Dark Souls 3 Trailer (Gamescom 2015)


This is ridiculous. You haven't actually pointed out a single thing that has been downgraded, you're just linking trailers. I've played the game some 300 hours and nothing I've seen in either of these trailers was downgraded for the final release as far as I can tell. You need to either stop being so vague, or stop being so obtuse.

As for the alpha footage vs final release - again, where is the downgrade? They had the alpha and the final game take place in different lighting situations, but there isn't any downgrade there, it's just the art direction changed slightly. Furthermore, If the alpha can run acceptably, why would they even need to downgrade it in the first place?
 
This looks like Demons + Bloodborne to me, couldn't have asked for anything better. Will praise the sun again, thanks Big M for gifting us with one more souls game. \[+]/
 
WYiqgn5.png

uvPfgRh.gif
 
What's your problem. You're again linking to a trailer that makes heavy use of cinematic filters.

Don't dare telling me that the word "gameplay" trailer somehow means you're not allowed to use such graphical filters.

So this isn't *at all* showing one thing and selling another just like Dark Souls 2 did. Okay.
 
This is ridiculous. You haven't actually pointed out a single thing that has been downgraded, you're just linking trailers. I've played the game some 300 hours and nothing I've seen in either of these trailers was downgraded for the final release as far as I can tell. You need to either stop being so vague, or stop being so obtuse.

As for the alpha footage vs final release - again, where is the downgrade? They had the alpha and the final game take place in different lighting situations, but there isn't any downgrade there, it's just the art direction changed slightly. Furthermore, If the alpha can run acceptably, why would they even need to downgrade it in the first place?

Like I said on the last page, there isn't much I can do if you can't see it yourself. I've put my fair share of too many hours into Bloodborne and it is *OBVIOUS* when I look back at these trailers.
 
I mentioned it in the conference thread but how does From keep making games like this so quickly? With all the games, and now the DLC expansions etc. Some developers seem to get stuck on making one thing for 10 years!

Looks amazing. *faints*

As awesome as they are to play, the games are not technical masterpieces (BB load times and aliasing, ds1 sewer, ds2 downgrade). Some will also complain that they are not 60fps.

Those don't bother me because the games are still amazing and I love playing them. Just keep it at 30fps and Im a happy camper.
 
I think it's due to the games having the same underlying engine and these folks being master craftsmen at using their tool enough to make gameplay tweaks and improvements as well.

All of the Souls games and Bloodborne are terrific games (regardless of where Dark Souls 2 stands in relation to the others). This is a testament to FROM's talent and focus.

Reposting this on the new page for folks who begin talking about FROM pumping the games out.
 
Looks roughly the same to me

One just looks like it has the brightness and contrast pumped way up on the display

I tried to change alot of setting on my tv but the game never looked as good as the alpha.

I even tried playing it on my pc monitor and still...


and like I said it's a small downgrade. it wasn't remotely close to DS2's situation and most ppl didn't notice it.

I wouldn't worry at all :)
 

Where's the downgrade?

These areas looks like that in the final game, same level of detail, models and textures. You don't fight Cleric Beast at night, but if you revisit that area later, you can see it looks like that.

1) I'm exaggerating for the sake of attention because people get supremely blinded by their adoration for certain game designers on this site (and plenty of other places) plus the torrent of "B-team" bullshit that has been spewed against Dark Souls 2.

2) It is hard to describe something very minute and detailed and the best I can do is just put them side by side and say "LOOK". If you can't notice, I can't do much else.

...I see
 
I'm definitely liking the look of the environments here, too. The first sweeping shot we get of the castle and the area that surrounds it makes it look very expansive and gives me hope that that area will be as interwoven in a similar fashion to the Undead Burg.
 
Its best to ignore the downgrade people. More often than not theyre spouting off about exceedingly minuscule things or stuff they have no substantial proof of anyway.

I didnt enjoy Ds2 as much as the other souls games but the lighting downgrade wasnt the biggest reason for that.
 
Like I said on the last page, there isn't much I can do if you can't see it yourself. I've put my fair share of too many hours into Bloodborne and it is *OBVIOUS* when I look back at these trailers.

WHAT is obvious? Exactly what was downgraded? You can't possibly expect anyone to listen to you when you're being so vague.
 
You can definitely tell the direction they are taking this game has been influenced from what they did on Bloodborne. The art direction, and color scheme certainly look more like Bloodborne than what was done in DeS and DS1. I just hope they are able to recreate that sense of isolation, and dread that the first two games had. It was pure atmosphere. Something that IMO they didn't achieve with DS2 and Bloodborne. I never felt scared of any enemies in the last two games, or never had a moment as tense as I did with the Tower of Latria, Sens Fortress, and Tomb of Giants.
 
I hope Dark Souls 3 will have the build customisation, world variety and amount of content of DaS2+DLC.

As much as i loved Bloodborne, it wasn't the DaS2 experience i was hoping for, it was really really good, but different.
 
Bloodborne is vary close in scope and quality to its original pitch

seems beyond silly to complain about it

Sure, but that's not the initial point I was making and you're trying to downplay my argument into something else.

There *was* a downgrade to Bloodborne. It's not as big as Dark Souls 2, obviously, but to say there wasn't is asinine. Every game goes through these sorts of cuts. There was a horde of cut content from Dark Souls 1 and I assume there was a horde of it cut from Bloodborne. The most obvious example is "Umbasa" from Gascoigne that just hints at a Demon's Souls connection that may or may not have been there and probably something we'll never know about.
 
I hope Dark Souls 3 will have the build customisation, world variety and amount of content of DaS2+DLC.

As much as i loved Bloodborne, it wasn't the DaS2 experience i was hoping for, it was good, but different.

The earlier details made it sound like it's even more ramped up from DS2, with specific abilities like the spin attack in the trailer that you can equip on top on weapons.
 
So this isn't *at all* showing one thing and selling another just like Dark Souls 2 did. Okay.

It isn't. The Dark Souls 2 pre-release demos had actually better assets and a improved lighting engine. Not comparable to the use of overlayed filters.

There was, but not as huge as DS2's

Looks like someone upped their brightness. I see that the lights aren't as bloomy as the final release but this is how it looks when you don't fuck up your RGB levels and contrast/brightness settings:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrzeVPbs8vc
 
I tried to change alot of setting on my tv but the game never looked as good as the alpha.

I even tried playing it on my pc monitor and still...


and like I said it's a small downgrade. it wasn't remotely close to DS2's situation and most ppl didn't notice it.

I wouldn't worry at all :)

That would be because it's not a downgrade. Changing your monitor settings isn't going to change the fact that the lighting is different in the two versions as they take place in two different circumstances. The alpha was dead of night, while the final version was dusk. The game only has the same midnight-looking lighting in some areas.

And the final game looked a lot better overall than the alpha. A lot of things were improved.
 
Now, I have to choose which system to get it on.

PC is my default system. Modding tools, usually better performance.

My PS4 is in a more comfortable location in my house.

Most of my real life friends are on Xbox One. I like saving clips and having people comment.

Hmmm.
 
Its best to ignore the downgrade people. More often than not theyre spouting off about exceedingly minuscule things or stuff they have no substantial proof of anyway.

I didnt enjoy Ds2 as much as the other souls games but the lighting downgrade wasnt the biggest reason for that.

Same here. I wish the mods would do something about it derailing this thread.
 
ITT: People so pissed that DS2 got critized for being graphically downgraded looking for downgrades in other Souls games to make them feel better.
 
Sure, but that's not the initial point I was making and you're trying to downplay my argument into something else.

There *was* a downgrade to Bloodborne. It's not as big as Dark Souls 2, obviously, but to say there wasn't is asinine. Every game goes through these sorts of cuts. There was a horde of cut content from Dark Souls 1 and I assume there was a horde of it cut from Bloodborne. The most obvious example is "Umbasa" from Gascoigne that just hints at a Demon's Souls connection that may or may not have been there and probably something we'll never know about.

There wasn't a downgrade. The graphics were improved continually during development. To say there was a downgrade when the only proof you have are trailers that don't exhibit any differences to the final game except some camera angles and camera effects that didn't make the final cut is what is asinine.

Yes, content gets cut from games, everyone knows this. But "downgrade" is a word with very special context on this forum.
 
Top Bottom