297 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

@Neofelis Nebulosa, in our 2018 dreams.

[fchopin]

Not impressed with the new trailer.

[Dutchess]

It looks gorgeous. My laptop will weep.

[slimgrin]

fchopin wrote...

Not impressed with the new trailer.

Really? I was petty amazed by how detailed and big Novigrad seems. Graphics are still being worked on but it looked beautiful.

[Kalas747]

Those shots look nice. I don't care about graphics in video games tho. If the game is great it won't be because of swaying grass and little dust particles.

[Eternal Phoenix]

slimgrin wrote...

fchopin wrote...

Not impressed with the new trailer.

Really? I was petty amazed by how detailed and big Novigrad seems. Graphics are still being worked on but it looked beautiful.

He/she was probably disappointed with how short it was just like me.

[fchopin]

slimgrin wrote...

fchopin wrote...

Not impressed with the new trailer.

Really? I was petty amazed by how detailed and big Novigrad seems. Graphics are still being worked on but it looked beautiful.

It looked ok, CDPR just put a few scenes together. Geralt looked terrible.

[spirosz]

I can run the TW2 on max, so hopefully I'll still be able to run this beauty.

[In Exile]

It's honestly the first medieval open world game that looks like it actually has cities. That's right Skyrim/Oblivion, I'm looking at you.

[Jestina]

It might be pretty...but you have zero input on creating your own character to play in it.

[Jozape]

Jestina wrote...

It might be pretty...but you have zero input on creating your own character to play in it.

I agree, but you can't fault the Poles for being ambitious in other aspects of the game. That town looks very impressive.

[spirosz]

Jestina wrote...

It might be pretty...but you have zero input on creating your own character to play in it.

That is established with the first game though, so why would that matter? 

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

Not to mention The Witcher without Geralt is essentially Batman without Batman.

People seem to forget this is based off a book series.

[slimgrin]

SergeantSnookie wrote...

Not to mention The Witcher without Geralt is essentially Batman without Batman.

That's a good way to put it. I understand some folks want a blank slate character, but that's not this game. You stll have the power to shape the story, and to a lesser extent, his character. If they keep making Witcher games without Geralt, it won't feel right to me.

Modifié par slimgrin, 09 décembre 2013 - 04:43 .

[deuce985]

My current PC could handle it fine but this game deserves to be played on ultra so I'll be building a new PC for it.

[Joy Divison]

renjility wrote...

It looks gorgeous. My laptop will weep.

So this.

[Eternal Phoenix]

spirosz wrote...

Jestina wrote...

It might be pretty...but you have zero input on creating your own character to play in it.

That is established with the first game though, so why would that matter? 

It allows for less role-playing of a character. Geralt is not only an established character but there are things pre-determined about him that you can't change or influence. I understand it's to stay true to the lore and background of Geralt but it means it ends up lacking the depth of other RPG's in that department.

Which is why I look forward especially to Cyberpunk to see what Cdproject are truly capable of without restrictions.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

Kaiser Arian wrote...

@Neofelis Nebulosa, in our 2018 dreams.

Please, by 2018 we'll have octa-cores maybe even more and the GPUs will be around three to four times as powerful as those we have right now. Also, 2018 12K gaming will be the norm.


Do you know ANYTHING about PC gaming at all?

It's just 5 years from now.
You'r TOO optimistic. What if they actually fail to develop significantly faster CPUs just like in mid 20(00)s? 
And consider that my cousin cannot afford my 2011 CPU: Core i5 2500K 3.3GHZ
Because in our currency a new hardware may cost a whole monthly salary or two. 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Kaiser Arian wrote...

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

Kaiser Arian wrote...

@Neofelis Nebulosa, in our 2018 dreams.

Please, by 2018 we'll have octa-cores maybe even more and the GPUs will be around three to four times as powerful as those we have right now. Also, 2018 12K gaming will be the norm.


Do you know ANYTHING about PC gaming at all?

It's just 5 years from now.
You'r TOO optimistic. What if they actually fail to develop significantly faster CPUs just like in mid 20(00)s? 
And consider that my cousin cannot afford my 2011 CPU: Core i5 2500K 3.3GHZ
Because in our currency a new hardware may cost a whole monthly salary or two. 

 

I have doubts multi-monitor gaming will become mainstream, but there is nothing out of the ordinary with anything Neofelis Nebulosa has said.

The idea of having graphics chips 3-4x more powerful than current ones, along with octocore CPUs and 4K gaming monitors as the norm, for example, would even be a conservative outlook. 

Could claim octo-cores are already mainstream, depending on whether you consider AMD's CPUs to have eight cores (instead of four).

Modifié par CrustyBot, 09 décembre 2013 - 06:11 .

[ObserverStatus]

Hm, maybe one of these days I'll force myself to finish TW1

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

My main focus was the speed of CPUs not their number of cores.
In 1998 we had Pentium 200 MHZ, in 2004 we had Pentium 4 2.6 GHZ (more than 13 times stronger, without considering boss and cache). It took a long time to create dual-core CPUs and the best they could do was to produce 3.4 GHZ CPUs until then.

Modifié par Kaiser Arian, 09 décembre 2013 - 06:30 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

TipsLeFedora wrote...

The idea of more cores is troubling dhe to the amount of energy that these cores dissipate when placed together. More cores require a more complex cooling systems and these are one of the arguments for the collapse of the beloved Moore's law. One counter measure proposed is the idea of 3 dimensional chips executing instructions in parallel.

Depends, really. Silicon is likely to still be viable until around 2020-2025 if it takes the same direction it has been going in (shrinking the die to allow for extra cores/higher clock speeds without pushing the thermal envelope), and I think I've talked with you before about people researching graphene as a potential replacement for that. And although I doubt mass producing integrated circuits on graphene will be ready then, it still has potential down the line. Imagine a CPU with a 400+ GHz clock rate lol.

But if we are talking specifically about eight-core CPUs, I am not seeing an issue. They are already available in the high end server market, with eight core Xeons and 16 core (8 module) Opterons. 

Kaiser Arian wrote...

My main focus was the speed of CPUs not their number of cores.
In 1998 we had Pentium 200 MHZ, in 2004 we had Pentium 4 2.6 GHZ (more than 13 times stronger, without considering boss and cache). It took a long time to create dual-core CPUs and the best they could do was to produce 3.4 GHZ CPUs until then.

It's more than just clock rates, though. IPC and parallel processing (taking advantage of dem cores) have eliminated the need to boost clock rates as the primary method of increasing performance. I mean, it is still important but refinements in the IPC (instructions per clock) allows a CPU to be faster while having lower clock rates.

Case in point - your 3.3Ghz 2500k is probably faster than the 4GHz FX-8350.

Besides, you could theoretically overclock current CPUs to beyond 7-8GHz and have them run stable, but the cooling required (LN2) is insane and the lifespan would be incredibly diminshed.

Anyway this has little to do with Witcher 3. So I'll get back on top and say that I am looking forward to the game.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 09 décembre 2013 - 06:58 .