CrackDownGrade 3 Confirmed | 201`5 vs 2019

Jun 11, 2018
184
134
170
#52
So much damage control as usual. It's a downgrade no matter how much ppl try to move goalposts or defend their corporation. What we got in the end is not even close to what was shown initially or talked about.

Unless I'm missing something and once the azure clouds kick in mid game the destruction gets better exponentially.
 
Last edited:
Mar 3, 2018
789
1,128
250
#53
Oh and in case anyone is actually wondering the game graphically looks far better than what was shown in 2015. That video is widely spread and low quality but actual raw captures are few and far between, and it was visually rough to say the least...

 
Mar 3, 2018
789
1,128
250
#54
This is the point that I'm making , he said this was "never the game" but it clearly was gameplay footage & even labeled as so.



About the cloud stuff most people don't understand that it's a process , today it's using the cloud to train the models for what can be ran on the consoles of tomorrow.
Pre-alpha doesn't constitute a game yet, that's a stage of development prototyping, engine and system testing. This is when developers are messing with technology, seeing what works, what doesn't, what can be done and what can't. It's more or less a glorified sandbox of prototype implementation and testing.

What was shown in 2015 isn't something special, they could implement that now if they so choose but you can't exactly build a game from that not to mention it's computationally wasteful. Development is a balancing act of capability versus viability, what something is capable of doesn't mean it's the most viable and that's exactly what we've seen here.
 
Jan 27, 2018
329
431
240
#55
When a game is shown off and is played, and it says it's in pre-alpha stage, there is a certain expectation that forms.

I don't think this was misadvertisement, because games change through development, but the way the cloud was hyped and emphasis on destructibility, and then have it not make it into single player, is a huge let down and indeed a huge downgrade from where they raised people's expectations to.

The multiplayer destruction looks awkward as well. Like a giant brittle styrofoam cage instead of real structured with intricate bits and supports tumbling down (also no debris).

I played a bit of the old crackdown last night, it's not too bad. This game looks like that but with a fresh coat of paint and a few extra bells and whistles.

I don't see this game making anyone go get an Xbox. I also don't see anyone besides the most hardcore crackdown or Xbox fans rushing to defend this game. It looks like a very average but fun affair.

Awesome destruction was likely the thing that was going to set it apart and bring it into AAA territory, but instead it ended up being used in a half baked multiplayer mode and the singleplayer looks like an upgraded x360 game, certainly not a current/next gen title. Just my opinion (overwhelmingly shared on the internet).
 
Mar 3, 2018
789
1,128
250
#57
When a game is shown off and is played, and it says it's in pre-alpha stage, there is a certain expectation that forms.

I don't think this was misadvertisement, because games change through development, but the way the cloud was hyped and emphasis on destructibility, and then have it not make it into single player, is a huge let down and indeed a huge downgrade from where they raised people's expectations to.

The multiplayer destruction looks awkward as well. Like a giant brittle styrofoam cage instead of real structured with intricate bits and supports tumbling down (also no debris).

I played a bit of the old crackdown last night, it's not too bad. This game looks like that but with a fresh coat of paint and a few extra bells and whistles.

I don't see this game making anyone go get an Xbox. I also don't see anyone besides the most hardcore crackdown or Xbox fans rushing to defend this game. It looks like a very average but fun affair.

Awesome destruction was likely the thing that was going to set it apart and bring it into AAA territory, but instead it ended up being used in a half baked multiplayer mode and the singleplayer looks like an upgraded x360 game, certainly not a current/next gen title. Just my opinion (overwhelmingly shared on the internet).
No one ever said destruction was in single player, it's actually been maintained since day one that it's not and for very specific reasons. You're supposed to be saving the city; not destroying it, not to mention if you could level the city it could be game breaking. If you blow up the whole city what are you supposed to do?

This is one of the problems, some people like yourself have expectations based around something that was never supposed to happen whatsoever.
 
Likes: CuNi
May 1, 2010
14,158
909
755
#58
Pre-alpha doesn't constitute a game yet, that's a stage of development prototyping, engine and system testing. This is when developers are messing with technology, seeing what works, what doesn't, what can be done and what can't. It's more or less a glorified sandbox of prototype implementation and testing.

What was shown in 2015 isn't something special, they could implement that now if they so choose but you can't exactly build a game from that not to mention it's computationally wasteful. Development is a balancing act of capability versus viability, what something is capable of doesn't mean it's the most viable and that's exactly what we've seen here.

There is nothing that you can say to change the fact that it was shown as gameplay , you can not say "this was never the game" when it was clearly the game. things changed but when it was shown that was the game.
 
Mar 3, 2018
789
1,128
250
#59
There is nothing that you can say to change the fact that it was shown as gameplay , you can not say "this was never the game" when it was clearly the game. things changed but when it was shown that was the game.
All I can do is provide context, you can think whatever you want but I wouldn't consider anything in actual pre-alpha stages as constituting a game.
 
Jan 4, 2016
961
329
255
#60
Funny to think that they spent 5 years on tech and all it got them was a multiplayer mode that will probably get old after a few sessions.

Yet apparently there is also a singleplayer campaign that doesn't even feature the tech that they spent so long working on.

Really keen to see a post mortem on this one in a few years.
 
Mar 14, 2018
597
527
200
#61
I've never seen the publisher of a game do so much damage to its own product. Microsoft clearly mishandled this game with promises and smoke and mirrors BS that is going to needlessly hurt what is otherwise a pretty good game.
 
Likes: Hayfield
Jun 9, 2004
8,989
29
1,370
39
United Kingdom
#62
Unless it's some sort of abstract Siggraph demo, these companies should not be showing stuff that cannot be realistically achieved.

It seems pretty clear that Microsoft needed at some point to sell an idea (cloud computing) as hopefully a way of pushing product (xboxes) and did so using an existing brand (crackdown). After all this development time has that led to any real and revolutionary benefits? No.
 
May 1, 2010
14,158
909
755
#63
Unless it's some sort of abstract Siggraph demo, these companies should not be showing stuff that cannot be realistically achieved.

It seems pretty clear that Microsoft needed at some point to sell an idea (cloud computing) as hopefully a way of pushing product (xboxes) and did so using an existing brand (crackdown). After all this development time has that led to any real and revolutionary benefits? No.
But that was achievable it just didn't make it to the finally game,
 
Jan 12, 2018
691
510
210
#65
Such a divisive game this is turning out to be. I have previously stated I bought a 360 primarily for the first game and it was so good. The second was shite.

This just looks sort of "meh" and they have totally botched the development, how can it take 4+ years to create this game? MS have some work to do in case of exclusives for next gen.
You guys are in for a surprise when this game releases. Even more so when you find out how many players are on.
 
Jan 29, 2019
20
8
85
#68
It's not downgraded, that was never the game.

They already discussed this in detail, this was a proof of concept not really attached to anything, this was the peak of what could be done. They had to build an actual game out of this though, they had to leverage the amount of acceptable compute usage for the game to allocate from the cloud, they had to look at the scope of the world, what was in it and what kind of gametype could be formed from it. I mean as cool as this looks a bunch of obstructive rubble everywhere doesn't make for a fun game, it makes for a bunch of shit you're going to get stuck on, in and frustrated with.
But have you listened the audio? they literally say that this is the game and that the XboxO will have access to around 20 times its built-in computing power for the game... This is different than thinking of some way to clean up rubble or maybe making the map less dense with big buildings, etc. or facilitate player navigation through the rubble (I admit it must be bad to have that much obstacles in, but they definitely sold the destruction).

It's not as if the game they released as amazingly good and showcased a level of destruction and interaction similar to the one they demoed years ago, just scaled back to save the game play (and sold their entire platform on "cloud computing" as their secret sauce) plus it doesn't even look good in screenshots.
 
Nov 27, 2018
206
146
175
#70
When a game is shown off and is played, and it says it's in pre-alpha stage, there is a certain expectation that forms.
Exactly - if a game looks this good, at that early stage, then it can only get better with time, right? I don't mind releasing a "gameplay" trailer on YT or something, but if some actual person walks on the stage, plays with a controller, and then the actual game doesn't even come close to what was being "played" (Watch Dogs, Anthem, Crackdown 3 etc.) then the game has all the rights or even deserves to bomb hard IMO. It actually wonders the hell out of me why the companies even bother spending time and funds on fabricating those pre-rendered "gameplays", instead of working on the actual game. It's like car companies, who spend tens of millions of dollars on all those amazing prototypes, only to release a model that actually doesn't have anything to do with the prototype other than the name.
 
Jun 6, 2015
1,040
84
285
#71
Crackdown 3 downgrade

Anthem downgrade


The narrative surrounding the Crackdown 3 downgrade and the Anthem downgrades are quite different.

The Crackdown 3 downgrade was just a "proof of concept" but with Anthem they LIED to us.

This is why I cant take any outrage over "downgrades" seriously, it happens all the time but people only get outraged over it when its a game they dont like.
You do realize that when Anthem was revealed at the MS conference it was showing actual GAMEPLAY "running on Xbox One X" and wasn't just a trailer right?
 
Nov 23, 2017
655
459
190
#72
This is one of the problems, some people like yourself have expectations based around something that was never supposed to happen whatsoever.

They literally promised that this level of destruction would appear in the final game. Dave Jones himself said we could expect it, but you're trying to tell people they were wrong for expecting it?

Come on, dude. This level of damage controlling is just awful.
 
Likes: Yakuzakazuya
Aug 15, 2015
1,329
63
270
30
MIAMISBURG, OHIO
#73
Who cares it was never gonna live up to that hype anyway and if you actually thought that your an iddiot. Eitherway tho the game looks like the original which is great news and the achievement list also seems fun. I got gamepass for 2 dollars last night gonna play the fuck outta it.
 
Mar 3, 2018
789
1,128
250
#74
They literally promised that this level of destruction would appear in the final game. Dave Jones himself said we could expect it, but you're trying to tell people they were wrong for expecting it?

Come on, dude. This level of damage controlling is just awful.
Apparently you can't read, his post was about single player.

Destruction was denounced as part of the single player since day one.
 
Likes: Hotspurr
Jan 27, 2018
329
431
240
#75
They literally promised that this level of destruction would appear in the final game. Dave Jones himself said we could expect it, but you're trying to tell people they were wrong for expecting it?

Come on, dude. This level of damage controlling is just awful.
I was actually wrong, turns out there was no destruction at all intended for singleplayer. My comments still stand for the multiplayer side of things.

I tend to agree now that it's much less of a big deal, but at the same time, what makes this game special? It still looks like a generic last gen game with better graphics. Without the cool multiplayer it's just meh. I might try it with gamepass, though.
 
Nov 23, 2017
655
459
190
#76
Apparently you can't read, his post was about single player.

Destruction was denounced as part of the single player since day one.
My reading is just fine.

You're still telling people that pre-alpha footage doesn't count as an actual game.

Check.

Dave was speaking about multiplayer.

Check.


Said this will appear in the game and we can expect it.

Check.

You?

It doesn't count because it's pre-alpha footage, which means their promises meant nothing because it was just "pre-alpha" footage.
 
Likes: ScaryMovies
Aug 18, 2014
1,483
118
305
#77
Crackdown 3 downgrade

Anthem downgrade


The narrative surrounding the Crackdown 3 downgrade and the Anthem downgrades are quite different.

The Crackdown 3 downgrade was just a "proof of concept" but with Anthem they LIED to us.

This is why I cant take any outrage over "downgrades" seriously, it happens all the time but people only get outraged over it when its a game they dont like.


The difference is that for Anthem they did not say the final game will not look like that, however for Crackdown 3, they did clearly state that this level of destruction will likely not be in the final game. Massive difference.
 
Last edited:
Nov 23, 2017
655
459
190
#78
I was actually wrong, turns out there was no destruction at all intended for singleplayer. My comments still stand for the multiplayer side of things.

I tend to agree now that it's much less of a big deal, but at the same time, what makes this game special? It still looks like a generic last gen game with better graphics. Without the cool multiplayer it's just meh. I might try it with gamepass, though.
I quoted his post because he mentioned people expecting things that were never suppose to happen.


Here's the problem.
He can acknowledge when things were not suppose to happen as in single player destruction (which I posted videos of on the first page). Some how, he cannot acknowledge when developers promise that this level of destruction WOULD appear in multiplayer.

This means he cannot tell people to "expect" things that were never meant to happen but then write off the words of the Dave Jones who specifically told us that this would appear in the final game.
 
Sep 11, 2005
2,690
185
1,115
#80
The difference is that for Anthem they did not say the final game will not look like that, however for Crackdown 3, they did clearly state that this level of destruction will likely not be in the final game. Massive difference.
Where exactly did they "clearly" state that the footage shown was not representative of the final game exactly? Going to need a link on this one.
 
Jun 11, 2018
184
134
170
#86
I worked on this briefly. All I can say is that Sumo got given a complete mess, and did an admiral job given the time and budget constraints they were probably under to get it back on some sort of track.

Don't blame them for this.
I Def don't blame Sumo or the ppl tht worked on it.
Just wondering guys..do you like bbq sauce or tomato with your crow?
I feel. Disrespected! Hot sauce of course!!!

But I'm lost what crow will ppl be eating lol
 
Last edited:
Jun 12, 2007
5,836
298
940
#92
I wonder where this will review compared to the recent batch of sub 70 metacritic Microsoft exclusives:

Sea of Thieves (69)
Below (69)
State of Decay 2 (66)
We Happy Few (64)
Crackdown (??)

Just remember, even Crackdown 1 which people actually like only has a metacritic average of 83. Based on what I have seen and heard, I think even 60+ for Crackdown 3 is looking like a long shot now right?
 
Last edited:
Likes: Yakuzakazuya
Sep 11, 2013
532
90
340
#93
I wonder where this will review compared to the recent batch of sub 70 metacritic Microsoft exclusives:

Sea of Thieves (69)
Below (69)
State of Decay 2 (66)
We Happy Few (64)
Crackdown (??)

Just remember, even Crackdown 1 which people actually like only has a metacritic average of 83. Based on what I have seen and heard, I think even 60+ for Crackdown 3 is looking like a long shot now right?
I think a fuller list including Forza (at least for games that have released recently like the ones in your list) would seem less MS bashing.

However, this is why I would never go for a Microsoft console. The raw console power is their but their 1st party games do suck for the most part and it's not even a debate. I have a PS4 and a PC, and the only 2 MS games that caught my attention are Sunset Overdrive (Which was technically 3rd party) and Forza (also 3rd party, up until last year?).
 
Likes: Three

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,449
1,045
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
#95
This is such a weird situation and I really do feel for the dev team. Crackdown 3 is basically two games. One, the campaign, is a sequel to Crackdown 1 made by Sumo Digital. The other is that Wrecking Zone thing which is the origin of the destruction stuff.

The main game would never work with destruction since these games rely on traversal through a large world - the agility orbs wouldn't work if you could destroy everything not to mention the core level design for various missions. So it sucks that everyone associates destruction with the game because of a tech demo that was never related to the actual sequel.

We see this a lot, though. I was genuinely shocked by the reaction to Spider-Man and its puddles (not to mention the suit thing). People were LIVID on Twitter and YouTube. Insomniac delivered one of the best looking open world games ever made and people went nuts over those puddles without understanding what they were looking at.

Ah well.
 
Feb 9, 2019
21
20
70
#97
This is such a weird situation and I really do feel for the dev team. Crackdown 3 is basically two games. One, the campaign, is a sequel to Crackdown 1 made by Sumo Digital. The other is that Wrecking Zone thing which is the origin of the destruction stuff.

The main game would never work with destruction since these games rely on traversal through a large world - the agility orbs wouldn't work if you could destroy everything not to mention the core level design for various missions. So it sucks that everyone associates destruction with the game because of a tech demo that was never related to the actual sequel.

We see this a lot, though. I was genuinely shocked by the reaction to Spider-Man and its puddles (not to mention the suit thing). People were LIVID on Twitter and YouTube. Insomniac delivered one of the best looking open world games ever made and people went nuts over those puddles without understanding what they were looking at.

Ah well.
In this case it is just microsoft's fault.
There was some sort of environmental denstruction even in the reveal trailer, so after all this, it is kinda impossible to ignore it.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,449
1,045
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
#98
In this case it is just microsoft's fault.
There was some sort of environmental denstruction even in the reveal trailer, so after all this, it is kinda impossible to ignore it.
Oh yeah, it’s 100% their fault. It just sucks for Sumo. They shouldn’t have even called that tech demo Crackdown 3 since it has nothing to do with the series design.
 
Feb 7, 2019
89
92
130
#99
  • LMJ

    LMJ

The main game would never work with destruction since these games rely on traversal through a large world - the agility orbs wouldn't work if you could destroy everything not to mention the core level design for various missions.
I'm afraid I've got disagree to here...

I think it could have worked if they had done it on a smaller scale, stuck to something more along the lines of being able to carve your way through brick walls and things like that

Not full building destruction, but something more streamlined I love the first Crackdown and I love the fact that Sumo is making more of what I love, but I can't lie I would have liked to see it evolved a little bit especially with all this talk of the power of the cloud and destruction.

Fully physically destructive things like Vehicles, walls, Bridges, perhaps something like just cause 4 with certain items being completely destructible offering a humongous explosion.

I haven't seen the game yet so I'm not going to judge too much, but I'm hoping some level of interactive destruction exists in the single player.
 
Last edited:

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,449
1,045
1,515
www.eurogamer.net
I'm afraid I've got disagree to here...

I think it could have worked if they had done it on a smaller scale, stuck to something more along the lines of being able to carve your way through brick walls and things like that

Not full building destruction, but something more streamlined I love the first Crackdown and I love the fact that Sumo is making more of what I love, but I can't lie I would have liked to see it evolved a little bit especially with all this talk of the power of the cloud and destruction.

Fully physically destructive things like Vehicles, walls, Bridges, perhaps something like just cause 4 with certain items being completely destructible offering a humongous explosion.

I haven't seen the game yet so I'm not going to judge too much, but I'm hoping some level of interactive destruction exists in the single player.
I suppose some light destruction could have worked, true, but not on the level of that tech demo.

Again, though, Sumo had absolutely nothing to do with that old tech demo and have built an entirely separate game. They never intended that to be part of the game so it sucks that they have to deal with that baggage.