Support NeoGAF

[Grief.exe]

Metroid and Grief, you're going in circles over the same damn images. The door gifs for the retail and TGS look identical with the exception of the door addition (For gameplay purposes) and the lighting, the pics for the pillars and ladders look completely different between TGS and retail.

Just hope for the best and then be satisfied or disappointed when the PC version comes out and inevitably rekindles this whole thing.

I know, I've been trying to break the cycle for two days now, but it just doesn't seem to be clicking.

I think, best case for me is just to bow out and not respond to Metroid at all. I have to get some work done anyways.

Look, everything shown in the PC TGS trailer is EXACTLY THE SAME as what appears in the TGS console demo. They're the same thing.

At no point have you shown ANY differences between the PC trailer (not the reveal) AND the TGS PS3 demo.

EVERYTHING you say about the PC trailer applies 100% to the TGS demo.

I think you are missing the point entirely. Never did I wish to imply that there are any differences between the TGS demo and the PC Trailer at TGS. I just used the PC trailer as it is direct footage, easy to acquire, and more relevant to my interests.

My entire line of reasoning, which others seem to easily follow, hinges around both the TGS Demo/PC Trailer are largely similar to the console release in everything but graphical effects.

My speculation on the TGS Demos being played on PCs is completely irrelevant and tertiary to the main argument. I even said so myself many times.

 

[Stoze]

I would argue that the console downgrades were done quite quickly and last minute.

It looks like From has just increased the brightness across the board, as darkness is now just this gray mist. With the lighting now looks completely flat.

Now useless sconces littered throughout the entire game. Note: Apparently there is one area where using a torch is a necessity.

6 months before a game's release is already last minute for a game of this scale though. And who knows what other changes were made to areas not shown at TGS.

To summarize, I guess I'm just pessimistic about the PC release, and think it will end up being the same as the console versions (including lighting), just with framerate and resolution options, and maybe not even that. Those sconces are still going to be useless. It depends if FROM really meant it when they said developed for PC first or not.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Was the TGS demo running on PS3s for real?

Someone needs to find dat demo disc!

This discussion is fascinating.

 

[Metroid-Squadron]

I think you are missing the point entirely. Never did I wish to imply that there are any differences between the TGS demo and the PC Trailer at TGS. I just used the PC trailer as it is direct footage, easy to acquire, and more relevant to my interests.

Just showing that the TGS Demo and PC Trailer at TGS are largely similar to the console release in everything but graphical effects.

My speculation on the TGS Demos being played on PCs is irrelevant and tertiary to the main argument. I even said so myself many times.

Yes, and I showed that the differences between the TGS and retail game are GREATER than the differences between the PC reveal and the PC trailer/TGS demo.

 

[Grief.exe]

I really doubt that PC version will get any of the lighting, textures and levels stuff that got cut.

I think it's more likely they'll have it in PS4/One non-gimped version they'll try to sell a year later for $60 as complete edition or some bullshit like that. at this point I have zero reason to trust From.

6 months before a game's release is already last minute for a game of this scale though. And who knows what other changes were made to areas not shown at TGS.

To summarize, I guess I'm just pessimistic about the PC release, and think it will end up being the same as the console versions (including lighting), just with framerate and resolution options, and maybe not even that. Those sconces are still going to be useless. It depends if FROM really meant that they developed for PC first or not.

I tend to lean towards the optimistic. I never tried to hide the fact that the PC version is quite possibly just the console release at higher resolutions and frame rates.

There is just a dearth of evidence that points towards a graphically updated PC version. Including the TGS trailer/demo being so similar to the console release, financial incentives for Bandai, screenshots on the Steam page showing the same geometry/textures from the TGS trailer/console version but upgraded lighting from the console release, and From taking 6 extra weeks to potentially finalize the effects missing from the console version.

 

[CountAntonius]

I've got a crazy theory...






What if...follow me here...

What if Sony (or MS) backed a dump truck full of money up to Namco and told them to dumb down the current gen version and make an exclusive next gen version for one of their systems?

Think about it. If the game could look as good as the initial reveal, etc. and they release it on next gen just looking slightly better, most people probably wouldn't care that much.

BUT. If they release it on next gen, say, this fall, and it looks even better than the reveal (with the extra development time) it could be a MASSIVE system seller for one of the next gen consoles.

Namco then spends the next couple months removing high res textures and graphical effects, dropping in old geometry from builds a long while back, etc. I mean, lets face it, some of the graphical effects and texture repetition seen in the retail game does seem like its some sort of pre-alpha build.

Crazy is right. You honestly think This game at 720p and a solid 60 frames per second wouldn't be enough to sell this game on next gen consoles? This is conspiracy theory.

 

[lazer_bean]

I don't understand the outrage in the first place. It should be common knowledge that the PC version looks better. There's absolutely no reason to assume FROM focused on and subsequently previewed the console version during development.

I think FROM should get the benefit of the doubt. Graphics aren't even a high selling point for this series, so I don't see it as something they'd go out of their way to pad.

you said it yourself: you don't understand.

You're right (kind of) though: graphics were never a selling point for Dark souls.
...Until the Dark Souls 2 reveal trailer where FROM started saying they would really focus on graphics for DkSII. This is the reason why people expected great graphics for DSII, because FROM promised them, FROM hyped the graphical improvements there would be in DSII as soon as they revealed it.
And then they led people to believe that the footage they were watching (again, supposed to be running on ps3) would be the game they would buy. Only now do we find out it clearly is not the same thing.

 

[Grief.exe]

Okay! So unless I'm missing something here, the changes seem last minute, right? We saw some, if not all of the downgrades shortly before release.

So those changes were made over performance issues, right? Meaning the lighting model was built and working in-game until fairly late in development.

So why, especially given the delay, would that lighting not be in the PC version, which would not need any considerations on that level for performance? Especially if that same lighting model was running on eight year old consoles, just not very well.

There has to be a line between discussing what will likely happen, and mentally preparing ourselves for the worst.

You have summed up all the speculation in the various threads so far.

It would seem the performance concerns were correct. While doing research for this, I noticed frame rate drops whenever dynamic lighting was initiated.

 

[Gbraga]

Okay! So unless I'm missing something here, the changes seem last minute, right? We saw some, if not all of the downgrades shortly before release.

So those changes were made over performance issues, right? Meaning the lighting model was built and working in-gane until fairly late in development.

So why, especially given the delay, would that lighting not be in the PC version, which would not need any considerations on that level for performance? Especially if that same lighting model was running on eight year old consoles, just not very well.

There has to be a line between discussing what will likely happen, and mentally preparing ourselves for the worst.

No reason at all, but I still think it won't be there.

 

[TimeEffect]

By all means avoid the disc version of the game like the plague. If you don't want to wait any longer to play it, get the digital version instead; you will probably skip most bugs and technical problems.

What's wrong with the disc version? The digital is actually better for PS3?

I have a copy already. Just second guessing if I should open it or not

 

[Metroid-Squadron]

Okay! So unless I'm missing something here, the changes seem last minute, right? We saw some, if not all of the downgrades shortly before release.

So those changes were made over performance issues, right? Meaning the lighting model was built and working in-gane until fairly late in development.

So why, especially given the delay, would that lighting not be in the PC version, which would not need any considerations on that level for performance? Especially if that same lighting model was running on eight year old consoles, just not very well.

There has to be a line between discussing what will likely happen, and mentally preparing ourselves for the worst.

At first that's what we thought, but then we saw that the changes were also in geometry, texturing and enemy placement so it's more likely that the changes were done long ago but kept using the older footage for promotional purposes.

 

[MMaRsu]

This topic came up on the Bombcast yesterday when they had a developer on as a guest. As usual they were pretty dismissive of the backlash but they made some great points about how development often goes. Bullshots suck but scaling back features for a performance boost once you start running out of time makes a lot of sense.

The tone people are using in this thread is making the GB crew's dismissiveness kind of clear to me...

Yeah, that the GB crew doesn't care about informing consumers of false advertising.

 

[phantomspiker]

Okay! So unless I'm missing something here, the changes seem last minute, right? We saw some, if not all of the downgrades shortly before release.

So those changes were made over performance issues, right? Meaning the lighting model was built and working in-gane until fairly late in development.

So why, especially given the delay, would that lighting not be in the PC version, which would not need any considerations on that level for performance? Especially if that same lighting model was running on eight year old consoles, just not very well.

There has to be a line between discussing what will likely happen, and mentally preparing ourselves for the worst.

Depends on what you consider last minute, IGN and Gamespot have videos from late January that closely resemble the retail release.

 

[zephervack]

More GIFs for people that cant watch Youtube at work or mobile.

This is definitely the "what could have been build", Im gonna go have some tequila now.

They all come from the amazing video done by HyperBitHero https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFQoLN89_j8

 

[zma1013]

Ughhh I have just bought a copy of DSII but I want to know: bait and switch aside, how bad is the game compared to Dark Souls I and Demon's Souls in the graphics/performance area for PS3?

I really am considering to sell it

You're probably going to hear mixed opinions about this but I personally feel it's overall worse looking than Dark Souls 1. Sure there are some improvements to be seen, but it doesn't make up for the places where things just plain don't look as good. Lots of pop-in occurs when rounding corners or moving the camera around too fast, particle effects seem worse, distance background objects are often made up of laughable 2D images that are clearly seen, etc etc.

 

[Stoze]

I tend to lean towards the optimistic. I never tried to hide the fact that the PC version is quite possibly just the console release at higher resolutions and frame rates.

There is just a dearth of evidence that points towards a graphically updated PC version. Including the TGS trailer/demo being so similar to the console release, financial incentives for Bandai, screenshots on the Steam page showing the same geometry/textures from the TGS trailer/console version but upgraded lighting from the console release, and From taking 6 extra weeks to potentially finalize the effects missing from the console version.

And that's where I disagree with you I guess, to me that TGS trailer looks different enough from the consoles for me to worry, especially if you see the framerate the PS3 version runs at, and Steam screenshots don't mean proof to me. The extra development time gives me hope though, I'll give you that.

 

[Garcia]

What's wrong with the disc version? The digital is actually better for PS3?

I have a copy already. Just second guessing if I should open it or not

I would suggest you resell it and use the money to get the digital version instead.

By playing the disc version you're setting yourself up for a gamble, basically. If you aren't lucky you will stumble upon these (already confirmed by plenty) bugs that are quite abundant:

• Objects and enemies materializing out of thin air.
• Flickering shadows and light sources.
• Out of sync sound effects.
• Mob animations either freezing entirely or moving at lower FPS (like 5 FPS low).
• Input lag both in the menus' and HUD screens.
• Input lag during gameplay (character not reacting at all).
• Player being "smelted into the wall" during a Boss fight.
• Painful loading times (18 seconds on average for me: quickest was 14s. longest took 42s.)
• Very inconsistent framerate (going from the higher 10s up to 60fps when nothing is happening on screen)
• Holes in geometry.
• Enemies not reacting to the proximity of the player.

Some people have been extremely lucky but for those of us who got the "beta feeling" the problems are a constant.

Edit: Those playing the X360 (retail/full HDD install) and PS3 (digital) versions seem to avoid most of these issues.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Dat Balance! "Balance" has definitely been used more in the past few months than I have heard in an entire generation. It seems to me, in my opinion, that it's an easy excuse for nearly any type of negative towards consoles or games.

Yep.

I happily Unbalance my money back into my wallet.

 

[CountAntonius]

Serious question, as I've only started following this situation recently: when you say false advertising are you talking about preview footage or something else?

Along with final retail footage there was also footage of what was either an earlier build with lighting intact or PC footage in previews for the console version.

 

[Raven77]

Crazy is right. You honestly think This game at 720p and a solid 60 frames per second wouldn't be enough to sell this game on next gen consoles? This is conspiracy theory.

Most definitely not. The game looks like it came from 2009 in its current state. By the time they would try to release this as a "next gen game" later this year, it would be laughed at.

 

[Grief.exe]

Serious question, as I've only started following this situation recently: when you say false advertising are you talking about preview footage or something else?

Bandai is using footage/screenshots from the Reveal Vertical Slice in April and the TGS Demo/Trailer to market the console version of Dark Souls.

Effects from both areas are not currently present in the console retail version.

Bandai is currently using the footage/screenshots from the Reveal Vertical Slice to advertise the PC version. Whether the effects missing from the console version ultimately make it into the PC version remain to be seen.

And that's where I disagree with you I guess, to me that TGS trailer looks different enough from the consoles for me to worry, especially if you see the framerate the PS3 version runs at, and Steam screenshots don't mean proof to me. The extra development time gives me hope though, I'll give you that.

It is fundamentally the same in terms of geometry and textures other than a few minor differences, the graphical effects are the major difference between the TGS version and the retail console version.

 

[CountAntonius]

Most definitely not. The game looks like it came from 2009 in its current state. By the time they would try to release this as a "next gen game" later this year, it would be laughed at.

No it won't. Assuming the difference is DS console to Durante Edition plus 60fps it would sell like hotcakes.

At the very least this will be the upgrade level of the PC version.

 

[The Lamp]

No response would have been better, gamers get too worked up about shit like this.

I bet you like getting falsely advertised to by all the companies you purchase from, huh?

 

[Shmuely Bully]

I blame Namco personally.

From Software has never made a huge deal out of graphical fidelity, even if they mentioned the graphics improvements this time around they weren't the selling point for them and never really have been for their games. Namco as a publisher on the other hand has gone back on their word on a number of occasions, even with the original Dark Souls (remember the SE downgrade?) and I give them a lot less leeway on things than I do From.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Serious question, as I've only started following this situation recently: when you say false advertising are you talking about preview footage or something else?

The widely distributed TGS demo is a big culprit and a huge cause of contention. The lack of current PC build content and clarity doesn't help

 

[RetroStu]

I have been watching a playthrough of the orig Dark Souls today and i swear you would think the first game was the sequel, not the other war around. The first game had decent framerate, nice wall textures, tons of wet textures that looked great, lovely lighting etc.
Even items and souls used to glow and light up the area, you can barely see the souls in the sequel.

I honestly don't know what happened with the sequel but it looks awful compared to the first game imo.

 

[Totobeni]

Yeah, that the GB crew doesn't care about informing consumers of false advertising.

I completely lost all respect I had for that site and especially for Brad and Klepek.

Ok you love the series but you should do you job, attacking fans and calling them crazy, defending a downgrade, not telling their readers and hiding a big case of deceptive because you like the series or developer is just pathetic really.

 

[Garcia]

Im gonna go have some tequila now.

:-( (same feels, bro).

 

[FairXchange]

I bet you like getting falsely advertised to by all the companies you purchase from, huh?

I didn't look at pre-launch footage of DS2, and in its retail form the game that Dark Souls 2 is, is quite simply incredible. So no, I don't have the same problems many of the people in this thread, and the other 3 threads about this topic, are having. In fact, I'm having the exact opposite experience in the sense that I'm enjoying a game that manages to be as gripping and addictive as its predecessors.

 

[Metroid-Squadron]

It is fundamentally the same in terms of geometry and textures other than a few minor differences, the graphical effects are the major difference between the TGS version and the retail console version.

Except not. TGS vs retail is far more different than PC reveal vs TGS.

 

[HRose]

It's an extremely condescending answer. I'd say it's actually insulting.

 

[The Lamp]

I didn't look at pre-launch footage of DS2, and in its retail form, the game that Dark Souls 2 is, is quite simply incredible. So no, I don't have the same problems many of the people in this thread, and the other 3 threads about this topic, are having. In fact, I'm having the exact opposite experience in the sense that I'm enjoying a game that manages to be as gripping and addictive as its predecessors.

Just because you didn't look at pre-launch footage because you like blindly buying your products does NOT mean that the issue at hand is negligible for everyone else, though.

I'm enjoying the game, I have 40 hours into it right now. It is very easy to separate that fact from the fact that I was lied to as a consumer and this is a very disappointing downgrade.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Bandai is using footage/screenshots from the Reveal Vertical Slice in April and the TGS Demo/Trailer to market the console version of Dark Souls.

Effects from both areas are not currently present in the console retail version.

Bandai is currently using the footage/screenshots from the Reveal Vertical Slice to advertise the PC version. Whether the effects missing from the console version ultimately make it into the PC version remain to be seen.



It is fundamentally the same in terms of geometry and textures other than a few minor differences, the graphical effects are the major difference between the TGS version and the retail console version.

I somewhat disagree here

Outside of the contentious TGS demo the content has been across the board since January.

Thr launch trailer clearly shows footage from all versions

Its confusing to say the least. Im not defending them but its more all over the place than just then pushing the reveal as pc and tgs as console

 

[zephervack]

I have been watching a playthrough of the orig Dark Souls today and i swear you would think the first game was the sequel, not the other war around. The first game had decent framerate, nice wall textures, tons of wet textures that looked great, lovely lighting etc.
Even items and souls used to glow and light up the area, you can barely see the souls in the sequel.

I honestly don't know what happened with the sequel but it looks awful compared to the first game imo.

I think once Dark Souls 2 releases on PC and we start getting screenshots @ 4k, it will be evident that DS2 does indeed look better than DS1, but I think DS2 is not as consistent as DS1 in the art department.

 

[Raven77]

No it won't. Assuming the difference is DS console to Durante Edition plus 60fps it would sell like hotcakes.

At the very least this will be the upgrade level of the PC version.

Well we'll see I guess. But I think a game that looks decidedly last gen will most definitely suffer come this fall. It would offer very few reasons for anyone who already bought it to "double dip". That is why the new Tomb Raider sold well on current gen consoles, because they showed much more than just a resolution and framerate increase.

 

[cakely]

I have been watching a playthrough of the orig Dark Souls today and i swear you would think the first game was the sequel, not the other war around. The first game had decent framerate, nice wall textures, tons of wet textures that looked great, lovely lighting etc.
Even items and souls used to glow and light up the area, you can barely see the souls in the sequel.

I honestly don't know what happened with the sequel but it looks awful compared to the first game imo.

Blighttown begs to disagree with you on the "decent framerate" point.

This is making me glad I'm waiting until next month for the steam version, though.

 

[Garcia]

I have been watching a playthrough of the orig Dark Souls today and i swear you would think the first game was the sequel, not the other war around. The first game had decent framerate, nice wall textures, tons of wet textures that looked great, lovely lighting etc.

There's one area in Dark Souls 2 where the wet textures look like jelly.

Spoiler

Drangleic Castle's

exteriors. It's pretty weird.

 

[Stinkles]

Serious question and don't attack me, and this is a serious question but aren't the graphics in DS really secondary to the gameplay and holistic atmosphere (which I understand graphics affect)?

 

[TimeEffect]

I would suggest you resell it and use the money to get the digital version instead.

By playing the disc version you're setting yourself up for a gamble, basically. If you aren't lucky you will stumble upon these (already confirmed by plenty) bugs that are quite abundant:

• Objects and enemies materializing out of thin air.
• Flickering shadows and light sources.
• Out of sync sound effects.
• Mob animations either freezing entirely or moving at lower FPS (like 5 FPS low).
• Input lag both in the menus' and HUD screens.
• Input lag during gameplay (character not reacting at all).
• Player being "smelted into the wall" during a Boss fight.
• Painful loading times (18 seconds on average for me: quickest was 14s. longest took 42s.)
• Very inconsistent framerate (going from the higher 10s up to 60fps when nothing is happening on screen)
• Holes in geometry.
• Enemies not reacting to the proximity of the player.

Some people have been extremely lucky but for those of us who got the "beta feeling" the problems are a constant.

Edit: Those playing the X360 (retail/full HDD install) and PS3 (digital) versions seem to avoid most of these issues.

Christtttttt almighty!! No joke??

I had the armored edition too...

Now im strongly considering to sell it and just buying some other games..

 

[Grief.exe]

That last part has been bothering me, which is why I've been following this a bit more.

So the TGS preview is what most of this leans on? Because the videos in January that I've been looking at seem pretty close to the retail version.

I'm not sure to what point enemy placements or textures changed between that and retail, as someone else pointed out. All I'll say there is that anyone who has used modern tools like Unity or the kits that have been shipping with a lot of RPGs from the last couple years would know how inconsequential it is to adjust things like that these days. Unless FROM uses really complex tools for some reason.

The TGS footage was used up through January essentially, so you were looking at that.

That footage was mostly the same in geometry/textures as the retail console build that ended up shipping, the enemy placement has changed slightly as well as some other, trivial differences.

I somewhat disagree here

Outside of the contentious TGS demo the content has been across the board since January.

Thr launch trailer clearly shows footage from all versions

Its confusing to say the least. Im not defending them but its more all over the place than just then pushing the reveal as pc and tgs as console

I'm just stating the points concisely. I do agree that From has been just showing the console footage since ~February.

Serious question and don't attack me, and this is a serious question but aren't the graphics in DS really secondary to the gameplay and holistic atmosphere (which I understand graphics affect)?

You are correct, the majority of this thread is trying to get some information about the PC version which has been left in the dark.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

Except not. TGS vs retail is far more different than PC reveal vs TGS.

I don't agree, there's a great disparity in textures and effects. Outside they might not look that different, there's a lot of details like the higher number of specular maps, way better textures, way better blur.

Is basically the difference of a fully next-gen version and a scaled down current version.

 

[CountAntonius]

Well we'll see I guess. But I think a game that looks decidedly last gen will most definitely suffer come this fall. It would offer very few reasons for anyone who already bought it to "double dip". That is why the new Tomb Raider sold well on current gen consoles, because they showed much more than just a resolution and framerate increase.

I'd believe that in franchises that were graphical showcases but people don't expect God of War when they buy a Dark Souls game and since enough people are enjoying it as is I'm sure a bump in resolution and framerate would be enough to sell a next gen version.

 

[Stoze]

It is fundamentally the same in terms of geometry and textures other than a few minor differences, the graphical effects are the major difference between the TGS version and the retail console version.

Yeah, I heard you the first time. In my first post the drastic changes in terms of geometry and textures I was referring to were from the first reveal, I should've been more specific about that. That being said the changes since that TGS trailer and even more recent footage still seem like drastic changes to me in terms of lighting and color aesthetic, and leave me with doubts for the PC version.

The major changes over what has occured in less than a year since the first first reveal bother me to the point where I think pretty much everything was scrapped and we are left with what we see on the console versions, lighting and paricle effects included, for the PC.

I want to be wrong, but if not Dark Souls II is still a good looking game.

 

[CadetMahoney]

I really doubt that PC version will get any of the lighting, textures and levels stuff that got cut.

I think the ultimate troll would be to cut out the lighting from the PC version so as not "expose" the shortcomings of the console version and make ppl who paid $60 not feel like they got a broken game when they see the PC version how it was meant to be and marketed.

For example the lighting is a gameplay mechanic, since it's so bright because of the downgrade you can see enemies pop in, you don't need to light torches to see through the dark etc. putting it into the PC version would expose all the nerfs with no apology or nothing. So I can see them not including it so ppl won't complain outside of "fringe groups" and "troublemakers" no one cares about.

Gaming press will keep up it's wall of silence of course giving credence to it just being a minority of butthurt pussies complaining.

 

[Metroid-Squadron]

I don't agree, there's a great disparity in textures and effects. Outside they might not look that different, there's a lot of details like the higher number of specular maps, way better textures, way better blur.

Is basically the difference of a fully next-gen version and a scaled down current version.

Don't tell me, show me.

 

[BumblebeeCody]

All these balance changes makes me think they should rename the game to Dark Souls 2: Turbo

 

[HeelPower]

Yes, it is quite bothering.

the game can look really good sometimes and really poor in others = laziness imo

It could have all looked good.

 

[Coreda]

My god, these endless threads lol. Well I suppose we were half expecting some non-answer. Only when the PC version releases will everyone know if anything was left in.

 

[Amir0x]

Serious question and don't attack me, and this is a serious question but aren't the graphics in DS really secondary to the gameplay and holistic atmosphere (which I understand graphics affect)?

It depends. Yes, the graphics aren't a focal point, but yes the brooding atmosphere and environs directly leads to the pleasure many people get from it. They were planning to enhance that feeling with their new visual flairs, which they advertised literally only a few weeks before the game came out, including many visual elements which fundamentally impacted gameplay. One boss is basically entirely fucking lame shit now without the new lighting system.

But the key thing is this: they advertised this as being the game we were getting until the eve of this game's release, told no one that this downgraded essentially beta product is what we'd be getting instead, and journalists did no one any jobs to fill consumers in either.

They basically straight misled all their fans and thought they could get away with it. THAT is the problem

 

[pretty done]

I have been watching a playthrough of the orig Dark Souls today and i swear you would think the first game was the sequel, not the other war around. The first game had decent framerate, nice wall textures, tons of wet textures that looked great, lovely lighting etc.
Even items and souls used to glow and light up the area, you can barely see the souls in the sequel.

I honestly don't know what happened with the sequel but it looks awful compared to the first game imo.

You were watching the PC version.