Support NeoGAF

[mickcenary]

Goddamn at people in here asserting that DS1 looks better than DS2. I mean, opinions and all, but that's got to be as close as you can get to an objectively wrong one.

Look at Majula.
Look at Heide.
Look at each game's respective sprawling outdoor castles.
Look at the cloth physics.

DS2's highs are noticeably higher than DS1's. Failing to see that is just mind boggling to me. I know that this isn't really the issue at hand here, but I feel like being the victim of From's jilting has really clouded the judgement of a few posters.

 

[Snapshot King]

Goddamn at people in here asserting that DS1 looks better than DS2. I mean, opinions and all, but that's got to be as close as you can get to an objectively wrong one.

Look at Majula.
Look at Heide.
Look at each game's respective sprawling outdoor castles.
Look at the cloth physics.

DS2's highs are noticeably higher than DS1's. Failing to see that is just mind boggling to me. I know that this isn't really the issue at hand here, but I feel like being the victim of From's jilting has really clouded the judgement of a few posters.

Look at the Shaded Woods.

 

[CadetMahoney]

They couldn't get the fundamentals right AND it ended up looking the same/slightly worse in the end.

What Irks me more are the bigger problems of sound design and general sound fuck-ups.

There's a lot of out of sync sound effects in the game where you get delayed sound effects that throw you off. Added to this is the weightlessness of hit animations.

It sloppy and not at all what I expected from Souls.

Coming from From I don't know what to expect anymore.

More backlash as From hypes up Dark Souls Infinite as the true successor to Dark Souls.

That backlash will be tremendous.

 

[Raitaro]

After both understanding and agreeing to people's sentiments towards DS2 in terms of animations feeling different / off, I do wonder why we (in my memory) never had similar in-depth analyses of the differences between DS1 and DeS. Perhaps because of its PS3 exclusivity / the fact that most people joined the party at DS1?

While I enjoyed both DS1 and DeS almost equally, and am enjoying DS2 despite it requiring me to adjust to it for some hours, for me there is a worrying trend going from DeS to DS1 (and DS2 as well) when it comes to a reduction in overall atmosphere.

Watching Christopher Odd's let's play on YouTube of DeS just yesterday up until Boletaria Palace and some of Stonefang, I was reminded again how atmospheric this game is - perhaps more so and far more consistently so than both its sequels in many ways.

It's all in the little, more subtle things, as usual:
- the little light producing crystal you have on your belt (which was strangely absent from DS1 despite your character still giving off an aura of light);
- the background sounds such as the ones in Boletaria Palace (world 1) where you hear a background static combined with crows that really emphasizes that you are in a mostly abandoned, but massive structure that in many places lies on a high altitude;
- the way NPC's turn their head to follow your movement, even when not talking to them yet;
- a character like the last Monumental who is surrounded by his perished brethren and who talks to you in the opening (where you emerge out of the black mist - another cool feature) and then later to explain some of the lore;
- the opening cinematic which is just epic in its blending of fantasy with horror;
- the music in general perhaps, due to it's larger use of choir vocals;
- things like the fat officials in Boletaria Palace waiting for you and setting traps for you (such as with the Tower Knight and the crossbowmen - a far more interesting fight compared to it's equivalent in Sen's Fortress I feel) - which creates the feeling that the whole game world is actively out to get you instead of you stumbling into it in a way in DS1 (up until you meet the primordial serpent that is);
- more rubble and other environmental details such as dead horses, broken carriages, fires, and crows flying away (when comparing castle areas again, Undead Burg in DS1 had some, but far less so than Boletaria Palace in DeS).

This is by no means a full analysis as I've only watched the beginning of DeS again recently, but I would love to read one if anyone that played all three games recently ever made it. And I do admit that some of these points might be due to nostalgia / me starting with DeS.

Nevertheless I'd like to know if there were any significant animation differences going from DeS to DS1. I never felt any, while I did immediately pick up on them from DS1 to DS2. Can someone here comment?

What I'm tryng to say, is that many people seemed to have started with DS1 and therefore have never scrutinized the transition between DeS and DS1 as thoroughly as they could/should. For me, as someone who started with DeS, DS1 never felt like a complete, 100% improvement over DeS. Sure, the interconnected world is great, as are the very varied environments and overall UI and weapon designs, but gone in a way is quite a bit of the special atmosphere sauce that made DeS so special. The Boletaria castle area alone proves this imo, as it is still the best medieval combat simulator ever made in a way, with both DS1 and DS2 castle areas not really trumping it.

So to reiterate: Is there indeed a worrying trend of less atmosphere overall and less environmental detail going from DeS to DS1 to DS2? I'm inclined to go with "yes". And, has there ever been an anlysis that goes into detail how DeS and DS1 differ from each other in terms of graphics / lighting and animation / game feel?

 

[Brerlappin]

So to reiterate: Is there indeed a worrying trend of less atmosphere overall and less environmental detail going from DeS to DS1 to DS2? I'm inclined to go with "yes". And, has there ever been an anlysis that goes into detail how DeS and DS1 differ from each other in terms of graphics / lighting and animation / game feel?

I just get the feeling that this is the 'Arkham Origins' of the series. Yeah on the surface it looks similar, you can see it ticks all the boxes, but its lacking the magic of its predecessors and was made mostly, by people who dont really understand what it was that made its prequels so special.
Atmosphere in souls games is paramount to me. Like you said, the sound of the crows in Boletaria, its so evocative, and makes the place feel so desolate and foreboding. And stuff like New Londo in DS, when you drain the water out of New Londo, and it reveals all the bodies of the drowned people who were sacrificed to keep the 4 Kings and the Dickwraiths sealed away, and the ambient noise changes to this kind of oppressive, claustrophobic sound like wind echoing in a massive empty chamber only now its mixed with barely audible cries and wailing...its fucking chilling. And it tells a story without ever needing a line of Dialogue...it's that kind of stuff that i just dont think DS2 is capable of matching

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

After both understanding and agreeing to people's sentiments towards DS2 in terms of animations feeling different / off, I do wonder why we (in my memory) never had similar in-depth analyses of the differences between DS1 and DeS. Perhaps because of its PS3 exclusivity / the fact that most people joined the party at DS1?

While I enjoyed both DS1 and DeS almost equally, and am enjoying DS2 despite it requiring me to adjust to it for some hours, for me there is a worrying trend going from DeS to DS1 (and DS2 as well) when it comes to a reduction in overall atmosphere.

Watching Christopher Odd's let's play on YouTube of DeS just yesterday up until Boletaria Palace and some of Stonefang, I was reminded again how atmospheric this game is - perhaps more so and far more consistently so than both its sequels in many ways.

It's all in the little, more subtle things, as usual:
- the little light producing crystal you have on your belt (which was strangely absent from DS1 despite your character still giving off an aura of light);
- the background sounds such as the ones in Boletaria Palace (world 1) where you hear a background static combined with crows that really emphasizes that you are in a mostly abandoned, but massive structure that in many places lies on a high altitude;
- the way NPC's turn their head to follow your movement, even when not talking to them yet;
- a character like the last Monumental who is surrounded by his perished brethren and who talks to you in the opening (where you emerge out of the black mist - another cool feature) and then later to explain some of the lore;
- the opening cinematic which is just epic in its blending of fantasy with horror;
- the music in general perhaps, due to it's larger use of choir vocals;
- things like the fat officials in Boletaria Palace waiting for you and setting traps for you (such as with the Tower Knight and the crossbowmen - a far more interesting fight compared to it's equivalent in Sen's Fortress I feel) - which creates the feeling that the whole game world is actively out to get you instead of you stumbling into it in a way in DS1 (up until you meet the primordial serpent that is);
- more rubble and other environmental details such as dead horses, broken carriages, fires, and crows flying away (when comparing castle areas again, Undead Burg in DS1 had some, but far less so than Boletaria Palace in DeS).

This is by no means a full analysis as I've only watched the beginning of DeS again recently, but I would love to read one if anyone that played all three games recently ever made it. And I do admit that some of these points might be due to nostalgia / me starting with DeS.

Nevertheless I'd like to know if there were any significant animation differences going from DeS to DS1. I never felt any, while I did immediately pick up on them from DS1 to DS2. Can someone here comment?

What I'm tryng to say, is that many people seemed to have started with DS1 and therefore have never scrutinized the transition between DeS and DS1 as thoroughly as they could/should. For me, as someone who started with DeS, DS1 never felt like a complete, 100% improvement over DeS. Sure, the interconnected world is great, as are the very varied environments and overall UI and weapon designs, but gone in a way is quite a bit of the special atmosphere sauce that made DeS so special. The Boletaria castle area alone proves this imo, as it is still the best medieval combat simulator ever made in a way, with both DS1 and DS2 castle areas not really trumping it.

So to reiterate: Is there indeed a worrying trend of less atmosphere overall and less environmental detail going from DeS to DS1 to DS2? I'm inclined to go with "yes". And, has there ever been an anlysis that goes into detail how DeS and DS1 differ from each other in terms of graphics / lighting and animation / game feel?

DeS and Dark Souls have generally the same animations. I would say Dark Souls is more detailed to be honest and the move sets of the weapons changed a lot so its hard to compare directly.

DKS2 is noticeably worse because it wasn't made by the original team.

 

[Hypron]

Goddamn at people in here asserting that DS1 looks better than DS2. I mean, opinions and all, but that's got to be as close as you can get to an objectively wrong one.

Look at Majula.
Look at Heide.
Look at each game's respective sprawling outdoor castles.
Look at the cloth physics.

DS2's highs are noticeably higher than DS1's. Failing to see that is just mind boggling to me. I know that this isn't really the issue at hand here, but I feel like being the victim of From's jilting has really clouded the judgement of a few posters.

This. Both games have their lows and highs, but Dark Souls 2 looks better overall. The lightning (even after having been downgraded) is a big improvement over the original. The framerate (on 360 at least) and the IQ (not sub-hd anymore!) are better as well. Cloth physics are a great addition indeed. I played through both games using the thief's set and I just love how the piece of cloth moves around in the second game. It's great.

 

[wickfut]

What about the option where they just didn't notice because you have to be really, really, really trying to not enjoy yourself to spot these differences on your own?

They're journalists. It's their job to notice.

 

[CountAntonius]

I think all of these differences could be because of a few reasons.

One it's a new engine not the same one they had been using for the last two games. Trying to exactly replicate the animations and weight on a completely new engine probably isn't the easiet thing to do.

Two this game was meant to be more and was held back by current gen consoles and lead development being done on PC. They had to scale back everything they had originally planned to make the game run. If this game was not held back by current gen hardware and we got what earlier builds showed I dont think there would be as many complaints. PC development was new to this team and they obviously struggled at the end and had to make Hasty sacrifices.

There was key members gone from the team but still plenty of the old team as well as other developers that are I'm sure just as talented. Calling these guys the "b team" when they still managed to make a fantastic game seems ridiculous to me. Blaming an "inferior" team for design changes probably made because they aimed too high in the beginning just doesn't seem warranted.

What made this game less than Ideal was they were planning for the future and were held back by the past. Had they stuck to the old engine The game would probably have been more consistant but they took a risk and hopefully for their next game they will have figured out the engine and give us something to blow us away.

 

[chrishackwood]

What made this game less than Ideal was they were planning for the future and were held back by the past. Had they stuck to the old engine The game would probably have been more consistant but they took a risk and hopefully for their next game they will have figured out the engine and give us something to blow us away.

Spoiler

...or the PS4 port coming at E3! Believe!!!

 

[CountAntonius]

Spoiler

...or the PS4 port coming at E3! Believe!!!

This wouldn't bug me if the PC got a free update for parity.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Spoiler

...or the PS4 port coming at E3! Believe!!!

There will be lots of backlashes for From/Bamco on that day, but they might aswell just do demons sequel instead to avoid it.

 

[test_account]

Let me be clear, when Dark Souls 1 was coming to Steam, the last thing on my mind was the graphics, I was incredibly hype for the gameplay/lore/atmosphere/etc, the game delivered in spades.

The only reason I ever got hyped with graphics regarding DS2 was because of the videos Namco themselves revealed, they look like actual gameplay, HUD and all.

I understand. I think you will enjoy the Dark Souls 2 if you enjoy Demon's Souls and/or Dark Souls 1 The gameplay and the lore is still excellent represented in all game, but that is just my opinion though.

There will be lots of backlashes for From/Bamco on that day, but they might aswell just do demons sequel instead to avoid it.

You're probably right, but i dont see why there should be any backlash to be honest. If a PS4 version comes, i would expect it to look better. And i'd rather play the PS3/Xbox 360 version now instead of waiting maybe 6+ months for the PS4 version.

 

[Crab Milk Mickey]

Goddamn at people in here asserting that DS1 looks better than DS2. I mean, opinions and all, but that's got to be as close as you can get to an objectively wrong one.

Look at Majula.
Look at Heide.
Look at each game's respective sprawling outdoor castles.
Look at the cloth physics.

DS2's highs are noticeably higher than DS1's. Failing to see that is just mind boggling to me. I know that this isn't really the issue at hand here, but I feel like being the victim of From's jilting has really clouded the judgement of a few posters.

Dark Souls 1 does look objectively better in some aspects though. Aesthetically it's more consistent. Textures generally have higher detail than in the sequel; this was apparent even with the pre-downgrade gameplay footage. Animations across the whole (and not just for your own character) are better in DkS 1, despite the original game having employed a method that requires more precision and time than DkS 2's motion-capturing. Dark Souls 1 also didn't suffer from crushed contrast / brightness to the point where nearly every dark environment (all but The Gutter) can be navigated through with relative ease without a player-made light source, regardless of FROM initially flaunting their torchlight innovation. Color balancing on enemies is also strangely muted in Dark Souls 2 this time around, making them less pronounced than in the first game (barring the entirety of Demon's Ruins and Lost Izalith). I'm forgetting other stuff too and this is all noticeable without PC resolutions that exceed 1080p.

Dark Souls II does utilize other techniques that help elavate its graphical strengths (cloth physics, dynamic lighting, superior spell particles / lava / water, smoother framerate, etc.) and it regularly does look fantastic in spite of its glaring flaws, but there are numerous lows in the game that stick out just as badly (if not more) than the ugly parts in the previous iteration. Generally dismissing claims of those who find the first Dark Souls to be visually more cohesive than the sequel as nonsense is just as "god damn" worthy, and I speak as someone who has finished and enjoyed Dark Souls 2... but not without noticing its obvious faults.