The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt has been bathed in critical acclaim over the last week or so, but one question that continues to pop up around the web concerns the game's performance on the PlayStation 4. Various reviews from other publications state that there are noticeable frame rate issues, and that bugs and glitches rear their ugly heads on occasion. Of course, no one wants to play a title that doesn't run very well on the console of their choice – it's frustrating and equally upsetting to think that a product that you've paid for doesn't operate as well as it should. Fortunately, we've now spent hours upon hours in Geralt's shoes, exploring every nook and cranny of the open world map and slaying any beast that dared to cross our path. As a result, we'd like to think that we know how The Witcher 3 handles on Sony's new-gen console.
First, however, we should point out that this article is based on the game with its pre-launch patch installed. This update only recently released, meaning that it was only available to download after many of the aforementioned reviews were initially published. The patch notes mention that stability and performance issues have been addressed, and we would assume that means that some if not all of the technical problems alluded to in the reviews of other publications have been fixed or tweaked to some degree. This means that we've essentially been playing the same game that you may be buying next week.
So, how does The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt run on PS4? Fortunately, the good news is that, in our experience, the game runs quite well. We've suffered no crashes, no particularly damning frame rate drops, and no significant bugs or glitches. Taking into account how massive the world is, how much stuff is crammed into it, and the fact that you can play for hours on end and not see a single loading screen, we dare even say that its technical performance is rather impressive.
That's not to say that it's perfect, though. We can tell you that there are indeed frame rate drops, and yes, they are quite prevalent. However, these drops are minor at best, and don't differ from the kind of performance loss that's common in open world titles like Grand Theft Auto V or Watch Dogs. When things get especially hectic, or you're roaming around a specifically detailed environment, the release does tend to drop a couple of frames. Those of you, who, like us, play video games almost all of the time, will no doubt notice the falls in performance – but if you're not someone who's playing games as consistently as we are, then we'd hazard a guess that you won't pay them much mind.
As hinted, The Witcher 3 boasts an absolutely huge open world that's fully explorable, but the best part is that there are almost no loading screens. You can wander from one corner of the map to the other without encountering a pause – and that's quite an achievement. Most loading screens that you'll see only appear when you decide to fast travel or enter a specific interior. For example, the title's biggest city, Novigrad, is divided from the rest of the map by a load screen. We have come across a few instances where the game throws in a load screen as it transitions to a cutscene, but these have been few and far between, and last several seconds at most.
Bugs and glitches have fared similarly. We've seen Geralt's horse, Roach, clip into buildings and get stuck inside of them, and we've seen non-playable characters hover in mid-air for a few seconds, but it's safe to say that these occurrences are all but expected in open world titles these days, as disappointing as that is. Thankfully, we've encountered no game breaking bugs whatsoever.
Moving onto how the release looks, the game's world is a sight to behold. The art direction is fantastic, and the developer has made full use of varying vibrant colours. The draw distance is impressive – you can gaze into the horizon and still pick out some of the smaller environmental details – but having said that, sharp eyed players are bound to spot some pop-in here and there. Foliage, shadows, and trees can spring into existence if you're moving at speed or swing the camera around quickly, but overall, the title hides its limitations fairly well – you'll likely only spot them if you're on the lookout for such things.
In conclusion, you really shouldn't worry too much about how The Witcher 3 runs on the PS4; in our experience, it performs as well as it needs to. That said, the fact that the game can't quite stick to its 30 frames-per-second target is somewhat disappointing, even if it hasn't impacted our enjoyment of Geralt's adventure thus far.
You can read our full and final thoughts on The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt in our review, which will be published before the game is released on the 19th May. Until then, have we put your mind at ease? Count the frames in the comments section below.
Comments 52
If anyone has any specific questions about the game's technical performance, feel free to copy me into your comment with @ShogunRok and I'll do my best to answer.
In conclusion, you really should just get a gaming pc.
fixed
@TOMBOY25 I'm glad someone got that out of the way!
@TOMBOY25 haha indeed. 60 fps 1440p ultra settings here I come
Nice write up. I can't wait to get my hands on it. @ShogunRok You think you will have a review up before the 19th?
I don't know about you guys, but if I was to play this on console, ps4 or xbox, I would have much rather if developers made the game run in 720p upscaled to 1080p and give us a silky smooth 60 fps. I dont understand where along the lines devs decided the framerate was the acceptable thing to compromise on.. that is essentially saying that visuals is more important than gameplay. It's just disappointing to me. :/ thankfully I have the great fortune of being able to play games on console or pc,but for people who only own a console it sucks they don't get that choice.
@mitcHELLspawn THIS, i can't stand 30fps it really ruins games for me.
@Splat "You can read our full and final thoughts on The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt in our review, which will be published before the game is released on the 19th May. Until then, have we put your mind at ease? Count the frames in the comments section below."
@TOMBOY25 - HAHA I don't know how I missed that?
That's mostly good news, thanks for the feature
Yeah, yeah, the gaming PC debate really is getting old. I've almost built my PC but I won't be banging on about playing games on it, because only you yourself really cares. It's a PS site, stop trying to sour everything with the "PC is better" spiel. Of course it will run better on a PC, I'd be shocked if it didn't, this article is about how it runs on the PS4. I'm happy to hear that it's a decent runner, as I was starting to get concerned that there were going to be some major problems.
If the frame rate dips even once in a while I won't be playing this game! But in all seriousness I can't freaking wait to play this game!
@mitcHELLspawn I disagree. A smooth 30 frames-per-second is perfectly acceptable for most games. Obviously, 60 frames-per-second is better, but I'd much rather the developer pushes the fidelity in most cases - especially in an RPG like this.
30fps is an acceptable frame rate as long as it is consistent. Many big open world games run at 30fps and play smoothly and I have no concerns about playing this at 30fps either.
Destiny is a great example of a game that runs smoothly at 30fps. It may have its faults in terms of 'story' and repetitive nature of looting etc but from a game play perspective, it plays incredibly well, the action and the solid mechanics all work. You get the occasional loading screen when moving from one section to another - particularly when on a sparrow but all the weapons feel as you would expect, hit detection is good and the pace doesn't seem to suffer because of 30fps.
All of Naughty Dogs PS3 games are also 30fps and we know how great they were. Would you not buy Uncharted 4 if that turns out to be 1080p/30fps? What about Batman: Arkham Knight? I bet City and Asylum ran at 30fps. I believe Bloodbourne also runs at 30fps (mostly) and that is a highly rated game and according to some, features the best 'combat' of that type too. I could go on and list many other very popular, high rated 30fps games that all play very smoothly and certainly don't suffer as a result.
The Witcher 3 is not the first big open world 30fps game and I very much doubt it will be the last. The size of the world and lack of loading screens is incredible.
@mitcHELLspawn While the 30fps doesn't really bother me I do agree that it should have been 720p upscaled. They could have used the extra bit of juice elsewhere.
Im just happy that I'll have access to this game without a PC and still get to enjoy it. Its clearly an enjoyable game even with the issues mentioned above. Been waiting for this one since E 2013.
The problem with favoring higher graphical fidelity and 30fps (which is perfect in theory) is that if the framerate suffers even just 5 fps you're going to notice. And it starts to actually affect the playability of the game. It's fine, iin theory, but most of the time the games don't end up locked at 30, which is why I'd prefer a lower res and 60 fps. That way if it takes a dip you're still in the 45-55 range.
@ShogunRok thanks, I know now I'll be hunting happily come Tuesday.
@JaxonH I would rather have a consistent 30fps even if the resolution has to be 900p or even 720p to achieve this than 60fps that can drop to 55 or even 45fps. Frame rate drops are far more noticeable and have a bigger impact on the gaming experience than a few extra pixels or a lower fixed frame rate.
These can be overlooked in certain circumstances as long as they are infrequent, not at important parts like the middle of combat and the game is incredible overall although I would still prefer a slightly lower resolution - say 900p upscaled than 1080p if it stops all frame rate drops.
@BAMozzy
Agreed. Framerate always trumps resolution. But I don't notice anything that's above the 45-50 range. 30 I can notice though. And DEFINITELY can notice dips below 30.
Its not so much the actual frame rate itself but the drop that is noticeable - particularly if it drops by a quarter. You become accustomed to how the game feels and plays so when it stutters due to frame rate drop it's noticeable. Even though the frame rate itself is higher than 30fps, its the fact that it changes that's noticeable.
@Crimson_Ridley you really should tag who you're talking to instead of just saying things. I really hope it wasn't to me because I was just replying to someone else's comment on the subject.. and besides, it's a comment section of an article about framerate etc of course comparisons to other platforms are going to come up. Sounds to me like you're just sour if anyone mentions ps4 might not be the best everything.
@get2sammyb yuck lol. Honestly man I used to feel the same way, until I had the chance to replay some of my favorite games in 60 fps after playing them on console. The difference is night and day to me. And the worst problem with 30 fps to me is that any dips whatsoever are absolutely atrocious and directly affect the gameplay. Even if it dips to 25 - 23 during combat with a few enemies on screen that affects the game terribly. The witcher 3 is extremely fast paced combat which makes it perfectly suited for 60 fps. Everything else in the game would work fine with 30 I suppose, as long as there were no dips, but there are :/
@mitcHELLspawn To be fair, I haven't noticed any jerking dips in combat - it's usually always when you're on horseback and turn a corner. Which is preferable!
Is it really necessary to have over 30fps on an action game? I can understand for a shooter or a racing game, but it doesn't strike me as all too important to put this at 60.
@NomNom Depends how hectic the combat is, I suppose. Fighting games, for example, need a solid 60fps to even be considered by the competitive community. Games like Devil May Cry, that hinge heavily on reaction-based combat that requires a lot of precise timing arguably need it, too. Personally, I think The Witcher, while combat can be hectic, doesn't necessarily need 60fps. It's a very reactive combat system where you need to think a little strategically. If it was all-out attack/dodge/attack at lighting speeds then maybe it'd be a different story.
Witcher 3 is best on PC? and I was gonna get it on Ps4. Thanks guys for letting me know that the PC I have which is used for typing up articles & visual novels (2.4ghz Core2Duo, 4GB ddr2 ram, radeon hd 6670) can run Witcher 3 better than the Ps4. I'll be able to save myself a bit of money on the purchase now
@BAMozzy destiny was not that big of a open world and had little to no content in it. While uncharted was never a open world game. Those type of games are easier to hit a higher res and frame simply because they are so controlled or limited on things on screen. Witcher 3 has massive amounts of plant life, animals monsters and humans, all in a huge open world. Only game that comes close is gtav and watch dogs except that the witcher has tons of content vs watch dogs and GTA v
@NomNom it is, every game its better at 60, theres no other way around
Either way I'm in it all the way, already bought and preloaded the digital edition. I'm sure it'll be awesome.
@mitcHELLspawn I was talking to everyone that constantly makes these comparisons and has to shove down everyone's throats that PC gaming is better. I know the PS4 isn't the best platform, as the PC is better. In fact, it annoys me that the next-gen isn't really a step up from last-gen, but the internet is so annoying with it's constant PC master race talk.
@JaxonH Depends on what games you play. Trust me, if you're playing something fast paced like a shooter or a racing game, you will see a massive difference. I used to not be able to tell, but I can notice it easily now on just about any game. Youtube for example supports 60 FPS videos but as I was watching one, I could tell it was kind of dipping in the 40-50's.
@raptor I don't know if your version of Destiny is different but I think the open world size of the planets are quite big and have quite a few enemies constantly spawning with the ability to have multiple players in them - also frequent public events too that increase the enemy count.
I very much doubt that the Witcher 3 has NPC's and enemies actively going about their business in areas you are are nowhere near but use some clever programming to load them in making it seem like they were always there. Novigrad, I hear does have a bit of loading. Apart from the villages/towns you rarely see more than 5 or 6 people/enemies in a group in the video's. With all the trees etc, you probably won't see them spawn in but doesn't mean they were there all the time.
The point is though that all these games are at 30fps and deliver good action, solid mechanics and smooth gameplay. A lot of the highest rated games and many Game of the Years are actually 30fps. Infamous Second Son, GTAv, DA:I, Far Cry 4, Watchdogs, Bloodbourne etc all run at 30fps
@BAMozzy pls don't call them planets 1 map does not make it a planet. Destiny is a small game there's a loading screen and instancing everywhere. To even compare it with the game you mention it would have to do a lot more than have enemies on the map. Any game can place enemies on the map. Its how Manny the diversity the way they evovle around you and more. DA was a boring graphical mess, infamous was the same as it always was pretty and linier with gimicky powers. While infamous to achieve what it did sufferers in other area. A lack of crouds low people count and emtpy world. No vegetation or any world variety outside of small area story zones. bloodbourne is not even open world. you get tons of assets in closed off worlds.
@raptor Regardless of what you think about these games, the point is they are ALL 30fps and don't suffer as a result. Destiny does have 'Planets' rather than maps. Just because these planets focus on a specific area, you still opt to go to Earth, Moon, Venus or Mars. If you opt to go to Earth for example, Old Russia maybe split up into various areas - some of which are larger than others - Mothyards is definitely bigger than the Divide or Rocketyard and often there is no loading as you move between these - occasionally if you are on your sparrow though. and can cater for other players as well as all the increased enemy count during a public event along with the enemies in that area anyway.
Its clear you have totally missed the point and just being argumentative. All these games are 30fps regardless of what 'faults' you see and if anything, just prove the reason why they are NOT at 60fps. If the developers had opted for 60fps, these areas would be far smaller, less visually impressive and even less populated too. I really don't care what you think of those games - its irrelevant but they are all examples of games that are at 30fps and you don't hear 'I can't play or not buying GTAv, Infamous, Bloodbourne etc because they are at 30fps'. All these people complaining that 30fps ruins a game or makes them 'unplayable' and yet all these are examples of popular, often highly rated games, with solid mechanics that are very successful AND 30fps.
@BAMozzy not trying to argue you can't just name games of different styles to fit a flawed statement. Games that have less on screen smaller worlds even closed worlds can produce higher visuals than games that are truly open. Not my fault a Dev like bungie can't program like say everyone else these days. Blaming old systems for the state of destiny. The real thing is bungie took old code probly from a game they was Dev for Microsoft and switched it to destiny. That would make more sense on why destiny fails to even feel like something new or even relevant.
@raptor This isn't the place to vent your displeasure at Destiny. In terms of its game play mechanics though it is very solid and does have some incredible technical feats. I have rarely encountered a loading screen when running a Strike and moving through a combination of different areas. The size of the first zone is very large and can have LOTS of enemies as well as players battling it out when the 'enemy moves against each other' You have a variety of enemy types from both Fallen and Cabal with their differing AI and weaponry as well as the possibility of a number of players with their weaponry, grenades and of course supers too. Not only do you get all the effects of these weapons but all the numbers of damage inflicted too on screen. It still takes a lot of processing to calculate all those projectiles flying around and movement of enemies/players etc.
The point I am making is that a variety of different styles and genres are perfectly fine at 30fps! Whether that's a truly open world game, A semi-open world game, a linear game, a hack and slash game, a shooter game, games with and without vehicles too. My argument is not flawed just because you don't like Destiny. The point I am making is that a game doesn't necessarily have to be 60fps for it to be good regardless of genre or size. Your argument just seems intent on criticising Destiny and has no purpose. I am interested to know how you think that showing examples of a variety of different, successful, highly rated and popular games that all run smoothly at 30fps is flawed in proving that games like the Witcher 3 will be unplayable, not smooth and/or awful because its not at 60fps?
On second thoughts don't bother because I have no interest in your opinions any more...
Only a couple of days to go! However, I'm about as confident in GAME's ability to deliver on time as I am that we'll ever get a new Clock Tower game (I loved that series!), especially after they canceled my CE order the first time. I'm expecting to pay the game sometime next Thursday.
I'm still annoyed that the X1 got exclusive physical content though, even if it's not fantastic stuff, it still sucks I had to pay full price for what is effectively a lesser CE.
All I read is that the actual game is fantastic. I can't wait to get started.
@ApostateMage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_q07b1BD1k
@BAMozzy I enjoyed destiny however this is the place since it was mentioned. It fails to live up to anything these days. Anyway it doesn't matter destiny is not a true open world game.
@raptor Yet AGAIN missing the point!!! I mentioned Destiny as an example of a game that runs well and smoothly at 30fps. It makes NO difference if you like it or think it doesn't live up to the expectations you had. It makes NO difference whether you consider it a true open world game or not. It still proves that games can run perfectly well and smoothly at 30fps regardless - just like the others I mentioned GTAv, Bloodbourne, Infamous, Uncharted etc. The whole point as people were saying that games have to be at least 60fps to be playable/worth buying etc!
The discussion has nothing to do with the content of these games but the actual frame rate and mechanics. I mentioned Destiny purely because it is a game that runs at 30fps - not because its open world or not, not because it lived up to your expectations or not etc etc
ALL the games I mentioned prove that 30fps is an acceptable frame rate and play well/smoothly regardless of whether you enjoy/like/hate the content. You don't hear people say I'm not buying GTAv, Uncharted, Destiny, Bloodbourne, Watchdogs, Assassins Creed, Infamous etc because they play at 30fps, so why say that the Witcher 3 has to be 60fps or will not play well because its only 30fps???
1080p locked at 30fps or 720p locked at 60fps....its the only way.
@ShogunRok A little disappointed, from since your played it, Can you give a more technical analysis as to why it can't keep 30 FPS.
ON a side note it's disappointing to see so many game struggle to hit the 30 mark, i think it's just making technical more gamers, like myself, disenchanted.
@wittypixel I think the frame rate's mostly a result of having the game run in 1080p. The environments tend to be really detailed, and like the article says, it has a good draw distance, so it's almost always loading in new details or characters or enemies.
@wittypixel Some of it is down to the Application Protocol Interface (API) and the CPU. Existing API's struggle to get the multi-core CPU to work efficiently with the GPU. Often 1 core does the bulk of the work instead of spreading the processing across multiple cores. When we see games developed using API's such as DirectX 12, Vulkan etc, these will allow the CPU to work more efficiently and reduce bottlenecking by allowing the graphics queue to be spread across multiple threads to compute simultaneously and reduce the time in which hardware is left idle from having to wait for other parts of the graphics queue to finish before starting the next job. These API's ability to efficiently break-down the "command buffer" into smaller tasks and spread them across multiple cores to process faster and relay to the GPU much quicker, allowing more traffic from a processor to reach the graphics card in a shorter amount of time. The end result: more performance, better image quality, reduced latency, or a blend of all three (as the developer chooses).
its already allowing developers to add more enemies, lighting effects, textures and details to their upcoming games but maybe the Witcher 3 (developed on DirectX 11) is too far along its development and releasing too early to take advantage of the performance enhancing options of DirectX 12. It maybe that we get an update in the future to Directx 12 version though.
What that means for Generation 8 consoles though in the long term is significant. They use an 8 core AMD CPU, so getting this to work more efficiently and communicate faster with the GPU should give us better performance in games.These new API's are expected in 2015. It may seem we are already struggling with the hardware to deliver performance in games but that is mainly down to the API's limitations and inability to get the CPU working efficiently and communicating quicker with the GPU.
Sorry if that's a bit technical and long but hopefully it mat reassure you that the PS4 has a lot more potential than it seems at the moment. See if you feel the same in a year
just built an uber gaming rig (or pc to me) for about £1150 a monto ago. Found out to play on recommended settings for W3 I'll need a new graphics card at a cost of £300. So I spent almost 4 times the cost of a ps4 and it'll play similarly. pc's FTW!!
@StonyK Ouch!
For the price you pay the PS4 is by far the best gaming machine. You will never get an equivalently priced PC to compete. It's all very well saying PCs are best but, considering the expenditure needed in order to achieve the specs, I'm betting 90% of PC users are shouting their praise yet secretly having to play with most effects turned off. In contrast, on the PS4, we'll all be getting the same great quality. And I for one am looking forward to seeing the Witcher in all its glory.
@get2sammyb
Frame-rate effects gameplay if it didn't we would not be seeing the likes of DMC, Dark Souls 2, Borderlands 2, The Last Of Us etc being 60fps, they would all be 30fps still. Its funny when you think a lot of PlayStation's 2 games where 60fps, Publishers/Devs are putting graphics over gameplay these days.
Do not get me wrong if a game runs at a locked 30fps I mind but I would much rather 60fps,.
Did you say there's a loading screen to get into Novigrad? Everywhere I've seen gameplay and articles this has never been shown. I'm confused.
If you have played the game then you will have noticed the dynamic weather, especially the wind. Well I was on a hill above the inland sea and I gazed far over the water to a peninsula jutting into that sea with the usual line of many trees marching down it's length. The trees were very far off, hidden at times by mists and atmosphere, but what really sold the scene for me was that all of those trees were swaying boisterously in the winds. Most games on a console would not render weather systems working so vigourously so very, very far off. It really impressed me with Witcher 3 and with CD Projekt Red.
@mitcHELLspawn I just started playing this after MGSV. This game does not feel nearly as smooth, fast, or reactive. The detail of the flora looks beautiful, it just doesn't measure up in terms of feel. The environment pulsates in a way reminiscent of a mushroom trip, not a desirable effect in my opinion.
Tap here to load 52 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...