Support NeoGAF

[Servbot24]

It is actually despicable how they handled this. Pushing on about how great the graphics are, having people play the build with great lighting and releasing the build as a demo for thousands to play. Then at the last minute switch that shit out and act like its no big deal. Some of the scummiest shit i have ever seen. Dark Souls 1 PC was awful but this shit is fucking sinister. EA would be impressed.

Holy shit at some of you, lol. Unbelievably entitled. Imagine if FROM actually did something notably wrong. This place would collapse under the weight of its own agony.

EDIT: If they purposefully made this version look bad in order to sell a next gen version than yeah that'd be messed up. But there's no reason to assume they're doing that yet.

 

[EvilKatarn]

No one has blocked them for telling us that the final version will not have the lighting shown in the beta/E3

Why would Namco let them come out and say that the game doesn't look as impressive as the previous demos. What kind of a marketing wizard would think that's a good idea for driving pre-orders?

 

[Doran902]

Demon's Souls / Dark Souls are two of the best games from their gen but the graphics have always been terrible in a technical sense. As long as they maintain the dark atmosphere and A+ gameplay mechanics who cares.

 

[Facism]

The current version seems too deliberate for that to be viable. It could happen but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Also I'm enjoying seeing all the "pre-order cancelled" posts. Not because I want this game to sell bad, but because I really don't think you should be playing FROM games if you care that deeply about graphics and performance. I could hear my 360 wanting to die over barely managing to render the mess that is Armored Core V onto the screen, but it absolutely is a game unlike any other.
As someone said earlier, this was not a decision to spit in players' faces. It's either because of technical reasons we are not aware about or because Bandai Namco really wants you to buy some next gen version of this game.

I'm enjoying them, too. People who were advertised to and promoted with a different product to the one being sold and telling the publisher to stick it. Good stuff.

 

[Raven77]

"Latest scandal: As FROM developed their latest game, they adjusted some of the assets!"

Not really a hot scoop.

"From lies to consumers, advertises DS 2 with superior graphics that aren't in the final game!"


How about that?


Also. Technical reasons? Are you kidding me? These systems are not new, if a developer is going on their third game on a system and DON'T know it's limitations by now they should just close up shop.

 

[double jump]

He's probably just not new to gaming.

I see where your going. Most games usually use trailers with funky camera angles but this is a bit different. Unlike those quick edit trailers people had actually been playing different builds of this game prior to it's leak without any hickups.

 

[gamerforever]

What I don't get is that the beta on PS3 had good lighting and ran at a stable framerate.

I am thinking other areas suffered badly, so they had to make the cut back or the PS4 version needs to show a marked improvement.

 

[Durante]

I don't know, I followed the pre-release discussion over the first DS's PC port fairly actively, and that's the last impression I had from the PR.

From what little I've followed of the sequel, my general impression is they admit the first port sucked, and this one will not be handled in the same manner.

Yeah, if there's one thing you can't say is that they made any promises about the first game's PC port.

They did, way back at the announcement, promise significantly more for the PC version of DS2.

 

[oxidax]

Welp its the PS3 version so i dont care. PC version better look good.

 

[Servbot24]

"From lies to consumers, advertises DS 2 with superior graphics that aren't in the final game!"


How about that?

Considering this sensationalist headline could conceivably apply to practically every game ever made? Again, not really a hot scoop.

It's the kind of headline in fact that would draw a wealth of "lol games journalism" posts on GAF.

 

[Cloud Strife]

It is actually despicable how they handled this. Pushing on about how great the graphics are, having people play the build with great lighting and releasing the build as a demo for thousands to play. Then at the last minute switch that shit out and act like its no big deal. Some of the scummiest shit i have ever seen. Dark Souls 1 PC was awful but this shit is fucking sinister. EA would be impressed.

Yes and the rest of the game looks completely horrible too. Pre-order cancelled!


...

 

[Shinjica]

Why would Namco let them come out and say that the game doesn't look as impressive as the previous demos. What kind of a marketing wizard would think that's a good idea for driving pre-orders?

You're right. I'm 26 years old and I still forget in what kind of world we live.

 

[Servbot24]

You're right. I'm 26 years old and I still forget in what kind of world we live.

Yes, the injustice of a video game beta not exactly matching the retail version is truly a sign of dark times that will bring many a youthful world view tumbling to this earth of grim reality.

 

[Stone Ocean]

Yes, the injustice of a video game beta not exactly matching the retail version is truly a sign of dark times that will bring many a youthful world view tumbling to this earth of grim reality.

You'd think the beta would look worse, not better.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Worst fear is we end up with inferior assets to dark souls 1 due to a lighting/shadow/torch mechanic which obviously didn't make the cut.

 

[Arkanius]

I'm not dealing well with this downgrade.
Graphics don't matter for a Souls game, but ambiance does, and DS2 looked TOP NOTCH from all the pre-release material.

It looks like a mere DLC to Demons Souls now...

 

[Raven77]

Considering this sensationalist headline could conceivably apply to practically every game ever made? Again, not really a hot scoop.

It's the kind of headline in fact that would draw a wealth of "lol games journalism" posts on GAF.

No, the vast majority of releases look about on par with what was shown first. Most look better. In the case of some new gen stuff, sure there could be differences due to unfamiliarity with hardware.

For a developer as respected as FROM, with their third game on this hardware, it's inexcusable IF the console version was indeed heavily downgraded either due to a purposeful deception or a technical problem.

 

[Shinjica]

Yes, the injustice of a video game beta not exactly matching the retail version is truly a sign of dark times that will bring many a youthful world view tumbling to this earth of grim reality.

Hyperbole?

Hyperbole

 

[Cloud Strife]

Hyperbole?

Hyperbole

Yeah that was the joke.

 

[Clear]

For a developer as respected as FROM, with their third game on this hardware, it's inexcusable IF the console version was indeed heavily downgraded either sure to a purposeful deception or a technical problem.

More likely its a problem due to them leading on PC rather than PS3.

When your lead platform is the one thats massively more powerful than the other sku's, cut-backs are basically inevitable. It goes without saying.

 

[Train of Midnight]

I don't understand. You all saw the terrible promo screens.

If you cared about graphics you would have waited for the definitive PC edition.

You made your blurry bed, now you get to die in it.

 

[Servbot24]

No, the vast majority of releases look about on par with what was shown first. Most look better. In the case of some new gen stuff, sure there could be differences due to unfamiliarity with hardware.

For a developer as respected as FROM, with their third game on this hardware, it's inexcusable IF the console version was indeed heavily downgraded either sure to a purposeful deception or a technical problem.

They had to go to some effort to change the look from the playable beta. They didn't go to that effort just because they enjoy deceiving people.

Technical difficulties happen with every game. It's perfectly excusable because it's not a sin to work on your game and shouldn't have to be excused in the first place.

 

[Kai Dracon]

Yes, the injustice of a video game beta not exactly matching the retail version is truly a sign of dark times that will bring many a youthful world view tumbling to this earth of grim reality.

You know, the majority of people annoyed at this are upset over the prospect of an inferior final version that affects gameplay. Because the missing feature (environments lit completely different from the beta) is centered around a core gameplay mechanic the developer themselves talked about at length.

Some people may be throwing out extreme reactions like conspiracy theories but it doesn't make the core complaint unreasonable. Especially because this basically wasn't known until the day the game launched. If nobody had gotten street-date broken copies and started live streams... not a single potential purchaser of the console versions would have known. Namco even embargoed the reviews until launch day.

That kind of deserves a headline to warn hardcore fans of a series that is entirely about gameplay, that something's wrong.

 

[KCroxtonJr]

I don't understand. You all saw the terrible promo screens.

If you cared about graphics you would have waited for the definitive PC edition.

You made your blurry bed, now you get to die in it.

you do realize they released "pc screenshots" when they announced the pc release date, right?

unless they are just console shots and someone got them mistaken, we will all die in the same bed.

 

[Stone Ocean]

They had to go to some effort to change the look from the playable beta. They didn't go to that effort just because they enjoy deceiving people.

Technical difficulties happen with every game. It's perfectly excusable because it's not a sin to work on your game and shouldn't have to be excused in the first place.

The point is that a veteran dev shouldn't have overpromised to begin with.

I'm fine with it and the gameplay looks spectacular regardless, but this type of apologist argument is pissing me off. Just because I'll gladly overlook it doesn't make it okay or normal, even if it's one of my favourite franchises ever. We could've expected the game to not look as good as the initial reveal, that's fair, but not delivering on the beta is inexcusable. That's the "demo" you put out to consumers, that's the least amount of quality they would've expected. Downgrading further from there, no shit people won't like it and rightfully so.

 

[Arelaz]

I just hope the PC version is definitive. I'm probably double dipping.

 

[gamerforever]

You know, the majority of people annoyed at this are upset over the prospect of an inferior final version that affects gameplay. Because the missing feature (environments lit completely different from the beta) is centered around a core gameplay mechanic the developer themselves talked about at length.

Some people may be throwing out extreme reactions like conspiracy theories but it doesn't make the core complaint unreasonable. Especially because this basically wasn't known until the day the game launched. If nobody had gotten street-date broken copies and started live streams... not a single potential purchaser of the console versions would have known. Namco even embargoed the reviews until launch day.

That kind of deserves a headline to warn hardcore fans of a series that is entirely about gameplay, that something's wrong.

For me it is pretty wrong, and as this game is aimed at the hardcore base they would have either played the beta or viewed videos of it and expected the final game to look as least as good as that - that is reasonable isn't it?

Seriously thinking of just selling my Black Armour edition with the metal card thing. Should achieve a decent profit.

 

[Polioliolio]

More than the lighting, still feel like the animations are poopier.

The way everything moves is so fancy now... like everyone's swinging their weapons around with a limp wrist.

 

[Garcia]

edit: it's also an entirely different spot. this comparision is useles once again.

It is the same spot in the game. Check out the videos.

 

[Servbot24]

The point is that a veteran dev shouldn't have overpromised to begin with.

I'm fine with it and the gameplay looks spectacular regardless, but this type of apologist argument is pissing me off. Just because I'll gladly overlook it doesn't make it okay or normal, even if it's one of my favourite franchises ever. We could've expected the game to not look as good as the initial reveal, that's fair, but not delivering on the beta is inexcusable. That's the "demo" you put out to consumers, that's the least amount of quality they would've expected. Downgrading further from there, no shit people won't like it and rightfully so.

A beta is not a demo.

 

[jimmypython]

truth: someone at FROM simply made a mistake by GMing a wrong build...

Spoiler

just kidding

You know, the majority of people annoyed at this are upset over the prospect of an inferior final version that affects gameplay. Because the missing feature (environments lit completely different from the beta) is centered around a core gameplay mechanic the developer themselves talked about at length.

Some people may be throwing out extreme reactions like conspiracy theories but it doesn't make the core complaint unreasonable. Especially because this basically wasn't known until the day the game launched. If nobody had gotten street-date broken copies and started live streams... not a single potential purchaser of the console versions would have known. Namco even embargoed the reviews until launch day.

That kind of deserves a headline to warn hardcore fans of a series that is entirely about gameplay, that something's wrong.

well put sir. without the lightning system the extensive placement of lamp posts seems meaningless now...

 

[Servbot24]

well put sir. without the lightning system the extensive placement of lamp posts seems meaningless now...

Maybe they listened to all the people who complained about that gameplay element.

 

[Stone Ocean]

A beta is not a demo.

Correct, a beta is actually closer to the retail release than a demo.

 

[Servbot24]

Correct, a beta is actually closer to the retail release than a demo.

I'm pretty sure a beta is a test tool while a demo is used for more for promotion. That's my impression anyways.

 

[ironcreed]

A user on Giant Bomb took these 4 screenshots while playing on X360. Especially the first and second one shows off lighting effects. And in the user's own words:



Screenshot 1 (fireplace)
Screenshot 2 (dark descent)
Screenshot 3 (bridge over water)
Screenshot 4 (village overlook)

Yep, the game looks great. Much nicer than the first one. The new cloth physics are also a welcome bonus.

 

[Kai Dracon]

For me it is pretty wrong, and as this game is aimed at the hardcore base they would have either played the beta or viewed videos of it and expected the final game to look as least as good as that - that is reasonable isn't it?

It's reasonable. Some people are focusing on a beta in the sense of "betas are always different from retail". But:

1. Namco was putting video walkthroughs of PS3 gameplay up after the beta that look different from the released game.

2. This is about a feature the developer stated the game was built around. Think about GTA V releasing and until people buy the game, they don't know half the world map is gone and one of the 3 playable characters was cut from the game. In a Souls game, not knowing what's down the hall is the game. Turning the levels into grey, washed out and fully lit environments that don't hide anything is breaking the game.

 

[gamerforever]

It's reasonable. Some people are focusing on a beta in the sense of "betas are always different from retail". But:

1. Namco was putting video walkthroughs of PS3 gameplay up after the beta that look different from the released game.

2. This is about a feature the developer stated the game was built around. Think about GTA V release and until people buy the game, they don't know half the world map is gone and one of the 3 playable characters was cut from the game. In a Souls game, not knowing what's down the hall is the game. Turning the levels into grey, washed out and fully lit environments that don't hide anything is breaking the game.

Would love to see the screens in the Official Guide - would provide some clarification. I guess FROM have known for a while going by those official screenshots that got slated.

On the whole I hope it looks as good as DS1 - that will do me, but would love some form of confirmation of a PS4 release.

 

[Raven77]

They had to go to some effort to change the look from the playable beta. They didn't go to that effort just because they enjoy deceiving people.

Technical difficulties happen with every game. It's perfectly excusable because it's not a sin to work on your game and shouldn't have to be excused in the first place.

I'm sorry but again, if a developer is on their third game on a piece of set hardware, how could they possibly overestimate its capabilities. It would be inexcusable at work if I tell a client I can sell them our product at 90% below what we charge. Why should developers be held to a different standard than the rest of the world? What if movies started putting better special effects in the trailers but then said "We ran out of budget, sorry" when the actual movie doesn't look as good? What if a restaurant showed their buffet having shrimp and lobster and steak and then when you get there those items are nowhere to be found?

Inexcusable.

 

[Servbot24]

If I buy the game and the meat of the game is nowhere to be found, as in your analogy, then yes, that will be inexcusable.

 

[pedr0theli0n]

so at this point, I've cancelled my pre-order and then almost immediately regretted that decision and re-preordered. There's no way the game will come out tomorrow and I won't want to play it. Been waiting too damn long.

 

[Garcia]

Demon's Souls / Dark Souls are two of the best games from their gen but the graphics have always been terrible in a technical sense. As long as they maintain the dark atmosphere and A+ gameplay mechanics who cares.

This is precisely why everyone around here is up in arms. The gameplay mechanics radically changed as a consequence of the lighting, texture and effects downgrades.

Dark Souls 2 was originally meant to be a highly tense and atmospheric game. The developers mentioned this in the previews and interviews, they specifically went in-depth with the torch mechanics and how those would add more layers to the existing formula. By the demo footage you could easily tell that the art direction was moving towards a very specific goal.

They ditched all of that, left a console port that misteriously keeps part of the original mechanics (torch lighting effects) and also ended up looking very similar to the first game.

This won't break the game at all. In fact, people are enjoying it, but you just can't selectively forget that what they released is far different from what the originally promised.

 

[Kai Dracon]

Would love to see the screens in the Official Guide - would provide some clarification. I guess FROM have known for a while going by those official screenshots that got slated.

On the whole I hope it looks as good as DS1 - that will do me, but would love some form of confirmation of a PS4 release.

Based on people who have the game, it easily looks as good as Dark Souls, and some details like cloth physics are better.

At this point I think the frustrating thing is that From built the game world with the full lighting system in place, so just turning it off does screw up the art direction and gameplay. So it's not quite a matter of "does it look as good?" More "this isn't balanced the way it should be."

 

[Artanisix]

Servbot24 is the ultimate downgrade sympathizer.

 

[gamerforever]

Based on people who have the game, it easily looks as good as Dark Souls, and some details like cloth physics are better.

At this point I think the frustrating thing is that From built the game world with the full lighting system in place, so just turning it off does screw up the art direction and gameplay. So it's not quite a matter of "does it look as good?" More "this isn't balanced the way it should be."

The lighting really did give the game a new atmosphere - if this is a balance issue, then the PS4 version won't have it either. I think sequels need some form of new ideas and the torch was it - I am guessing some sections became a little unbalanced, so FROM removed it.

Perhaps FROM needed a bit more time to iron out any issues. Will be interesting to read what the reviews say.

On the whole the downgrade is a shame, especially when we are becoming used to the new generation of visuals.

 

[Servbot24]

Servbot24 is the ultimate downgrade sympathizer.

Probably just because I don't mind the changes. The original version looks blown out to me.

 

[mnannola]

The core problem here is not the downgrade, it's the communication (or lack thereof) from the developer. This thread is large because everyone here is just guessing on everything. Guessing if the PC version will be better, trying to find what parts were downgraded and how much they were downgraded by, and why the downgrade was done.

All of this could be stopped with a post by the devs explaining what is going on, and why the game looks so different from the Beta. No one expected anything more than what they showed us in previews. No one expected From to work miracles, they just expected the game to look like what they said the game looked like.

Step up to the plate FROM. Tell us why so much changed, and what to expect in the PC release.

 

[ironcreed]

so at this point, I've cancelled my pre-order and then almost immediately regretted that decision and re-preordered. There's no way the game will come out tomorrow and I won't want to play it. Been waiting too damn long.

I bet my bottom dollar that you will start playing it and will realize that it actually looks better than the first one. Then you will ultimately fall into that addictive Soulsy zone and will not even be paying attention to how it looks anyway.

 

[KCroxtonJr]

I'm sorry but again, if a developer is on their third game on a piece of set hardware, how could they possibly overestimate its capabilities. It would be inexcusable at work if I tell a client I can sell them our product at 90% below what we charge. Why should developers be held to a different standard than the rest of the world? What if movies started putting better special effects in the trailers but then said "We ran out of budget, sorry" when the actual movie doesn't look as good? What if a restaurant showed their buffet having shrimp and lobster and steak and then when you get there those items are nowhere to be found?

Inexcusable.

they developed an entirely new engine for this one, its not like they downgraded the old engine.

movies often remove entire scenes that were actually shown in the trailers for it.

sometimes the food i eat at restaurants doesnt look as advertised, or taste as expected.

lets not act like this is some crazy rare occurence that never happens anywhere until recently.

anyways, in really hoping we can atleast get SOME better graphics beyond increased resolutions for pc. we have 6 weeks to raise hell guys.

 

[Stone Ocean]

so at this point, I've cancelled my pre-order and then almost immediately regretted that decision and re-preordered. There's no way the game will come out tomorrow and I won't want to play it. Been waiting too damn long.

The game is good. This hasn't changed.

It's oh god so ugly but it's good.

 

[Raven77]

they developed an entirely new engine for this one, its not like they downgraded the old engine.

movies often remove entire scenes that were actually shown in the trailers for it.

sometimes the food i eat at restaurants doesnt look as advertised, or taste as expected.

lets not act like this is some crazy rare occurence that never happens anywhere until recently.

anyways, in really hoping we can atleast get SOME better graphics beyond increased resolutions for pc. we have 6 weeks to raise hell guys.

Movies rarely do that, you would send the food back, and you're right, this kind of thing happens all the time.

The point I'm trying to make is that developers and also game publishers should not get a free pass. They should communicate openly about changes to what was already shown. It technically IS false advertising (which is illegal, by the way) for them to show a game and say "this is the game on PS3" then release it and have it look entirely different.