yes, every game running at 60FPS is better.

Rendering videos son

I still say a 3930K would of been better. Runs cooler than Hotwell, has more cores and would encode faster.

Not really, the price to performance ratio isn't justifiable. Below the 3930K only wins in one category (the overall block not the benchmarks), I mean sure performance is king and it does indeed outperform but not enough for the price difference

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-3930K

Still very disappointed with Haswell performance thermal wise.

Eh, stick a hyper 212 Evo on it and it's more manageable. I don't like seeing a CPU reach the 70s but they are rated pretty high

My i5 never reaches 60 though

I mean, compared to Sandy, both Ivy and Haswell have been extremely hot. Intel cheaped out with them. That and the high degradation on Haswells compared to Ivy and Sandy.

No. Even with one of the most powerful supercomputers in the world, pixar is hardware limited and cannot render their movies in real time despite only being 24fps.

Every game dev out there is governed by hardware limitations, and are perfectly capable of creating a game that would bring even the most powerful PC to a screeching halt... but in the interest of actually selling games, they make graphical compromises in favor of playable framerates.

The simple fact that devs target 30fps shows it isnt necessary. It might be preferable, but not necessary.

But devs have to make decisions based on PC limited hardware as well. How many PC games you playing with realtime ray tracing? Realistic fur and hair modeling/physics? The reason those things dont happen is because the framerate would be unplayable on any consumer grade PC. There are always tradeoffs.

What a stupid association. Have you seen the frame sizes for a Pixar movie? They also have a thing called "graphics options".

ROFFL! I game primarily on PC, idiot. The statement still rings absolutely true.

Let me put it another way. Let's say you haven't upgraded your graphics card in a little while and are playing a game like CoD on PC. Would you:

A. Turn down your settings a bit to achieve 60FPS

or..

B. Keep settings ramped up so you can die a lot in pretty graphics land?

A is the obvious choice. However, if you turn the eye candy down to get a high framerate in Skyrim, then you deserve to have your graphics card ripped out of your rig and fed to you.

So leave the PC elitism fuckery out of this. You sound like a monumental douchetard.

I would turn down the eye candy in Skyrim in a second to get 60fps. I can't stand first person games that don't run consistently at 60fps (occasional dips aside).

Again, the Witcher 3 is an action RPG, and thus benefits CONSIDERABLY by being at a higher framerate just like all the other Witcher games. Are they unplayable at 30fps? No, but they certainly are a lot better. Same with stuff like Dark Souls or Kingdoms of Amalur.

Not even worth gloating over. Single card systems are for peasants.

Next gen indeed lol.