They wouldn't want to play the game then. And so, the circle closes.

Well, more importantly, they are quite simply not done. I have no idea how Witcher 3 development went, but let's make an example:

Devs show a playable demo in which you see a beautifully rendered village, grand vista with seemingly vast plains and massive cities in the distance, and they show you how the main protagonist talks to a bunch of NPCs, how those NPCs walk around the village, and then show some combat.

Now, what happens is that they have some NPC pathfinding done, some scripting so they can show off NPCs "going about their lives" or whatever, they have grabbed bits of combat systems and monster AI from Witcher 2 and built upon it a bit to show off basic concepts of the combat, and that's it. Not only is the game presented on a massively overpowered rig as to not run into any performance problems, all that rig has to calculate is the tiny slice of what they have decided to present.

When it comes to the finished game, however, things are suddenly a lot more complicated. I have no idea of Witcher 3 featureset and I most certainly do not know how it had been achieved, nonetheless, in the finished product, the presented slice of the world is suddenly expanded upon massively - suddenly, what those NPCs do is not just pre-scripted, but calculated to some extent, based on a bunch of variables. Geralt's beard is growing, presumably the game keeps track of various happenings around the world, there's a ton more AI calculations it needs to be doing for opponents, and even in the biggest pitch, the game needs to run smoothly on a computer fulfilling minimal requirements. The difference is massive.

Funboy me does like to laugh. Thank you for providing in spades :-)

The only substantial difference between what I can make out from that video, and what I see in game, is that the fur on the wolves is massively simpler in the release. Background objects, water, clouds, everything else except shadows? Exactly the same.

I've got 12GB on my Titan X plus enough system RAM for the card to use the full 24GB swap. So I say again, as I have in the past - if you have enough machine to run it, the game looks amazing. Sorry if whatever sub-par setup you've got makes the game look less than perfect. Why would you think a brand new game would require less than brand new hardware to max out?

LOL. So landscape is the only thing that it takes to make a game. And nobody has ever called me a "fun"boy. I know at least have an image what "so stupid that it hurts" actually means. Wanna know? Find a mirror...

haha fuck you stupid fanboy tell me what happened to the effects in the video that arnt in your game, you cant right so then you outright ignore me, oh and btw even the pictures NVidia posted on their website with tweaked ini settings and 4 titans in SLI didn't look no where as good as the video so yeah fuck U

+1 for a well written explanation. I had tried something like this earlier, but my internet connection died. And your version is a lot more detailed and eloquent.

Oh yes, I'm such a horrible person for NOT agreeing to a Faustian pact with you that would require me to be your slave for your life after receiving that game and then saying "I'll never forget this".

The pathing is a bit drab, & AI just never seems to get much better over the years, yeah. Also, the rendering issues that happen at times, oh man, I could post pictures, but I don't. Have over 700+ taken so far, and barely into the game, still not done with Velen "?"...

I know what you mean, but really console programming did come first this time. I just understand why something may have had to give. Once I look at the massive scale of the game itself (that includes all they did get right mind you, because there's plenty of that too). I do hope they can work more on the PC version, but CDPR did plenty for Witcher 2 & 1, I love still. So, that's why I let it go.

I only can understand why it may have upset some.

I would say this is another typical butthurt response.

I used to think it meant Social Justice Warrior. But now it must mean something else since people here are throwing it out when you disagree with them.

I don't know, from the comparison vid, PC version seems noticeably prettier than the other two (not hugely, but the XBOX and PC version of Witcher 2 didn't differ that much either) - it's mostly tiny stuff, like PC having sharper textures, the fog looks much prettier (and is present), that kind of thing. The presence of similar features suggests to me that during the development, PC indeed did get its due time and did get some neat features, it just does look better than the console versions do. Regardless of all that, I find outrage about "it doesn't look as good as it did during the presentation!" to be quite silly.

Pre-release, and especially 2 years before release, developers are not showing a finished product, I think that has been stated already. What they are showing is their vision for what do they wish for the finished product to be - naturally, they'll try to show off the coolest shit they have made, and they do it with the intention of putting that into the game, and perhaps improving it too. But then, dream clashes with reality, and compromises need to be made. As far as I'm concerned, when someone believes in dreams of another person, any other person, he has then only himself to blame when those dreams let him down.

Well CDPR put out massive EE patches for TW1+2. Things other companies would have charged $$$ for.

The only way Breja can feel good about himself is convincing himself he is more mature than other people for enjoying indie platformers and adventure games instead of violent action games. Truly pathetic.
That was a long time ago. You are living in the past.

Does that imply you think you're more mature than the rest of us? :P