So the issue is that DF stated that because Deathloop isn't aiming for the highest end graphics that this is OK.
Ironically Deathloop does feature some high end visuals and even raytracing which
does have a significant impact on the core visuals, which DF demonstrated.
Putting that aside, lets address OP meaningfully.
The first and the last sentences have absolutely no place in a technical review of the game. I can understand Gamespot or IGN giving it a pass for last gen graphics, but DF's only job is to critique visuals. If they dont do it, no one else will. And they feel it's OK to do the bare minimum for a game selling for a $70 next gen price tag.
What they are saying is that the overall technical package of the game is significant enough to impress, despite not pushing the latest and greatest technology.
Because if we were to take your argument, every developer should strive for the latest in tech. Why release a game on UE4 when UE5 is available? The reason is time and costs.
In regards to Deathloop, and like many Arkane games, their focus is less on technology and more on
stylization. The original Dishonored used UE3, but had a strong artstyle generating a rather unique look where most lighting was baked in. Dishonored 2 moved to a physically based pipeline like many games in 2016, but artstyle was prevalent. The same is happening here with Deathloop. Its not about the latest in tech, but
good enough to support the artstyle the team is going for.
Nevertheless there are clear visual differences and the sharpness is very prevalent. Despite all that, Deathloop does support raytraced shadows and AO and the video details that the visual difference is rather stark when compared to rasterization only. Visually, those shadows and the
grounding of objects have more in common with Metro Exodus's shadow implementation.
Deathloop is a game very much centered around its artstyle.
If your argument were to hold up, you should have raised a similar complaint back when Borderlands 3 was released. After all, it does not look that much different than its last gen counter part, Borderlands 2.*
* There are clear visual differences, but the core artstyle is very much the same between Borderlands titles.
As we look ahead to an unprecedented 2nd year of cross gen games this year, it's important to have game journalists hold these studios to a higher standard and critique sub standard looking games. Alex is the writer of this piece, and he had no issues criticizing a studio for what he considers to be decade old character design. Well, this game looks literally a decade old and he seems to have NO issues with it.
Absolutely insane.
Back in 2011 practically no game used PBR for the rendering of materials. Deathloop's materials look far more realistic, as in that pottery looks more like pottery and less
videogamey.
You seem upset about the developers decision to go for a strong artstyle where technology is more
in service of said artstyle, rather than be
at the forefront. You expect that every game releasing on this generation consoles needs to have technology
at the forefront rather than being
in service of.
I do not share that argument because i don't think that the comment made is actually harmful. What both John and Alex mention is that the game is looking
gorgeous and it does so through the aformentioned artstyle. They call it
polished, not so much by technical expertise, but because the gameworld is visually very
consistent. This is a known plus by Arkane and it occurs here aswell.
What you are saying is that certain games should get a pass. Why? Why is Halo held to a different standard? Why was Halo Infinite mocked and criticized into a year long delay? Why should Deathloop get a pass?
Halo Infinite was partially mocked because unlike Deathloop it takes into account the Xbox One. As such you are limited by your possibilities and the initial reveal didn't look technically refined (I won't say it looked bad, as it didn't). A lot of that had to do with a lack of polish, aswell as artist-defined choices, such as the time of day. In the next reveal after the criticism, Halo Infinite looked a lot better, which is primarily due to artist-defined choices.
When they review Halo in December, should Halo get a pass if it has GOTY caliber gameplay? Of course not. Not from DF.
Its statements like this that the possible accusation of bias becomes apparent, let alone judging the game on a percieved lack of talent because in your eyes the game does not have that next-gen seal of approval.
You can make games that look like shit. Most indie games look like they are from the PS2 era.
Stuff like this is absolute hyperbole and suggests you will need to define which indie shooters of today look like a PS2 game.
Im not sure what the thread is actually for?
To highlight a percieved difference in technological prowess and being agitated that an outlet like DF thinks its okay that Deathloop isn't targetting the highest end of graphics.*
*Ironically, the same was said by Microsoft when they revealed their Xbox One in 2013. I wonder if Slimysnake had the same issues then regarding that console?
Hahahaha if you gonna bitch about something this trivial be expected to answer the "hard" questions
Apparently doing that is issuing excuses for why the game looks like it does. And apparently within those excuses we can't state that art-style plays a big part in here, because a PS3 game looks similar despite the difference in artstyle.
Because of diminishing returns the visual differences become smaller and smaller. A rather obvious one is however Physically Based Rendering which Deathloop uses to significant effect. That alone makes it clearly stand out from KZ3.