The game probably ran like shit and they had to scale back the tech. /thread
wtf is the issue here?
- It still runs like shit (on PS3).
- They kept showing a version of the game that clearly doesn't look like the final product.
The game probably ran like shit and they had to scale back the tech. /thread
wtf is the issue here?
Man, gaf has become brutal against devs and pubs. Nothing they say could make you guys happy, short of "April fool's! It totally looks better now!"
Things change in development, guys. That's how it works.
Nevermind that this is nothing like the Colonial Marines debacle. Colonial Marines was in development hell, was outsourced, and came out a piece of shit overall. Dark Souls II is still a great game overall at least, it's just that From likely had to strip away graphical details to make the game run at playable framerates at the last minute, and Bamco decided to keep promoting the old version, possibly without From's knowledge.Did people defend Gearbox this adamantly with their bait and switch on Aliens:CM?
Yes, that's the reason I am hopeful.Well the framerate on the console version is unlocked and goes above 30 from time to time, so it seems likely.
That was an entirely different game. The demo made by Gearbox was completely scrapped, and the developer they hired on rebuilt it... sort of. Not really comparable to downgrading a game so it can run on previous gen consoles.Did people defend Gearbox this adamantly with their bait and switch on Aliens:CM?
But it won't.
Not because PCs aren't capable to handle the difference, but because I can't really see a Japanese publisher/developer releasing on what they consider a minor, secondary platform a version of the game that puts in shame the one they offered to their core audience on consoles.
Nevermind that this is nothing like the Colonial Marines debacle. Colonial Marines was in development hell, was outsourced, and came out a piece of shit overall. Dark Souls II is still a great game overall at least, it's just that From likely had to strip away graphical details to make the game run at playable framerates at the last minute, and Bamco decided to keep promoting the old version, possibly without From's knowledge.
They shouldn't lie.Man, gaf has become brutal against devs and pubs. Nothing they say could make you guys happy, short of "April fool's! It totally looks better now!"
Things change in development, guys. That's how it works.
120 FPS Souls would be awesome.
Yep. It's getting insane. I like good graphics as much as the next guy, but it's just all too much.
Isn't that the exact same reason they gabe for the locked resolution in DS1 PC? We're fucked."Continuity in graphical quality"
![]()
Yeah, that is a jerky way to open up a response. Have fun with your pitchforks guys.Are you new to gaming? I am being serious, not trying to be a jerk.
They shouldn't lie.
These guys are professionals. They have enough experience with this franchise and developing in general to know what is feasible in the long run. Don't market it as being graphically amazing, then deliver something lesser and claim graphics aren't a big deal.
They should have never marketed the console versions the way they did I guess.
Oh well
Except that we've seen *tons* of console screenshots that showed the game indeed didn't look great.We have repeatedly been told that it was running on console hardware. The developmental downgrade itself isn't the issue here, it's only finding out about it upon release. If constantly posting gameplay shots from the pre-downgrade build up until release and claiming it is running on the console isn't being intentionally misleading then I don't know what is. The game did not go gold and ship to consumers the same day as the developers finding out that the game wouldn't look like the promotional material.
kinda, from watching the aliens comparisons it looks like that game got a pretty massive visual downgrade tooUh, true, but it's also true that the difference is even more striking in this case.
The end result reeks of a rush job - leaving the textures as-is without modifying them to accommodate the scaled-down lighting, for starters. And altering/removing geometry to reduce the polygon count isn't remotely difficult or time consuming, especially if the pieces of the environment that were actually removed were separate objects - in modern level editors, entire levels are generally a whole bunch of bits and pieces as separate objects, with larger, connected pieces of geometry generally being much, much simpler.You really think they altered entire geometry and altered the lighting in a major way at the last minute?
The biggest issue with this game is that they renamed Sticky White Stuff.
This is absolutely disgraceful, and now I have to decide if I want to cancel my pre-order or not.
Why wouldn't they? It rarely gets out, but it's definitely not out of ordinary to have to make drastic cuts at the end of development due to unexpected problems and especially since they had most of the features working at some point having to strip away things at the last minute would certainly result in a drastic drop in quality we've seen so far. Marketing with the old stuff is certainly questionable, but it's fair to note that the marketing material is usually done way before the game goes gold so there's little time to come up with totally new material and it happens because there's hardly any consequence to showing off touched-up or purely marketing material because that happens in pretty much every gametrailer. Something that should definitely change, but given the pressure the publisher has and lack of consequence isn't pointing in the right direction.You really think they altered entire geometry and altered the lighting in a major way at the last minute?
Except that we've seen *tons* of console screenshots that showed the game indeed didn't look great.
Pretty much every Dark Souls 2 screenshot thread was filled with 'this is ugly' comments and rightfully so.
This is why I cannot get fully behind this "movement". The mere idea that we are trying to equal situations like Aliens:Colonial marines to DS2 is -way- out of proportion and merit.This is the major issue at hand. If we are going to roast EA and Gearbox for this... I know Demon Souls is a sacred cow among a large portion of membership of GAF, but this whole thing is sleazy.
Why maybe ? I mean it's the lead platform ( which mean so much, right ?), got delayed to make the PC version optimal, and the steam page is still using pre-downgrade trailers to sell the game.Maybe its graphically amazing on PC
BINGO!!
JFYI, your "oh well" is something other people feel a little more strongly about.
The faux outrage in this thread is pathetic. This happens in the development of many games, and quite frankly the souls series was never a graphical showcase in the first place. It's always been about the gameplay, the challenge, the lore and the learning experience - all of which stack up against Demons and Dark.
DSII achieves its look from the dark fantasy art it's inspired by, not by a lighting engine that would have crippled the frame rate on current gen consoles. The game is great, it's a souls game through and through, and the graphics are on par/better than previous iterations. Get off your soapbox people, and judge the game on what you have rather than what you don't have.
Thats where reasonable reflection come in.
The game performs favorably alongside its predecessors on the platform and its good. Not to mention the high fidelity PC version on thr horizon.
It sucks how it was marketed but not THAT bad. If it wasn't marketed at all everyone would be happy to have it.
I get the disappointment about a lack of transparency but this is far less offensive than what we saw in Colonial Marines
The backlash seems to outweigh the issue itself.
Things change, yes. Developers get praised when their game looks better than the WIP they showed before and devs get criticised when the game looks worse. It's not like the typical gamer (or GAFer) is an enigma, the psychology is pretty easy to understand. It's not like this kind of backlash has never happened before.Man, gaf has become brutal against devs and pubs. Nothing they say could make you guys happy, short of "April fool's! It totally looks better now!"
Things change in development, guys. That's how it works.
- It still runs like shit (on PS3).
- They kept showing a version of the game that clearly doesn't look like the final product.
Too bad the game is lacking in the art department as well. Some areas are downright hideous. Blighttown and Lost Izalith are masterpieces compared to shit like the Shaded Woods or Tseldora. Seriously, at least the past Souls games were somewhat consistent despite the highs and lows but DS2 is all over the place.The faux outrage in this thread is pathetic. This happens in the development of many games, and quite frankly the souls series was never a graphical showcase in the first place. It's always been about the gameplay, the challenge, the lore and the learning experience - all of which stack up against Demons and Dark.
DSII achieves its look from the dark fantasy art it's inspired by, not by a lighting engine that would have crippled the frame rate on current gen consoles. The game is great, it's a souls game through and through, and the graphics are on par/better than previous iterations. Get off your soapbox people, and judge the game on what you have rather than what you don't have.
You aren't seeing the bigger picture.Thats where reasonable reflection come in.
The game performs favorably alongside its predecessors on the platform and its good. Not to mention the high fidelity PC version on thr horizon.
It sucks how it was marketed but not THAT bad. If it wasn't marketed at all everyone would be happy to have it.
I get the disappointment about a lack of transparency but this is far less offensive than what we saw in Colonial Marines
The backlash seems to outweigh the issue itself.
The number of stawmen arguments in this thread is staggering. Again, people are not upset at the final product. They are upset at the intentional deception that was and is still being used to market the game to consumers.
Except that we've seen *tons* of console screenshots that showed the game indeed didn't look great.
Pretty much every Dark Souls 2 screenshot thread was filled with 'this is ugly' comments and rightfully so.
This is the sad truth of it. There is no story here. If you want to drag these companies (devs, pubs, throw 'em all in) through the coals every time there's a whiff of disparity, then you've got your work cut out for you. The idea of From (and yes, even BN) wringing their hands with an evil grin while making/promoting "fake" content to mislead people is ridiculous.
If you feel you've been lied to or misinformed, take the game back or don't buy it in the first place. Pretty easy to get all the info you need before making a purchasing decision these days.
And I'm sorry for repeating myself, but please people, stop making honest consumers/fans out to be "blinded" by their appreciation for the series and what it stands for. It's just as insulting as what you're claiming to be offended and shocked by.
"Everyone does it" is about the poorest excuse for a shitty business practice I can think of.Is this deception not used in almost all gaming products nowadays, and always has been? We constantly see bullshots of games that don't look like the final product.
Well, that's Bamco's fault, not From's. For all we know, From might not have had a damn clue what Bamco was up to with the marketing, while Bamco was more than happy to parade an older build to make the game look good.The number of stawmen arguments in this thread is staggering. Again, people are not upset at the final product. They are upset at the intentional deception that was and is still being used to market the game to consumers.
Is this deception not used in almost all gaming products nowadays, and always has been? We constantly see bullshots of games that don't look like the final product. They hit a bump in the road with development and this statement shows they're being honest about it.
You aren't seeing the bigger picture.
This isn't about comparing it to Colonial Marines.
This is about how this blatantly false marketing is becoming commonplace in the industry.