-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Dark Souls 2 Lighting changes/Downgrade
- Thread starter Moral Panic
- Start date
Maybe it would have been, if they told us three months ago instead of letting us find out after we purchased the game.
Future PhaZe
Member
Crimsonclaw111
Member
I don't want to be that guy, but everyone buying the console version despite news of a downgrade and deception deserves what they purchase, especially the double dippers.
People need to start voting with their wallets if they don't want to get pushed around. Not saying word won't be spread around by everyone, but the best option is to not even buy the game if you feel deceived.
It's the only screenshot i have on minus that shows them a little bit, but they're there 100% on ps3, don't know about 360.
Alright, what about GTAV? That looks stunning and has plenty of godrays.
RedDeadRedemption, too.
EvilKatarn
Member
Boy I hope I'll be called the Ruiner of Games Industry for buying a fucking FROM Software game.
I mean graphically, aside from the torch mechanic for DS2. There's no doubt, of course, they were was a huge change for A:CM for the worst. I'm saying that Aliens is the most recent similar event that everyone seemed up in arms over, while most people seem to be ignoring this.
Krusenstern
Banned
At this point I believe that not even the PC version is safe from the "downgrades".
I canceled my pre-order now. I'm not going to trust them on all their "PC is lead" talk anymore (unless the show undeniable proof of the PC version not suffering from the stark downgrade).
Kamina
Golden Boy
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Having played further into the game, no, I don't think it looks worse than DS1. Most of it looks better, just not a generation better. Even the places that have lighting removed do not look that bad for real (not looking at blurry, low bitrate stream images). I don't think anything I've seen looks worse than the Demon Ruins or Lost Izalith in Dark Souls. There are still a lot of places that look great artistically.
One problem is the subjects chosen for the art style in DSII. There's way more "colorful" locations that take place outdoors in more robust nature than the intentionally grey, dead world of Dark Souls. The limits of From's technology hurts these more organic environments more. For instance, Forest of the Fallen Giants. It has gotten a lot of flack from screenshots that show bad camera angles for ground textures and geometry. But in practice it looks pretty good in terms of layout and scene composition.
At this point I think the main issue is that, if From realized they were going to have to turn off some visual aspects to keep the game playable, nothing was done to replace gameplay-dependent losses with altered art direction and older ways of creating darkness. So it hurts that the full torch exploration system is nerfed - that was a new concept to make this a full sequel, and not just a remixed version of Dark Souls 1.
That does make me think there was some poor planning involved. Nobody took the specter of hardware limitations seriously enough early in development, and even with the downgraded geometry on the console environments there was no effort to adjust the art to compensate for the dynamic lighting system being cut back.
One problem is the subjects chosen for the art style in DSII. There's way more "colorful" locations that take place outdoors in more robust nature than the intentionally grey, dead world of Dark Souls. The limits of From's technology hurts these more organic environments more. For instance, Forest of the Fallen Giants. It has gotten a lot of flack from screenshots that show bad camera angles for ground textures and geometry. But in practice it looks pretty good in terms of layout and scene composition.
At this point I think the main issue is that, if From realized they were going to have to turn off some visual aspects to keep the game playable, nothing was done to replace gameplay-dependent losses with altered art direction and older ways of creating darkness. So it hurts that the full torch exploration system is nerfed - that was a new concept to make this a full sequel, and not just a remixed version of Dark Souls 1.
That does make me think there was some poor planning involved. Nobody took the specter of hardware limitations seriously enough early in development, and even with the downgraded geometry on the console environments there was no effort to adjust the art to compensate for the dynamic lighting system being cut back.
If someone isn't bothered by the downgrade, they should go ahead and buy the game (assuming they want to).
Personally i think the new screenshots look very bad, and i wouldn't pay full price for that game, considering i also had some issues with the changed gameplay (from the beta).
Jeez, that trailer seemed really poorly put together >.>
Oh and it's giving me a "comments unavailable error".
Bro, maybe that's a bad screenshot, but it looks like regular lighting to me. This is godrays in ARMAIII.
There is nothing to be done, aside from warning people about the changes.
They didn't downgrade it for shit and giggles, obviously the game wasn't running smoothly in the previous build and they had to.
I'm not sure what you expect to happen, beside giving these changes more exposure for the sake of clarity.
Kamina
Golden Boy
I just posted, so it must work.
Personally, I would be happy with a public apology for the bait/switch on PS360 and a commitment to make the PC version (through updates, etc) meet the vertical slice promo bullshots.
^^^ I don't see the public apology happen, and i don't think it's even necessary (they didn't downgrade to hurt people), though i guess they could've shown the retail build without letting people find out after the purchase, that was indeed shitty behaviour.
Hopefully the PC version will improve significantly, though.
I have Dragon's Dogma on right now, the godrays are there, though they are more subtle than Crysis or Arma (which is not a bad thing, btw).
I don't see why you wouldn't believe me, it's not like there is no other example of games with godrays on consoles:
Uncharted3, GTAV, RDR etc etc.
--
I'll try and take a more clear screenshot later.
Hopefully the PC version will improve significantly, though.
Bro, maybe that's a bad screenshot, but it looks like regular lighting to me. This is godrays in ARMAIII.
I have Dragon's Dogma on right now, the godrays are there, though they are more subtle than Crysis or Arma (which is not a bad thing, btw).
I don't see why you wouldn't believe me, it's not like there is no other example of games with godrays on consoles:
Uncharted3, GTAV, RDR etc etc.
--
I'll try and take a more clear screenshot later.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Hush, child.
DS as Dark Souls, not Nintendo DS.
Bro, maybe that's a bad screenshot, but it looks like regular lighting to me. This is godrays in ARMAIII.
That is a horrible screenshot of ARMA III lol
Again torches were first "advertised" with the pharros stones as new mechanics of the game. People are totally able to not use either of them but in turn will completely miss out on certain stuff in the environment if they don't. I can vouch for certain places that need you to use the torch and stones to find secrets otherwise completely hidden from the eye.
The torch does not need to be used in every area of the game, its a helpful tool in certain circumstances and i don't see the game's appeal dwindling because of it at all.
How big of a difference would it make if every inside area would become dark enough to need a torch? What do you gain from it now?
The torch does not need to be used in every area of the game, its a helpful tool in certain circumstances and i don't see the game's appeal dwindling because of it at all.
How big of a difference would it make if every inside area would become dark enough to need a torch? What do you gain from it now?
Blargonaut
Banned
But that's the thing: From and Namco-Bandai did not formally inform anyone of this downgrade prior to release! WE DIDN'T HAVE OFFICIAL NEWS OF THIS DOWNGRADE AT ALL.
Not a single official statement! Nothing! Absolutely nothing formal telling us about this downgrade!
All we had to go on was screenshots and video footage, the majority of which was of the superior dynamically-lighted version that was shown to be playable on console . Only customers paying close attention to all media releases would notice the lower quality before release. We even had a playable, functional beta, a beta version containing dynamic lighting on PS3. It was already functional.
How can we prevent ourselves from paying for an inferior product, when we were misled?
It's not even only dynamic lighting, as evidenced by that dragon bridge footage from a few pages ago!
YianGaruga
Banned
Crimsonclaw111
Member
I don't want to tell people how to spend their money, but I'd never preorder a game just based off the fact that embargoes are a thing and most review sites are a joke.
You take the risk handing your money out day -1, as evidenced by several games over the years. Things may be downgraded or removed completely. It's all at your own risk. I'm not saying FROM is right in doing this.
Also, it was a beta. Things change, for better or worse.
Raven77
Member
actually...
http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/30/4287382/aliens-colonial-marines-lawsuit-class-action-sega-gearbox
false advertising is something that should never go without any sort of consciousness.
The problem here is journalists and sites treat From like an innocent puppy and try to not look at their shit. I think if this was Gearbox, EA or Activision we will see arm in arms to warn people and let them know. but since it's the "cool" FROM it's now " a normal thing happens all the time" like what that GB dude said.
They should at least said Kojima for an example show that not all versions of his game will be the same. but the fact is FROM kept showing the "old version" as the real thing to the journalists and public, they kept talking about their new engine till few months ago, and I don't believe for one bit that they didn't test the game or noticed bad performance months and months during the development. it's just very recent that people noticed huge downgrade (with the last patch of screenshots) and before From was just showing the old version when they know the final game wont be like that ( and I said they know because they final version got new and different textures and geometry change so it's not only the lighting... FROM knew it and kept fooling people for months and months).
Really not sure what you expect or want to happen. It's an unfortunately common practice that games often don't look as good as they do in previews. Perhaps it was a mistake to show the improved lighting in the first place, but If they could have gotten the lighting working well on current gen systems, I'm sure they would have. The framerate isn't great as it is. By the way, it definitely still looks better than the first game does on consoles. I'm not surprised at all that reviewers didn't mention the downgrade. I didn't notice it until I saw this thread many hours into my playthrough, and only when comparing footage side by side it's really obvious in some spots. I brought attention to the issue on twitter so more people know, but what do you actually expect to get accomplished by messaging From or Namco? From's twitter account is almost always in Japanese, and I can guarantee Namco or their community manager won't give you the answers you are seeking. I'll do my part in asking them because I'm very curious as well.
Exactly, if you expect me to believe that they realised they had performance issues only after the last time they showed the superior tech build (which was shown late jan on playstation access for ps3) then you are deluded. They knew long before late jan they had performance issues, they didn't do that drastic of an overhaul quickly in february a month before launch, yet they kept showing that old build 2 months before launch. That's bullshit.
It'll be an achievement in the next call of duty
Uhm, i actually agree with your points.
I don't like how people had to find out just by buying the game, that was dishonest.
I didn't follow the Colonial Marines debacle, so i'm not sure if this is as severe and warrants a law suit, though.
Blargonaut
Banned
Admittedly, I personally can't remember if any developer has ever made a formal statement regarding a downgrade of a game prior to release, but then again, I can't think of a game that was downgraded so drastically prior to release and to the minority's knowledge until it was in our hands. This situation is so shady its ridiculous.
The Watch_Dogs downgrade is the only one I can think of, but I haven't followed it very closely, so I'm not sure how it's going or how it went.
I too feel like it should be the reviewers' job to inform us of this. Only a few did. I think EGM was one. But the majority only made minor comments or none at all; the graphical difference is staggering, so this is flat-out Twilight Zone-level strange. I don't know if they played the version we're getting or not.
From Software owes us an explanation. I feel misled and in the dark. They straight up owe it; a lot of us paid for the game, and regardless if a lot of us are happy with what they got or not, we got an inferior product. Not what was promised or shown to be playable.
My dream would be a patch, re-implementing the cut lighting engine. I don't care when it comes, as long as it's ASAP.
They look nothing alike what are you on about?
Considering the PS3 version gets down to 22 FPS at times, I'd say that's about as likely as your PS3/360 sprouting a new, supped up GPU overnight.
I've seen it go down to 16fps. I think that's similar to the performance in Blight Town.
Yeah, I don't see a patch happening. Unless you want to play the game like Skyrim on PS3.
0fpstown
Reading this thread is disappointing for a number of reasons, but I've gotta say that I'm pretty glad I didn't follow the game until launch. I didn't realize all the previously shown stuff looked so different, so I went in expecting DS1 graphics and gameplay and that seems to be what we got. I didn't even realize people were upset over graphics until I saw this thread, though I can absolutely see where the disappointment comes from given some of the comparisons. From should have been more up front about what people were getting, but I still think the way people are reacting on gaf is kinda over the top, especially considering how I haven't seen any other online community get as bent out of shape over this. People saying they won't buy the game because of this seem to have forgotten why they liked Dark Souls in the first place.
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Aye, it's not even up for debate, anyone with a semi working set of eyeballs can see it. To deny it, let alone call people for pointing it out "crazy" is dangerously approaching fanboy nonsense.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Hell, lower than that even I believe. Digital Foundry's video showed as low as 14fps I believe when explosions occurred.
I mean, one is alive with a bunch of armor on with a large, dwarfish-build and a big beard and the other is a skeleton of a large, dwarfish-bodied person with a "skeleton beard." Just saying there are similarities that remind me of that blacksmith. I thought maybe the skeleton could be a dead version of the same guy or something. Probably just coincidence since fantasy genre tends to use these types often enough.
Metroid-Squadron
Banned
Godrays done in screen space are easily achieved on consoles, even Dark Souls 1 has them during the gaping dragon's bossfight. In Dark Souls 2 you can see them in Majula.
Garcia
Member
I guess it's just a matter of personal taste after all. I don't think it looks (generally speaking) better than the original Dark Souls. So far, every armor, undead enemy and humanoid looks significantly worse than those found in the first game. (I'm 7 hours in)
It has some eye candy here and there, sure, but the transitions between the good and the ugly are so frequent, it kills any sense of immersion or atmosphere.
Besides, like you also mentioned, DS2 is way too colorful. There's saturation to be found most of the time.
People need relax a little here is a nice summary of the most frequent complaints about the next dark souls:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utqHy0lM1b4
Oh, lol. There are tons of "this looks like an N64 game!" posts on GAF so I got the wrong idea there.
FairXchange
Member
That's unfortunate to hear your experience is marred to that extent. I think the game looks excellent, and very impressive despite the ageing hardware its running on.
Want immersion? Wait until you see how it looks on a powerful PC with all the settings on high, in 1080p or above resolution. I can actually close my eyes and imagine how nice the PC version is going to look based on what I recognize as cut back in the console version.