Support NeoGAF

[Shaanyboi]

WTF have you done GAF?

Good? We've gone through this time after time of Ubisoft overpromising with incredible-looking media, only to realize it was all smoke and mirrors come the final product. That, or they just couldn't deliver on what their pitch suggested. God, Red Steel comes to mind.... Same happened with Aliens: Colonial Marines. If that game had just been bad (or atleast underwhelming), people would shrug and move on. But the fact their preview footage outright lied about what the final quality would look like... yeah, that's hot bullshit.

 

[Tractopoulpe]

Damn, this seriously hurts the hype I had about the game. :/

 

[StuBurns]

1. Your last of us screenshot is a bullshot, the game has horrible anti-aliasing.

2. Your Perfect Dark Zero screenshot is from the xbox version of the game. Not the xbox 360 version (the retail one everyone got)

The Resistance shot is a bullshot too, but regardless, no one is concerned Watch Dogs is a PS4 fully tapped.

 

[tbm24]

Go read up on the Halo 2 E3 2003 demo.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/bungie-halo-2-e3-demo-was-a-fake

This is a carbon copy of what happened then.

I remember that demo quite vividly. I still have the e3 DVDs from then. The main difference in my opinion from that situation and this one, is the Xbox was not new hardware. Bungie knew exactly what it could do. Watchdogs was revealed well before we even had final specs of the consoles it would be appearing on(next-gen wise). At worst they assumed too much of then.

 

[biggersmaller]

Lol. This better come out at a time with absolutely nothing around it. Otherwise I won't touch it.

I also hope no one complaining about the graphics has posted how resolution and graphics don't matter, it's all about dat fun factor.

Oh well, at least ACIV turned out to be surprisingly awesome. Give me another pirate game, Ubi.

This isn't a comparison where a GIF barely has the fidelity to effectively compare, rather this looks orders of magnitude different than earlier footage. It's basically this all over again:

It's not just graphics not meeting expectations - it's the utter bullshit from Ubisoft to this point that has most here mad.

 

[xMuku]

1. Your last of us screenshot is a bullshot, the game has horrible anti-aliasing.

2. Your Perfect Dark Zero screenshot is from the xbox version of the game. Not the xbox 360 version (the retail one everyone got)

Alright well you may have your gripes about my post or the Last of Us but there is a significant graphical difference between them.

You understand my point regardless right? Developers will get better over time.

 

[tbm24]

Ubisoft has a record of downgrading games since its first reveal. We had a similar discussion a few months ago and the people working on the game went on twitter to deny that it wasn't graphically downgraded and wait for direct feed etc.. now it just looks like trash. I'll see you next year in the The Division downgradeaton confirmed thread.

I'll also see you next year when The Division looks as awesome as it does right now . Personally, I'd rather be optimistic than cynical about it all.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

I still want to see the final product and reserve judgement. Judging off a tiny gif of one scene or a YouTube trailer (which doesn't look terrible) is hard for me to do.

I'm still looking forward to playing he game, though.

 

[BigTnaples]

You are still going to make it a point to dissuade others based on just visuals and not about the game itself. You did not make it sound like you were casually going to go to your buddies and say hey it got downgraded ah well. You can call it a generational downgrade, that's fine not like I don't see where is and isn't there compared to the reveal. What I don't like is the immediate reaction of laying blame in the people making the game for not being able to hit their target for whatever reason. If the game truly looked like garbage I would be able to understand but the fact is that it doesn't unless we saw different trailers.

Dissuade and warn are two different things.

Warning someone a stove is Hot when they think it is cold is always a good thing.


Also clearly graphics are not that important to you, but they are hugely important to me, and many many many others. Especially within the early adopters of next gen systems, graphics matter. Saying "Just the visuals" is infuriating, especially for a game that for most of its hype for being a graphical powerhouse.

 

[Rvaisse]

But....but... Who cares about the graphics, it's a whole new experience.... A charachter in an open world, doing...things... Killing people... ... ...... !

Now let's hope they cancel this hideous disguised AC game on Wiiu and make a new ZombiU game instead.

 

[Hasney]

and this is an Xbox 360 lunch title:

Mmmm, lunch title.

Image isn't loading though, not sure if it's just me.

EDIT: It is just me as it's loading now. YAY POINTLESS POST.

 

[jabuseika]

They better put this one back in the oven.

If that's too late, they're in for some backlash.

 

[anonymous_abc]

Alright well you may have your gripes about my post or the Last of Us but there is a significant graphical difference between them.

You understand my point regardless right? Developers will get better over time.

of course they will that does not excuse the huge gap between Infamous the original reveal and the present day...

 

[Clott]

I just need to hear from Ubi that I can make the PC version of the game look like the reveal trailer, my gut tells no because then there would be a too large of a disparity between the launched products.

I won't pick it up for that principle alone. But they still have time to prove us wrong.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

I think Ubisoft should release a new trailer and try to pack in impressive looking parts of their game. I have a feeling that what they showed wasn't really the best side of the game.
Rainy weather for example should look much more impressive because of all the screen space refelctions on the road.
Lighting when the sun goes down is also much more impressive in comparision to the brightest daylight we saw in the recent footage.

But at the end of the day Watchdog is a cross-gen game and I don't think it will look much better than GTA V. Higher res, better framrate, some better textures, foliage and a few more effects. But the core of Watchdogs graphics is still last gen based.
It'll still be beautiful. Its not like GTA V looked like crap...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksz_waaJPLA


But another thing:
Do you think that openworld games at the end of current games will show an equally massive jump in comparison to late last gen open world games as they did in the previous gen?

 

[blazeuk]

Well yeah, similiar situation with DICE, i bet if DICE had a word to say about the Battlefield 4 release they would have never released the game at this status. but now everyone blaims the developer and NOT EA which wanted to get the game out just to compete with CoD: Ghosts. The publisher is the real problem here and not the developer.

Sorry but as much as the publisher may have added to the problems, DICE does not get off the hook that easily, their game was a mess and it's not for the first time either. They're happy enough as developers because they're getting paid, but if they were a good developer they wouldn't have ever let it out in the state it was in, CoD:G or not they would have made it clear it wasn't ready - let's not diminish their role in it, they're a big enough developer to have a say in what happens. Instead they let it go out in the state it was in and millions ended up with a broken game - that's somewhat off topic though.

 

[TyrantII]

I think the excuse of cross platform can only go so far. We were told that the lead platform was PC. Ubisoft has demonstrated cross gen, open world capabilities with AC4. The current gen systems have the RAM to where there shouldn't be so many issues if they are optimizing each port from the PC base platform. So this isn't asking the impossible of them expecting more than what we're seeing.

If they were having so many issues with resource allocation, then they should have late ported the 360/PS3 versions as they have with the likely-is-cancelled-but-isn't-officially Wii U version.

Will be interesting to see how BioWare will fare with Dragon Age Inquisition. So far looks beautiful, probably on PC, but they may have similar issues in overextending the development net.

If anything was getting late ported it was to be the current gen versions.

PS4/XB1 has a 10-11 million installation base, while PS360 is something like 150 million.

Hate to say it, but we know where the focus is going on these cross gen games that are looking to recoup their huge budgets.

Its simply a matter of numbers.

 

[GluedOnBeard]

This makes it sound like they're honestly surprised lol

"People aren't eating our bullshit anymore PANIC BUTTON PANIC BUTTON"

So they should be, this degrade means I will never play it. The graphics for once actually helped this game given its direction. If it was a different kind of game they may have gotten away with it. Immersion being a key factor in this game and the current style really detracts from it.

This should be pushed back to a Q4 release to sort things out, no point in releasing a game that has been dragged though the mud just to get it stable.

 

[-SD-]

WTF have you done GAF?

Don't lie to anyone. Especially to gamers. It isn't rocket science to figure it out. Lying never pays off.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

I remember that demo quite vividly. I still have the e3 DVDs from then. The main difference in my opinion from that situation and this one, is the Xbox was not new hardware. Bungie knew exactly what it could do. Watchdogs was revealed well before we even had final specs of the consoles it would be appearing on(next-gen wise). At worst they assumed too much of then.

MGSV: GZ was revealed in September of 2012, well before specs were finalized.

And this is the results of a year difference.

 

[lifa-cobex]

I'll also see you next year when The Division looks as awesome as it does right now . Personally, I'd rather be optimistic than cynical about it all.

As much as I would like to side your argument, You have to go with the simple evidence.

 

[Seanspeed]

Looks fine to me....

same car:

nice grass, yumm:

This all looks quite good still.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Never lie to anyone. Especially to gamers. It isn't rocket science to figure it out.

I'm confused though, is presenting a target for your game running on PC the first time you show it lying? Don't most devs show something similar?

 

[tbm24]

Dissuade and warn are two different things.

Warning someone a stove is Hot when they think it is cold is always a good thing.


Also clearly graphics are not that important to you, but they are hugely important to me, and many many many others. Especially within the early adopters of next gen systems, graphics matter. Saying "Just the visuals" is infuriating, especially for a game that for most of its hype for being a graphical powerhouse.

I say just visuals because that's pretty the only thing being discussed. From what I remember, all the hype came from the visuals AND the fact that the game revolved around hacking your environment in an open world game and all the possibilities that brings. Graphics matter sure, but the game doesn't look terrible or even bad based on the trailer we have to work with. It just doesn't look like their target that they initially released which I've already admitted is disappointing.

 

[Dictator93]

Mmmm, lunch title.

Image isn't loading though, not sure if it's just me.

EDIT: It is just me as it's loading now. YAY POINTLESS POST.

That is from the unreleased xbox version. Not the 360 version. IMO, the OP for that post should remove the image given how it misrepresents reality so much so.

I'm confused though, is presenting a target for your game running on PC the first time you show it lying? Don't most devs show something similar?

Many people doing the same thing does not make it justified or better. We should hold ALL game companies accountable for demoing on PCs with the intention of misrepresenting their game's quality.

 

[StuBurns]

But another thing:
Do you think that openworld games at the end of current games will show an equally massive jump in comparison to late last gen open world games as they did in the previous gen?

Obviously not, because the gap between SA and GTA5 is larger than the gap between GTA5 and near photo-realism, there's also the issue of producing assets at that quantity at that quality, even if the PS4 could draw it, you couldn't make it.

 

[Kid Ska]

My video back from September 2013 already said enough about the state of the game at that moment (PS4 version)

Wait why did he even try to punch out that window.

 

[-SD-]

I'm confused though, is presenting a target for your game running on PC the first time you show it lying? Don't most devs show something similar?

Target footage should never be shown publicly. Show only the stuff that is 100% certain to end up in the retail version.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

I think a lot of people are looking into this a little too seriously. It's pretty common knowledge that most of the demos we see at E3 are run on PC during their developing stages. Also I just want to point out that games that come out with a new consoles within the first year of its release never usually have the best graphics because they are still learning to build games with it.

Resistance: Fall of Man (PS3 Launch Title):

XI/TcweRQ90aII/AAAAAAAABkE/mZ6zv9NcXQE/s1600/resistancefallofmanlg.jpg[/IMG]

Last of USs (PS3 game released only last year):

gixav.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/the-last-of-us.jpg[/IMG]

and this is an Xbox 360 lunch title:

w.mundorare.com/imgs/content/games/perfect-dark-zero/screenshots-xbox/ss-xbox-perfect-dark-zero-011.jpg[/IMG]


I think the games will get better over time when the developers have more time to learn the new dev kit. Learning from mistakes.

Oh for sure, just look at Infamous SS. Everyone is most likely looking at Ubisoft, laughing at them, not the capabilities of current gen hardware.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Many people doing the same thing does not make it justified or better.

A lot of liars.

It's a target though. At the time I'm sure they anticipated being able to come close to that. Should all devs just try to shoot as low as possible in target demos?

Target footage should never be shown publicly. Show only the stuff that is 100% certain to end up in the retail version.

This I can agree with. They showed the game too early.

 

[kinggroin]

I'm confused though, is presenting a target for your game running on PC the first time you show it lying? Don't most devs show something similar?

A lot of liars.

 

[tbm24]

Target footage should never be shown publicly. Show only the stuff that is 100% certain to end up in the retail version.

You realize they wouldn't be able to show you the game until practically a few months before release with that kind of requirement.

 

[WJD]

and this is an Xbox 360 lunch title:

.

no

 

[Betta Lines]

Go back and watch the original reveal again.

There is a massive gap in graphical fidelity. Massive. Looks at the atmospherics (smoke), the coat, the lighting.

I'm not seeing it. Ok, so there's some smoke coming out of the road. The coat has been toned down, quite frankly it looks better. It moves like it's made of leather, rather than a much lighter material. It is also... not windy in the newer footage. The lighting? Different time of day - the sun is much lower in the original footage and we all know how low sun makes everything look better. All of that new footage seems to be in perfect weather, around midday. So I'm not convinced.

 

[Seanspeed]

Oh for sure, just look at Infamous SS. Everyone is most likely looking at Ubisoft, laughing at them, not the capabilities of current gen hardware.

Infamous has nice lighting and impressive(but annoying and overdone) particle effects, but the actual setting and everything doesn't look leaps and bounds better than other stuff we've seen. I think The Witcher 3 will be the first next-gen, open world game to WOW in terms of its environment.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

You realize they wouldn't be able to show you the game until practically a few months before release with that kind of requirement.

Indeed, this is why they do CG trailers. But then they get a ton of flack for those too.

 

[Juice]

I'll also see you next year when The Division looks as awesome as it does right now . Personally, I'd rather be optimistic than cynical about it all.

"I'd rather keep placing my trust in others only to be disappointed"

 

[watchdog]

You guys. Seriously. The only way to make this stop is to refuse to buy the game. If enough people refuse to buy on this principal of false reveal/misleading information, publishers will eventually stop doing it. It's not right. It's not fair. Think about how little they've shown. Think about the fact that, when the game releases, we'll probably have more footage of the game before the downgrade than after the downgrade. They are intentionally trying to trick people. That's why they have barely shown anything since.

"False reveal/misleading information?" What was so false about the reveal? It seemed to accurately represent what they were going for in terms of gameplay. Sure, an argument can be made about the graphical downgrade but keep in mind they were developing a game for next gen consoles whose hardware and software had not been finalized. For all we know the PC version could look similar to what was shown back in 2012.

I don't think they're intentionally trying to trick people. If that were the case then they wouldn't have shown anything at the last E3 or anything since then. I think the most realistic scenario is that the game was probably shown way too early and once Ubisoft got access to near final hardware then some sacrifices had to be made to achieve the performance and gameplay they wanted.

 

[Marcel]

The delay pretty much muted any hype I had for the game. If this stuff about the downgrade holds water, it's stone dead now.

 

[Ricky_R]

The Division's 2014 build image leaked.

 

[TylerDurden4321]

Warn them off of what? You're going to tell people not to buy a game they might be interested in because the graphics didn't turn out to be what the developers tried to make it? Don't push yourself and your ridiculous principles on to other people and let them enjoy the dam game if that's what they want to do.

Not saying that BigTNaples phrasing didn't overdo it a little, but if I knew someone who pre-ordered Watch Dogs, who doesn't follow the games media thoroughly, I'd try to warn him/her too: "Hey, you might want to check this trailer and reconsider pre-ordering until there's reviews and maybe a demo or so..."

 

[Juice]

I'm not seeing it. Ok, so there's some smoke coming out of the road. The coat has been toned down, quite frankly it looks better. It moves like it's made of leather, rather than a much lighter material. It is also... not windy in the newer footage. The lighting? Different time of day - the sun is much lower in the original footage and we all know how low sun makes everything look better. All of that new footage seems to be in perfect weather, around midday. So I'm not convinced.

Heh, did you consider the new game might always have perfect weather?

 

[-SD-]

You realize they wouldn't be able to show you the game until practically a few months before release with that kind of requirement.

I do realize that. There's a solution to it, though. BIG HUGE LETTERS telling people it's only target footage. Did Ubisoft ever do that with WD or Far Cry 3 etc.?

Publishers should make honest communication with gamers. Always clearly explain why things are like they are.

 

[TyrantII]

MGSV: GZ was revealed in September of 2012, well before specs were finalized.

And this is the results of a year difference.

Rule #1: Set realistic expectations

Rule #2: Manage those expectations

COMMANDER GEORDI LA FORGE
Yeah, well, I told the Captain I'd have this analysis done in an hour.

SCOTTY
How long will it really take?

COMMANDER GEORDI LA FORGE
An hour!

SCOTTY
Oh, you didn't tell him how long it would *really* take, did ya?

COMMANDER GEORDI LA FORGE
Well, of course I did.

SCOTTY
Oh, laddie. You've got a lot to learn if you want people to think of you as a miracle worker.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

I still want to see the final product and reserve judgement. Judging off a tiny gif of one scene or a YouTube trailer (which doesn't look terrible) is hard for me to do.

I'm still looking forward to playing he game, though.

I'm reserving final judgement as well, but this is more than looking at a gift or trailer out of context. There was the additional footage, and we've had two years of footage of what looked, in visual fidelity, an entirely different game.

And that's the issue here. We are told this is the game, the PS4 version, for two years and suddenly we have a current gen game that now looks about the same as GTA4. While it was clear to the knowledgeable that the 2012 footage was likely not going to be the final product, what we saw last year was definitely manageable for at least the PS4 going by Infamous SS and AC4 and kept being told it's PS4. Then get a delay, and see this.

People are just sick of the bullshit. Most probably wouldn't mind these pitch demos if Ubisoft and others are honest that those are what they are, and explain why some thing didn't survive the transition through development. Most of us could probably deal with layman explanations. Just communicate more than just making excuses and run around when asked about the Wii U.

Anyway, I'm with you though on waiting for impressions on release. I don't mind the AC style gameplay, so it's already at least on neutral ground there.

 

[mercenar1e]

I'll also see you next year when The Division looks as awesome as it does right now . Personally, I'd rather be optimistic than cynical about it all.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/07/the-division-may-be-delayed-to-2015

It seems that a small portion of the game was created for the reveal.. the same thing happened with Watch Dogs. You should watch the reveal again and ask yourself if that level of detail is possible with an open world online game on a console/pc.

 

[Marcel]

The Division's 2014 build image leaked.

Funny enough, I found a photo of the 2015 final version of the game:

 

[Fafalada]

this looks like a slightly upgraded 1080p PS3 game.

I dunno about upgrades - resolution aside there are better looking open-world games on both PS3 and 360 than what was shown in that video.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

Heh, did you consider the new game might always have perfect weather?

As a Chicago native, this made me laugh.

 

[FiggyCal]

"False reveal/misleading information?" What was so false about the reveal? It seemed to accurately represent what they were going for in terms of gameplay. Sure, an argument can be made about the graphical downgrade but keep in mind they were developing a game for next gen consoles whose hardware and software had not been finalized. For all we know the PC version could look similar to what was shown back in 2012.

I don't think they're intentionally trying to trick people. If that were the case then they wouldn't have shown anything at the last E3 or anything since then. I think the most realistic scenario is that the game was probably shown way too early and once Ubisoft got access to near final hardware then some sacrifices had to be made to achieve the performance and gameplay they wanted.

I don't know what else they were trying to do in that case. We were led to believe that the PS4 version of the game looked a certain way and it turns out that they were misleading us. What other reason could they have to tell us that a game looked better than it actually does? It absolutely does not look bad, but when you compare it to older footage that we were lead to believe was PS4 footage last year, then it's quite clear they were trying to trick us.